supergerardo

Technically you are wrong here. The Nüvi 205 has a STMicroelectronics STA5620, the Oregon has a STMicroelectronics's STA2062 "Cartesio" which is the same processor used in the PN-40 Please don't present false information as facts. Btw, please don't present false information as fact while you're accusing other people of presenting false information as fact. And please don't get all worked up by the BS that I am spouting, I'm just a bit of a clown, and were all just here for entertainment, no? Anywho, it's more complicated than that. You presented correct factual information: "The Nüvi 205 has a STMicroelectronics STA5620, the Oregon has a STMicroelectronics's STA2062 "Cartesio"" While leaving out other factual information: "The Nüvi 205 has a STMicroelectronics STA2062 "Cartesio", the Oregon has a STMicroelectronics's STA5620" Which in fact made it seem like the factual information that I presented was in fact, not factual. Have you ever considered a career in politics?

Ok, I think coggins and dakboy are only partially right. According to this the STA2062 is a cartesio chipset with an ARM processor that is designed to work specifically with the sta5260, which is the RF chip. So both the Oregon and the Nuvi 205 have a sta2062 AND a sta5260. The big chip in the photo is probably the sta2062 and has garmin's name slapped on top. Here's a little blurb about the release of the 2062. It mentions that the 2062 and the 5260 cost less than $10 for the pair. The screen in the Oregon must be pretty darn expensive.

Technically you are wrong here. The Nüvi 205 has a STMicroelectronics STA5620, the Oregon has a STMicroelectronics's STA2062 "Cartesio" which is the same processor used in the PN-40 Please don't present false information as facts. Sorry, don't mean to start nasty rumors. I just took the part number off of the top of the chip and then put it into google. I then got a hit for a japanese webpage listing the detailed specs of the Nuvi 205, and it listed that chip. Big whoop if garmin uses the same chip in different models, GM used the same V6 in different brands of cars with wildly varying prices for the last 20 years. Two factors that help justify the price of the oregon over the Nuvi are a more expensive transflective screen and a lower sales volume. This still doesn't change the fact that the Oregon comes with more AIR inside. Just ran across this while I was attempting to double check my "facts": Oregon MB Nuvi 255 MB. Can anyone point out the Nuvi antenna? From experience it works extremely well. Which all begs the question: Why does the Oregon cost 2.5 times as much as a Nuvi 205W? Each has features the other lacks, by example: Nuvi has that Oregon lacks: - Rechargeable battery - Voice quality speaker - Much larger display Oregon has that Nuvi lacks: - Altimeter/Compass chip - Replaceable battery holder, no batteries - Waterproof case To me these features are a wash from a cost standpoint, but at retail . . . My conclusion, Garmin dominates the handheld market and can charge whatever it likes.

I just can't stay away from this forum. This is funny: Cruise into circuit city and ask for a Mil Spec phone. Anyway, back to this empty space peeve of mine. Here are the innards of an oregon: Contents? One sparsely populated circuit board, one screen, and lots of AIR. Idea: Make it smaller (using the same components) and everyone who wants "something to grab on to" can stick it in a giant rubber Oregon 300 shaped pod that fits in their hand. That way everyone will be happy. Also of note is the oregon has the same ARM processor as el cheapo Nuvi 205. Perhaps Garmin made it bigger to trick you into thinking you're getting more for your money. Here are some examples of more efficient use of space: sansa clip: I-phone:

Aha, you're on to something. After giving it some thought, I think this is what really happened: 1. Supergerardo purchases a Vista HCX, thinking the map rendering will be similar in quality to Supergerardo's phone which has a similar resolution screen. 2. Supergerardo realizes that despite having a 256 color screen, the Vista HCX renders non-anti aliased 4 color maps that look worse than the screenshot from a Tandy 1000 (this is not a joke, here is a screenshot from a Tandy 1000). The handling of street names also makes the maps significantly less usable than the gerardo phone. 3. Supergerardo writes a scathing critique of handheld units on the market, even though Supergerardo has only used a few of them briefly in the store. 4. Supergerardo buys a Colorado 300 for $180 AR from amazon. 5. Supergerardo realizes that the Colorado isn't as bad as the pundits say. The screen looks good in sunlight and under clouds, even without the backlight. 6. Despite the minor shortcomings of the Colorado, Supergerardo is satisfied. 7. Supergerardo becomes interested in openstreetmap and will never be seen again in this forum (unless I have questions about my Colorado ).

