MISSING DEVICES

There are 67 unique devices in the latest DEVICES.XML file.

I'm populating a spreadsheet for these 67 devices, mostly from running my little DF that grabs the info. And for ICON size and Color Depth - parsing the XML directly.

However, there are missing devices. For example, the Edge Explore 820. It is different from the Edge 820... for example, according to the Compatible Devices webpage, the Explore 820 does not support Power Meters or Shifting. But the simulator groups those devices together, and DEVICES.XML doesn't have the Explore 820 listed.

Is this an oversight/bug, or there really isn't a unique part number for some of the devices that have different characteristics?

Top Replies

All Replies

sabeard over 6 years ago

From a CIQ perspective there are a few devices which are identical whole the real devices are different. For example the Edge 1000 and Edge Explorer 1000 are different devices, but are the same for CIQ. You do get additional part numbers in the list to account for the differences in FW, but you have no method to split support for the two devices. I suspect the 820 is the same case.

jim_m_58 over 6 years ago

Yes, for CIQ some are considered the same. a prime example is APAC vs ROW variants, and things like the f5x and tactix charlie.

I can see you're parser is wrong on vibration BTW, as the e520 and e530 for example, don't have vibrations.

DaveBrillhart over 6 years ago in reply to jim_m_58

jim_m_58

Weird... this is for the Edge 520 Plus. Why does this return TRUE for vibrate?

jim_m_58 over 6 years ago in reply to DaveBrillhart

Use something like (Attention has :VibeProfile) to see if you can use vibrations and/or tones. In this case while the setting might be available in code, it doesn't mean it's available on the device

DaveBrillhart over 6 years ago in reply to jim_m_58

That worked! Thanks.

jim_m_58 over 6 years ago in reply to DaveBrillhart

I have a test app I use when a new device is added to the SDK to "look around",and it's got a ton of "has" statements for various thing. In something like that, "has" is really the way to go.