Opening up permissions on watch faces? Here's why it should be considered.

I did this was a watch-app and not a watchface (as I couldn't!), but shows why some permissions on watch faces should be considered.

Battery drain wise, in most cases, it only updates once per minute (like a watch face in LP mode) But every x minutes it does a makeJsonRequest() to update the temperature, and every y minutes, it gets the current location with GPS, and that is used to update the temperature.

Not that things like Comm and Position should be wide open, but what if a comm request are allowed ever 10 mins from a watchface, and GPS every 30 minutes? (this interval could be longer, of course!). Minimal battery drain, that could be adjusted if it's an issue. HR seems another valuse that a snapshot every z minutes might be worthwhile...)

It would allow the watchface to a bit more "alive" with other data. I crammed a bunch of stuff on the screen here including step data and a move bar! Example:

Top Replies

Former Member over 9 years ago +1

Watch faces and data fields that drain battery life will self moderate

It is great that Garmin want to provide consistent user experience and keep battery life long.

However, users of app stores should…

All Replies

HermoT over 9 years ago

I don't agree they will "self moderate". What will happen is that someone will download a watchface that's heavier in battery usage, and a week or two later, may notice they have to charge the watch every 3 days instead of every 5 days. As that goes on, they forget about the watchface being the impact, but do remember that they aren't getting the 5 days like they grew to expect, and will blame the watch, and not the watchface.

Agree with Jim here. In my experience I have encountered users that are so clueless about the ecosystem.
Most think I work for Garmin and don't understand that my watchfaces are 3rd party developed apps.
I fully understand how Garmin needs to carefully balance the features of products with protecting their reputation.