Re: [APP] - version 4.34.+ ( 05/2026 )

[freischneider]

The route is marked as poor in OSM. Potholes, cracks, etc. Bad for road bikes. You should adjust the OSM data if it's better in your local area.

If you are referring to the smoothness=intermediate tag - I think to classify this as "demanding" still is a bit to harsh. Since there is only one category of bad road in locus, it is s bit broad to classify this the same way as some really unrideable roads.

All the smoothness=intermediate I found in my neighborhood do not qualify as demanding. The OSM description also just says "may cause trouble for racing bikes." This is a Konjunktiv and only refers to a small subset of bikes.

So in my opinion the cutoff is better suited at smoothness=bad.

Greetings, Ulrich

It's not impassable. It is passable and has been graded. But with a warning—and that's important. If you ride your road bike into a pothole like that, you'll crash. That's why the warning is important.

[Ulrich Kiermayr]

It's not impassable. It is passable and has been graded. But with a warning—and that's important. If you ride your road bike into a pothole like that, you'll crash. That's why the warning is important.

I think it is a problem that there is only one fixed cutoff for all classes of "bad" surface. In my experience riding a rodadbike the smoothness=intermediate roads that I know do not pose a problem for road biking (except in a race maybe).

So in light of the discussion it would be useful if eiter

• More than one class of "bad" surface to get a better feeling of what to expect without checking every section, what exactly is meant by "demanding"
• make the cutoff configurable to get some liberty to what is accepatable as surface condition and what should generate a warning to accomodate different expectations/material

Greetings, Ulrich

[freischneider]

It's not impassable. It is passable and has been graded. But with a warning—and that's important. If you ride your road bike into a pothole like that, you'll crash. That's why the warning is important.

I think it is a problem that there is only one fixed cutoff for all classes of "bad" surface. In my experience riding a rodadbike the smoothness=intermediate roads that I know do not pose a problem for road biking (except in a race maybe).

So in light of the discussion it would be useful if eiter

• More than one class of "bad" surface to get a better feeling of what to expect without checking every section, what exactly is meant by "demanding"
• make the cutoff configurable to get some liberty to what is accepatable as surface condition and what should generate a warning to accomodate different expectations/material

Greetings, Ulrich

I think it would be most sensible if you submitted a suggestion to the helpdesk. Discussing this here is the wrong place.

[Menion]

Hi guys,

I had a shorter hike + team meeting, so this week > nothing extra new. At least some answers ...

@Tapio
left search screens > can't simulate it, sorry. Back event firstly closes the keyboard and on second event, it correctly do a "back step". Does anyone else have a problem here?

@WildWortWechsel
problem with bottom bar > thanks. Give a try to next app version (tomorrow or next week). We've created an improved system for auto-resize of top bar based on the length of the text, so it should help here.

@Graf Geo
slope coloring > in all charts, yes intent. Useless? I found it pretty useful to see for example speed on bike with colored slopes.

legend > next to track style in the track detail (if coloring is enabled)

@Gerhard57
missing Y value > hmm, and no gap (missing data) in this place? I'll be looking at it.

@Ulrich Kiermayr
not working "My location" > thanks, got it

"demanding surface" > If possible, yes, post it please on the help desk as an idea. This is more on my colleague @Radim V and it will be a lot easier to discuss it with him in a single place there.

@slarti76
100m range > no serious reason. Improved, give it a try in the next version.


Reordering of track screen content:
thanks for the interesting ideas. As I see, everybody has a huge list of ideas and it leads me to stay with minimal customisations for now. So, do not expect too much from it for now. Thanks for understanding.

Anyway, I'll read your posts more carefully, do some summary and definitely think about it.

[Menion]

Version 4.34.1.4 (12.6.2026) - mainly bug-fixes.

   - fix: occasional crash at app start while the initial loading screen is visible
   - fix: geocaching waypoint projection now starts from the waypoint's own coordinates
   - fix: selecting a result in the offline POI search now correctly shows it on the map
   - fix: handling of incorrect track when switching over them directly on the map screen
   - fix: not working "My location" location in Route planner itinerary
   - fix: thin seams no longer show between map tiles on dark maps
   - fix: crash when selecting a vector map theme with no style layers
   - fix: crash when pressing back on a web page that failed to open
   - fix: crash when opening My live location while a live-tracking session was running
   - chg: reduce minimum X-axis distance width to 100m in track charts
   - chg: local map server now works with the Locus web portal over HTTPS (Private Network Access preflight supported)

[Graf Geo]

Thanks for the update.

When I zoom in with two fingers or move the chart in the chart overview, Locus crashes.