Forerunner 945 Beta 2.72 is available

Is not needed more analogies. I understand it and our points were already clear. We´d prefer a proper readings. Since is not like that for now, for you is useless, for me is enough. Anyway is not that important. I´ve been reading posts about the erratic WHR is, for running or bike due to vibrations, and few people are complaining. It is what it is. You want or need exact results because you are a profesional? You have HRM tri or Swim. You swim for pleasure and love to have at least some results? WHR while swimming is a blessing.

Chabier said:

I´ve been reading posts about the erratic WHR is, for running or bike due to vibrations, and few people are complaining. It is what it is. You want or need exact results because you are a profesional?

Again, perspective. What you think is a few, I see as a lot.  I'm far from being a professional, but I don't see how that's relevant.  Are you implying if I'm a amateur, I should just settle with what it is?  Your question raises doubt in the accuracy you find to be working with the oHRM. Are you saying that the accuracy is OK unless you're a professional athlete?  It's OK for the average Joe, but if you're a professional or want correct data, then......?  You started off saying the oHRM works well for swimming.  Though it doesn't for me, I took your word for it.  Since conversing with you, you've made comments such as something is better than nothing.  You'd be happy with adjusting the difference with the off oHRM readings.  Are you a professional and need better results?  You choose words such as "slight" and a "few" when talking about people who see the problems with the oHRM.  (Have you read any post in any forum since the inception of the oHRM?).  Anyone can see these are not the comments of someone who sticks to their guns and thinks the oHRM is accurate for swimming.  No, these are comments made by someone who just wants something; anything, regardless of accuracy.  Sorry, I can't support that.

Sorry, but I won´t continue this story. Again, our points were already clear.

It you don't want to continue this conversation, that's fine with me.  I just don't want you thinking I'm attacking you and that I'm against adding this feature.  We both want the same thing.  A functioning oHRM while swimming that's going to give us accurate results.  I would love nothing more than to ditch my HR straps.  I've tested the oHRM using the "other" activity profile with the 1st generation sensor on my 235, the 2nd generation sensor on my 935 and the newest sensor with the betas on my 945.  Each generation sensor has shown progress.  If Garmin can tweak the software to a point that the oHRM works well with swimming, I suspect it would also improve readings with other activities.  That's a win for everyone.  What I don't want to see is Garmin settling for a half-baked feature because many (I'm not saying you've said all these things) make comments like it's close enough, just compensate for the off readings, something is better then nothing or my personal favorite, just move on or don't use it.  How selfish is this that last comment?  It works well enough for me and to hell with everyone else?  I understand my findings don't fit with with a lot of peoples agenda, but I'll still continue to test the beta and send my findings to Garmin.  Garmin may or may not take into consideration my findings, but without opposing reviews, what's the incentive for further improvements?  Doesn't this benefit everyone?

make comments like it's close enough, just compensate for the off readings, something is better then nothing or my personal favorite, just move on or don't use it.  How selfish is this that last comment?  It works well enough for me and to hell with everyone else?

I guess it´s as selfish as saying "it doesn´t work for me so better get rid of it". I´m not saying you´re saying that, but I guess some people like me are afraid of Garmin take that guess as a proven fact and decide to stop developing the OHR for swimming bacause, anyway, that feature wasn´t in the watch when we bought it.

Chabier said:

I guess some people like me are afraid of Garmin take that guess as a proven fact and decide to stop developing the OHR for swimming

Point taken.  Let's just hope Garmin takes a fair look at all reviews and comments and they use those in their decision and further development.  I can assure you that my review isn't to ax the project, it's my hope it will be used to further the development.

The difficulty that Garmin face is presenting a workable feature that works accurately for the majority of users. That's an almost impossible task given the nature of individual difference. Some people are sceptical of Garmin's motives but stopping work on a feature simple because 

Chabier said:

anyway, that feature wasn´t in the watch when we bought it.

is not one of them; well I'd certainly like to believe that is the case anyway. I am sure Garmin are collecting enough data to determine whether or not the feature is worth pursuing simply on the premise of whether it works or doesn't work. What will help is people reporting both good and bad examples; not just the good, not just the bad.

If WHR in the water cannot be made to work reliably and accurately then there is no point in having it, whether as a choice or not. Bad data is of no use to anyone despite what some people think.

You're voting down all my post jstpassaro.  I reiterated what Browner40 found and asked if he performed a test he was thinking of conducting in my last post.  Odd that you didn't vote his down, but you decided to vote down mine.  You don't agree that Garmin should consider all reviews when developing this feature to make it the best for everyone as I stated in another post?  You also voted down my post about saying the purpose of the beta is to test it and give Garmin feedback.  Again, you disagree?  Perhaps you'd like to share your insight?  Or maybe you have an ulterior motive for your votes outside of this topic?

Now you're removing your vote to the post I mentioned?  Lol. I think I got my answer about ulterior motives.