Jump to content

SiliconFiend

Members
  • Posts

    358
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by SiliconFiend

  1. It's been a while since I used the program, but a couple things come to mind. First, if the vertical bar that you show above is actually in the file name, that could cause problems. I'm guessing it's just a typo, though. Second, make sure cgpsmapper is on your path. Third, maybe try an older version of cgpsmapper?
  2. This brings back fond memories. I made several trips to hike at Palouse Falls while in college, and we would roll large rocks off the cliff next to the falls, probably breaking some laws and certainly endangering our lives...
  3. Definitely a business thing. You might check out OpenStreetMap, which was started for the reason of free access to map data. Not as easy as select-n-download, but you can get map data onto your Garmin (even routing works to a limited degree). The nice thing about it is if you find an error in the map, you can fix it yourself. If you want free non-routable maps of the US, check out Ibycus maps on http://www.gpsfiledepot.com/
  4. Very quickly: drag the rgn file onto the WebUpdater exe file and follow the steps. When it asks to check for additional firmware updates, just cancel it otherwise you will overwrite the 2.50 GPS firmware you just installed.
  5. Small correction: The PN-40 has the same receiver as the Oregon (STM Cartesio), not the HCx series (MediaTek MTK).
  6. I also have played with the 400i maps and Moagu, the performance of the 400i aerial images is much faster than the vectorized Moagu maps. Still not proof that Garmin isn't doing something similar I guess, but somehow it doesn't feel that way to me. Someone who has the GB Discoverer maps could test it by installing on an older unit and see if it displays. Not a conclusive test by any means (because a failure to load doesn't really confirm that it's a true raster), but it would be interesting to see.
  7. You have raster mapping on your unit to check?? Affirmative. MapWell allows me to turn scanned 24K USGS quad maps into raster maps for my Oregon and I can still see the transparent road layer I've made for Montana ON TOP OF these raster maps. My guess is that Garmin may have given the GB maps a higher draw priority than the road layer folks have been complaining about. I may be comparing apples to oranges here since MapWell rasters and my transparent maps aren't Garmin products as GB Discoverer is, hence may not have their draw priority affected by specific language in the firmware. BUT if you're wondering about NW Trails ( i.e. North America), you're probably not concerned of it's interactions with GB Discoverer. Yep, it's apples and oranges. Mapwel vectorizes (is that even a word?) a raster image so that the format is equivalent to typical Garmin vector maps. Even older non-raster-capable units can display them (albeit slowly). It will probably require someone with one of these GB Discoverer maps (with what appears to be true rasters) to test a transparent vector map overlay to see if it works.
  8. I'm not sure why one would want topo without trails. So that you could use the topo sort of like a basemap and use an alternate source for trails which could be updated much more frequently. Sounds like that's the plan here.
  9. No, it's not Follow Road/Off Road. The setting you want to change is called Lock On Road. It's under Menu->Setup->Map->General. Change it to Off and it will show your true position. The circle is an estimate of your actual location (95% of the time your true position will like within that circle), and it's a combination of the EPE of your position as well as the resolution of the map.
  10. The Garmin Colorado and Oregon can display raster-based Ordnance Survey maps. Look in this forum for a recent thread with "GB Discoverer" in the title.
  11. I think you answered your own question.
  12. That classification/info does not exist on the old Garmin map format (the only format for which free tools are available to make your own maps), as far as I know. I believe that is a feature (along with lane assist, additional POI types, etc.) unique to the NT format maps.
  13. That is not true for the vast majority of machines. The front USB ports are usually just like an extension cord (i.e. no electronics components) to a USB header on the motherboard. A hub has active electronics in it. Theoretically, there should be no difference, but it may be more susceptible to noise, and may be less reliable due to poor electrical connection. All the USB ports on your computer act as if they were on a hub, which is part of the USB host circuitry on the motherboard. However, there generally shouldn't be any difference between the front and rear ports. For a while, though, Dell laptops had a problem where they weren't supplying sufficient power to the USB ports and some devices wouldn't work or would randomly fail. In some cases you might do better using an external, powered hub to ensure sufficient current is available for your devices.
  14. That's because Ibycus first created a set of Topo maps for Canada, and later he created these street and hydro maps for the US from publicly available sources. They do not (yet) include topographical information, but another user, Snowfleurys, has created transparent contour overlays available here.
  15. I downloaded the free version of GPSMapEdit and cGPSmapper, opened a .gpx file of a hike along several trails in MapEdit and saved it, but when I go to Export it, the Garmin IMG/cpsmapper is greyed out. Am I missing a step? I was hoping the demo version would let me try this to see some results before purchasing (if needed). Thanks for any help getting going. You are missing a few steps. First, you need to save the file as Polish format (.mp). Then go to File->Map Properties and change the Type Set to Garmin, enter an 8-digit ID and a Name, then switch over to Levels and make sure you have at least two levels defined (clicking Insert Before will create them for you). Switch over to the cGPSMapper tab and change the map to transparent (Y). Click OK to return to the map. Then you need to right-click on your tracks and Convert To->Polyline.. Choose any type you want, but Walkway/Trail might be a good choice (0x0016). Save your file and then you should be able to perform the export.
