Instinct - 9.20 Beta Release Candidate

Hello Instinct users,

We have new beta software ready for your upcoming adventures!

(Quick turn around on this one, we pulled in one more change and created a 9.20 update. You can see the previous post for 9.10 here.)

This software version is our next Public Release Candidate. This means that this software will become a public update, as long as we do not identify any critical bugs in this version. We would appreciate any feedback on v9.20. (Whether you install 9.20 now or wait for the official release in a few days, the v9.20 "release candidate" or "public release update" software will be identical.)

Please read the 'notes' and 'installation instructions' in the 'Updates and Downloads' page found in the link below. We look forward to your feedback!

Instinct: https://www8.garmin.com/support/download_details.jsp?id=14527

Note: Please allow for the updates to propagate across all servers. There is no need to post that the link does not work. It will after a bit of patience.

9.20 Change Log Notes:

Fixed potential issue with True North compass mode.

Previous changes from 9.04 to 9.10:

Fixed an issue where non-GPS activities were displayed in the Navigation menu.
Fixed a possible issue where the “Go” option was missing when trying to navigate an activity.

Top Replies

victorio over 5 years ago +2

It is well appreciated that Garmin has been working hard to improve the firmware of the Instinct, my Instinct came with version 6 and we are already on 9, but only has 10 month old.

What is the plan of…
6399314 over 5 years ago +1

thanks for the update, I really appreciate yours hard work and devote. but there are couple of things which are not exactly right and I hope you can look and solve it: gps accuracy is way off even with…
trux over 5 years ago in reply to 6399314 +1

6399314 said:
it's in the buildins or in the waters

GPS does not work indoors or under water, and a new firmware won't change it

All Replies

0 TeaRacer over 5 years ago in reply to 8887529

I have 9.3 in my Instinct in czech version. :-)

0 8887529 over 5 years ago in reply to TeaRacer

Thanks, actually it updated a short while ago finally, to 9.2.

0 Former Member over 5 years ago in reply to trux

Your heart abnormal alert it’s working??

0 trux over 5 years ago in reply to Former Member

Your heart abnormal alert it’s working??

No idea, I never tested it. Up and then, I just use the HR min/max alerts when running, if I want to stay within certain range. And that works fine, indeed.

0 Former Member over 5 years ago in reply to trux

thanks

0 PMO over 5 years ago in reply to trux

I don't think it is unimportant if the barometric pressure or the measured pressure is being used. Not at all. It would be so if the variations in both pressures were identical. But they are not. One of them depends solely on the accuracy of one sensor (the barometer) and not on temperature or altitude. The other one (at sea level) requires an arithmetic extrapolation that needs the additional knowledge and consideration of both temperature and altitude, which, as you mention, are not only unreliable, but even if they were reliable would increase the estimation error. For example, if the perceived temperature changes, the barometric pressure will change (and possibly trigger an alert) even if the barometer reading did not change at all. It thus seems much more reliable (albeit always prone to failure) to use directly the altimeter reading for this purpose.

0 trux over 5 years ago in reply to PMO

PMO said:
I don't think it is unimportant if the barometric pressure or the measured pressure is being used.

In this case it indeed is unimportant, since the only value Instinct has, is the pressure taken by the sensor. As far as I know, Instinct does not read the mean sea-level pressure (MSLP) over the phone from a local weather station. If it did, the storm alerts would be without the problems we all know.

0 PMO over 5 years ago in reply to trux

It IS important, precisely because of your arguments (which are, btw, identical to my previously stated arguments :) ): a) the watch DOES measure the local pressure; and b) the watch does NOT measure (or obtain from the phone) the sea-level pressure, which means that it has to obtain it indirectly and unreliably. Just think about it for a while, as I have.

0 trux over 5 years ago in reply to PMO

Yes, and that's exactly the reason I wrote that the watch "It simply looks for pressure change patterns". And since the only source of the pressure is the pressure sensor, it is exactly that pressure that was meant. If the pressure is algoritmically recalculated to MSLP or not, does not matter at all.

0 PMO over 5 years ago in reply to trux

That algorithm uses the temperature and altitude to make the conversion. Keep this in mind, because you are still not considering this fact, even though I keep repeating it. Keep also in mind that the watch determines, uses, and shows to the user two different pressures: the ambient pressure (as measured by the sensor) and the barometric pressure, at sea level, (the one calculated with that algorithm). Either one can be being used to trigger storm alerts, because the watch determines (and therefore knows) both. As I said from the start, I do not know which one is being used to trigger storm alerts. As you said, you don't either. But knowing which one is used is important to the problem of false storm alerts, because these two pressures do not necessarily have the same patterns of change. A simple example of why the change patterns in those two pressures are not necessarily the same (my last try): Suppose you go outside, and the watch detects a change in temperature, but not a change in the measured pressure. Even though the ambient pressure (the measured pressure) remains the same, the algorithm may now compute a barometric pressure (at sea level) different than before, simply because the temperature that is now being considered in the calculations changed, leading to a different calculated result. Note the difference in change patterns: even though the ambient pressure remained the same, the barometric pressure calculated by the watch changed, just because there was a change in temperature. The same thing may also happen if you change the altitude (by calibrating it, for example), something that will also change the barometric pressure even if the ambient pressure did not change. Do you see now why the "change patterns" in these two different pressures determined by the watch may not be the same at all? And why it is important to consider real changes in pressure (as measured by the sensor), instead of possibly false changes in the barometric pressure induced by changes, not of the pressure, but of the temperature (or altitude)?