Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Didjerrydo

  1. Am I just being too picky are does anyone else notice the agravating inability of not being able to call up a listing of all saved waypoints in the "Waypoint Manager"? Quite often I find myself wanting to call up a distant saved waypoint, only to find the "ever how many it is" of the closest ones displayed. Unless you happen to remember the name you gave a more distant point, how are you supposed to "recall" it! Earlier units didn't have this handicap. Is there a setting I'm missing somewhere that lets you get around this issue somehow?
  2. I now have City Nav NT, US Inland lakes, & Eastern 24K Parks all loaded on a 4GB Micro SD card in my Oregon 400t (which obviously already has Topo 2008 in its internal memory). Although I understand all these mapping types can't be displayed of the same area at the same time, it gets a bit aggrivating trying to figure which type is going to have dominance over the other when trying to look at a given area with a particular type mapping. Is there a simple rule of thumb here?
  3. "Fixed issues with power off pressure trending." I wonder if this is another way of saying they fixed the clock?
  4. Has anyone else noticed any comparative sensitivity or "signal-holding" between the Oregon and other Garmin handhelds?
  5. I don't know, but I do know that Garmin recognizes that the clock thing was/is a very serious issue with the Colorado. We have had several units do this here where I work. It was tweaked in a couple of the software updates which made an attempt to fix it, but only seemed to cause the clock to run a bit too fast afterwards. I guess that's better than it stopping entirely. This is only noticed if the unit has been turned off for a day ir so and is then booted up where it is unable to acquire. It seems as the internal clock can't keep accurate time with the unit off. I've never seen this sort of thing in any previous units back as far as the Garmin 38's! Looks like having an accurate internal clock would be a no-brainer after all!
  6. I just booted up my Oregon 400t a few minutes ago here inside the store (2:50 PM Eastern Time). It couldn't acquire a signal here inside. When I looked at its alarm clock screen to check it's now dumbed-down time display, it was showing 7:20 AM! This unit had been used just yesterday afternoon, at which time, it had no doubt, reset its clock to the exact time via the satellites! Don't tell me that Garmin now has the same damned clock issue with these units as plagued the ill-fated Colorados. Surely they didn't use the same internal timekeeping circuitry in the Oregons. If so, this means the same ongoing problems with the pressure plotting, alarm function and slow aquisition as in the Colorado. Better check yours!
  7. After playing with my Oregon 400t for a while now, I'm finding that it doesn't really pick up and hold signal nearly as well as my former 60 CSx with it's helix or even as well as the newer eTrex's "H" models with their patch antennas. I'm basing this on just how much "stopped time" I'm seeing after a five mile walk, out in the open for the most part, with the units carried in my shirt pocket. With the 60 or eTrex units there's hardly ever a second of dropped signal (stopped time) showing, yet with the Oregon, I'll always get 2 or 3 minutes out of an hour and 15 minutes. This makes me wonder if the new "ceramic" antennas used in the Oregons may have been a cost cutting move that has cost the units in terms of overall sensitivity?
  8. Is it possible to save track logs to the Oregon's memory card rather than its internal memory? By the way, I wonder just how much internal memory is "left over" and still available in a unit like the 400t anyway? Looks like Garmin would have provided a screen somewhere where a user could see the amounts of used and available memory anyway!
  9. Yeah, I really wish someone with experience with the Inland Lakes program would respond to this one because I've wondered that myself. My guess is that it is unprotected and can be loaded to multiple units though.
  10. I wouldn't try it unless it was in a ZipLok bag. Yeah Buddy.. read this: http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php...9&hl=dunked
  11. Has anyone noticed the obvious absence of an antenna plug on the new Oregon's? Is Garmin confident enough now that the internal antennas are all that we'll ever need now? Is this kinda' like what happened to external vehicle cell phone antennas on cars- just no longer necessary?
  12. There's a number of "screen protectors" on the market by various manufacturers, any of which (as long as they're at least 39mmX 69mm), that can easily be cut down and used sucessfully on the Oregons. I'm using an old Fellows brand version made for an older Palm V PDA. It works perfectly. This particular protector has a glossy surface rather than a textured one, which I find to actually improve visibility bt killing the dull, matte surface of the Oregon. It's simply a matter of cutting the protector down to the above size with an X-Acto knife or similar super sharp knife and a straight edge of some sort. It is important to apply the protector very carefully to avoid air bubbles underneath it. I would also be very cautious in removing an old protector. You should use a wood or plastic toothpick to carefully lift a corner and then slowly peel it off. This is important in order not to possibly pull the underlying surface material away from whatever is underneath it.
  13. Does the screen ever get real smudgy so that you are wanting to clean it off every time you look at it or does a matte finish help mask this? Aside from text entries and navigating around on the screen I was pretty good handling the R-n-R. From what I've read though I shouldn't be regretting the switch. I've now owned both the Colorado and the Oregon, and believe you me, the Oregon is a sweetheart compared to the problematic Colorado! I wrestled with one issue after the other with the Colorado. Its clock wouldn't even keep time when the unit was off! The Oregon, on the other hand, seems to have it mostly all dialed in. The only real gripe I have is its somewhat poor display visibility in certain lighting situations. You pretty much have to constantly use the unit's backlight to maintain visibility. Of course, this results is greatly reduced battery life. I'm still getting about 10 hours out of 2650 mAh NiMH AA's with compass on and 100% backlighting though. The first thing I did with my 400t was to apply a glossy screen protector over the matte surfaced display. This actually seemed to improve the screen's visibility as well as protect it from scratches which I'm sure will happen if it's not protected in some way. It sure would have been nice if Garmin had went with the nice hard, super-clear surface such as used on the iPhone instead of the somewhat cloudy, matte flexible film, but I understand this type surface is a necessary trade-off to make it usable with gloved fingers. I believe I could have dealt with that to have improved visibility! Overall, I've really got to hand it to the Oregon. It's a vast improvement over the Colorado. I really feel Garmin temporarly dropped the ball with it (something that they rarely ever do). Watch it fade into the sunset very quickly.
