Data field shows IQ and 3 dots

I've never seen or heard of "IQ..." appearing in a data field before, but if you have access to the device in question, you could create a couple of test apps with known crashes (such as array out of bounds and watchdog timeout) and see if any of them trigger this error message.

If you don't have access to the device in question, you could ask the user to send you a copy of CIQ_LOG.YML so you could try to the determine if there was a crash associated with the error message.

i've been seeing this randomly as well.  Seems to happen simultaneously to multiple ConnectIQ apps and changing the field to something else and then back to the ConnectIQ app and all is good.

windfield said:

i've been seeing this randomly as well.  Seems to happen simultaneously to multiple ConnectIQ apps and changing the field to something else and then back to the ConnectIQ app and all is good.

If that's the case, it's most likely the same crash as indicated by "IQ!".

I've seen the kind of behavior you described in multiple generations of devices (except it was the "IQ!" message). Pretty annoying that it keeps recurring tho.

Anyway, just to make sure, I created a CIQ data field with a deliberate crash and sideloaded it to my 955 (which is new to me, and for which I hadn't seen which icon/message is displayed for a data field crash yet.)

Yeah, 955 displays "IQ..." instead of "IQ!". So I'm almost certain it's simply a new error message/logo to indicate the same old kind of crash.

But when you have those intentional crashes, like ArrayOutOfBounds or DivisionByZero, etc, then you do get a stack trace in the crash log, and I think that you see it in ERA (I think I had there ArrayOutOfBounds once)

flocsy🤠 said:

But when you have those intentional crashes, like ArrayOutOfBounds or DivisionByZero, etc, then you do get a stack trace in the crash log, and I think that you see it in ERA (I think I had there ArrayOutOfBounds once)

What is the point of continuing a 2025/2026 discussion in a 2023 thread?

In 2023, when this thread was posted and replied to, nobody said anything about not having a crash log, stack trace or ERA report. Maybe it was implied (by omission and in hindsight), but nobody said it outright.

It was only in 2026 that it was explicitly mentioned by Brandon.ConnectIQ that (supposedly) "IQ!" gives you a crash log and "IQ..." does not, and that context does not appear anywhere in this thread.

Anybody other than you and me who happens to read this thread will have no idea what you are talking about.

I think this is a great example of why most user support communities for companies like Apple will lock threads after a few months.

Yes, I think one of the strengths (and occasional weaknesses) of forums is that you can have discussions which span months, years, or even decades, unlike almost any other medium on the internet (except maybe youtube comment sections). Sure, some reddit posts stay open forever and you can leave comments 10 years later (but it doesn't push the post to the top, unlike the situation with forums).

I also think that there are many situations were it makes zero sense to dredge up an old discussion for no reason.

I see it over and over again.

e.g.

- User A posts observation of weird behaviour in 2017, and makes educated guess about the reason (it's an app crash or whatever)

- Discussion ends in 2017

- 8 years pass...

- Excitable User B replies in 2025, exclaiming that User A is absolutely wrong, because they recently saw they same behaviour but it's not an app crash!!!

- Eventually it turns out that actually it was an app crash after all, so the 2025 part of the discussion was worse than useless. User A was right in 2017, and the behaviour actually hadn't changed by 2025.

So what was the point of resurrecting that topic? Just to incorrectly contradict User A? Even if User B was right in 2025, how do they know that User A wasn't also right in 2017? It's possible for things to change over time.

True, but it's funny, 'cause you brought it up:

Now you can reply to this, then 4 more times to yourself, as usually :)