Ok, my thinking is still a screwed up on this heat thing. It's not waste heat. I think ALL of the energy consumed by a GPS is converted to heat, with the exception of light leaving the screen. Again, I'm not an engineer, so please correct me if I'm wrong.

Ok, you guys can forget my earlier post. I just invented a superconducting processor for the SuperGerardo™ GPS (pictured below) that produces no waste heat, and now it can't heat the screen.

How do you propose to heat the screen while not contributing to the poor battery life you complained about in your original post? This was a joke, but the concept is valid. All IC's produce some measurable amount of heat. How much is produced by the circuits in a GPS? I have no idea. Is it significant? Don't know that either, but I doubt it. If your GPS had a laptop processor it would definitely be significant. The point is they produce some heat. If you use this heat to warm the screen and you insulate the outside of the screen the GPS will be able to operate at a lower temperature. How much lower? 1/2 a degree? 5 degrees? No idea. Also this heat would be wasted anyway, so it's not draining the batteries. Kinda like the heater in your car using waste heat from the engine.

Actually I did have a cellphone back in 1997. In fact I had one back in 1995. So did lots of people in urban areas. And 1997 is the late 90's. While I agree that handheld GPS units could be much better, I suggest you actually purchase and / or use one for a while before you start throwing out suggestions on a topic you seem to know little about. I said odds are you didn't have a cell phone. That doesn't mean you didn't have one. I'm just saying the average person in 1997 still didn't have a cell phone. And yes, by now we all know I have my head up my ***.

OK, every one can stop holding their breath. I have solved the world's problems and I am starting my own GPS company. Move over Steve Jobs, here comes SuperGerardo! Our first device will use the special SuperGerardo™ heated and insulated e-paper screen. There will be an insulated outer layer and the heat will be supplied by the integrated circuits in the GPS. Here's the data sheet:

Anyone else notice the Colorado 300 is now $180 on amazon AR and the Oregon 200 is now $230? The prices have been dropping $10 every two days. Wonder where it will end.....

Ok, so you guys are right. My original suggestions for GPS improvements weren't so hot, but I wasn't suggesting that GPSes (whats the plural of that?) should be Iphone quality by now. Here's a comparison of the map drawing abilities on a palm centro and the Vista HCX: I think it's pretty sorry that a $300 handheld GPS does a significantly worse job than a phone at drawing maps. The GPS is a dedicated mapping device, while the phone just has mapping as a bonus. The centro's $49 price is probably heavily subsidized by the phone contracts sold with it, but I bet it still costs a whole lot less than the $173 it takes to make the Iphone. The really interesting part of this is that Palm is a small company and they have less than half the annual revenue of Garmin! This is not crazy alien Iphone technology, this is something that garmin is more than capable of. Yes, the colorado and oregon series are capable of making maps like the centro (well, better than the centro), but at a stiff price and in a bulky package.

This is totally bogus argument. The first commercial GPS was available in 1982 and the first commercial was available in 1984. commercial cell phone and usage didn't really take off until the late 90's: commercial handhelds didn't really take off until 2001 (when selective availibility was turned off)Mobile phone usage No graph but divide the millions in half and it would be a generus GPS reprsentation. In addition, with the exception of the receiver portion of the of the gps there is tons of hardware developed for phones and pdas that can be used in a gps ([processors, screens and cameras can found in GPSr], video drivers, etc) Software development to integrate is also an issue here and not yet addressed. : I still disagree with you on processors and screens. The nuvi supposedly uses a generic arm based processor and I'd imagine the colorado and oregon and pn-40 are no different. This is the same cpu architecture that is used in a lot of phones, pdas and scientific calculators. This processor probably handles menus, map drawing and other calculations, but not antenna/position calculation functions (again, this is a guess) I also don't see why screens from cameras and phones aren't suitable for gps. They have similar requirements, i.e. low power consumption, visibility in varied lighting conditions, durable, etc. The screen on the colorado could even be this off the shelf unit, available from digikey: http://www.optrex.com/products/partdetail....9GD030J-MLW-AJN

I'm glad we have reached an agreement. Yes, consumer use of phones and gps units did not take off until the late 90's. Did you have a cell phone in 1987? I doubt it. How about a GPS? Even if you had an offshore boat you would have probably been using Loran C. Odds are you also didn't have a cell phone in 1997, unless it was for business. I know I didn't have a cell phone in 1997 and neither did anyone I knew. Cellphones did not become commonplace until the late 90's, much like gps. Again, this graph backs up my assertion: cell usage # of colors have nothing to to with resolution. Read this wikipedia article: Screen Resolution I said "if you want to purchase a hand held, waterproof, high resolution gps, you have to buy a Garmin." This doesn't mean that other GPS units are not waterproof, it just means they don't meet all of the above requirements (specifically high resolution).

