I’ll start off with I know that many people have already expressed an interest in having their yarbo not cut across their finished mowing lines when getting between points. I agree that this would be a nice feature for many. I however would like to suggest that it be a toggle switch that in one position the yarbo follows the perimeter and prioritizes yard aesthetics and in the other position it prioritizes speed and battery usage. In my case I have a very large yard that my yarbos are maintaining and the yarbo following the perimeter would be horrible as it would make an already long mowing session too long to be finished. In the case of part of my lawn I don’t care about the aesthetics as I and no one else sees it I just need it mowed regularly. For other people who do care about the aesthetics they may still wish to be able to switch it to the most efficient mode in case a storm is coming and they need to finish faster or it is behind on mowing due to many days of rain in a row.
Thanks for your considerate thought. I agree, some people prioritize aesthetics while others care more about mowing efficiency. I’ll be sure to share your feedback with our product team. We always appreciate hearing different perspectives to improve the user experience for everyone.
Yeah I agree with this.
I dont mind if support is added to maintain aesthetics.
but I have 10 hour jobs.. and I just want it to finish 
so I would have any feature like that disabled
a few extra lines Im not worried about.
BUT I will say there are definitely optimizations in the pathing that could be dont to obtain both. Astetics, without compromising efficiency.
Mostly, no go zones. right now they are mowed as part of the perimeter. but that typically means having to travel back to each no go zone independently. Where it would be great if the nogo zones perimeters could be mowed, while the unit is already at the nogo zone, and that would cut down on alot of the aesthetic pathing concerns.
Also carve outs in the pathing caused by nogo zones, or concave corners.
If the Yarbo prioritized these carve outs instead of pathing away from them only to have to come back later, that would also be a big benifit. though yes this can be difficult because “which side” would be the carve out.
I agree. There are definitely other area where efficiency could be improved as well. The concave corners and return to finish them later is a big issue for me. I’ve got some mows that are 18+ hours.
I also wish there was a feature that would change the return time not just on battery percentage like right now they have us able to set it to return at the basic is 20% or you can decrease it to 15% or any other number, but what I’d like to see is in the algorithm it says oh I’ve got 21%. I’m supposed to return at 20 and I’m mowing away from the charger. Let me stop and go ahead and return now. On some of my big jobs it going out with only one percent and heading away from the charger means it mows seven minutes or eight minutes across the field, which in the end adds 16 minutes of travel rather than just returning. Something like that could definitely add efficiency.
That does seem like a bad deal.
What do you think about “my next job is x minutes and I have y minutes of battery”.
Don’t start the job unless y is at least 1/4 of x?
something along those lines?
Maybe It could top off the battery in that situation if it wasn’t able to execute the plan to completion on a charge when it’s passing or is closest to the dock.
While I am one who hopes for the ability to not have arbitrary lines across the yard, I assumed that whatever algorithm is chosen would enable all of the planned cutting path lines to be potential crossing points. I hope it’s not only going to follow the perimeter.
Looking a the map on the app while Yarbo is moving and I’m 30 miles away. Yarbo currently doing the spiral pattern one of my kids has been hounding me over. Just a thought but, if Yarbo is doing the spirl pattern it should be more efficient if Yarbo started in the center then worked to the outside. Reducing lines crossed and also would be closer to the charger every time it went round the yard.
Good thinking there @MrRoboto
I have a Luba2 and then bought the Yarbo. There are many features the Luba has that Yarbo is really doing poorly not having. Considering they are normal now, these are deficiencies.
- The Luba can be told to move zone to zone or recharge but following the perimeter. This prevents ugly tracks.
- When I choose checkerboard on, the Luba does the checkerboard. It doesn’t take two separate cut starts. It just does what I ask it. And by the way, the checkerboard makes most grass get cut and much less missed.
- Your vision is worse than Luba was when it first came out. Now the Luba can run without GPS for some time. This allows it to cut my side yard (between houses). The Yarbo can’t.
- You have cameras on all sides but they do next to nothing.
- Dead ends are a good feature but often fail. They either don’t do it where i set it or lose GPS and stop. Likely somewhat back to visual system not working.
- When I map the Luba it follows it exactly. The Yarbo will not go to the edge I make. It always misses a good foot here and there. Doesn’t make sense. Maybe hire a developer from Mamotion.
- I bought the trimmer and spreader. Man oh man these are taking forever to come. Delay after delay. Lots of interest on the payment owed.
- Obstacle avoidance is poor. Even when it works the Yarbo goes the long way around and just assumes it mowed the area it assumes it goes around. This makes it miss a lot of grass.
- The whining noise from the gears is horrible.
- Because it has so many issues it would be nice to be able to watch the video while it is cutting. But nope. The Luba2 allows it.
- Greasing all the time kinda gets rid of the idea of schedule and let it go. I’m sure you can make tracked system without this need. My old snow blower was tracked and never needed it.
- Having the blades as low as they go by default when all my mowing is at 6.9 is silly. I have cut to low on little patches because I have to do all the missed parts manually.
In the end, it’s a good product with very weak code you guys need some better developers to make it work properly
Hi there,
Thank you for taking the time to share such detailed feedback. We’re truly sorry for the frustrations you’ve experienced, and we’re working to turn your input into concrete improvements.
What we’re working on
Zone-to-zone / recharge routing: We plan to add an option for the unit to follow the perimeter when moving between zones or returning to charge, which should help prevent visible tracks.
Checkerboard pattern: The checkerboard pattern currently completes in two work plans. We’ve noted your request to complete it in a single plan and will evaluate it.
We’re preparing an update that introduces a dead-reckoning algorithm to improve Yarbo’s navigation when GPS weakens or drops. We also plan to remove the current default boundary buffer to honor edges more closely, and we’re continuously enhancing the vision system by exploring advanced depth-estimation models and training on a larger dataset.
Live camera feed: This feature is in active development, and we need a bit more time to optimize it before release.
We’ve also heard you on the other issues and will reflect to the relevant parties.
We genuinely appreciate your patience and candor, and we’re committed to improving your experience with every update.
It’s almost the end of August. When will the fabled, all-improving update arrive?
I see FR’s like this and requests to optimize the routing and think that most of the devs probably haven’t done much with 3dprinting. They’re basically building a slicer from scratch 
A lot of these features are already in popular slicers.
- Avoid crossing through middle of the yard is opposite to Avoid crossing perimeters
- Optimizing -infill- cutting path looks a LOT like Monotonic Infill
- Even settings like perimeter count, detect thin walls etc.
Cura skips holes (NGZs) and continues along a straight line and comes back to pick up missed areas.
There may be some influence within Yarbo’s planning .
Good comparison, but I think some have never mowed a lawn before, let alone 3D printed.
Luckily, appart from the noise, I think everything else is software engineering…
I really hope that there is no hardware limitation (memory, cpu or other) inside that prevent them to run the required optimization jobs..
However:
-
we went on the moon with 64kb of ram… so…
-
if compute is a problem, given what seems to be quite good connectivity, they could offload heavy calcs on the cloud…