When I am in schedule and click on “Duration”, I’m able to change the watering times for each zone. You can also change the order by dragging each zone up/down. For example I want to water in the order of zone 3,4,5,6,2,1. I make the changes and click done.
However when I go back, the zone order is always back to 1,2,3,4,5,6.
Am I missing something? Is this a bug? Is it not possible?
I created some test schedules on the website. You can’t reorder zones there by dragging and dropping, but the zones you select are displayed and watered in the order that you check them. However, I did find a minor bug associated with editing a schedule – the Done button is grayed out (and nonfunctional) if the edited schedule has the same zones as before (even though the order is now different). An easy workaround is to remove the last zone, click Done, add the zone back and click Done again.
The behavior with the mobile app may be different but IMO relatively unimportant. I assume that most people would edit schedules on their big screen computer, rather than fighting a smartphone.
No, you can reorder them on the web page. It’s the little hamburgers on the left side.
BUT, I don’t think there is a problem at all. If I look at “zones” when looking at a schedule, they do show up as 1,2,3,4,5, etc. But if I go to durations, then the zone order that I set is still correctly there. Don’t think it’s a bug after all.
@franz, I can see why this could easily get confused. Heck, I just did it myself after using the system for several years. Can someone smarter than me figure out a better way to show more clearly where the zone ordering takes place?
You are correct; many thanks. And indeed when I shuffle the order there, it displays correctly and waters in the updated order. So it appears to be an app- and OS-specific bug.
Just say “No” to mobile apps. Rachio invests many resources in these apps, IMO to no real benefit. And it’s not just engineering work; a huge administrative effort is spent dealing with the Google Play and App Store police. Why? The web is a beautiful thing – it works the same on Windows, Mac, Linux, Android, iOS (and many others). Rachio did a great job on their web app. It recognizes mobile devices and adjusts the layout accordingly.
I’d much rather see the team’s effort go into fixing problems with establishing and maintaining Wi-Fi connections, HomeKit compatibility and other functionality issues. And, of course, implementing widely requested features that will sell more Rachio devices (coordinating multiple controllers, sub-minute runs, predictable end time, run pump only with specific zones, etc.)
And please, please, don’t prioritize form over substance. I was looking at the “Technical info” page to see if it had useful data such as Wi-Fi signal strength. Nope. But I noticed that not only are the values in gray (making it harder for someone with low vision to read them accurately), but they are cleverly rendered such that they cannot be copied and pasted into a log, forum post or support ticket, making it necessary to read them accurately.
Confirmed that on my iPad, zone watering order (appearance and function) seems fine. I reorder by dragging hamburger adjacent to each zone under Schedule / Water Duration, so must be an Android issue as mentioned above.
Sure, it’s important to be able to control Rachio when out in the yard e.g. adjusting or cleaning heads.
I have both the Rachio app and a link to the website on my phone’s home screen. When I first got the controller, the website offered a somewhat better layout and that’s what I normally use. But even if it were slightly worse, it’s IMO preferable to the app, because it works the same as on the desktop, and it’s far less likely to be broken by an update.
Lately, Rachio has added some features to the app that have not been reflected on the website. This is a disappointment, because complex tasks such as planning a schedule or analyzing historical runs are much better done on the desktop. Another member mentioned yard mapping as an example.
OTOH, tasks done on a phone are usually trivial e.g. Quick Run, so the UI details are relatively unimportant.