Software version 19.06

If past behaviour is any indicator, it's very likely that a new beta will appear near the end of April, ahead of a public release in June.

I wish this version was full of fixes. The watch deserves it after those months of suffering.

In regards to the watch suffering, I'm not sure what you're referring to.. But ok

Inaccurate measurement with an optical sensor. Altimeter (altitude rises at night), altitude gain during a circular run. High battery consumption. Fake naps. There is more.

...And a pace averaging instead of instant pace. It seems to me, like a Garmin melts together firmware from many models x55-x65 to maximize a profit. Some functions will be lost. but who cares. it is the main aim today. Marketing goes slowly mad - I am getting mail 2 weeks after releasing a buggy - sorry - "a new FW" - all will be better with a brand-new-super-duper-FW!!1 Garmin made it for you!!! 

It is a unfortunate development for me as a consumer. Fortunately, competition never sleeps. ;)

global_local said:

It seems to me, like a Garmin melts together firmware from many models x55-x65 to maximize a profit.

The same sensors, the same laws of physics - at this level, programs should objectively work the same.

What profit maximization, what are you talking about?

And what functions were lost, please give examples?

Putting your reputation at risk for instant hype - Do you really have such a low opinion of Garmin management?

global_local said:

Please read my first sentence again

Okay, what functions do you expect to be lost?

global_local said:

Really no clue?

Of course, by the way, it’s better not to answer a question with a question.

Just estimate this very profit - so that I understand what you are talking about.

4684381 said:

global_local said:

It seems to me, like a Garmin melts together firmware from many models x55-x65 to maximize a profit.

The same sensors, the same laws of physics - at this level, programs should objectively work the same.

While I agree it makes sense for Garmin and its customers for similar to devices to have similar firmware, we've all seen cases where Fenix/Epix have some random feature that Forerunner 955/965 don't, just for arbitrary market segmentation purposes, like Auto Lap by Position or the fancy power manager that's available on Fenix/Epix but not Forerunner.

I've also seen at least one case where using the same codebase as 955/965 has hurt 945 LTE. 945 LTE used to have different software/UI (closer to 945), but at one point it adopted similar software/UI to 955/965, which seems like mostly a good thing on paper. However, 955/965 have a GPU (supporting translucency) and touchscreen, and 945 LTE does not. Before the UI change, the map screen on the 945 LTE had zoom button hints (+ and -) with completely transparent backgrounds, so you could see the map underneath. After the UI change, the zoom button hints have a solid black background which blocks a significant chunk of the map. On the 955/965, this background is translucent (so you can see the map underneath) and it sorta makes sense because it represents an area of the screen you can physically tap. On the 945 LTE it's a step backwards and it make no sense (there's no touchscreen.) It seems that in this case, instead of tailoring the shared code for different devices, they just grabbed the code for the latest devices, without considering the impact on older devices.

This is sorta like how some people are complaining that certain parts of the UI (like notification backgrounds) are always black now, on newer MIP devices, which makes it harder to read for some. Clearly this was done to accommodate even newer AMOLED devices, which require a black background for everything.

TL;DR sometimes garmin device firmware is different when we wish it would be the same, and sometimes it's the same where it would be better off being different.

I agree - where there is a difference in elements, the code should be different. Now, as far as I understand, the main wave of complaints is related to the optical heart rate sensor. And here I do not agree that this is because Garmin (to increase profits?) uses the same software to process its readings, in my opinion this is justified - (the sensor is not a screen, that’s what I’m talking about). The same goes for the altimeter and gyroscope.