Difference in sensor accuracy on soft surfaces (barkdust trails)?

I read in one thread that the sensor is less accurate on soft surfaces. I do most of my running/walking on barkdust trails. Some times the barkdust is so thick that you feel like you're sinking. But many, if not most, of the traiIs in Eugene, Oregon are barkdust and Nike is huge here, so I have trouble believing they didn't factor in soft trail surfaces.
Anyway, I'm just wondering, do soft barkdust trails reduce accuracy of the sensor?

I've noticed this as well on treadmills. At one gym, with treadmills that have a very slightly "softer" feel, my run graphs look mountainous, with variation between miles of 10-20 sec/mile, although the treadmill stays on the same speed throughout. At my new gym, which uses Precor machines that are noticeably more stiff (I can feel the onset of minor shin splints), the graph is like a straight-edge - almost uniform and perfect consistency throughout the run.
However, in the end, final results on both treadmills are within 0.1mi of the treadmills' readout.

Similar Messages

HT4543 is it ok to keep my computer on a soft surface such as a bed or couch if it's asleep?

is it ok to keep/ leave my computer on a soft surface such as a bed or couch if it's asleep?

Not a good idea. Such surfaces and material hamper air flow and ventilation without which the computer could burn up. Either turn it off or put it on a flat surface like a desk or table.

Using MBP on soft surfaces

I usually try to use my MBP on a hard flat surface, as opposed to on a bed or sofa. Does using it on a softer surface make it heat up faster or cause any damage? Thanks.

All of the above is true. it's a common misconception that using a portable machine on soft surfaces is bad for heat. Using it on insulating surfaces is bad, as it'll heat up more, but anything that will conduct the heat away quicker is better for it. Just make sure that airflow around the back of it is good where the vents are.
Generally, hard surfaces allow some airflow to remove heat, versus the normal insulating couches or blankets that people curl up in during winter with their overheating computers!

There is difference between Total vat and vat as per trail balance

Dear Gurus,
           I am getting difference between vat payble and vat as per trail balnce,i am attaching below file.
               Dr      Cr     Net Balance     VAT Rate
410000          SALES - HANDSET     249,500.47     162,055,133.33      161,805,632.86      4%
410001          SALES - VODATA     93,422.47     4,897,111.40      4,803,688.93      4%
410002          SALES - KITS/CARDS/A     1,389.60     1,391.43      1.83      4%
410004          SALES - OTHERS     143.27     562,801.74      562,658.47      4%
410005          SALES - FWP          2,597,821.94      2,597,821.94      4%
410007          SALES - T SKY     2,665.78     34,655.14      31,989.36      12.50%
410051          SALES RET - HANDSETS     271,951.50           (271,951.50)     4%
410052          SALES RET - VODATA     3,701.92           (3,701.92)     4%
                          169,526,139.97
          Less : Additional Trade discount               960,165.57
          Net Sale               168,565,974.4
          VAT @ 4%                6,741,359.40
          VAT @ 12.5%               3998.67
          Total VAT                6,745,358.07
          VAT as per Trial                6,696,095.39
               Difference           49,262.68

Hi,
   How to i will check zero vat entries for the revenue G/L accounts,could u give me T.code and example.

Sensor Accuracy and Ways to Improve?

I know there's been a lot of chatter about accuracy problems since the device came out years ago. What I'm curious about is if anyone has had improved accuracy by going from a lace-attached sensor (using any of the 3rd party ways to do that like runaway or lacelid) or if they went ahead and carved a hole in the sole of their shoe.
I've tried 2 different lace methods and I'm still 1/5 of a mile off which seems huge to me. So I'm tempted to cut a hole in my NEW running shoes and just want to see if its worth it before I go chopping them up.
So basically, is placing the sensor in the sole the most accurate way?
Thanks

Before chopping up your new shoes, you may want to look into the following:
http://www2.yoursole.com/products/footbeds/signature/dk-plus?id=xwwtiCC8

Neo2Platinum (7025) Temp. Sensors accuracy?

