Re: First Test: MapRunG - MapRun on a Garmin Watch
Thanks for the testing and the feedback.
OK re font size and screen layouts.
Slow reaction - Have you changed your watch to one-point-per-second rather than Smart? (Details in the doco).
Incrementing control numbers - See doco for the thinking on this: 9.7 Does MapRunG beep/buzz at Repeat Punches?
In terms of whether to show or not - We show on MapRunF - so only fair to show on MapRunG - unless I change on both (as you say)
On 22 Jun 2020, at 1:56 am, MichaelRaz [via MapRun] <[hidden email]> wrote:
Fenix 5X, iPhone XS Max (everything latest software)
Overall a very good integration with the Garmin environment with no system level issues.
Watch specific: During the initial setup when the Watch ID is displayed, the watch screen contains general instructions on entering the ID into MapRunF. This results in the ID being on the bottom of the screen in a very tiny font that was close to unreadable (especially for us old guys). It was difficult to tell an 8 from a 3 due to some pixilation (I should have taken a screen shot - sorry). Although there are other means to capture the ID (through Garmin Connect on the phone) this is the first presentation of the ID and the one that most people will use I suspect. Perhaps the layout of the screen could be modified to reduce the text and present the ID in the center (maybe two lines?) in a larger font. I realize that this may be very watch dependent.
Setting up Event: Very smooth and a very nice integration between the two environments.
Running the Event: Again, no general issues at all. Occasional slow reaction to a punch but this is likely more to do with the GPS catching up and the limited processing on the watch. I'll likely try playing around to set up a F235 as well and try both watches concurrently (using that other application). Naturally it is very difficult to provide a valid GPS comparison.
Uploading Results: Again, no issues at all - very smooth and easy, especially given the limitations involved in linking with Garmin.
Issue/Comment? During the run the watch shows the last Control Code and displays the number of controls punched out of the total. I realize this is "as designed" but there is an issue from my perspective on this. I punched an extra control in the middle of the course (just ran past it - no issue) so, from that point forward the display (example) 7/13 is no longer really valid and can cause confusion as the next control to be punched is actually 7. It might be possible to end up with something like 15/13, which provides no real value and is misleading. I'm not sure how to solve this and understand the difficulty in ignoring extra punches dynamically during a point to point.
Now for the feature request (I know it is really early to be asking for a feature): I'll go one step more and suggest that maybe control count, and the page that shows all the controls punched, is not needed, or should be set by the administrator of the event to show or not (applies to MaprunG and F actually). I'm looking at this from the perspective of a regular competitive event with Si ( or other). The runner does not have a system that tracks which controls they have punched and, other than validating the Control Code at the flag, has no means of seeing the status of how many controls have been punched. Given that MapRunG needs to have a paper map (and I acknowledge that this is the focus in our club, while not for everyone), perhaps, at the most, the watch should show the last Control Code that was punched - just like coming across a control in the woods and checking the code, hoping it is on your map and you can now figure out where you are (or is that just me??). Perhaps a solution is to provide two modes - non competitive and competitive, with the latter not displaying as much details - more like a standard SI event. Understood that this would need to be synced with the MapRunF system to keep things consistent during an event regardless of which system was being used.
Overall, really successful first outing with this and really appreciate the hard work that has obviously gone into it. Thanks so much Peter (and team).
Ottawa Orienteering Club
If you reply to this email, your message will be added to the discussion below:
Thanks, Peter - installed via the Store and ready for the next outing on Wednesday! (My wife was making grumbling noises about my attempts to connect her watch via a tablet...).
FWIW: I had assumed it was a factor of the smaller display on the S model but, seeing it in the screenshot from Andrew H makes me think otherwise: the fact that some of the text goes off the edge of the screen e.g. that giving the GPS signal strength.
I concur with others that all I really want to see at a glance on the default screen is something to tell me whether I've successfully punched the control I'm at and, particularly for a score, a timer. Happy to stop and scroll to other screens if I really need to know more than that.
Thanks for the return comments.
Delay: I generally always use 1 sec - Unless I see something more dramatic I don't suspect this has anything to do with the app but just less than ideal GPS data. I love my fenix 5x but does not have the best GPS reception.