Thank you. And the current manufacturing cost of the Iphone is only $174.33 The Etrex, Colorado and Oregon all do not float. The Delorme PN's only float with lithium batteries. Holding the oregon with gloves is a non issue, since it can't be operated with gloves. Back in the day nobody asked for a giant compass that floats and they could grip!

(double post)

I said commercial gps, not commercial handheld gps. Also, Remember the first real cell phones came out in 1983 and cost $4000. Mobile phones prior to that were really just radios that contacted an operator who dialed your number for you. You have to be joking. I'm not an engineer, or a venture capitalist. Yes it's crossed my mind that I could be wrong.

There is no reason a GPS can't be small and durable. I'm not talking motorazor slim, but I think an etrex or oregon could be half as thick and still be durable

Those are all lower resolution than the Oregon and Colorado. The Magellan triton is the only one that comes close and it's a POS. I hate to break it to you, but your delorme is not high resolution. It's 176x220, same as a color etrex and lower than an older black and white etrex! This is totally bogus argument. The first commercial GPS was available in 1982 and commercial cell phone and usage didn't really take off until the late 90's: Mobile phone usage In addition, with the exception of the receiver portion of the of the gps there is tons of hardware developed for phones and pdas that can be used in a gps (processors, screens, video drivers, etc)

That's not what I'm saying. The Oregon and the Colorado gps units are thoroughly modern, but for backpacking use the power consumption and the bulk are less than ideal (given available technology). The delorme pn-40 seems to be very modern internally, but the screen is a little lacking (again, given the available technology) With regards to competition: Correct me if I'm wrong, but if you want to purchase a hand held, waterproof, high resolution gps, you have to buy a Garmin. If I'm not mistaken, that gives them more flexibility for setting prices.

I wasn't talking about caching, I was talking about navigating. You're right though.

I'm not trying to start a flame fight here. I was merely pointing out that hand held GPS units seem to lag technologically compared to other consumer electronics and that there is plenty of room for an enterprising company to grab some market share. Based on my experience with other consumer electronics I just expect more for my $500. Let's face it, the handheld GPS market is not as competitive a other markets and you get more for your money when you buy a laptop or a digital camera. Garmin has weak competition and they price their products accordingly. Why do you think the Colorado 300 went down from $500 to $200 in the course of a year? Do you think their manufacturing costs went down $300? No way. Garmin charged $500 because that's what they thought would make the most money. It could easily cost less than $100 to manufacture a Colorado or an Oregon. Now you can get a Colorado for $200 because the Oregon came out and they're switching to a new price structure. You could argue that any new feature or improvement on a gps is a frivolous luxury. High sensitivity vs low sensitivity, color vs black and white, mapping vs non mapping, the list goes on. None of this stuff is necessary. I'm sure if you guys were a few years older you'd be arguing you don't need anything better than a compass and a good map (and with good reason).

I wouldn't want a 5" screen, that's just what I could find specs for. There are a bunch of E-readers on the market with a ~5inch screen and a cell phone. I imagine you could get something more appropriate for a gps, but I could be wrong. I don't know if the typical gps manufacturer buys off the shelf screens or has them made to spec.

I wouldn't want anything much smaller than my CO. I had one of those dinky cell phones that were out several years ago and I hated it. I need something that I get ahold of. It appears that you are wrong on the display but the rest is just a difference in opinion. Just like hybrid vs SUV, Ford vs Chevy, etc. In 1920 it was considered unmanly to wear a wrist watch and real men had pocket watches. Yes, obviously a difference of opinion. I bet you can get your hands on this GPS:

Ok, you're right, looks like the quoted operating temperature for epaper is down to freezing and the minimum storage temperature is 15 deg or so. Garmin says the 60cs goes down to 5deg, which is significantly better. I think for many users (including myself) this would be a pretty good trade off, but wouldn't make an ideal all around unit as I was suggesting. Plus you could fry your screen below 15 or so.