Make "Training Effect" available as standard field.

mike over 3 years ago

Why is training effect not available as a standard field on FR245 and others?

It is easy to add it as a simple data field (one line of code), but you are losing one of your custom data fields.

This should be trivial to implement.

Top Replies

jim_m_58 over 3 years ago +1

This is a forum for Connect IQ (3rd party) apps. You want to post in the 245 forum, or use Garmin's
"ideas" to suggest something in the base FW

https://www.garmin.com/en-US/forms/ideas/
FlowState over 3 years ago +1

According to the manuals for 245, 645, 935, and 945, Aerobic and Anaerobic Training Effect are available as standard data fields. I use both when I go for runs with my 935.

If those 2 fields aren't available…

All Replies

0 jim_m_58 over 3 years ago

This is a forum for Connect IQ (3rd party) apps. You want to post in the 245 forum, or use Garmin's
"ideas" to suggest something in the base FW

https://www.garmin.com/en-US/forms/ideas/

0 FlowState over 3 years ago

According to the manuals for 245, 645, 935, and 945, Aerobic and Anaerobic Training Effect are available as standard data fields. I use both when I go for runs with my 935.

If those 2 fields aren't available on your 245, then it could be an error in the manual (wouldn't be the first time).

For further context, in CIQ, ActivityInfo.trainingEffect is the aerobic training effect, according to the documentation:

https://developer.garmin.com/connect-iq/api-docs/Toybox/Activity/Info.html#trainingEffect-var

The Training Effect score of the current activity.

Training Effect is a score developed by FirstBeat, which indicates an activity's level of effect on aerobic fitness. Scores range from 1.0 (easy) to 5.0 (overreaching).

mike said:
This should be trivial to implement.

Sure, but if they purposely left out the standard aerobic and anaerobic training effect data fields for 245, it's probably not because it was hard to implement, it's probably because they want you to buy a more expensive watch to get that feature.

I can't speak for every company, but in my experience, the way marketing departments do market segmentation is they design the most expensive, fully-featured product first, then they decide what features to take out for the lower-end products.

They don't, as many of us assume, start with the lowest end product and add new features based on how easy/cost-effective it is to add to them.

TL;DR it's about figuring out what customers are willing to pay for a given feature, not how much it costs to implement that feature.