Jump to content

jmedlock

Members
  • Posts

    119
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by jmedlock

  1. Anyone know of any side-by-side tracklog comparisons, ability to maintain signal in difficult terrain, etc..., between the SiRF and the new MediaTek chipset in the 60CSx?
  2. I was under the (mistaken) impression that it was the "old" MediaTek chipset. Do you have any data / specsheets on the new MediaTek chipset? I'm curious to know more about it. Thanks
  3. Well, if you look at the specs on AMAZON, it has the text below. If you bought the unit, and it had the MediaTek, then you might be able to convince AMAZON to take it back and refund your shipping charges and not charge a restocking fee. Technical Details * Receiver: High-sensitivity SiRF architecture
  4. Perhaps I'm being pedantic, but doesn't your experience confirm that, more than likely, Garmin did not remove the "D" display, but has instead broken WAAS / EGNOS with this update? Well, that would be my interpretation, even though there are a few other possibilities. I am a software engineer, and Garmin software quality (and hardware in some cases) leaves a lot to be desired. Although I think the 60CSx currently outperforms the DeLorme PN-40, I think DeLorme is on the right track and offers much better quality than Garmin. Hopefully competition will improve Garmin products. Regards
  5. Can anyone guess why Garmin would remove the "D" display? Is it to dumb down the display for dumb users? I don't consider myself a dumb 60CSx user, though, and prefer to see the "D". Maybe I'm a skeptic, but it seems more likely to me that Garmin has broken WAAS with this release, thus "D" is not showing up.
  6. Pretty cool! I have a rotty-mix that I found in pretty poor shape on the side of the road (about 1.5 years ago), no tags or any identification. He's in great shape now. When I take him out hiking in the forest, tho, I have to keep him on a flexi-lead leash. Too many episodes (3 - I'm a slow learner) of him running after deer or elk, and not returning for 30+ minutes. The GPS idea is neat...
  7. jmedlock