Hi there,
Are the temp. sensors accurate on the neo2Platinum? Is it possible that a bios update is necessary to get a more accurate reading?
I have:
12/21/2005-MS-7025-6A61CM4DC-00 on the bottom of the initial screen.
Thanks,
Steve

Quote from: Grayone on 06-February-07, 05:11:32
Are you referring to the bios temp readings? You can go to the MSI site for later bios versions for your motherboard and check if there is a problem with the temp sensor reading for your motherboard.
Some temp monitoring programs are not as accurate as others if you are comparing the bios readings to a monitoring program.
When was the last time that you used canned air to clean out the cpu heatsink and power supply?
It's a clean install on a new ( old stock ) board that was just delivered so it's factory clean.
Sandra and the bios and also Core Center all give the same readings.
I'll get the bios update and I just got a Sonata II delivered today so maybe that will help also.
I was just curious if you'd seen that the older bios presents higher readings than what's real.
Thanks,
Steve

Nike+ Sensor accuracy

There are so many conflicting stories posted on the forum about accuracy, most of which are negative. Can somebody whose had postive feedback from the sports kit and its accuracy please reply. I just bought the gear but have yet to get out. Regards

I've been pretty happy with the accuracy I'm getting. I calibrated the unit for both walking and running. Before calibration, it was off by about 10% (short) on most runs. After calibration, on my short loop (estimated at 2.85 miles from Google Maps) I've measured 2.79 both times I've run it. On my long loop (estimated at 7.0 from Google Maps) I got 7.01. So it seems to be within a few percent for typical runs -- as accurate as I trust my Google Maps measurements, anyway. On the other hand, for a trail run (with lots of steep hills) that was officially measured with a roller at 13.3 miles, I measured a bit over 14.
Not too surprising that an accelerometer will lose accuracy on a hilly course, but GPS doesn't do too well in the woods either.
Overall, I'm surprised how well the unit works. I'm not using Nike+ shoes; I've just got it taped under my shoelaces, though it remains firmly fixed from run to run. For best results, I suggest calibrating it on a long course. The fractional error introduced by starting/stopping and jitter will be much worse for the default 400 meter calibration than if you do a mile.
dual G5/iMac/powerbook/etc Mac OS X (10.4.5)

Difference between Soft and Hard Reboot

Dear all
Can anybody tell difference between the hard and soft reboot Option? Does it matter if a user is logged on to the Windows Desktop or not?
What dialogs appear in any Event when a user is logged on and where can I Change this
behaviour?
What is the
behaviour in any Event (Soft / Hard) when there is no logged in user after an installation?
And after clarifying these questions what is the difference from the above compared to "Config Manager Device Restart"
Any help is much appreciated.
Regards
RLI27

Hi,
Soft Reboot (Reboot requested but we can still install other patches)
Hard Reboot (Reboot requested, we cannot install anything else until this is completed, not even other MSI installs)
Reference:
Information on the ConfigMgr 2007 client side process for Software Updates
http://blogs.technet.com/b/configurationmgr/archive/2010/11/04/information-on-the-configmgr-2007-client-side-process-for-software-updates.aspx
If you are deploying a application, you could change the return code to get expected behaviour or configure the option(Should Configuration Manager enforce specific behavior regardless of the application's intended behavior?) in User Experience of the Deployment
Types.
The following thread is for your reference.
http://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/4214d35b-6cfc-422b-b460-67c4a864b1dc/sccm-does-not-wait-for-soft-reboot-in-deployments-with-dependencies?forum=configmanagerapps
Best Regards,
Joyce
We
are trying to better understand customer views on social support experience, so your participation in this
interview project would be greatly appreciated if you have time.
Thanks for helping make community forums a great place.

