So is this ever going to happen? They started working on it in October and said it would be out by January. It can’t be that hard can it?
1 Like
10 Likes
I think its very very hard to be honest.
1 Like
idk, xert and join had it done quickly enough.
Though, i know xert to zwift has issues with curvilinear intervals, making them way too hard in zwift. So for those it was better to run xert and zwift seperately.
Either way, TR on ant+ and zwift on bluetooth on my pc works fine so. Meh, not missing much, minor inconvenience
5 Likes
I’m just hoping they release it alongside progression levels for unstructured workouts (which makes sense if you do something on Zwift that isn’t a prescribed TR workout). That would make the 4 month development timeline somewhat worth it.
If it gets released and you can simply sync activities back and forth like you can on every other platform with no other changes, I’m wondering if they do their coding on an abacus.
4 Likes
good one
1 Like
I mean no disrespect to you (or anyone) that has been hung up on the January timeline.
First and foremost, I don’t believe “by January” was what anyone at TR ever said as I believe their actual words were they were “targeting a January release”. These two phrases are completely different in my mind, and as anyone with a software development background can attest to, things are rarely as easy as they seem on the surface.
As a software developer in a previous life, I can certainly attest to it. I once was tasked with a “relatively simple” product to develop that ended up taking the better part of 4-5 months to complete as the sole developer on the product (and that was initial rollout only).
Software development takes time to get right, and I believe what other users have said already (in this thread or others on the subject) is TR is quite possibly sorting out how to bring the after workout analysis that currently happens when doing workouts within the TR app to workouts done from outside sources as well (think WLV2).
10 Likes
I’m sure they are working hard on it and don’t think there is a need to be offensive. As a software engineer myself, it’s attitudes like this that really offend
I’m sure people would rather it was right than have them release something that has lots of bugs. I’m sure they will be testing it the best they can, and it’ll be released when they are happy with it. We’ve lived without it for this long, surely a few more weeks can’t hurt?
10 Likes
Everything takes longer than you think it will with software development. The amount of details are immense and any little bug will lead to you guys then complaining about that instead of complaining about why it isn’t out yet. Trust me, I’m dying to use this too and am bummed it didn’t hit for the start of my winter training, but it’ll be here when it’s here.
3 Likes
I’ll give TR their dues, they have a very forgiving and defensive community compared to pretty much any other platform I use.
1 Like
I’ve been on the other side of this and it is pretty demoralizing to give users a peek behind the curtain at what’s coming and share what they’re working on, and have the response from certain users be entitlement and condescension. I’d rather have them continue sharing what they’re working on and soliciting feedback from us with the understanding that timelines and launch dates aren’t set in stone than have them start keeping their cards close to their chest because they don’t think it’s worth it anymore.
14 Likes
That abacus comment was uncalled for and juvenile.
9 Likes
Have you spent time in any other topics? The level of criticism leveled against TR in the forum since inception in Oct 2018 is rather strong on the verge of distasteful in more instances than I care to remember. But some quick reminders of the Dylan Johnson post, legacy pricing, Ramp Test results, AIFTPD and numerous others have put TR’s feet to the fire over and over. I even vented a bit in a recent thread on the issues I had with TrainNow and a narrow bug that affected me & others.
The implication that we forum members are somehow blind to TR’s shortcomings is straight up wrong. Having a rational understanding of the potential difficulties behind this or other pending tools is not the same as blinders or unchecked faith. I see your “forgiving and defensive” as “practical & rational” as my own opinion on the matter.
15 Likes
That’s fine, you’re welcome to your opinion as I am mine. I wouldn’t leverage such an opinion at, say, intervals.icu, but TR is expensive and as a customer you can express negative opinions on such topics, it’s not a charity. I also post positive comments around the stuff they get right, which is quite a lot, hence why I am ‘currently’ giving them my money.
The abacus comment was obviously a dig, I’ll hold my hands up to that.
3 Likes
And let’s not forget PL2.0 as another source of frustration from the forum community. There has been plenty of criticism over that issue…and honestly, well deserved. It has been years in the promise and still nothing has materialized.
Constructive criticism should always be welcomed and considered. Insulting or disparaging comments…not so much.
I will also add that TR does a good job of allowing those critical threads to remain…many (most?) other company-based forums would shut them down quickly.
10 Likes
If Nate states a timeline, I take that as a promise - I don’t care how it is phrased. This is not some internal software deadline. This is a consumer platform. Nate is the CEO. If my CEO told the public that we were targeting a specific deadline, you better be sure that we’d be hitting that deadline, or at the very least have a good explanation as to why it didn’t happen.
4 Likes
Fair enough point, but it’s extra steps that are annoying, and for some reason Strava doesn’t recognize simultaneous efforts like it used to, so I wind up with duplicate Strava posts. Guess I can’t blame TR for Strava’s crappy performance.
I think this is a fair criticism and we should know by now to take any target date with a fairly healthy dose of salt. While we all appreciate Nate’s openness about a lot of issues, there is a history of over-promising and under-delivering. But it is also hardly nefarious in nature…I honestly believe Nate thinks they can hit those target dates when he states them. This can then be compounded when TR seems to go dark on a subject once a target date comes and goes.
In addition, we know from Jonathan’s recent posts that they are working on the integration and it does appear to be close.
8 Likes
I know enough CEOs/leaders that operate like Nate to know that it’s never a true guaranteed deadline when he says it. I do appreciate the openness as well, and I agree that he’s not doing it to somehow increase sales. I’m not going to stop my subscription because of this, I’ve just been looking forward to it for a while now and since several other platforms have the integration, I want TR to have it ASAP.
1 Like
Yup…I get that. I want it, too…But as has been outlined, there are a number of reasons why comparing TR to the other platforms isn’t the same. I have a good friend at Zwift who told me months ago that the integration was a bit more complicated than what people expected.
But by all accounts, it is coming soon…
3 Likes