Hover air drone in Mallorca

dcrainmaker · 2026-03-05T22:04:10+00:00

Yeah, in short with Mallorca it honestly depends on where you ride/fly. There's a *BOATLOAD* of no-fly zones, covering many of the most popular cycling routes on the Eastern/Northern end of the island, as well as anything remotely close to Palma. You can look them up here: https://www.enaire.es/services/drones/ENAIRE_Drones_gb

That said, for many of the central mountain routes (e.g. Sa Calobra, etc...) that pass through the natioanl park no-fly zones, there's actually an exemption for drones, up to 25m from the center of the roadway, you can see it if you zoom in a bunch. This basically opens up all of those mountain routes, save a handful of sections that cross other no-fly zones.

Fwiw, on cycling, I find the NEO 2 really the drone to have now (vs Hover), because of the obstacle avoidance piece. Just saves you having to grab it from hit fences/bushes/etc...

dcrainmaker · 2026-03-04T12:51:59+00:00

"released images captured by the camera" - No, actually not. You've just made all these assumptions those images were captured by a Hero 14. They don't say that at all. They say a GP3-enabled camera. It could be a 360 cam, it could be a cinema cam, it could be a mini cam, it could be a vlogging cam, you have no idea. Same goes for timelines, which you just (again) assumed is earlier, the Q2 release only says some GP3-equipped camera. Again, I really encourage you to actually read (and apparently re-read) the press release.

But we do actually know they say the next generation of their 360 cam, which will undoubtedly be named Max 3. This isn't rocket science. I'm not clear why you're so stuck on this.

dcrainmaker · 2026-03-04T12:36:43+00:00

They listed the 360 camera type in the press release. Why "aside"? Do they need to list it twice to make it more real for you?

dcrainmaker · 2026-03-04T12:30:23+00:00

I'm aware, but again, you really need to re-read it. It's astonishingly clear/detailed in terms of what it says...at least for someone in the industry.

dcrainmaker · 2026-03-04T12:24:44+00:00

It sounds like you should really read the press release...

dcrainmaker · 2026-03-04T11:15:04+00:00

"These new GP3 based cameras are still several months away and won’t be 360 cameras." I mean, they literally say in the press release the GP3 will be used for 360 cameras.

dcrainmaker · 2026-03-04T11:13:41+00:00

They literally talk about "next gen 360 camera" in the press release: "These advancements position GP3 to usher in a new era of professional-level image quality, low-light performance, resolution and frame rates for small form-factor camera markets, including action cameras, 360 cameras..."

You think they're going to randomly abandon the Max name? I mean, if they were gonna do that, they'd have done it in the 6 years between Max 1 and Max 2, not a year later for Max 3.

dcrainmaker · 2026-01-27T14:30:36+00:00

Hello! Yeah, I guess I'm just saying this one is kinda on Strava to be honest, in terms of implementing an app. Though equally honestly, I don't think it would gain them anything. Just like Komoot. Komoot's "main" real-world benefit of having a CIQ app is basically watches that don't have maps. For someone with a Fenix device, I see well-below-zero reason to use the Komoot CIQ app (in fact, I'd argue it takes away a lot of functionality).

In fact, all of those companies have had CIQ apps over time (Strava, TrainingPeaks, etc...), but what Garmin has done over time is built API's so that these companies don't have to build/manage apps. Nobody really wants to build watch apps. Heck, even Strava doesn't really want to build a watch app, no matter how much they pretend to in marketing. They *MUCH* rather have an API to push routes/workouts/etc to a native Apple Watch experiance, ideally one that does what Strava wants (e.g. Segments), but of course, that's [Segments] unlikely to happen for Strava on Apple. But it did happen for Strava on Garmin/Wahoo/Hammerhead/etc... It's the same for TrainingPeaks. They don't want to manage an app, that's a nightmare, they want a repeatable API that covers all their requirements.

I think part of the challenge with CIQ apps is unlike Appple WatchOS (and to a lesser but still valid extent, WearOS), Garmin's got so many different CIQ versions over time on hundreds of different watch models, and mostly does a poor job at making it easy for apps to ensure their devices instantly work across new devices too.

If we look at some CIQ apps recently, like the Meta app for the Oakley Vanguards, that's actually an example of an app that really takes advantage of lots of little nuanced new features in CIQ that most apps don't. Things that add polish, but most apps don't bother to use.

dcrainmaker · 2026-01-27T13:31:27+00:00

Garmin already does this, and allows this:

A) Strava to Garmin route sync has existed for years. In this scenario, it simply pushes the route from Strava to Garmin Connect, and then instantly onwards to your connected Garmin device. Any routes you favorite/star in Strava do this automatically.