For me, accuracy is much better under the foot than on my laces

Just thought I'd pass on my experience...
I did about 30 miles of running with the sensor tucked under the laces of my Asics (held in custom-made duct tape pouch -- who needs neoprene!) but was pretty disappointed at the wide range of inaccurate paces and distances it reported. It was especially off when I did some trail running on soft surfaces.
Then I got brave and took an X-acto knife to my Asics insole, and cut out a little cubby for the sensor, just under my arch, in the same location the Nike diagram shows it. And after another 15 miles or so, the results are FAR more accurate -- agreeing with mapmyrun.com down to the 0.1 mile on a 5 mile run -- certainly as accurately as I click on their map.
My guess, based on the Apple statement that the sensor is a piezo accelerometer that works by time the foot is on the ground, is that the accuracy is improved because (a) the sensor is horizontal under the foot, compared to ~30 degrees when on top of the foot, so when mounted on top, the vertical acceleration is confounded by some component of horizontal acceleration, and (b) there is some additional flexing of the foot that would be seen as a "muddying" of the acceleration signal when on top, whereas under the foot the 0-acceleration "on the ground" time is probably more clearly delineated, and thus easier to signal detect. (This would seem to fit the observation that the pace computation is way off when on soft dirt & sand compared to pavement, too). Just my engineering guesses, of course. But the improvement in accuracy so far seems well worth cutting a hole into my insole.

Thanks for the info. I had actually read about your modification when you first posted it. Great information. I am hesitant to cut into my two pairs of Asics GT-2110 as these have become my favorite shoe and probably the only shoe I will ever buy in the future. So I plan to use your velco under the laces modification on those.
I do have a pair of Saucony Omni 5's that I do not like as much. So I decided to try the cutting method on those. It actually worked very well. The sensor was very accurate and consistent. I could not feel it at all in my arch. Of course, the real test will be repeated runs to see if my foot develops any soreness.
I have also used a shoe pouch. I do not recommend this method. The accuracy greatly decreases and worse, it is much less consistent. I usually run around a 9 minute pace and using the shoe pouch method, the pace is always flucuating from like 7:00 to 13:00 even though most of the time it does settle around 9:00. I assume this is because the sensor is moving around too much.
I may try the marware product when it comes out. It looks like there will not be much movement with that one. And since I rotate shoes, it would be slightly more convenient than the velco method. But it would have to be accurate and consistent to make it worthwhile.
All in all I love this product. I refuse to buy Nike shoes. So I am glad I have found a few proven methods to make this thing work.

Soft references

1) The only difference that I know between soft references and weak references is that weak references are guaranteed to be garbage collected, however soft references would be garbage collected only if JVM is running out of memory. Now my question is would the JVM rather resort to using virtual memory in case required than garbage collecting soft references or would it garbage collect befor that.
2) Phantom references are objects on which finalize method has been run. So finalize method does not run on phantom references. Now when would you in real life use class java.lang.ref.PhantomReference for large objects which you dont want to take the risk of being resurrected. But as per my information if youo don't override the finalize method, there is no chance of resurrection. Can anybody point out any real life examples when it might be useful to use phantom references.

