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

5.03 Beta Version Available

It looks like we have a new Beta build available. I'll jump on it tonight when I get home from work.

http://www8.garmin.com/support/download_details.jsp?id=10451

Changes made from version 4.70 to 5.03:
Added Connect IQ 1.3.0 SDK support. See the Connect IQ 1.3.0 SDK for a list of new features.
Various bug fixes and stability improvements.
  • Former Member
    0 Former Member over 8 years ago
    I've never tried Beta of Garmin devices before (have done Android and iPhone betas though). I see the change log showing some improvements. How is 5.03b working for you? I see the restore file in the download is v4.70.... I only have 4.60 on my device... any idea of differences?
  • An interesting note with the advancement to SDK 1.3, http://developer.garmin.com/index.php/blog/post/connect-iq-2-biker-monkey Looks like soon the new features will no longer be able to be put on the FR235, we're only about 6 months away from Aikido end of support. Guess that'll become a factor when getting watches in the future... how far is the SDK support lifeline for the watch?
  • An interesting note with the advancement to SDK 1.3, http://developer.garmin.com/index.php/blog/post/connect-iq-2-biker-monkey Looks like soon the new features will no longer be able to be put on the FR235, we're only about 6 months away from Aikido end of support. Guess that'll become a factor when getting watches in the future... how far is the SDK support lifeline for the watch?


    This is kind of a new thing for Garmin, so really, the answer is "who knows".

    I don't personally see it as a huge deal, this isn't an iOS issue where it will negatively impact the core functionality of the device if you can't upgrade. We might miss out on some neat homebrewed stuff by the middle of 2017 or so, but I don't personally mind.

    I do find it bizarre just how little flash and RAM they're putting into these watches, though. They're definitely not built to be future proof, that's for sure, and I'm not gonna advance beyond the 2xx line until Garmin stops dropping full support for these things yearly. $400++ is just too much to pay for something so quickly obsoleted. They really need to adopt an Apple-like lifecycle to get me to drop that kind of cash.
  • They're definitely not built to be future proof,
    In spite of the Connect‑IQ platform, these sports watches are not marketed or sold as general-purpose computing devices, and what the released models would (or promise to) do for their current and prospective buyers are known at the time the purchasing decisions are to be made.

    If you take ‘future proof’ to mean there will be post-sale increases in the value proposition and/or feature set of a model (that offer the manufacturer little or no commercial return in investing to deliver), I don't see why it ought to be the design intent.

    $400++ is just too much to pay for something so quickly obsoleted.
    People are still buying Garmin watches that are superseded models, e.g. the Forerunner‑225, going by what we read in the relevant sections in this forum. If you sell your old watches when you upgrade, then it won't be at a net cost of ≥$400 to you. Isn't that a viable approach if money matters more than one's toy collection? (For what it's worth, I am myself pretty bad at disposing of old gear while it still retains some resale value, and all my old mobile handsets, tablets and laptops that haven't been broken are still here. Some have been re-purposed, and others just collecting dust.)
  • This is kind of a new thing for Garmin, so really, the answer is "who knows".

    I don't personally see it as a huge deal, this isn't an iOS issue where it will negatively impact the core functionality of the device if you can't upgrade. We might miss out on some neat homebrewed stuff by the middle of 2017 or so, but I don't personally mind.

    I do find it bizarre just how little flash and RAM they're putting into these watches, though. They're definitely not built to be future proof, that's for sure, and I'm not gonna advance beyond the 2xx line until Garmin stops dropping full support for these things yearly. $400++ is just too much to pay for something so quickly obsoleted. They really need to adopt an Apple-like lifecycle to get me to drop that kind of cash.


    Garmin is saying that the CIQ 1.3 VM has and end off life, but that doesn't mean CIQ DEVELOPERS do too! (at least I hope not! :) )

    You'll get support for things in CIQ.... It just means that the firmware won't add new stuff the developers might want to do....