    PN-40 vs 60CSx

    Regarding "accuracy", I've done some side-by-side comparisons with a 60CSx and PN-40: http://gps.wmsar.info/pn40/ I'm waiting to do more testing until after DeLorme releases the 2.5 firmware release since they have WAAS and other fixes. Regards, Justin
  8. ...nothing important... I left my 60CSx on the hood of my car, drove 2 miles down a rocky dirt road, and then hit pavement. About two miles down the paved road (at 40mph), it flew off and made impact. This wasn't a planned test, and I'm surprised it didn't fall off during the dirt road trip. The plastic screen cover completely detached (but remained in-tact probably due to the ZAGG invisible shield), and the unit seems to be working working okay, except that it is beat up in a few spots on its case. I put the screen cover back on thinking that I would have to glue it back on when I got home. However, the screen re-attached itself. I didn't take a close look at it to see how it attaches, and now I have a small speck of dirt on the inside-part of the screen. I'm thinking about shipping it back to Garmin and paying the fee ($125? $150?) to get a refurbished unit just to be safe (e.g. I don't know if the "waterproofness" has been compromised, especially around the screen). I'm impressed that the 60CSx survived this ordeal. Justin
  9. So how does this help the OP who is in Canada? I didn't think that TOPO USA covered there or worked on a GPSMAP60CSx. There is no need for a registry hack either. MapSetToolkit will do this with a couple of keystokes and mouse clicks, if that is torture, I can see why you haven't bothered to find so much as one cache. Really, not so much as "one cache"? I have so many "found caches" that the counter has rolled over to 0. And I think that was a 64-bit counter, too, so do the math! But seriously, I didn't realize the original poster was from Canada. If they moved to the USA then they could take advantage of DeLorme Topo and its very easy map making software, instead of struggling with GpsMapEdit, cGpsMapper (and the awesome "copyright" message it puts on your GPS map unless you shell out around $400 as far I can tell; or get an older version of the program), and I guess MapSetToolKit, although I prefer the registry hack myself, instead of yet another 3rd party software program. Regards
  10. This is one area where DeLorme excels with their "Topo USA" software and PN-20 / PN-40 GPS receivers. It is trivially simple, and takes only moments, to create a hiking trail map and put it on the GPS. Doing the same, on my 60CSx, using GpsMapEdit and blah blah blah (plus a registry hack so my map shows up in MapSource) is tantamount to torture. My opinion only....
  11. I'm not pleased with the Delkin 2900's at all, and if they are checking out to be 2100, then that's as good as it will get (4 of mine are below 2200, IIRC, and the other 4 are around 2400). By the way, when charging the Delkin's, I have been charging them at around 1300 and have noticed that they get hot to the touch. I charge my PowerEx 2500s at 1200 and they don't even get warm during the charge cycle. Something is very bad and wrong with the Delkin NiMH rechargeables.... not recommended!
  12. Hi, Instead of "obsession", I think my tracklog comparison exercise is one of prudence, or even due diligence, since the consumer handheld GPS market hasn't recently been known for high quality products. So that leaves me curious: how exactly did you determine that the PN-40 was sufficiently accurate? Hopefully not the marketing hype surrounding the product release. Take, for example, Garmin: I wish they would have been "obsessive" about ensuring that their Colorado series was released without numerous software bugs, especially the obscene drift problem that made it suspect for navigation. I hit the drift problem more times than I care to remember, and I hope they really fixed it in the 2.8 release. The Garmin Oregon series was much more stable at initial release, but I had my share of crashes and other problems (I posted a YouTube video showing a completely non-responsive UI). Sure, screen size is important, but readability is just as important. The only people that have totally readable Colorado or Oregon screens are those folks in the Garmin Marketing department; Garmin should release those wonderfully brilliant screens to the marketplace. For the record, the 60CSx screen may be larger, but I don't find it any easier to read than the PN-40 (also the PN-40 screen supports 65k colors compared to 256 colors on the 60CSx). I think additional imagery options (such as supported on the PN-40) are another tool in the tool chest. Maybe I wouldn't use them all the time on the PN-40, but it's nice to have them there. Compare this with the "3-D tool" on the Colorado or Oregon: I played with this tool a few times and found myself wishing that Garmin would have focused more on the essentials, instead of the bells and whistles. 3rd party software is an unfortunate "requirement" for Garmin since their MapSource product isn't very feature rich. I am finding the DeLorme Topo USA software extremely powerful and useful: it is very simple to build a network of trails without having to use "track memory". The other night I was going to sit down to make transparent maps for my 60CSx (for my trail system), but according to one tutorial, I was going to need 2 or 3 different programs and a large number of steps to accomplish what should be a trivial task. Believe it or not, I'm not bashing Garmin. I'm simply re-hashing facts... painful facts for Garmin. My basic point is that consumers shouldn't trust that the latest and greatest GPS product actually works out of the box (unless, from my brief experience, you buy from DeLorme). Even though I may sound like I'm drunk on DeLorme kool-aid (surprisingly not included as part of the PN-40 bundle), I'm still not ready to make a decision between the 60CSx and PN-40. I am, however, impressed with the quality of the initial PN-40 release. By the way, I posted another tracklog from earlier today... I'll probably get a few more samples of other areas. I'm nearly convinced that the PN-40 is a very good performer. http://gps.wmsar.info/pn40/ Regards
  13. To be fair, you may be able to "just carry [a GPS] in a chest pocket, or clipped on your belt". I think it depends on (1) your local terrain, canopy cover, and other environmental conditions, (2) your personal needs and how "accurate" you need your GPS to be, contrasted with how accurate your consumer-level GPS can be. For example, even though I might get away with carrying the 60CSx in my chest pocket and get reasonable results, I would never carry it that way. The conditions, in which I hike, have taught me that it is better to position the 60CSx vertically and up-high on my backpack (and even then, I periodically encounter difficult areas for the 60CSx). The PN-40 is no different, except that I position it 6 inches higher on top of my shoulder strap in a mostly horizontal orientation. There's really not a big difference between the two orientations. Finally, I know a surveyor with $$$$ GPS equipment. I'm simply not going to get the accuracy and reproducability on a $300-$400 consumer-level GPS compared to the results he can get. Regards
  14. Well you do have to base the comparison against something, otherwise there is no comparison. Most people hiking on trails know two things about them when viewing them on the maps. 1. The maps are general representations of where the trail should be. 2. Things happen to the trails i.e. washouts, landslides, maintenance, rerouting, etc. making the general representation more ambiguous. It appeared to me the user did some comparisons to known and well established trails and used routes that were known to be fairly accurate when the 60csx was used. The 60csx is considered the gold standard of GPS units and this makes what it does on the trail when comparing the PN40 to it relevant. Yes, exactly! And, of course, I don't expect to get better than an "approximation" of where trails are by mapping them with GPS, but I know that I most likely have better results than a USGS topo map will show. For example, we had significant flooding during our monsoon season, and some trails have been re-routed or completely disappear for 200-300+ feet. I've mapped many of the "new routes" using a 60CSx. Regarding your stopwatch suggestion: that's an interesting idea, but so far it seems that the trip stats between the PN-40 and 60CSx are within reason of each other. I'd have to find some old notes, but I don't remember the Garmin Oregon (or Colorado) (older firmware on both since I no longer own these) doing a better job when compared to the 60CSx stats. So I'm so far pleased with the PN-40 vs 60CSx. Regards
  15. Hi, I don't know if you are referring to my tracklog comparisons (http://gps.wmsar.info/pn40/). If so, then be aware that I'm not comparing the PN-40 or 60CSx against topo maps. Instead, I'm comparing the PN-40 waypoints and tracklogs against the 60CSx to see how they relate to each other. For example, so far my experience is that both units put down remarkably similar waypoints and tracklogs, so it is easy to get an "approximation" of where the trail is really located; I rarely trust trails shown on topo maps. Regards
  16. I posted new tracklog comparison results for 3 hikes that I recently completed using the Garmin 60CSx and DeLorme PN-40. http://gps.wmsar.info/pn40/ If you visited the website above previously, then you may need to force a page reload (e.g. "hold down SHIFT + click Reload" on your browser). I'm using simple HTML and finally configured "no-cache" on the pages, so this shouldn't be a problem going forward. I plan to do more hiking over the next few days, and if so, I'll post additional tracklog tests. Regards
  17. Hi, I was intending to show that, at least in the areas I hike, it is important to carry the PN-40 in a horizontal orientation for best performance. But even so, I showed one segment of a hike where the 60CSx clearly out-performed the PN-40; this wasn't representative of the entire hike as shown in one of the other pictures (i.e. where I thought the PN-40 performed arguably better than the 60CSx). I hope the three samples aren't interpreted to mean that the 60CSx easily out-performs the PN-40. For example, I have tracklogs from two canyon / heavily treed areas this afternoon where the PN-40 was "as good" to "much better" than the 60CSx. I'll post these pictures soon. I hope to do more comparison testing between the 60CSx and PN-40 over the next several days in different areas. Hope others can do the same. Regards
  18. Here are some samples between a 60CSx and PN-40: http://gps.wmsar.info/pn40/ Regards
  19. jmedlock