1) The only difference that I know between soft
references and weak references is that weak
references are guaranteed to be garbage collected,
however soft references would be garbage collected
only if JVM is running out of memory.Untrue and not in agreement with the Javadoc. There
is no guarantee that any object or reference
is guaranteed to be garbage-collected, including weak
references. Soft references are stronger than weak
references and AFAIK they are GC'd before them if GC
ever happens.Can you post any links which proves its not true. As per
http://java.sun.com/developer/technicalArticles/ALT/RefObj/
Weakly Reachable
An object is weakly reachable when the garbage collector finds no strong or soft references, but at least one path to the object with a weak reference. Weakly reachable objects are finalized some time after their weak references have been cleared. The only real difference between a soft reference and a weak reference is that the garbage collector uses algorithms to decide whether or not to reclaim a softly reachable object, but always reclaims a weakly reachable object.
>
Now my question is would the JVM rather resort tousing
virtual memory in case required than garbage
collecting soft references or would it garbage
collect befor that.This question doesn't make sense. The JVM always uses
virtual memory, because the operating system does.
The JVM will GC when it feels it needs to. There
isn't a strong relationship between these things.Yes JVM will GC whenever it feels like but the whole idea behind having the reference classes was to The main feature of the reference classes is the ability to refer to an object that can still be reclaimed by the garbage collector for better memory mgmt.
>
2) Phantom references are objects on which finalize
method has been run.Nope. Phantom references are references, not objects.
' An object is phantom reachable if it is neither
strongly, softly, nor weakly reachable, it has been
finalized, and some phantom reference refers to it.'
yeah i should have been careful with my wording. An object is phantomly reachable when the garbage collector finds no strong, soft, or weak references, but at least one path to the object with a phantom reference. Phantomly reachable objects are objects that have been finalized, but not reclaimed.
So finalize method does not run
on phantom references.Make up your mind. You just said they have already
been finalized. Both statements are wrong.I was talking about instantiantions of java.lang.ref.PhantomReference that finalize method won't run on these objects.
>
Can anybody point out any real life examples whenit
might be useful to use phantom references.You would use phantom references plus a queue
instead of finalize() methods, e.g. where you
can't add finalize() methods to the classes but you
still want to know when the instances have
disappeared.finally I did find some reasonable explanation to these references
Phantom references
A phantom reference is quite different than either SoftReference or WeakReference. Its grip on its object is so tenuous that you can't even retrieve the object -- its get() method always returns null. The only use for such a reference is keeping track of when it gets enqueued into a ReferenceQueue, as at that point you know the object to which it pointed is dead. How is that different from WeakReference, though?
The difference is in exactly when the enqueuing happens. WeakReferences are enqueued as soon as the object to which they point becomes weakly reachable. This is before finalization or garbage collection has actually happened; in theory the object could even be "resurrected" by an unorthodox finalize() method, but the WeakReference would remain dead. PhantomReferences are enqueued only when the object is physically removed from memory, and the get() method always returns null specifically to prevent you from being able to "resurrect" an almost-dead object.
What good are PhantomReferences? I'm only aware of two serious cases for them: first, they allow you to determine exactly when an object was removed from memory. They are in fact the only way to determine that. This isn't generally that useful, but might come in handy in certain very specific circumstances like manipulating large images: if you know for sure that an image should be garbage collected, you can wait until it actually is before attempting to load the next image, and therefore make the dreaded OutOfMemoryError less likely.
Second, PhantomReferences avoid a fundamental problem with finalization: finalize() methods can "resurrect" objects by creating new strong references to them. So what, you say? Well, the problem is that an object which overrides finalize() must now be determined to be garbage in at least two separate garbage collection cycles in order to be collected. When the first cycle determines that it is garbage, it becomes eligible for finalization. Because of the (slim, but unfortunately real) possibility that the object was "resurrected" during finalization, the garbage collector has to run again before the object can actually be removed. And because finalization might not have happened in a timely fashion, an arbitrary number of garbage collection cycles might have happened while the object was waiting for finalization. This can mean serious delays in actually cleaning up garbage objects, and is why you can get OutOfMemoryErrors even when most of the heap is garbage.
With PhantomReference, this situation is impossible -- when a PhantomReference is enqueued, there is absolutely no way to get a pointer to the now-dead object (which is good, because it isn't in memory any longer). Because PhantomReference cannot be used to resurrect an object, the object can be instantly cleaned up during the first garbage collection cycle in which it is found to be phantomly reachable. You can then dispose whatever resources you need to at your convenience.
Arguably, the finalize() method should never have been provided in the first place. PhantomReferences are definitely safer and more efficient to use, and eliminating finalize() would have made parts of the VM considerably simpler. But, they're also more work to implement, so I confess to still using finalize() most of the time. The good news is that at least you have a choice.
http://weblogs.java.net/blog/enicholas/archive/2006/05/understanding_w.html

My new (2 months old) 5s fingerprint recognition sensor does not work. It worked well when I first got it but now to get it to work I have to redo my fingerprints every few days, which completely negates the convenience and cost of the phone.

