Feeling dumb...Garmin Edge 520 Plus
 

Yea, I had several pre-touchscreen Edges. I'd never go back to them after the touchscreen ones came out. Their OS is simply better suited to be configured with a touchscreen.

In operation, the Edges use BT to communicate to the Garmin Connect app (GCM). GCM gets the notifications and relays them to the device using BT. The device sends data to GCM which relays data to other things. Everything goes through GCM.*

In setting up, the BT connection has to be established before GCM can communicate with the device.

* Data can get transferred via WiFi but the use of that is limited.

I should have been clearer. I had to pair the actual device to the phone with 2 different forms of BT - Edge 1000 and BLE_Edge. That's what the iPhone BT screen calls it. It took a few try's to get the BLE_Edge BT connection. Once you have the device and phone paired, GCM (Garmin Connect Mobile as note) than wants to sync with the device and uses the established BT connection(s) to do so.

In function, GCM will BT connect when you power up the device. It than allows functions such as Live Track and message and notifications push to the device (as desired, which is as I understand it, is the BTE_Edge BT connection). You can also as desired, see on GCM any Courses you've created in Garmin Connect and download that Course to the device for navigation purposes. If you track a ride, when you save the ride, it pushes the track to GCM, which then pushes to your Garmin Connect website account (if you create one), which can than push to RideWithGPS and Strava, etc.... The push of a saved track to Connect and onward can either be via a cell data connection from GCM (useful from remote start/finishes) or via a WiFi connection from GCM. In theory the 1000 can do WiFi direct, so no GCM required. I've never set that up on my 1000.

Sounds overly complicated to me

Hmm. It looks like those are two Bluetooth "profiles". I'd guess that one is used for the connection between the device and Garmin Connect Mobile (the Garmin app) and that the other is for BT services the phone knows about.

BLE is Bluetooth Low Energy, so it makes sense that the phone app and device use that for on-going operations such as Live Track, incident notification, real time location of compatible devices, as well as push notifications (text, e-mail), etc... from the phone directly.

Hmm. So, there's on!y one connection. But, you are offered two to choose one of?

​​​​​​One connection for "heavy duty" and the other for lighter duty devices/use.
​

.

Thanks.

BTW, I like your signature/profile quote.

I ride a lot in windy conditions, and climbing, for me at least, is a heck of a lot easier.

The fact that this thread happened at all it testament to how bad Garmin's software is in general and the sad state of bike computer software overall.

J.

With bike computers, we're at the stage we were with cell phones pre-smartphone revolution. They had clunky user interfaces that were difficult to set up but once you got them set up, they worked ok, but just "ok." That's pretty much what we have now. Great opportunity for a disruptor to show up and tip over that market. Can't wait - bike computer UI's basically suck. Garmin is kind of the Palm Treo of the bike computer world - no real competition but the first. That didn't end well for Palm (or Microsoft for that matter). Hopefully, Garmin gets religion sooner than later and does some real innovating in their UI.

J.

I think many were expecting/hoping the Karoo Hammerhead would be one of those innovators. A reasonably nice unit based on the Android OS. Unfortunately they took forever to get the product to market, with a ton of hype to start, than have been really slow to get the unit up and running with steady bug fixes. I'm just glad I didn't buy into the hype.

I don't see Garmin changing much with the way their units operate, unless they hired away some Google or Apple software engineers.

I actually have a Hammerhead Karoo. Their UI and their performance and their performance as a touchscreen and display blows Garmin out of the water . Where they are working on improving is adding to the sensor suite, improving reliability and adding features using somewhat the same development strategy that Wahoo did with frequent code sprints and updates. Where the Karoo has really worked for me is in side loading Android apps such as Komoot, Osmand, and Zello (two way walkie talkie). The Android OS is a big (giant) advantage. So I'd keep an eye on them during this next season. If they leverage the Android OS with an app store, fix some their display formatting issues, and further leverage the cellular modem (how about color weather radar superimposed over the nav map, for example) then things are going to get interesting. But to be successful, you can't just do it with a great UI, you have to have a great backend too.

Garmin is following the standard dominant market share leader strategy of incremental gains and minimizing risk - only doing just enough to maintain marketshare and using their bulk to fend off the competitors. That said, that's the same strategy Sony followed with the Walkman (remember those) until they got taken out by Apple with the iPod/iPhone etc... Garmin is saddled with their ancient proprietary OS which makes change difficult. That coupled with their risk aversive strategy leads to a UI that is marginal, IMO. Love to see them wake up or get some serious competition.

One reason Garmin doesn't change how their units operate is because the newer software/hardware is based on prior models. What they can do is constrained by the legacy architecture.

The thing that is fairly unique with the Garmin devices is that they do a lot in a small form-factor with reasonably good battery life. The Wahoo units largely duplicate the 520 functionality but that's it.

The Karoo is a small android phone and it's big (it's big because Android isn't very power efficient and needs a larger battery).

Google or Apple engineers wouldn't likely be able to do much because they are used to writing software for much more powerful computers than the Garmins provide.

The obvious choice for Garmin would be to use Android. But that means that they would be competing with scores of other companies apparently happy to keep loosing money making/selling android hardware. Garmin actually had a phone and an android device but they weren't sold for very long.