  14. Change History Changes made from version 2.20 to 2.30: Added the ability to control the scale of the x and y axes of elevation plot . Tap the x-axis legend to zoom the x-axis. Tap the y-axis legend to zoom the y-axis Added panning and zooming to the image viewer Added ability to set position after pressing the go button when GPS is in Demo Mode Added option to add a point from the map in Route Planner Added option to search near a point on the map in Where To? Added preview of on-road routes in Route Planner Added option to save a geocaches as a waypoint Added error message when the maximum number of geocaches is exceeded (2000) Added error message when the maximum number of gpx files is exceeded (200) Added option to clear the current track from Track Manager Added support for downloading geocaches written using Groundspeak v1.1 extentions Added elevation plot type to user profiles Improved GPS performance Improved map drawing performance in some situations Improved handling of naming a waypoint the same as an existing waypoint Improved feedback when typing an invalid character into the keyboard Improved display of intermittent water areas Fixed 3D View not showing detail from supplemental maps Fixed 3D View occasionally not showing anything Fixed waypoint and geocache symbols not updating on the map after being changed Fixed Custom POIs not being removed from Recent Finds after the Custom POI database was deleted Fixed being unable to pan or zoom when reviewing a route Fixed issues with Cyrillic characters Fixed issue where the Oregon would temporally stop responding after a spell search Fixed issue where left map data field could get stuck on depth Fixed creating invalid gpx files after projecting a waypoint Fixed city coloring with CityNav 2009 Fixed map getting stuck in north up mode after panning Fixed geocaches without names not being in the geocaches list
  15. I sell Garmin GPSr's in an outdoor store and have had pretty in depth experience with both units. The previous posters are right: the Oregon blows the Colorado away! Seems like to me that the Colorado was sort of a miscarriage for Garmin. Its displayis a little more visible, but not worth the other short comings of the Colorado. The Colorado's I used were very problematic. The Oregon is truly a pleasure to use!
  16. I sell Garmin GPSr's in an outdoor store and have had pretty in depth experience with both units. The previous posters are right: the Oregon blows the Colorado away! Seems like to me that the Colorado was sort of a miscarriage for Garmin. Its displayis a little more visible, but not worth the other short comings of the Colorado. The Colorado's I used were very problematic. The Oregon is truly a pleasure to use!
  17. I'm just noticing that in the Oregon series, that there's only the one "Sun & Moon" page, unlike former units that provided a second page from there, showing their actual positions in the sky relative to the horizon. Am I missing the trick to accessing this display, or is this something Garmin has just cut a corner on and totally omitted?
  18. I'm finding my new Oregon 400t to be one sweet little unit in all respects except for its poor screen visibility which I can't believe is this terrible! I find myself constantly having to use the backlight at max just for it to be usable whatsoever. Is this just the price you pay for a high resolution, touch screen? I wonder if using the backlight constantly is going to cause the it to fail prematurely? Has anyone actually noticed the run times variance between light on vs. light off ,since its use is practically a necessity? Looks like Garmin's got a real little winner here except for this one (but major) flaw!
  19. You Guys are right! Check out this: http://rfdesign.com/mag/605RFD30.pdf
  20. After talking to one of Garmin's higher level outdoor tech guys yesterday and complaining about thier choice of going back to the "patch" type antenna in the Oregon's, he informed me that that was not really the case! He described the Oregon's internal antenna as being a new inovative type that he referred to as a "ceramic" antenna, that he said ran across the top of the unit and down the left of the inside of the units. He said this was an entirely new thing for Garmin and seemed to feel that it would be almost an equal performer as a helix type. Does anybody know much about this type antenna?
  21. 'Just received a couple of the Oregon 400t's here at the store yesterday and instantly made one mine for study and evaluation. I must admit, having only played with the unit a few hours now I'm pretty much shooting from the hip, but Here's a few quick observations: 1. The touch screen is wonderful! Works like a charm. 2. Dissapointed to see the screen's surface is a somewhat translucent, matt-surfaced flexible plastic film that makes visibility even poorer than the Colorado (which is pretty bad!). I can also see this material being easily scratched by grit if not extremely careful when "panning" the map, etc. I was hoping Garmin had improved screen visibility and used a durable super hard material here. 3. The water resistance looks great. I haven't tried my famous "goldfish pond dunking act" that I did so unsuccessfully with my Colorado, but the Oregon looks really air tight and well designed in this respect. I think Garmin has learned a lesson here. 4. I'd really wished Garmin had used a quad antennae instead of the internal patch in the Oregon. I can definitely see that the Oregon isn't nearly as good picking up sats as my Colorado was. What's the point in doing this back-step here? I have put a slick surfaced screen protector on the unit's screen (I had to cut one down to 39 X 69mm) and this seems to help visibility somewhat by reducing the cloudy matte appearance that reduces visibility. Seems to me Garmin's got this one pretty dialed in except for the rather poor visibility thing.
  22. An invaluable reference source for checking out the integrity of electronics retailers is: www.resellerratings.com I got royally screwed some years ago by a bunch of rip-offs called Discovery Cameras & Electronics, matter of fact, I just checked reseller ratings site to find that they're apparently still reaming the unwary till this day! I was ready to make a trip to New Jersey and visit these maggots. I finally got my credit card company on their case to get my $700 back for goods they never delivered!
  23. There's 9+ pages of discussion on this at: http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=198780
  24. I saw this from benh57: Oops, that don't sound good at all! Sounds like scratch city!
  • Create New...