Run Power: Data Field

That's what I was gonna say actually.... (but I didn't bother to double-check)



Yeah, distance and pace from footpod has been brought up, although maybe in the context of the large memory watches.

The problem here is the same problem that all IQ apps have: distance and pace from an IQ app cannot override native distance and pace.

So if you care about the following, you're SOL:
- Workouts (unless the app builds its own workout system, which tbh, I would never even consider doing)
- Pace alerts
- Native distance and pace metrics in GC

Obviously Garmin wants you to buy the expensive watches if you want distance/pace from footpod with GPS enabled.

Besides I hate to bring this up (again), but the "market" for all these apps, even with a price tag of $0, seems awfully small. When Run Power was released, there was a brief surge of interest (maybe 200 downloads for the first two days), and now it's down to 700/month.

Could Run Power be better? Of course. I don't even like the aesthetics that much, tbh. (Which is not to say that I think 7-field layouts look nice, either....)

And I know the complexity of the settings is a turn off for some.

But the problem from my POV is:
- I have no idea why people don't download Run Power. Is it because they don't like the way it looks, they don't get what it does, they think it's too complicated, or they don't need it?

It's so niche and if Stryd already provides what people need, maybe that should be good enough.

I'm still working on Run Power+ in the background, as I kinda like the challenge of cramming as many features into CIQ data fields as possible >_>. But I really don't foresee a huge spike in demand. It won't be the next dwMap or Dozen Run, for sure. And maybe it was never meant to be.

Run Power is the best garmin datafield for running with Stryd. My coach, a professional who trains european champions in mountain running and triathlon, uses your datafield.

Run Power delivers, others might have the looks but lack the flexibility and usability.

It's niche? yes, because few people run with power.... and even fewer people really understand what that means. I think that most of people who buy Stryd don't really know what to do with it.

What I'm trying to say is: Thanks for your work! .... It makes my training easier and more productive :)

cortizovizcaino Thanks for the kind words.

It's niche? yes, because few people run with power.... and even fewer people really understand what that means. I think that most of people who buy Stryd don't really know what to do with it.

Exactly. But I find that the apps from the "big names" like Stryd, Strava and Garmin obviously get more downloads, even if a CIQ app exists that does better. For example, I made a stopwatch that looks like the 935 native stopwatch and fixes many of the problems with the Garmin stopwatch app in the store (including some visual quirks), but my app = 1000 downloads/month and Garmin's app = 5000 downloads/month, despite Garmin's app having some terrible reviews. So it's not always about looks and functionality, a lot of it is just marketing and name recognition.

Run Power delivers, others might have the looks but lack the flexibility and usability.

Which CIQ/native data field has aesthetics that you like? And what would you specifically change about Run Power's looks if you could? Believe it or not, I do want it to look nice. But I prioritized features, because there were obviously a few features missing from some of the existing fields.

And I really think that some of the most popular apps in the store don't necessarily look amazing. But they do fulfill a need or fill a gap in functionality.

I'd like to hear from anyone who has an opinion.

My two cents on aesthetics:
- The look of Run Power is very basic, but that's intentional and also necessary (because I spent available memory on features, not looks). Some of the layouts are almost exact clones of the native 2 and 4 field layouts, so they're no different than what we all use every day on our watches.
- Maybe the header and footer don't look that great and would be better if they just looked like small fields (without the "inverse background" and white text)? I'm not sure.
- I don't think there are any truly "beautiful" (*) CIQ data fields, partly because there just isn't enough memory on most watches. In contrast, there are a couple of really nice looking watchfaces, because watches have a lot more memory for those, and also because looks are more important than features for a watchface
- I did go to the trouble of copying the native alert popup. I haven't seen that in any other app.
- I wish I could have a nice battery icon like some of the other fields, but there just isn't enough memory on any device except 645 Music and Fenix 5 Plus / 5X. Ironically, due to low demand, I don't know if it's worth investing time in this kind of thing. Are people going to download Run Power because of a nice battery icon?
- I know that a lot of people seem to like the 7-field layout(s), but I think it doesn't look that great, and I think some of the asymmetrical versions are even less great. Maybe I'm in the minority here
- Even if I had unlimited time and device memory to make Run Power look amazing (e.g. for 645 Music, Fenix 5 Plus / 5X), I still don't know whether it would be worth spending that time on an app that doesn't draw interest in the first place.

