I am wondering if having an update frequency of 100ms is wise for the stop watch clock_info.
I have 2 reasons for saying this.
The tenth of a second accuracy is only displayed for the first 60 seconds
I have noticed a difference in battery consumption.
I am now running tests but it looks like using simplest++ clock the battery drops (from 100%) to below 50% in 12 hours when running the stopwatch clock_info. Using the Lato clock (with same config) the battery drops to 10% in 12 hours. I am now repeating the tests with both watches fully charged to 100% and the stop watches started at the same time. Of course I will have to swop the watches round as the difference could be due to the watches. But conclusion is that 100ms refresh time uses a lot more battery power and that it seems to be more obvious with an app that uses a custom fonts.
Espruino is a JavaScript interpreter for low-power Microcontrollers. This site is both a support community for Espruino and a place to share what you are working on.
I am wondering if having an update frequency of 100ms is wise for the stop watch clock_info.
I have 2 reasons for saying this.
I am now running tests but it looks like using simplest++ clock the battery drops (from 100%) to below 50% in 12 hours when running the stopwatch clock_info. Using the Lato clock (with same config) the battery drops to 10% in 12 hours. I am now repeating the tests with both watches fully charged to 100% and the stop watches started at the same time. Of course I will have to swop the watches round as the difference could be due to the watches. But conclusion is that 100ms refresh time uses a lot more battery power and that it seems to be more obvious with an app that uses a custom fonts.