Following on from this post, which was getting off the original topic of the post:
This is a full day without Facer running, using the Dashboard face. From around 11pm until 7.20am the Always On feature was disabled but it was on for the rest of the day. 3% draw to WatchFace, as opposed to 14% the previous day to Facer. I understand that Facer is an app running a watchface, and that it probably has to be more complex to cope with everything that might be thrown at it by designed faces, but is almost five times the battery drain what you expect to see?
I’ll repeat the test today with Facer running.
So after running Facer for a day of very light usage, the results show far higher draw than the native face:
In lieu of any replies I’ve carried on my own testing. Using another watchface app, with the exact same face I built on Facer, I get draw of 3% in total over similar periods. Surely this is something that needs to be looked at?
Can you share the following info:
- Watch model
- Phone model
- Version of Facer on watch and phone
- Watch face you use for testing
We’ll run some tests on our side with the exact same configuration and see if we can reproduce the issue. Facer should use roughly 5% battery per hour at most - if it’s more, it’s a bug.
Facer 4.5.11_87794 on my watch
Android Wear Ver. 188.8.131.52.188487362
Huawei Watch 2 0074 (LEO-BX9)
Thanks! And what is the rough battery % usage per hour you are seeing?
As you can see in the images above, between roughly 9am one day, and 7am the next (with the watch in screen-off mode, just sleep tracking mode after 11pm), a total draw of 13%. The native “Dashboard” face saw a draw of only 3% over the same period, as did the same design of watchface run in a different watchface app.
so reading this if the stats are higher than 5% its a bug?
because my stats for facer are reading betwen 9% - 14%
so just out of curiosity is there something i can do to reduce the drainage?
im using This Face
Watch: Asus Zenwatch 3
Watch App Version: 4.5.11_87794
Phone: Samsung S7
Phone App Version:4.5.11_87793
Your battery draw to Facer seems quite similar to mine - I’m glad it’s not only me, or the face I made!
yeah if you didnt post this thread i wouldve figured it was normal but after reading this thread im glad you posted it because i would like to have mine working like it was intended too not drawing more than what it needs and sucking the life out of my watch lol
Edit: just wondering if the DEVs have made any progess on this? or if they can inform us of how to fix the bug?
Good question - I’d like to see a big improvement but I wonder how difficult that might be to achieve. The watch app has a surprisingly large footprint in the watch memory. At 52Mb on my watch it’s only surpassed by Google Play Services and the Wear OS itself! Mind you - that total may include other faces installed within it, I’m not sure.
EDIT: I’ve just deleted several faces and the footprint is down to 37Mb, so that initial size I quoted was significantly larger because of the number of faces installed.
@Facer_Official any update on this? just curious because im still reading at the same percentage
Indeed! Facer matches or exceeds the battery draw of the Wear OS itself!
not to be a pest but i would like to have some input from @ariel @Gavin @Facer_Official on this matter
I was just thinking the same thing.
They don’t wanna admit they have programmed a Vampire!
i was thinking parasite lol but its been… 3 months since @Gavin has been on… 2 months since @ariel has been on… the only person from facer i see getting on is @Facer_Official and they respond to other posts… but not this one… maybe just happened to over look it.
but id still want some information or an update on how to fix this or whats happen to rectify the situation.
Thanks for following up - we are still tracking this thread and are not ignoring you We are investigating some edge case scenarios that may lead to higher battery usage than normal.
hopefully some updates come soon or a fix