hbdgaz

I took my Oregon out for a couple of hours yesterday with the batteries on about 50% charge. I got a power off every time I pressed the backup arrow after browsing the map, which was more often than when the batteries were fresh. WAAS reception seemed the same as the last update and the track looks pretty good to me even at my slowest speeds (4-6Km/h). There is, however, a noticeable drift at one point along the track (compared to a previous track, and GE)

Yep, they are properly charged, I have tried 2 sets now. The charger I'm using is newish as are the rechargeables. They have also been used without any issues in my old Legend Hcx and they would happily power that for 18-20 hours+. I doubt the GPS is the problem, the batteries are much more likely suspects. Perhaps they're past their best? For those interested, http://www.csgnetwork.com/batterychgcalc.html is a handy calculator for NiMH batteries in different chargers.

I'm getting a power off problem that occurs around 25% of the time after pressing the back up arrow when navigating around the map with this new software. Are there any patch notes for this new GPS firmware? Is this firmware specifically for the GPS chipset? Who writes it? Garmin or the chipset manufacturer?

I use 2450mAh batteries and they last around 7-8 hours with screen always on, backlight on full and the compass on. Are you sure your batteries are properly charged? They can take over 24 hours to charge on lower power/older Ni-Cd chargers. Also, make sure you have the right battery type selected in system -> battery type. If it's set to a non-rechargeable type, the lower voltage from the NiMh batteries will make the gps think the batteries have less charge left than they really do.

It'll have to be a pretty dadgum good camera to make it worth while in my opinion. Looking at the body of my Oregon 300 (which is already big and heavy enough as it is) I can't see anywhere a camera of any decent quality could be put. Ok, so I may be a little snobby when it comes to cameras (I have a Olympus E420 and a rational hatred of mobile phone cameras) but I really think if a photo is worth taking, it's worth taking properly. Photos taken with mobile phones are woeful when viewed on anything apart from the equally woeful mobile phone screen, even from expensive 9 billion mega pixel phones (with a lens and sensor smaller than a pin head). There's no way a camera added to another device as a novelty will ever compare to a proper digital camera. And even if its just a quick and dirty geotagged picture that's required, most people already have a camera in their mobile. Even if it can't geotag just snap the photo then snap another of the GPS screen. I'm skeptical that a gps with a camera will be much use to most people, especially considering the extra expense, weight and battery drain it's likely to add.

I can't match 45 miles an hour but I did drop my Oregon yesterday on to concrete from my backpack. It hit on the plastic casing on the front then slid along screen side down for a foot or so. I can see why Garmin put a good amount of plastic casing around the screen now - there are a couple of minor chunks missing for the plastic but the screen is thankfully totally unscathed. It still works fine too, which is impressive considering that sort of drop would probably have obliterated a mobile phone, even though they're much lighter.

Double post

Just to add some data to the battery discussion: I have 2450mAh batteries and was riding for 6 hours with the compass on and screen always on full and the battery gauge was down to 1/4 bars by the end of the day. It was probably around 7 hours in total the device was running in this state, so having 1/4 battery power left seems reasonable and in line with the last firmware I was using.

I've managed to get WAAS locks twice this weekend since upgrading, WAAS has never worked at all for me before 2.93. Both times have been in very clear areas (no trees, at the top of a hill, for example) and the lock has fairly quickly been lost again. The first lock was hard to keep tabs on as I was on a bike, but it didn't last more than 5 minutes out of a 6 hour ride. The second time was in a different area, again with clear sky and was lost on putting the unit in my pocket.

I've just upgraded from 2.85 to 2.93 (having avoided 2.86 after reading the thread about it). I thought I'd test it quickly on my way home, and to my inexperienced eye I can't see any significant difference between the tracks. There are certainly no major inaccuracies or drifts in either. The only differences I notice is that the jumping behaviour that sometimes occurs as the gps initally finds (or loses) its signal isn't recorded on the 2.93 track (blue), however, this is just one track so it may just be a fluke. Also, the gps was still obtaining satellite information for the first half of the journey (that's what the white bars mean, right?). Regardless of this, the gps reported an accuracy of 3m all the way home (as it did with 2.85), but never achieved a WAAS lock (nor did 2.85 for me). This journey is through Brighton in South East England, with a clear view of the sky along the majoity of the route. I'm was on my bike and travelling at about 20-30km/h. The red trace was recorded using 2.85 and the 2.93 trace is blue.