How to submit a clockface with AOD for review

[PaulRussell2020]

Hi, I have built and tested a clockface following all the guidelines for AOD. However I can't side load it to my Versa 3 and I can't upload it for review by Fitbit.

Can you please tell me how I can use this clockface I built?

Thanks

[Gondwana]

Use of AOD is still invite-only. As I understand it, Fitbit doesn't allow unapproved AOD to be installed on physical devices to prevent the risk of hardware damage.

[Joern2572]

Never...
It is a completely unsatisfactory situation. If I had known before how you are treated here as a hobby developer, I would have bought another watch, sorry.

[PaulRussell2020]

Since posting this I have done a bit of Googling. A year ago @JohnFitbit said "The current situation is far from ideal, but we're working towards unblocking this for everyone once we're happy with the tooling and the process itself."

@JohnFitbit it would be great to get an update.

In the meantime I published the clockface with all the AOD code but removed the permission. I submitted it for review with the request that AOD also be reviewed. I just hope that is a path to getting my AOD clockface on my device!

[JohnFitbit]

Hi @PaulRussell2020,

I think there might be some confusion here, as I don't take part in the review process for clockfaces.

I think you meant to tag @JonFitbit, the moderator for this subforum, though I can understand how the two of us can get mixed up 🙂

[PaulRussell2020]

Ah, sorry @JohnFitbit you are right, I picked the wrong person!

My clockface has been reviewed and published but still not AOD. @JonFitbit a year ago you said "The current situation is far from ideal, but we're working towards unblocking this for everyone once we're happy with the tooling and the process itself." Can you please provide an update, and let me know how I can get the AOD version of my clockface on to my device?

[JonFitbit]

We're continuing to improve the tooling and review process, and we're still working to make this more widely available, but it's not currently possible to grant access to everyone. We will post on the developer blog when the situation changes.

[PaulRussell2020]

Thanks @JonFitbit. There is clearly a current process for getting approval for a clockface with AOD given how many are live in the gallery now. Can you please explain what the current process is?

[JonFitbit]

We invited a small number of developers in order for us to assess the impact and help us improve the processes, as described in the blog https://dev.fitbit.com/blog/2019-12-19-announcing-fitbit-os-sdk-4.1/#always-on-display-api

[3v1n0]

Given that it happened already more than 1 year ago, I guess you should have got enough data to improve the process, isn't it?

[Joern2572]

Maybe it is possible to describe the process as PaulRussel2020 posted? Don't missunderstand me, but I can't see where the problem is. I think everyone has the option built into their watchfaces and just removed the permission, but this cannot be the solution?
I don't want to be successful with my watchface, it's just for fun.

[3v1n0]

I agree, also would be nice for developers to be able to test the iface directly on HW assuming they're taking their risks already.

Allowing at least to install the AOD apps/clocks into a developer watch.

[JonFitbit]

In order to allow you to sideload onto your own device, we'd need to create a mechanism allowing you to knowingly invalidate your warranty. I'm not sure of the legal position around that, and it would also require tooling for customer services to check that invalidation. Unfortunately there just isn't a simple solution to allow developers to build and test AOD at this time. 

[PaulRussell2020]

Can you tell us how some developers are able to be invited in and presumably have their clockface reviewed to ensure it does not damage the device? There are quite a number who seem to have gone through the process.

[czandor]

Do you know what's happening now?

Beginner developers does not uploads clockfaces with their own accounts, but with the accounts of "invited" and "trusted" developers.
You can see AOD clockfaces that I don't even understand how they were accepted by the review team.

I have 20k active users who complain almost every day why my clockfaces dont have AOD mode.

[Joern2572]

And any news regarding this issue? More than 2 years are left.

[Guy_]

Hi @Joern2572  - nothing has changed but you can provide the simulated AOD, see SimpleAOD 

[PaulRussell2020]

Sorry but that really is not a solution.

As Fitbit has not provided a solution after all this time it seems they do not really care about building a proper community for clock faces.

[Joern2572]

In my opinion, creating an AOD watchface is equivalent to the function of the watch. What if only certain users could access the step count and everyone else could not?

Fitbit is afraid that incorrectly applied AOD will cause users to destroy the watches and fears legal consequences.

For the developers of watchfaces, the possibility of developing AOD was a selling point. Fitbit also advertises this. But, the development of AOD watchfaces is not possible for many developers. What are the legal consequences here?

Shouldn't fitbit explicitly point out that a special approval is required for the development of AOD watchfaces, but that you don't usually get it, or that the “decision-making” process is not transparent?

[alt-jero]

Simple:

Step 1: Enable me to sideload my AOD watch-face by whatever means you need to do so.

Step 2: Add a note to my account, visible to customer support, that my warranty is waived by the customer.

Step 3: I can use my watch to develop and test my AOD in real-world use!

Complicated:

Update the simulator to be able to run as a headless process while keeping track of calls to hardware sensors, simulating battery drain, counting pixel on percentage, alerting for large blocks of active pixels which may cause flickering, etc. Then run review-faces through the simulator for a few simulated battery cycles and check how long it would last each time. Importantly: Make sure the app doesn't know it's running in a simulated environment. Simulations can be run in batches on cloud VPS providers. For this functionality, charge a developer fee to cover the cost of the simulation environment use.

Expensive:

Hire more reviewers.

Alternative:

Allow community members to review apps and faces. Keep track of a trust score by having internal reviewers audit at random. Have several community members review each submission without an audit, to ensure consensus, before allowing publishing - or upon non-consensus between community reviewers, have an internal reviewer audit the application and provide feedback to the community reviewers.