    Garmin vs DeLorme

    I have a 60CSx and a PN-40, hate kool-aid, and am 39 so possibly have better eyesight than you do. I'm not ready to sing DeLorme praises since I'm still getting familiar with the PN-40, but I would suggest taking a serious look at the PN-40 (in the flesh) to see if you think the screen is really harder to read than your 60CSx. Speaking of screen size: I've previously owned both the Garmin Colorado and Oregon series. What they make up for in larger screen real estate, they fail miserably in screen readability. They also failed in many other areas: Garmin releases products that are far from ready for prime time, unlike DeLorme which releases products that simply work. Yes, I'm surprised that my PN-40 hasn't crashed once, and is so far working as advertised (strange concept these days). Regards
  20. I loaded it on a 60CSx today (along with Garmin Topo 2008), and went out and played with it in the forest in Southern New Mexico. I was quite impressed with the topo you generated: 40' vs 50' contours doesn't seem like a big difference, but it really is. Also the updated road data was nice to see. I need to play with it more this week. Otherwise great job!!! Regards...
  21. Awesome! I'll give it a try later today and will let you know!
  22. It seems that you may be implying that Garmin is perhaps different than DeLorme? It seems to me that both companies try to figure out what their consumers "need", and then deliver whatever they decide will fit in their design cycle. I can find any number of posts complaining about "Why doesn't [Garmin || DeLorme || Magellan || blahBlah] have feature [x]?"
  23. Garmin has spun-off its handheld GPS organization -- it's called DeLorme. But seriously...
  24. Last week I returned my Oregon 400t, but I had applied a spare screen protector that I happened to have (i.e. when I had the Colorado 400t, I purchased two screen protectors, but only used one). I applied the screen protector to the Oregon 400t, and later it came off just fine. I had it applied most of the 5 weeks that I had the unit before returning it, and the screen was in beautiful condition when I returned it (which is kind of important). The touch screen worked fine with the screen protector; not any difference that I could detect prior or after applying it. Note that around week #5, my unit developed a strange user interface problem where it would periodically fail to be responsive to user input. This was a sudden onset problem and was intermittent. I don't believe the screen protector had anything to do with it since the unit functioned fine for 4 weeks prior without incident. Regards
×
×
  • Create New...