This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Petition: GroupTrack as a Widget not data page

I have GroupTrack activated to sometimes coincide with colleagues, but the truth is that most of the time I go out on my own to train and always having a data page there with a connection is annoying, if I have to switch between data, map, potentiometer, etc... (it's one more screen that doesn't give me anything).

I also don't want to remove it in case I want to coincide with someone in some output and have to go to the settings to enable/disable each time (I also often have active connections and the page does not activate until a long time has passed)

I propose the option that GroupTrack can be managed from the page like now or from the upper curtain, along with sensors, messages, segments, lights, music and GroupTrack. I think it would be more useful and clean.

  • No disagree. I want it to stay as a “page”. It’s easier to access than your proposal.  

    interesting that people raise many complaints  (or raise petitions) about Garmin not getting hardware / software releases perfect, but then there is also this expectation that they offer high levels of configuration options and high levels of integration with many third party devices.  There aren’t many products on the market that allow this.  Many are more “tied down” which off course helps them release products with less issues.

  • Well, I think that a Garmin is like a Casio calculator if we compare it with what a current €600 smartphone does (whether Android or iPhone) that work perfectly and without crashes...

    I believe that giving this option does not require a very complicated level of engineering and development. I think it would be better designed or give the option to the user.

    The same as you can control the bontrager lights from the Garmin widget or have a dedicated page just for that (and personally I prefer the widget that takes up less space and is not something that is used constantly)

  • I'm curious why you believe this would not require a very complicated level of engineering and development.

  • ... because I studied computer engineering and I've been a programmer for 25 years and that's what I work for. 
    Trust me it's not quantum computing or AI models... classic C programming. Any mobile game of the thousands that are in the play store is more complicated to develop.

  • I think if you actually look at what level of customisation is actually available to a smartphone it is ver y low compare to what Garmin allows.  

    I too work in the industry for 30 years and I appreciate there is a lot more to it than ”just doing the code”. You need to add in all the interactions and use cases, the testing of the changes and the long term support.  I think if you really understood and appreciated the code behind these devices you would not make such a statement that they are less complex than a game on the play store. 

    People don’t realise it but software changes are a long way from free and easy. 

  • Comparing a Garmin with a smartphone at the level of complexity of the Operating System leaves me speechless. iOS won't be customizable (is not free), but on Android you can do whatever you want. But that of hundreds of devices that carry android such as car radios, or the Hammerhead Karoo itself, would not be possible.

    Anyway... it was a request, it's not critical nor is it a major problem. But I think Garmin has a lot to learn when it comes to interface design.

    For example, they put some very nice new icons to the fields (altitude, HR, cadence, slope or gears), but leave many other fields without an icon, such as speed, distance, temperature, lap, time, time.... why?

    It's called "lack of details" and doing things halfway

  • Weird, I've been a programmer for 30 years and I would never say that about a codebase I haven't access. The framework might be so complex and with so many different layers,and classes that moving the map from one kind of view to another might require weeks of work and refactoring. Also, the map should be refactored to work in different contexts. All these developments would then require thorough testing across lots of different situations. Not to forget code and features are shared beteween lots of devices at garmin, so one change need probably to be reviewed and checked for different platforms as well. We then have configuration that needs to be developed, configuration in the device and in the app. But quite simple you say.

  • I'm not going to get into this discussion. ...

    I think that a €600 device could come out more mature and tested on the market, at least. The bugs it has and the weeks of development and testing, they stay in an office afternoon against the clock

    And the interface and user experience are a far cry from using an iPhone. It is more a PDA with Windows CE or Mobile in a Casio Calculator

  • You made a statement to support your petition that is not backed by any evidence. Since you made it publicly, I think it's only fair to reply.

    Agree that less bugs would be better, but I can't say I've been bothered with issues. I am fully satisfied of the 1040 and I see other suppliers of electronic devices suffering the same fate. My Iphone 13 is not without bugs and the Samsung phones I used in the past were nest of bugs, horrible compared to Garmin. What I don't have with other suppliers is a forum where I can discuss my issues and see them rapidly solved, and hardware longevity. I changed my edge 1000 after 8 years of use and abuse and it was still fully functional, I just retired it because I was looking for some novelty, can't be beaten.