Connect IQ 2.1 SDK Preview!

Post code, ideally a minimal implementation of a Ui.View derived class, so that others can reproduce the issue.

Travis

thanks.

I do not know what I'm doing wrong but I dont see the hrTSS value in the summary of activity in the garmin.

In the .fit file appears:

Data,4,field_description,field_name,"hrTSS",,developer_data_index,"0",,field_definition_number,"0",,fit_base_type_id,"132",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

thanks.

I do not know what I'm doing wrong but I dont see the hrTSS value in the summary of activity in the garmin.

In the .fit file appears:

Data,4,field_description,field_name,"hrTSS",,developer_data_index,"0",,field_definition_number,"0",,fit_base_type_id,"132",,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,,

There's another piece to this whole thing - the <fitContributions> section in the .xml. That's the data that Garmin Connect uses to display fitcontrib data. The way I think it works, is that the definitions are included in the .iq, and when garmin connect gets a .fit with fitcontrib data, it gets the info from the app store as to how to display it.

So until 2.1 .iq files can be sent to the store, garmin connect won't do anything with the fitcontrib data.

There is a tool in the sdk to look at the data (monkeygraph), but it too needs a .iq. So for now, something like fittocsv is about it to test out fitcontrib.

There's another piece to this whole thing - the <fitContributions> section in the .xml. That's the data that Garmin Connect uses to display fitcontrib data. The way I think it works, is that the definitions are included in the .iq, and when garmin connect gets a .fit with fitcontrib data, it gets the info from the app store as to how to display it.

So until 2.1 .iq files can be sent to the store, garmin connect won't do anything with the fitcontrib data.

There is a tool in the sdk to look at the data (monkeygraph), but it too needs a .iq. So for now, something like fittocsv is about it to test out fitcontrib.

thanks

When the beta firmware for Edge devices became available, I've started experimenting with CIQ2 SDK. I was hoping that widgets or apps can be viewed as a DataScreen when activity is in progress. The current realization of accessing widget and apps make it completely unusable during activity. Too many clicks to access!

My question is: Since I can't use Widget or App paradigm to develop a full screen app that is available during activity. Can we increase the DataField memory limit from 32K to at least 64K for the Edge 520 device? 32K makes it very tricky to develop full screen datafield with alot of displayed info :)

The better solution could be if we'll able to use Widget or App as a DataScreen! This solves both problems: to many clicks to access and memory limit. Is it possible to implement?

The Fenix 3 HR is far from obsolete, though it has been one of the more challenging products for us because of its relatively limited resources (e.g. memory).

As with the given API development support it seems to be obsolete. Only 6 months for the Akido API is not long for such a expensive device that's only for some months on the market. Why is this device so limited in resources? Hopefully Garmin is able to reconsider the development of Akido API based devices.

As with the given API development support it seems to be obsolete. Only 6 months for the Akido API is not long for such a expensive device that's only for some months on the market. Why is this device so limited in resources? Hopefully Garmin is able to reconsider the development of Akido API based devices.

Technology ages very quickly. I believe 18 months is more or less the lifespan of technology before it becomes out dated.

By end of 6 months, Aikido will be 24 months old.

I'm acutely aware of how quickly technology ages, but it's absolutely bonkers to release a new API version that doesn't support a flagship product released under 5 months prior. I absolutely understand that there are hardware limitations, and I also agree that releasing new software ASAP to take advantage of new hardware features is a good thing. But in this particular case, and with these particular products, it's no wonder that you're going to piss off developers and customers alike releasing products with such quickly deprecated support. If you want to create an app and developer ecosystem that doesn't fall apart, you have to shed the mentality that these products stand alone and don't require any guaranteed degree of ongoing support. My point here is, pay very careful attention to putting out hardware with more than a few weeks worth of future-proofness over the next few product cycles.

The apple watch is completely unsuitable for serious training right now, as are most products Android Wear. But don't rest easy believing that'll last long, or they'll beat you up and take your lunch money as soon as they have onboard GPS and 30m water resistance.

The 2.1.0 Preview SDK can be used to develop for watches with 1.2.x, 1.3.x, and 2.1.x VMs (you may need to use "has" to see if one some of the functions are available on a specific watch at runtime and the api guide tells you what's available based on the VM versions). Nothing on a 1.2.x VM will stop working, but you wont be able to use the newer functions in 1.3.x and 2.1.x. (the 2.1.x SDK) In the same way, on a watch with a 1.3.x VM, you won't be able to use the functions specific to 2.1.x.

I'm not sure what you're worried about, as things will keep working, and new things can be developed for older watches.

I'm not sure what you're worried about, as things will keep working, and new things can be developed for older watches.

I think people are not happy with the fact that a flagship product won't be too flagship anymore.