    "Jim, I'm a CIQ developer, and not a smug pickle" (old star trek reference, I'm sorry! :) )
  • Former Member
    0 Former Member over 8 years ago
    I do find it bizarre just how little flash and RAM they're putting into these watches, though. They're definitely not built to be future proof, that's for sure, and I'm not gonna advance beyond the 2xx line until Garmin stops dropping full support for these things yearly. $400++ is just too much to pay for something so quickly obsoleted. They really need to adopt an Apple-like lifecycle to get me to drop that kind of cash.


    I couldn't agree more. I would have gladly paid the extra $10-$25 for a bit more growth potential. I won't be buying a new watch until this one dies, they just are too expensive to toss away.
  • Former Member
    0 Former Member over 8 years ago
    I couldn't agree more. I would have gladly paid the extra $10-$25 for a bit more growth potential. I won't be buying a new watch until this one dies, they just are too expensive to toss away.


    They must be going out of their way to add so little flash memory. I like my Forerunner 235 but it is definitely my last Garmin product.
  • Garmin is saying that the CIQ 1.3 VM has and end off life, but that doesn't mean CIQ DEVELOPERS do too! (at least I hope not! :) )

    You'll get support for things in CIQ.... It just means that the firmware won't add new stuff the developers might want to do....

    "Jim, I'm a CIQ developer, and not a smug pickle" (old star trek reference, I'm sorry! :) )


    That is reassuring, although I'm sure at some point you guys will come up with some super cool functionality that'll make me drool, but I'll have to pass up. I keep my computers and cars until they no longer run, and suspect it'll be the same with the FR235.

    And if I get the reference does that mean I'm old? Bummer.
  • In spite of the Connect‑IQ platform, these sports watches are not marketed or sold as general-purpose computing devices, and what the released models would (or promise to) do for their current and prospective buyers are known at the time the purchasing decisions are to be made.

    If you take ‘future proof’ to mean there will be post-sale increases in the value proposition and/or feature set of a model (that offer the manufacturer little or no commercial return in investing to deliver), I don't see why it ought to be the design intent.

    People are still buying Garmin watches that are superseded models, e.g. the Forerunner‑225, going by what we read in the relevant sections in this forum. If you sell your old watches when you upgrade, then it won't be at a net cost of ≥$400 to you. Isn't that a viable approach if money matters more than one's toy collection? (For what it's worth, I am myself pretty bad at disposing of old gear while it still retains some resale value, and all my old mobile handsets, tablets and laptops that haven't been broken are still here. Some have been re-purposed, and others just collecting dust.)


    For the most part, I agree; the 235 does nearly everything I could want in a device like this. It is invaluable for training for races, as well as looking at trends over time.

    That said, there are some ridiculous bugs and missing functionality that I'm not confident are going to be dealt with. For the price of the product, I would expect a bit more than "only" critical bug fixes to the device. I am not expecting an entire software overhaul, but to give you an idea:

    - Sleep tracking is pretty much broken garbage. It's gotten slightly better since the device launched, but is leagues behind what competing products do.
    - No notification when hitting step goals is ludicrous. Again, why have this functionality if you're not going to notify the user of hitting their goal?
    - Not being able to add custom activities is nonsense. "Other" is the catch-all, but super inconvenient when you have some "Other" activities that use GPS, some that don't.

    I don't feel as though I'm asking for the moon here. All three of these things, amongst others, are very obvious and glaring flaws with the device easily fixed through software updates. I understand that you don't feel as though Garmin "owes" us this stuff, but why include things like sleep tracking and step goal tracking if they're going to put in such weak implementations of those features compared to *any* competing product? It makes them look bad for the price they're charging.
  • I updated to 5.03 beta. It initially froze after the update and reboot, so I had to do a forced reboot. It's pretty sluggish going back and forth to the custom watch face (GearMin). It's taking about 4 seconds from the time I push a button, to the time the watch face loads. I might try doing a factory reset to start from scratch.

    As far as functionality, I don't really see any differences at the moment, but I haven't invested too much time in it to be honest. I'll take it for a run tonight and post back.