Tracker One - Few Questions

Hi, I have few questions about Tracker One. Please respond to them accordingly;

1. Writing Your Own Code
I was able to compile code and upload to tracker using Workbench with Cloud Flash from command palette. However, when I try to compile it on Web IDE I get errors with missing tracker.h, tracker_config.h etc. I can manually add them but I thought it should be a part of particle cloud library.

This is my code:

#include "Particle.h"

#include "tracker_config.h"
#include "tracker.h"



SerialLogHandler logHandler(115200, LOG_LEVEL_TRACE, {
                                                         {"app.gps.nmea", LOG_LEVEL_INFO},
                                                         {"app.gps.ubx", LOG_LEVEL_INFO},
                                                         {"", LOG_LEVEL_INFO},
                                                         {"net.ppp.client", LOG_LEVEL_INFO},

void setup()
    Particle.connect();; // TimeZone - New York
    String show_time_date = (Time.format(, "%Y-%m-%d %r")); // Example: 2016-05-20 11:23:30 PM
    Particle.publish((String(show_time_date)), "System Restarted", PRIVATE);

void loop()

2. Timestamp
Is there any way to change timestamp, it seems to be 4 hours ahead


3. Vitals
They seem to show data partially, sometimes it’s completely empty.

I’ve been using Particle.publishVitals(3600); on my Boron LTE for couple of days and it doesn’t look like its making any improvements.

4. GPS
GPS seems not working as I would expect, I tested it in various locations and it’s been way off to many times. On the screenshot below you will see 2 RED arrows, this is where vehicle was parked for couple of hours within last few days. Looks like GPS is throwing a lot of false readings. Just so you know, the GPS is sitting on the floor of the vehicle under an open sky. The map you see is in Manhattan but I noticed the same behavior in other parts of the city.

5. Cellular Signal
I own couple of Boron LTE units and this Tracker One, they all seems to have a LOW cellular coverage, no matter where I go it’s always in 30’s and 40’s. I can leave antenna on top of my dashboard and it’s always the same. I’ve never seen anything close to Full Bars.

Please respond with any suggestions and advice as it will help other members of this community as well. Thank you

Have you been able to select the TrackerOne as target in Web IDE?
I cannot see mine in the devices list of Web IDE.

The timestamp is always UTC and the responsibility to localize it falls on the receiving application.

In urban areas (especially with tall buildings) satellite visibility is always an issue when the few available ones sit low in the sky and not “directly” over head. Hence when one satellite goes out of “sight” and others come into “sight” slight missalignments are to be expected.
The TrackerOne also features a WiFi module for aGPS, but that only works when there are good enough WiFi APs available too.
Depending on their respective variance and ratio of GPS vs. aGPS accuracy will be somewhat volatile too.

I didn’t see mine until I added it. Follow this procedure:

and here I get errors:

If I add tracker.h and tracker_config.h manually, I will have to add all the remaining libraries since they point to each other as it compiles, its really annoying procedure. I wish there was a way to upload the whole project folder from your Drive/Workbench to Web IDE.


Hi. I just got my hands on a Tracker One… compiled and flashed using Workbench… but I have the same question for the pros: how can we use Web IDE to work with that hardware?.. tutorials aren’t very explicit about this device…

We do not recommend using the Web IDE for programming the Tracker One or Tracker Edge. There is no way to synchronize the Tracker Edge updates and dependencies automatically. And because using the Web IDE is not recommended, Tracker Edge is never tested with it, and changes in the future could cause any current Web IDE workarounds to stop working.

1 Like

Thanks @rickkas7! That clarifies a lot of things.

Today is my “Hello World” day with my first Tracker One device.

I’m used with working with my flock of Photon for a few years, and I also work often with an Electron original “Asset Tracker”. But I have to admit that switching to “Local” compiling and uploading with Workbench for this Tracker One only to accomplish minor code adjustments to main.cpp (just like I would do with a simpler device), is giving me nosebleeds. I feel like I’m killing a fly with a finnicky jackhammer.

I do like to code. I do it with all my particle devices and other hardware, like we all do… but no possibility to just hop on the Web IDE for tiny adjustments will be a new paradigm for many Particle users like me. I’ve managed to do great things in the last four years, without any local IDE. That is one of the reasons I gradually switched to Particle as my go-to solutions for everything.

The way I see it is simple. Tracker website is advertizing about some application where you can go without writing any code… of course I knew I would have to code. But then I realized, as soon as I configured my shiny new Tracker, that any real work on this hardware will require a full-fledged local IDE. There is no middle ground.

While working with Photon / Argon / Electron required a “medium level” of complexity, the new Tracker is all or nothing: It requires either zero hassle (web config, using it as-is as a simple tracker in 5 min) or maximum level of hassle (configuring a local IDE + plugins + installing git + MinGW + bash fun + environment settings + DFU flashing… everything that Particle hardware was helping me to avoid for years).

I know I’m probably not a true hardcore coder as most guys here if I complain about local IDE use, but I’m definitely not the only WebIDE user either…

Thanks for hearing my “day one” opinions on the new generation Tracker.

Most of that headache is taken care of with Particle Workbench installation. You may just need to avoid some pitfalls (i.e. blanks in your user path are often a pain for applications that employ command line tools).

1 Like

Yes Particle Workbench makes it (slightly) less painfull than having to deal with a cold hard IDE. But it’s still a behemoth of a jackhammer setup compared to changing a line on the fly with two clicks in WebIDE.

Thanks @ScruffR and @rickkas7 for your explanations. I’ll suck it up and code like an adult… :neutral_face:

1 Like

Re: your point #4

I can offer my datapoint that in a low-density residential area in the midwest, with a view of slightly less than half of the sky, I get 7 days of location data basically reporting as a single point.

I know the multipath and limited view of the sky that you get in hi-rise canyons like Manhattan is a problem; but I am surprised to see the DOP (Dilution Of Precision) that your map suggests. It looks inferior to what I would expect for a modern, high channel count, multi-system GNSS receiver.