  16. Yes, this site sucks. They have something misconfigured and/or their servers are not adequate for the load. Here's a hint, though--when it says that it had an error, almost always your post went through anyway. The thing to do is to go back, copy the text of your post out of the input box to save it just in case, and then reload the thread you were reading to see if it went through. If it didn't go through, you can reply again and paste in your text. But generally you don't need to do that.
  17. Topo 2008 does not support "lock on road", and the accuracy of the roads on Topo 2008 is widely known to be poor.
  18. If you're using the Topo 2008 map, then the street accuracy of it is known to be bad. (50-150 feet off as you describe) Only City Navigator and its friends will have both accurate street locations and street names. (Topo 3.0 has reasonably accurate street locations but no names)
  19. You can create both transparent and non-transparent maps in Garmin. You can also have a transparent polygon layer. I have created such a mapset that displays building footprints. In that case, the polygons are not transparent, but the spaces between them are. It's true that the tools for creating Garmin maps come from third-party sources, but I have found them to be much more customizable and flexible than DeLorme's tools (speaking here of Topo 7). And you can actually make sort-of transparent polygons for Garmin, too. If you use a transparent map, then use a custom TYP file, you can make polygons which are only partially filled (according the the pattern you design), so you can see what's underneath. I did this when I layered a customized version of Topo 3.0 on top of City Nav NT 2009 because the polygons for park areas were not identical and I wanted to see the polygons from Topo 3.0 without completely obscuring the City Nav roads underneath.
  20. Now, what would be awesome would be close collaboration between a handheld and car navigation unit. So you could find a cache on your handheld that you want to go to, and zap it over to your car unit to drive to the parking area. Come on, Garmin, you already have the ANT wireless technology and communication working between handhelds. This is not a huge leap...
  21. Why? Did somebody use that specific expression in this thread somewhere? Where trade-offs have been mentioned in this thread, I think they're more economic than engineering decisions. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tradeoff http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opportunity_cost Well, I'm an engineer, so I understand engineering trade-off. While lee_rimar is correct, most of the tradeoffs tend to be economic, there certainly exist trade-offs for engineering reasons. For example, the screen they chose was probably a balance of resolution, brightness and power consumption. There may have been a screen with better visibility, but the power draw was too high, or the size wasn't right, maybe the vendor was unknown and they couldn't trust the reliability, etc. You might argue that's a marketing (i.e., customer expectations) trade-off, and you may be right, but given certain constraints, engineers have to come up with the best part or design to meet the requirements. From experience, I'll tell you that there are so many vendors and parts out there it is very difficult to find the "best" one. Often you'll see the same part (or its clone) over and over again and the "best" ones have to fight to rise above the noise. A big company like Garmin should be able to do better to find good parts (or work with their vendors to create them), though...
  22. I had problems using the cGPSMapper TYP compiler--if I recall correctly, it incorrectly swapped my "on" and "off" bits for a transparent bitmap. I had much better luck using this site. The one thing that bugged me is that I couldn't find a way to start with the default typ file and edit it. The good news is that you don't have to create a pattern for every type, only for the ones you want to modify. So you could create patterns/linetypes associated with your footpaths, bridleways, etc. A quick tutorial: First, find out what feature code is being used on your map for the line types that you want to change. Since you're able to change that to a contour, etc., I'm assuming you already know how to change the type. I noticed that mkgmap recently changed the way styles work, and I don't know what version you're using. Anyway, after you have the feature codes, use your favorite (sorry, favourite) editor to create line colors and patterns (dashed, thick, thin, whatever) for those codes. Note that you have a wide choice of colors when you're creating the file, but they won't necessarily show up with the same color on your GPS due to color limitations. I had to go through a few iterations using colors sampled from screenshots from the GPS before I got the color the way I wanted it. Note that you'll probably want to create both day and night colors. Once you have your TYP file, it has to be combined with the map when it's sent to the GPS. I ended up putting it into MapSource because that was the easiest way for me to manage my maps. However, it looks like sendMap can support it, too. For sendmap, I think you just add the TYP file in with your map segments and it will figure it out when you create your gmapsupp.img file. Then when it's done you just copy the gmapsupp.img file to your GPS and test it out.
  23. Lots of (badly needed) rain and mid 40's here.
  24. Nice! Thanks to the guys at the Perry site for setting up that resource! Now, how about 2.40, 2,60, & 2,70? Come on guys, somebody out there must have them! I'll keep "pinging" Garmin, but I really think it is going to be up to us in the forums to make this happen! Are you absolutely sure there exists 2.40, 2.60 and 2.70 chipset versions "in the wild"? I seem to recall there were occasions where the next logical version number was skipped.
  25. The satellites are barely moving relative to your position. They are in geosynchronous orbit. If you could see them from the ground, they would not appear to be "whizzing around us" - rather, they would appear to be stationary. Nope, they are not geostationary (the WAAS ones are, though). They're in a polar orbit. I believe the orbits were carefully designed as to give coverage over most or all of the world for at least part of the day before the entire constellation of satellites was launched and operational. As to the OPs question, your GPS knows the path of the satellites and it knows the signal timing received from those satellites, but it can't know what you're doing if you're moving around. You're adding another variable into the equation.
×
×
  • Create New...