And the dates say 3/11/18.
FYI... most countries throughout the world (except the US / Canada) would read that as 3rd November 2018.
Maybe just came home from work and took a photo of the data whilst still in shirt / tie?
And just for the record, I'm rooting for the ES2020 to be a smashing success so that it competes with the trackmans and foresights of the world.
Consumers win when we have options! Also forces companies to innovate or die... and maybe it will stop Foresight from price gouging me for things that should be free!!!
The ES-16 and ES 20/20 both use the same App the only one available which kind of shoots down the statement that the ES 20/20 used nothing of the design or components of the ES-16. I mean if they both use the same App they both would have to use the same output of data for the App to work so what makes the information any better than that of what the ES-16 had. Still nothing on the Ernest Sports Product Comparison page because all it would show is just what they have for the ES-16 so far nothing different or new to show, maybe getting a better readings to some degree but how accurate are they? I can do club fitting with my GC2 and can see a difference in different balls I use, can the ES 20/20 pick up any of that?
This is not correct. As much as I detest this company, hardware products with no common design or components can use the same software. A variety of iOS devices use iTunes, for example.
Ookie If it has no common design or components it can not us the same software, there has to be a common connection to do so, you say that "A variety of iOS devices use iTunes, for example. " with out it being designed to us iTunes it would not be able to do so, they may be none Apple but they have to be able to play MP3s to use iTunes. If it is not configured to do so the software will not work other wise you would have been able to run Windows programs on the Apple computers and vise versa, Apple Apps would work on an Android or Android Apps would work on an iPhone neither of which will work.
For all who ask themselves so many questions about date format and T-shirt. I am from Austria and I have done some tests in the garage to prepare the net and everything for the winter season.
To see if the whole thing works for my son, I called him for a moment and then he came out of the house and made some shots.So in Europe we use 03/11/18 for the date, that photos was made last weekend, there is no secret behind. So it's really easy, I only will share my experience with people there are interested on ES 20/20, nothing else. Someone would like it, other ones not and that's ok for me. Some people are extremely upset about ES and yes I could understand that and that's their right.
I've decided to go ahead with ES, it was not an easy decision on me with all the past experience. But I will give them I chance to do it better to get more competition on the LM market.Time will tell if I've made a good or bad decision, no one knows it now.
As soon as I have time, I will try the questions on club selection.
My son will have training with his coach again in the next few days and there we will do a comparison with the Trackman 4, then I can say more about accuracy. The distances works much better than the ES16 and the deviations left and right are now recognised correctly and also displayed right, that was not the case with my ES 16. The other values ​​we have not yet looked at in detail, that we want to do with the trackman next.
Manly we are working at the moment on the game from 40 to 120 yards, for that reason the ES 20/20 is quite useful for now. Now he can do that in the evening at home after school, with ES 16 it wasn't possible. Swing plan and club path quit good and that data's my son work's only with his coach. In the future I hope we can use also ES 20/20 for that, but at the moment we have an other focus.
I wish you the best, I really do, but I have yet to see anything other than your post on a ES 20/20 and nothing to show it will preform as claimed which were the same claims made for the ES-16.
A review of the ES 20/20 was just posted on youtube.
I watched the video, you still have to tell it which club you are using which to me is a draw back because you don't know what is being calculated or measured and all the club manufactures do not use the same loft on their clubs so what would be an 8 iron in one set could be a 7 iron in the other or vise versa. I set my ball down and hit it with my GC2 and it gives me my ball flight with no need to tell it which club I used, but if need be I can name clubs for testing (Club1, Old club, New club, ect,,) I just don't have to tell the GC2 what they are to get a reading.
Agreed, I love my GC2 worth every penny i paid for it. I'm over the sticker shock now.
I see the pro that made the video answered the question about hitting a wedge and selecting wedge or driver in the software. He says the results were the same. The smash factor does seem to vary a bit, but I would like more data to make a call on that. The variation in carry distance was only +-3.5M. I suppose that may not be great for a pro, but I would take it.
Last edited by Stonebattle; 11-10-2018, 01:17 AM.
Nick is a friend of mine and he did a comprehensive test vs Trackman 4 and Flightscope Xi Tour today. I will update you all on that test next day or two.
But ES are working on helping rectify any issues!
"But ES are working on helping rectify any issues! "
I think that's their company mission statement. One company I wouldn't come within 100 miles of.