(*) Except maybe this one: Here's an example of a data field that looks really nice imo. It's modern, clean and minimalistic. There's nothing else like it in the store (except for one watchface that copied the design). It looks like it came from a designer, not a coder. Yet I never use it and it has 4000 downloads in two years....

If Run Power looked like this, would it be more appealing? Unfortunately, it would be impossible for all watches but 645 Music, Fenix 5X, and Fenix 5 Plus. Plus, it's obviously a lot harder to imagine having the same kind of flexibility when you have a layout like this.

https://apps.garmin.com/en-US/apps/7...2-2d739e0dbad7 [IMG2=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","src":"https:\/\/services.garmin.com\/appsLibraryBusinessServices_v0\/rest\/apps\/75b73ffc-731b-4b6a-be62-2d739e0dbad7\/screenshots\/591a255b-2810-4011-b448-ca31d190ebee"}[/IMG2]

Hi,
I am trying to make a formula for TSS field in RunPower.

I have tried this formula, but nothing happens during a run - the field stays "--"...
((timer * avg(timeavg(power,30,1)^4)^0.25) * (avg(timeavg(power,30,1)^4)^0.25 / 349) / (349 * 3600)) * 100

In this case 349 is my FTP and 3600 is seconds in an hour.

The original formula is from Joe Friel:
TSS = [(s x NP x IF) / (FTP x 3,600)] x 100
???????(s = time of activity in seconds)
- https://www.joefrielsblog.com/2011/06/oops-what-is-tss.html

I have a Fenix 5+ watch - do you think the formula is too long (I have tried to paste the code as well with same result) or can anybody see an error in the formula?

erniedk the formula looks okay although I haven’t tested it. If it was too long, Run Power would crash with an “IQ!” Error.

Are you pairing your power meter natively (through watch settings)? Currently formulas only work with native power, and not if you type in the ANT+ ID in the app settings. This could change in the future.

EDIT: Also, you need to start the timer and wait 30 seconds for a value to appear. NP and IF (as implemented above) are undefined until 30 seconds have passed.

EDIT: I tried this formula in the simulator, and it seems to work. 0 is displayed after 30 seconds, and 1 is displayed about a minute later.

FlowState thanks!
I have paired natively (both as power and foot pod) - AND typed in the ANT+ ID in the app settings, just to be sure :)
With this combo I have had no problems with other formulas so far..

I have removed the ID now and will check tomorrow.
Great that it works in the simulator - so I should be able to get it to work on my watch too

erniedk As mentioned in the manual, for watches that support power meters natively, there's no reason to type in the ANT+ ID unless you want to pair a second power meter (for some reason). Sorry for the confusion!

I probably should de-emphasize this option for F5+ by placing it at the bottom or something.

In the future it could be possible to have Power in formulas work with power meters paired by ANT+ ID. I just haven't done so yet because I haven't seen a lot of interest in the custom formulas.

[1/4] On the subject of aesthetics. I do realize that the header and footer might look a bit annoying, with the inverse background. So I'd like to take a little poll.

The next 3 posts show Run Power:
1) As it is today
2) With an alternate style for the header and footer (no inverse background)
3) With a second alternate style for the header and footer (black background)

Please press "Like" on the post with the style that looks better to you. Thanks! (Again, I know all the styles look pretty basic and cramped.)

If you have any comments or suggestions, please feel free to leave a reply.

As a reminder, I would genuinely like to hear which data fields look nice to everyone.
I like Trendy Run: https://apps.garmin.com/en-US/apps/7...2-2d739e0dbad7
I also think Stryd's Power Race looks okay (although it might be a bit much): https://apps.garmin.com/en-US/apps/5...6-b095480dfda7

[2/4] Like this post if you prefer the current header style: header and footer with background that's the same as theme colour.

[IMG2=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","src":"https:\/\/i.ibb.co\/12KnGjf\/runpower-headers.png"}[/IMG2]

[IMG2=JSON]{"data-align":"none","data-size":"full","src":"https:\/\/i.ibb.co\/hXgvb47\/runpower-headers-black.png"}[/IMG2]