Search results for:

I'm finding it odd going from the launcher to the settings menu because on the launcher, I am pushing the page, but on the settings menu I am pushing the selection.

My first thought, which may not actually feel as good in practice as it sounds in my head: What about fixing the "selection" in the centre in menus, and moving the position of the menu items instead?

It depends - what happened with Bangle.js 1 is often apps stopped being maintained after the first 6 months - and then if there's a problem it was me that had to sort it. The 'Run' app is an attempt to replace 'BangleRun' that had exactly that issue and turned into a maintenance nightmare because it was written in TypeScript and mostly undocumented... So I guess with this one I'm a bit more worried about maintenance precisely because the last one was such a pain.

Maybe not my place to say, but I don't think you should feel obliged to take over unmaintained apps. If an app that someone else contributed has a problem, and the original authors have lost interest, that is a gap for someone else to step in and take part - either by adopting the existing app, or creating a new one. In some cases, it might inspire someone to do something even better than the original. I can understand how having all the apps under one roof (repository) with one list of issues could give you the feeling that you need to take responsibility, but you've already provided an amazing platform, you don't need to shoulder everything yourself.

@Fteacher I didn't see anywhere that said forks etc. were bad, so maybe we understood things differently.

@Gordon I don't know if I feel a library is necessary, because I don't see the problem with code duplication here - people can copy/paste what the run app has that works for their app and add what doesn't (or re-implement... just making a user interface isn't the fun part for everyone).

Edit for clarity: I'm also not saying a library is a bad thing, nobody is obliged to use what is already there, I'm just saying that the run app is simple enough that someone can take what they want from it as is.

I can't speak for Gordon, but as for me: I found out about this watch because I was looking for a sports watch, so the sorts of things I want to implement/see implemented are things that friends with sports watches have described. That includes the things discussed on the other thread, and possibly more.

Wow, that one is impressive!

I may be misunderstanding, but does the time it takes to get a connection really matter? Surely you connect first, then check and send the accurate time. The time to check and send is the only bit that matters, isn't it?

@HughB , @myownself and @everyoneinsterested, do we open a different thread to discuss this other app ? I think Gordon's app is a nice base whose main screen could be modified, there could be an extra screen accessed through swipe up/down to access to what myownself described (completion state of specific running activities).

You opened a thread previously and you and I described what we had in mind - I suggest that we discuss there. I agree that Gordon's app is a great base.

@Fteacher as said in the other thread, I am interested in writing it - the Run app doesn't cover all of my wishes, and Gordon has expressed the desire to keep it simple. That said, I made my app even lower priority when Gordon released the Run app.

@Gordon I noticed https://github.com/espruino/Espruino/issues/2125 last night. Is this related, or am I conflating two completely different things just because they relate to timers?

@HughB is the difference between the positive and negative noise just gravity? I am not at the computer but I can't remember where in the current algorithm it is accounted for.

What sort of drift have you noticed so far between the two? Aren't the crystals in the GPS and Bluetooth at the same frequency (32.768 kHz)?

I think you're capturing the flashes just fine, you aren't calculating the units correctly.
The writing on the meter says 800 Imp/kWh, so you should be dividing by 800, not 1000.

2320 / 800 = 2.9 kWh, which is pretty close to what you estimated your usage to be.

Yes, some of my experiments used the difference and it showed promise.

@HughB Thanks for the explanation, it confirms my understanding and adds a couple of details I missed.

Your spreadsheet of step speeds is at http://forum.espruino.com/comments/16122158/ - I have just realised that the range I was looking for is slightly extended (allows for faster running), so when I get back to this I am going to pay more attention to the effect of that. My own running pace, which I didn't think was that fast, falls outside of your highlighted range.

Thanks @diego - I think I might end up using this, I think connecting will result in a much more accurate time than relying on the right advertisement being picked up at the right time.

I had a look at Bleak recently (it is in the Espruino tutorials somewhere), your example will be useful to me for another project I think.

I had an idea just before falling asleep last night, I hope I can still remember enough of it to give it a try (when I come to it, it might suddenly turn out to be obvious nonsense). Sadly I've got day job stuff to catch up on first.

Mixed activities are not great, they dont make good comparisons. We have to be quite rigid in the testing regime and a range of activties measured seperately AND the activity set needs to be as close a possible the same as the last test.

Actually, I think if we can get the timestamps of when the activity changed this could be very useful as an additional comparison.

1) Walking a 1 mile circuit
2) Sleeping overnight.
3) Driving 15 minutes or 30 minutes
4) Sitting at a Desk for 4 hours typing
5) General housework.

Running would be another good one. I think you said somewhere in the thread that runners will be more interested in other things, but step detection is important for some of the stats runners are interested in. If we can get the step count right, we can even put in a rougher version of distance if GPS is turned off.

I also liked (or hated) your train journey sample @HughB - I take the train far more often than I drive. I suspect that sample would look very, very different with a higher sampling rate. I'd be interested in more train journey samples if anyone happens to be commuting that way at the moment.

The question is, what is better. Obviously in the case that led to the threshold change, the phantom steps were unacceptable, but missing real steps for real walks is also not great.

Several of the articles I read accept that "steps" is really a proxy for physical activity, and in my view housework counts somewhat in that regard too. If I am using the step counter because I'm on a hike or a run, I want accuracy for actual steps. If I'm using it as a monitor of my general lifestyle, I probably want other exercise-like behaviour included, or at least don't mind about it.

Nice quick work.
I'm curious though - does doing something like this actually have the kind of accuracy you are after, or is it just adding a different offset? (maybe it is better, I have no idea whatsoever)

Can you explain how to read the steps and battery level? I can't work out how it shows the values you said.

I like the fake analogue time display idea, though.

@Numerist has also mentioned problems with accuracy of the clock. I am struggling to find the thread, but the fact that he wanted to use GPS time may have been a red herring/distraction from whatever @malaire is also seeing.

libs/banglejs/jswrap_bangle.c +2688:

• undefined or 'current' - health data so far in the last 10 minutes is returned,
  
• 'last' - health data during the last 10 minutes
  
• 'day' - the health data so far for the day
  

@HughB Although I may come back to this at some point, so far your current approach keeps winning out. It is easy to beat it for one or two of the sample files, but it is always at the great expense of another. My best experiments have all come back to a variation on the same theme as your state machine, and none have beat it.

I spent a significant part of my evening reading through that website. Thanks @jeffmer.

I've spotted it, thanks.
I haven't had chance to try with that sample yet, but I'm hoping at least one of my experiments will cope with it.

But to be honest at 12.5 sampling frequency filter design is severely constrained - as high frequency would be classed as up to 6.5Hz. After that all bets are off due to the Nyquest sampling rule.
Yes, I've so far found that filters haven't been that helpful because of the sampling frequency.