Yeah, ES was working on helping rectify any issues with the ES-16, and we have all seen how well that has turned out!
NOT rooting for these guys.As Mark noted, ES-16 was released when it was not close to being a finished product.
We're not talking unforeseen issues that could not have been discovered. It didn't work, period.
Eventually, they finally admitted the hardware they sold was incapable of doing what was advertised. They abandoned it, and had the nerve to try to sell existing consumers an "upgrade" that they have promised will do what they first one was promised to do.
I'd rather get gouged by Foresight than see these clowns succeed.
It is in all our interests for these clowns to succeed. The more competition there is the less likely we are to continue to be gouged by foresight.
If their product did what it was suppose to do to start with they would be succeeding, but selling something that doesn't work is of no help to anyone but themselves and hurts the industry as a whole. A product should be prototyped, tested and found to be functional before you start production and definitely before you start selling it to the public.
I am still paying on the loan I took out to buy my ES-16 that never worked any where near as what was promised it would and the wife was not very enthused about me getting another launch monitor, and she didn't care who it was made by. Now I can't say I am happy about the prices being charged by Foresight, but I do have to say that everything I got from them preformed as they claimed it would. I am in a situation now where I am unable to use the GC2 as planned, but it is due to things that have happened concerning a death in the family and no fault of Foresight's what so ever, and the only time I had to call support on Foresight was due to my hard drive crashing and it was fixed by them promptly.
So to me the price gouging is when I buy a product that never works as claimed, spend all kinds of time talking with the company about what is going on sending them information as to what the system is doing and then being ask to pay extra for a new system that has the same claims of performance as that of the original system that I bought but still isn't working as claimed and only a promise that they will get it to work this time, which is the same promise they made to me on the ES-16. I'll pass, if I am getting gouged on the prices from Foresight then I can at lest fall back on the fact that when I do get to use my GC2, it works.
I'm not defending ES, and I won't be buying anything from them any time soon. Clearly the ES16 was a disaster. Also clearly, Foresight products are much better. I have a GC2/HMT myself.
But hoping that ES continue to fail is not helpful to anyone. It would be much better for them, but also much better for us, if they get it right with the ES20/20.
I am not hoping they fail, it is I just haven't seen anything to show they are doing anything all that different than what they did with the ES-16. I thought this form was so people could gather information and make an informed decision on what systems to buy for themselves. I myself would have loved to had the info to have gotten a system that worked as claimed instead of wasting all the time I did trying to help get the ES-16 to do what it was suppose to do when I bought it.
I was responding to Ookie who said "I'd rather get gouged by Foresight than see these clowns succeed."
Trip I understand the way Ookie feels and see his point of view, and I feel as if I was ripped off by ES as well, along with many others. I paid only $45.00 more for my CPO GC2 and FSX 2018 software than what I paid for my ES-16, and the GC2 and software works just as advertised right out of the box. I wish ES would do what they should and provide a good quality product but they seem to think getting the sales is priority #1 and fixing any problems is priority somewhere farther down the road, and that a good stall tactic is worth it's wight in gold. Reporting the problems is not what is preventing them from being a success, them not providing a good quality product that preforms as claimed is the problem. I had rather report what I went through so people have a chance to make an informed decision instead of working to try and get a unit that does work to preform as claimed and wasting time and money in the process. I myself had rather pay a bit more for something that works rather than waste time and money on something that doesn't, no savings there.
If the ES16 disaster involved a simple mistake, I wouldn't be taking this perspective.
But the issues with ES16 were not hidden bugs that could not have been discovered until the product was used by large numbers of people under a variety of conditions.
This was a product that never worked at all for its advertised purpose. And ES knew or should have known when they solicited customers' hard earned money.
People (including myself). spent hours and hours trying to help them fix the product. It was wasted effort, as the hardware was never capable of the task.
Even if ES 20/20 does work, it was developed on the backs of customers who spent thousands of dollars and provided untold hours of free labor to assist in troubleshooting. And got NOTHING for it. A cash upgrade to buy a product that might really do what the first one they paid for was advertised to do?
When people engage in unethical business practices, it is helpful to everyone when they fail. Society as a whole benefits.
Full disclosure: I got off the sinking ship within the 30 day trial period. But I still wasted HOURS **working** to troubleshoot a product instead of enjoying it. I have a graduate degree in computer science. I should have sent them a bill.