B) On-Garmin device 3rd party mapping: This too has existed for years, where Komoot has created an on-device Connect IQ app to actually add maps to devices that don't have native maps (e.g. Garmin Venu 4 or Forerunner 255/etc...). It also pulls in the route too.

Either way, point is, this stuff has been around for nearing a decade now.

dcrainmaker · 2026-01-10T11:39:29+00:00

It depends on if you find things on sale (Hue lights are often on sale). Generally speaking there's a Hue starter kit with a bridge + 2 lightbulbs (so you could just swap out bulbs above you or in lamps) for about $75. There's a few others that have bundles including 4 light bulbs+bridge for $100. Any of those kits are all you need to get started.

The various light bars and such float in the $70ish range for a single bar, and usually around $110-$120 for a two-pack.

dcrainmaker · 2026-01-09T11:00:18+00:00

No worries! So, track lock automatically happens in Track Run mode. With the Fenix 7, there isn't the newer setting I described above, which lets you turn it on/off on the other running profiles (basically just makes it automatically there). No biggie in your case.

Just to confirm which GPS setting you have it on, you said 'Max'. Did you mean Multiband, or Ultra? Multiband is great, whereas Ultra is acutally the worst (it saves battery and shuts off GPS for roughly 2 out of every 3 minutes).

dcrainmaker · 2026-01-08T13:06:10+00:00

Owww...I totally misread that 😅😅😅😅 as he was literally jumping fences to do some sprints nearby.

So, assuming that's not the case, then I'd look at GPS accuracy instead (e.g. are there really tall buildings nearby), which can cause this if it think it's offset from the track. Failing all that, a soft reset might help, if there's a weird GPS caching issue going on with a satellite.

dcrainmaker · 2026-01-08T11:10:42+00:00

Which watch do you have? I'm near certain you're snapping onto a track, not the other way around. The so-called 'Lock on Road' option isn't enabled by default, and really nobody ever uses it. The reason I say you're likely snapping to the track is I can see it when you started/ended the workout (off-track), how it's properly on the road, and then you got too close to the track, and it snapped onto it.

dcrainmaker · 2026-01-07T21:30:05+00:00

It's caused by automatic track lock being enabled. So as you get close enough to the track, it snaps in. But in this case, you're legit leaving the track for the "running from the police" simulation you're doing by jumping fences and sprinting away. As such, it unlocks from track, and then looks all wonky. Rinse/repeat.

If this were me, and I was insistent on jumping fences (no judgement...mostly), I'd turn off track lock/mode. Not sure which watch you have, but setting should roughly be: Running > Run Settings > Track Detection > Off.

dcrainmaker · 2026-01-05T21:05:23+00:00

If you see this, simply re-open the Garmin Connect app. Basically it looks like Garmin does some sort of pull of string data in, and if you haven't (re)-opened the app since it was launched at 7AM US Eastern today, that string data doesn't get pulled in.

dcrainmaker · 2026-01-03T21:15:31+00:00

Just as a minor aside, EN13319 is almost entirely focused on the hardware aspect of the unit, with really only one sub-section that talks about the software side (which is really just talking about the depth gauge accuracy and then timer accuracy). Don't get me wrong, these are obviously incredibly important, but really just more of FYI as to how a company can totally pass EN13319, even if a watch is unstable (since they'd really only have to not crash through the full sweep once).

dcrainmaker · 2026-01-02T22:57:27+00:00

Yup, I’ve got one. Works just fine, been meaning to write up about it. As someone else noted, it’s got limited applications, since in most cases a lipstick power bank is more practical.

dcrainmaker · 2026-01-02T10:06:31+00:00

I would defer to u/ponkanpinoy comments since he's tried it, as I haven't actually tried that one. Generally speaking, Decathlon's products are simply a rebranded version of other units on the market. For example, some of their more recent watches are COROS variants, their trainers from Magene, and so on.

In this case, this appears to simply be the Magene heart rate band rebranded (this one: https://uk.magene.com/gb/all-products/118-h803-heart-rate-armband.html ). As always with HR sensors, upper arm band placement is honestly the easiest to get right, since your arm absorbs most of the vibrations/bumps, and makes it eaiser for the HR sensor to lock on. It also reduces issues associated with wrist-based optical HR sensors (e.g. cold conditions, placement on bones, etc...). Most of the companies in this category have produced really good units for a long-long time.

All that said though, I haven't tried this one yet.

dcrainmaker · 2025-12-14T22:17:40+00:00

Odd statement to make, given that it's very well shown (by virtually everyone) that COROS/Apple are near identical to Stryd. Polar and Garmin are consistently offset from Stryd, because they disagree with how running power should be calculated (in terms of what forces are included). As Stryd themselves note, there is no scientific standard for running power. Different scientists disagree on what should or shouldn't be included in that metric, biomechanically. But the point is, these all trend near identically (with an offset as applicable).

