3.30 regular release for 935 vs. 3.30 beta for Fenix 5?

...does anyone know if that is a typo on the Fenix 5 forum regarding the latest firmware release?


i find it strange that they are calling 3.30 a beta for the Fenix 5/5S while it is a general release for the 935. i thought X.x0 releases were standard releases...

my watch is updated...no mention of alarms being addressed in the change log, but i'll play a little later to see if is improved behavior...

I was asking myself the same thing. TIMGROSE and others have chimed in on this in the past but I am still so thoroughly confused around Garmin's Firmware strategy around the F5 and 935 ...

There were one or two x.x0 beta release on the F3, which turned up a few days later as full releases. Probably what they're planning here, unless anything weird shows up. Odd they're saying it's just a changed name for the previous beta, in that case, though, so also puzzled :confused:

That is odd that the Fenix team are calling an "0" release a "beta".

The difference seems to be that they want you to install it "manually" whereas our 3.30 comes down "properly" from Garmin Express etc

Cursory glance suggests they are functionally largely the same. Maybe the "strategy" is that the Fenix users do the leg work and we just get the end results. Still at this stage of the product cycle releases are of any description are pretty regular anyway but they are still largely confined to bug fixes rather than new "goodies" !

Maybe the "strategy" is that the Fenix users do the leg work and we just get the end results. Still at this stage of the product cycle releases are of any description are pretty regular anyway but they are still largely confined to bug fixes rather than new "goodies" !

I would be pretty upset if I was an F5 user and was doing the "leg work" for the 935 folks who have more stable and wait for it ... *cheaper* watches :-)

I think also that the general demographic of Fenix and Forerunners users is different. I imagine that the typical Fenix user is more interested in "experimenting" than a Forerunner one.

Heh, if they release betas one can complain that they are testers for other watches and if they don't the others can complain that they don't get as many updates or active support... It's truely hard to make everybody happy.

Anyway, I'd love to have more betas on the 935 as well but I do like to experiment. In the end it's not that they publicly release a beta without any internal testing so it should be pretty solid as well.

Heh, if they release betas one can complain that they are testers for other watches and if they don't the others can complain that they don't get as many updates or active support... It's truely hard to make everybody happy.

Anyway, I'd love to have more betas on the 935 as well but I do like to experiment. In the end it's not that they publicly release a beta without any internal testing so it should be pretty solid as well.

We all like to complain from time to time! Would not be many posts here otherwise :)
I think you are right about internal testing as the "gaps" in the version numbers of the betas suggest there are quite a few that are internal only.

As Tim mentioned, the weird thing to me is the last digit being "0" for a beta (on the fenix devices). I've always seen that as an indicator of a production release that goes out with GE or OTA to everyone, and I think this is the first time I've seen a beta that had the "0"!