Control Numbers: I fully understand the logic of repeat punching and see this just like running past the same control a number of times (and physically checking the control code), beside the more technical reasons noted in the document.
I do think the '7/13' type counter display may be more confusing on the watch than the phone as, with the latter, you also get to see which controls have been marked as punched on the phone map if you need (assuming this is not turned off), while on the watch with a quick glance, this might look like the next control needed is 8 (which may or may not be correct depending on if you have extra controls punched. Perhaps, as others have suggested, it may just be a change in the various watch screens. As you noted I realize that all this involves both the F and G (I guess that was why I considered it a bit more of a feature request). Perhaps on both apps it could be tied to the "Controls change to green when punched" option so, if set to 'no', the count and list of controls punched is not shown with either app. somewhat like a "competitive" mode. Something maybe for future consideration!
I still had a lag of about 5 minutes between receiving the notification that Garmin Connect had finished syncing, and MapRunF could find the activity to upload. If this delay is to be expected then is it possible to add to the notice "check results on MapRunF" at the end of the watch activity?
Incidentally I tried to download the app from ConnectIQ but it still tells me it's using version 0.1.3 not 0.2.3. Do I have to dump the old one from the watch before getting the download from CIQ?
A successful trip out on a line course with the Fenix 6S Pro this evening. A bit of faff initially trying to upload the course due to lack of connectivity between phone and watch but that seems to be a perennial problem with Garmin and nothing that turning it all off and back on again didn't fix! There was a notable delay (20 - 30s?) between the Connect app (and Strava) receiving notification of the uploaded track and the ability to pull it down in MapRunF but it showed up after a few refreshes. Otherwise, all went well. No sign of the earlier error messages.
I've now tried the app on 3 maprun routes that I've done before with phone maprunf.
Unlike the maprunf phone based app I can't change the punch tolerance. It appears to be locked.
Most of my routes are in heavily wooded areas and the blue track on route gadget often shows my route being 20m away from the path shown on the map. To counteract this I usually put PT to 30m or 50m. This means when I arrive a check I get it to register(bleep/buzz) straight away. With the PT on 15m I have to go back and forth over the check 4-5 times slowly and occasionally have to wander off the path/route to get it to register. Thus wasting 5 or mins. Does MapRunG default tu 15m PT and lock it so you can't change it?
I sent you a lengthy email on this point yesterday.
See section 9.6 of the documentation... MapRunG uses the punching tolerance set for the Event. For example, if the event organiser sets a punch tolerance to 25m - both MapRunF and MapRunG will use that tolerance.
Did you try this and it didn't work? Or are you just using the default 15m and assuming it can't be changed?
Re: First Test: MapRunG - MapRun on a Garmin Watch
A few points:
- The default setting for whether Punching Tolerance is locked or not for a published event, had been UNLOCKED. This has been fixed in later versions of MapRunF. ie it is now LOCKED, as it doesn't make sense in a published event to allow people to run with different punching tolerance values.
- If it is a QuickStart or CheckSites event (ie a personal event) then Punching Tolerance can be changed by the user in MapRunF
- Anyway, its all a moot point, as the current design of MapRunG is that you can't change ANY settings for an event on the watch... I thought that was too fiddly. The settings are inherited from MapRunF.
- So if the fundamental issue is that for a forest event you want a larger punching tolerance. Just set up the event that way and both MapRunF runners and MapRunG runners will have the same tolerance.
For published events, the Admin sets the punching tolerance and this applies to MapRunF and MapRunG
I have now fixed the bug that allowed individual users of published events to change the punching tolerance. Allowing one user to run with 100m tolerance and not have to run to the top of the hill to get a control whilst others are running with 15m is not fair. It was a bug. I don't think this was being abused, but the bug is now fixed in MapRunF v5
For personal events - QuickStart and CheckSites the user is free to change the tolerance on the phone and then if they send the event to the watch (MapRunG) it will have this revised setting.
For forest events you are publishing, you are free to choose 30m tolerance.
Is there a bug-fix or enhancement you would like to propose?