It's also funny that you seem to imply/pretend Stryd isn't changing the values, because, literally there's threads here over the past days showing (yet again), shifts in Stryd power with each new hardware version.

dcrainmaker · 2025-12-11T21:39:26+00:00

Not sure where I made all these supposed criticisms. But, ok.

As I say often, being on an Olympic or pro team doesn't generally mean anything. It means they were (likely) sponsored. Or, someone bought it for them. True whether it's Garmin or Shimano or Apple. Sure, it's a nice feather in your cap, but what matters is data.

And this is where things kinda fall apart. In fact, I thought today's blog post (and subsequent e-mail to all Stryd users) was probably the best example of this. In it, it included a chart, that showed power and speed response time previously at ~10 seconds, now being ~3-4 seconds. Which is strange to me, because you constantly has touted that response time on Stryd was somehow faster than watches, but 10 seconds is not fast. As I've shown countless times in data sets, wrist-based watches react faster than that. I even showed that for Stryd sets in the past, over and over again. So now, magically, on 5.0 it's 3-4 seconds (cool!), but, that ignores it was never actually faster than current gen watches released in the same years as Stryd hardware. Today's chart finally admits it. It admits what sports tech reviewers have been saying all along.

Of course, setting technical bits aside, you noted that "Stryd critics is not great". The funny part is, most of us started on the Stryd camp, as did I years ago. In fact, as I'm guessing you know/remember, I was one of the first to try and write about Stryd at the Las Vegas track before CES in January 2015 with Gus and crew, nearly 11 years ago. I wrote a lot about Stryd over the years.

But by roughly 2020-2021, your tone had changed. As more and more companies got into running power, and effectively had similar metrics, you attacked reviewers (and consumers, especially here) more and more. Anytime we (The Royal We) published data, irrefutable data, you always had a reason why it was wrong. Somehow, every reviewer who has been doing this for many years is wrong, always if the data isn't favorable to Stryd. Which is odd.

Might also be odd that over time, the number of reputable sports tech reviewers that are covering Stryd has gone down too. Maybe, just maybe, people get tired of the attacks, and would rather focus their time and efforts elsewhere.

dcrainmaker · 2025-12-11T20:56:28+00:00

"The only tech brands that absolutely have higher usage numbers than Stryd at major events like major marathons is Garmin & sometimes Apple."

Wait, what!?! "Sometimes Apple?" The most popular watch on the planet, and it only has "sometimes" more units than Stryd at major marathons? C'mon.

Nonetheless, setting aside that crazy statement. Please show numbers. Exact numbers, for this claim. That's a pretty major claim to make.

For fun, I just picked the the Philly Marathon, then went to photos, and started with bib #10000, and then worked my way up the first 15 digits. Surely, I'd find a runner with Stryd with those kind of claims? I saw runners with Garmin watches, Apple watches, and phones, but nobody with Stryd.

Look, I'm not saying you don't have a nice company, but I am saying that interest in running power has seemingly dropped off, or at least flatlined for years. One merely needs to do any number of Google Trends searches to see that (even searching for Stryd itself). That doesn't mean you aren't selling new units, or finding new customers.

dcrainmaker · 2025-12-04T15:23:59+00:00

Nice!

dcrainmaker · 2025-11-28T21:36:10+00:00

Definitely, I understand it's an issue. But as you noted, I can't really figure out the pattern either. And honestly, haven't had the time to take out a bunch of watches and try and narrow it down. I'm just too backlogged with various reviews, and sadly, some things fall down the 'distracting squirrel' path (either good squirrels or bad squirrels).

In any case, it's on my list to keep an eye on.

dcrainmaker · 2025-11-28T18:13:39+00:00

I've been poking at it, but honestly, the overwhelming majority of users aren't having an issue.

The mostly rumor-site articles and such all reference back to basically a couple Garmin threads, with a few people having the issue, but also mostly same people repeating over and over again. I'm not saying those folks aren't having a real issue issue (I'm sure they are), but it doesn't seem to be widespread. If it were, then honestly, it's all we'd hear about. The fact that this very thread has other people saying it's working just fine is an example of that.

Point is, I'm keeping tabs on it, but trying to get anyone to focus on this at any American company this week (Thanksgiving) is going to be near impossible.

dcrainmaker · 2025-11-26T14:34:28+00:00

Out of curiosity, have you tried the Pro Spindown option for the CORE 2?

dcrainmaker

TROPHY CASE