GeckoGeek

I suppose it depends on the photo and what you consider "properly calibrated". One issue I've noticed in Google Earth is that they seem to use photos from aircraft and some of them have been taken at a angle. As a result. the top of a building covers a different spot on the 2-dimensional screen then the base of the building. So the coordinates you read depends on the local altitude change. It may not affect all photos, but it's something to watch out for. The readings you get should be reasonably good, but may not be "dead on".

Garman Geko 301 or eTrex Summit would be one of the choices. If you don't need the compass, then the Geko 201 or eTrex "yellow". Just don't get the Geko 101 - no computer connectivity.

I know zip about the Lowrance but I think the Garmin would be better supported by 3rd party software.

Not all that hard. Just need to document the change in buildings. NGS isn't that unreasonable. My only concern is to show that it was mounted to the building itself and not the ground where it might have survived.

I don't know why, but I just can't get them to pop out at me at all. But I think there is a couple of factors to the illusion. First is where the shadows are - our brain is used to seeing shadows below, not above because the sun is usually "up". Second, we expect to see indented things as in shadows and "out" things as being highlighted. But if the carved out area is lighter then the surface, that can create confusion when looking at a 2D (photo) of the object.

First I've heard of it. Not sure how many caches per MB, but with more then 2MB, I think it's more likely you can download every cache in your travel area and then when you find yourself somewhere with some time on your hands you can go caching. You get out of the pre-planning "I'm going that way so I need to load what's in that area".

Does the 1000 "play well" with 3rd party software? Such as allowing you to download you caches from CG and upload them to the GPS?

In some ways an older Palm will work better as it will have a serial interface that allows you to connect it to your GPS to upload waypoints. The newer Palms only have USB connection so you'll not have that functionality. A PalmIII is fine. Better if it has 8MB (Palm IIIxe). I'm sure there are others.

WAAS on or off? I know in my (older) GPS, having the WAAS on tended to make the signal "jumper". Trying to find "ground zero" would have you wondering around like a drunk.

I'll agree it's easier to mount using the magnet, but does a GPS antenna really need a ground plane? I know some antennas do, but I'm kinda doubtful about a GPS or much of anything else up in the microwave bands. As for mounting, a great big washer from the hardware store is probably adequate.

I watched another bank building go down the same way. I got some still shots from a distance. Oh man the dust! I later found it it was a station. Dug up a newspaper article and sent it in to Deb. Also saw on the log that USPS had "recovered" that station after it was destroyed. (The building was replaced by an even higher one, but still the same bank.) I guess they didn't count the number of floors or notice that the building was a little newer then 1963. Just shows what you have to watch out for.

This worked for me: Sakar International iConcepts at CompUSA

Getting access to "ground zero" to check the coordinates may be a problem. The base of most antennas are usually a controlled area. But if you walk around the outside of the fence, and watch the way the arrow on the GPS moves, you should be able to confirm which of the antennas is closer to the indicated coordinates.

The very newest models use a different chipset for receiving and have different characteristics - more sensitivity and nearly instant lock. As long as you're comparing older models to older models and newer to newer, I don't think there is much difference. It's mostly features. Depending on your needs, you might want to get one with an external antenna connection to give you more flexibility and to insure better reception in the car, etc.

I can assure you it will work fine. But what you have to watch out for is not all USB/Serial adapters will work the same way. Most of those adapters are sold to allow someone to sync with their serial-only PDA. Given the specialized application, some will not pass all the handshake signals or allow the software to control them properly. To avoid problems, be sure to buy a cable that others said they have used with a GPS with no problems. Price is not a good indicator of if it will work or not. I've had good luck with the Sakar International iConcepts adapter that you can by from CompUSA for $35. But there are cheaper units out there that also work. Your software will see this as a serial port.

A USB to serial adapter will allow you to use your computer on any serial GPS unit. You don't have to get a USB GPS if your computer doesn't have a serial port.

Let's not forget that the human body also blocks the signal, so you're doing your GPS no favors by carrying it. An external antenna on the top of your hat will help it see as much sky as possible. Likewise it's helpful if you've got a car with metal tint that doesn't let the signal into the car.

I don't want you to get the wrong impression here. The converter I'm talking about allows USB devices like a laptop to grow a serial port. That works fine to connect a serial GPS unit to your computer. The reverse is not true, I seriously doubt you'll find something to convert a serial-only computer to have a USB port, or allow a USB only GPS to get a serial port. As far as the NEMA protocol, as long as the GPS will spit it out on a serial connector (I don't know the 60 that well), and as long as your software doesn't mind connecting to COM 5 or some other unusual COM number, then you should be good to go.

I don't know if the TX has a serial port. That's usually been the sticking point on newer PDAs. But the referenced link does have a cable that supports Bluetooth. That might be just the ticket.

Common problem. Get a USB to serial adapter. Just scan the forum for recommendations. Not all adapters work well for GPS. I've had good luck with one I got from CompUSA. At about $30, it's not real cheap but I was in a rush. You can do better on the internet, but be sure that someone has tried that model first. As long as the software doesn't mind talking to COM 5 or other unusual number, it shouldn't be a problem.

I discurage people from buying those. No computer interface. The computer makes for so much more that can be done with the unit. Yeah, you can cache, but you'll aways be very limited. Geko 201 is a better choice for "minimal" and only a bit more.

I'm staying that it can only be called NMEA compliant if it had a serial port. If it doesn't have a serial, then it's not NMEA. However, they could have done a much better job of accomodating the software that's expecting NMEA so that it would "play well". As for GPSGate, I've no clue. Given how new the x series is, it may take time for things to catch up to it. But watch this forum. If a solution is found, someone will post it here.

Is that just because you don't have the Palm connected to the GPS? I've seccessfuly connected my Geko 201 to a Palm IIIxe and got Cachemate to talk to it. Just take the Geko cable and the Palm serial cable and connect them together with a 9-pin null modem adapter.

If by a "CDC-ACM" you're talking about the same sort of thing that a USB to serial converter cable has, then you're right. Garmin could have made this a lot more friendly to legacy software even if it didn't strictly stick to the standard. It sure seems like the natural evolution of it.

I wonder if that's the downside to increased sensitivity? Someone once claimed that the lack of sensitivity was a feature - to prevent the unit from picking up reflected (weaker) signals that would cause an erronious reading. Then again, it might just be a different way of calculating probable error. With the two units side by side, is it really giving a different position or just assigning a different confidence level?