My new (2 months old) 5s fingerprint recognition sensor does not work. It worked well when I first got it but now to get it to work I have to redo my fingerprints every few days, which completely negates the convenience and cost of the phone. I have tried all the tips and they help a little but it always stops working and I have to redo my fingerprints. Does Apple read these comments? Is there an app that might help?

Apple does not read here.
If you want Apple to know send feedback
http://www.apple.com/feedback/iphone.html
I also have iPhone 5s on day one and it's working since. When it's not registering, I just clean the Home button and it works straight away.
Did you try when registering fingerprint using all angles? It should learn the more you use it.
Did you clean the sensor with a soft cloth?
http://support.apple.com/kb/HT5883

Converting parametric to a surface plot?

I had previously generated a 3D plot, with the 4D being intensity.
This was done using a parametric plot.
How can i convert the parametric plot to a surface plot.
Attachments:
4D plot.vi ‏61 KB

Fred,
I took a look at the VI you had attached an noticed that your Z matrix only had 1 dimension of data therefore your data will only be points, which it is. Is there any particular reason you are only sending 1D of data to the z matrix?? Second thing I noticed was just the inherent difference between parametric plots and 3D surface plots. The big difference here is that you input relations to surfaces for x,y,and z for the parametric while the 3D surface really only uses z for relative surfaces and the y and x array as skews for the plot. Basically I think you need to figure out the difference in what the plot shows and not try to directly transfer one to the other. The math behind it can be confusing and while looking at a parametric plot it might seem simple to make a surface plot out of it, it is arithmetically hard to do. Look into the issue a little more and let us know what you find, I would be interested to know, given that I am a math nut, but not in 4D space.
Tyler Heikes
Applications Engineer
National Instruments

Soft reset and hard

What's the difference between the two?

soft reset is usually a forced reset for if your device crashes and a hard reset is usually a factory reset and wipes your c drive, things like sms, contacts and any apps stored there, you should only use a hard reset if your phone won't turn on/load

Sensor Calibration is always .02 off

I have a 2nd Generation ipod nano and the nike+. I've had the nike plus since april of this year. When I calibrated it when I first got it...the distance was right on. I calibrated it on a measured 400m track.
I recently noticed the distance wasn't measuring correctly. So I tried to recalibrate the sensor and now everytime I try---no matter the distance (I've tried 400m, 800m, 1600m) each 400m always measures at .23 when it should be .25. Its driving me insane. The low battery light isn't flashing. I've tried flipping my sensor. There is no wiggle room for the sensor to move. Please help----is anyone else having this issue??

to respond to both questions, the 400 meters you think you are running may not be exactly 400 meters. some tracks are not exactly a quarter mile, though some people might say they are. that could be the problem, if not, i have no idea. for the second question, laying it flat should not make a difference. as long as the correct side of the sensor is facing up, it wont make a difference. my sensor does not lay flat on my shoelaces either, but it works perfectly.

How to create soft GIF edges?

I have a character that fades in over the background of a hallway. As a GIF, it has jagged edges. Any ideas how I can make it soft edges?
I have two images to show the difference. The image with soft edges also used Captivate to fade in the character over a background.
EXAMPLE: HARD EDGES - click on the image to see in 100% size. (do not want)
EXAMPLE: SOFT EDGES (I DO want)
Both use Captivate to fade in the person over the background after 2 seconds.
Micky

Hi,
Does the source GIF's have those jagged edges?
If yes then you hav to edit that in an external image editor (say photoshop, and feather the edges)
If the source GIF's are proper, then you can increase the slide quality to high and check if it solves the problem..
regards,
Hari

Difference in sensor accuracy on soft surfaces (barkdust trails)?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for