Mac And Gpsrs Which Is Better Magellan Or Garmin?

[+a_friend_of_dorothy]

So I know that this is the age old question of Garmin Vs. Magellan but I've got a bit of a twist. I'm not interested in the merits of each manufacturer or even the quality of the hardware my main interest is in how each unit interacts with a Macintosh computer (OS 10.4.something). I've been Garmin all my life and I work at an outdoor retailer so I get to play with both units in the store but having never taken a Magellan home and I'm not sure how it would work on my G4 powerbook. I'm cautiously excite to see that Garmin is going to start making their software mac compatible towards the end of the year but if Magellan is already there I'd have no problem jumping ship. Any insight would be helpful and I thank you all in advance.

[+Cache Heads]

According to this recent press release, "By the end of 2006, Garmin intends to have made all its popular hardware and software applications Mac OS X compatible."

 

As far as I know, Magellan has no such plan

[+user13371]

"By the end of 2006, Garmin intends to have made all its popular hardware and software applications Mac OS X compatible." ... As far as I know, Magellan has no such plan

But speaking of what works NOW instead of in the near future:

 

NEITHER of them make software for the Mac. There are numerous software tools available for translating waypoints, tracks, etc between your Mac and your GPS - and for 3rd party developers Magellan has an advantage over the Garmin.

 

Garmin sort of makes up their own rules for protocols, USB interfaces and such and doesn't document very well for the rest of the world. Their own software naturally work with their units. But third-party software vendors are used to seeing their own products break with each new Garmin tweak, and have to figure out how to fix it.

 

Magellan offers proper NMEA across their product line, documents their vendor specific extnesions, and their USB implementation on the eXplorists is logical and works perfectly. They stream NMEA over USB (which Garmin claims is impossible) and you can alsop use it as a mass storage device for transfering other data (maps, tracks, waypoints, etc).

 

Of course, those things are of benefit to PC users too. But in the Mac realm, with no direct vendor support for either product line, having well documented protocols that work is a BIG plus.

 

IF Garmin does come out with native Mac support in their product line, AND IF it's feature-for-feature comparable to PC versions, AND IF no other vendors offer Mac support - then Garmin would be the clear choise for Mac users. But that's not the case today.

 

Disclosure: I own neither a Garmin nor a Magellan at this time. I have owned or used both but now own a Lowrance iFinder. Lowrance falls somewhere in the middle of M & G when it comes to Mac friendliness - and they have unbeatable feature sets for the price.

Edited April 11, 2006 by lee_rimar

[arthurking83]

Well with Apple finally coming to it's senses....and using real hardware for it's PCs!!

 

One would expect just about every software manufacturer (that cares!!) to compile a copy of it's popular software over to Mac! (???)

 

So you can forget about Magellan making Mac compatible software then!....

[+NotThePainter]

Well with Apple finally coming to it's senses....and using real hardware for it's PCs!!

 

One would expect just about every software manufacturer (that cares!!) to compile a copy of it's popular software over to Mac! (???)

I'm a Macintosh software developer. In almost all cases Apple's switch to Intel chips does not help. Software is written at a much higher "API" level. We write for "OS X " or for "Windows" or "Linux Gnome" or "Linux KDE."

 

So sadly, there are some exceptions, but the switch to Intel doesn't matter.

 

Paul

[+hogrod]

Well with Apple finally coming to it's senses....and using real hardware for it's PCs!!

 

One would expect just about every software manufacturer (that cares!!) to compile a copy of it's popular software over to Mac! (???)

I'm a Macintosh software developer. In almost all cases Apple's switch to Intel chips does not help. Software is written at a much higher "API" level. We write for "OS X " or for "Windows" or "Linux Gnome" or "Linux KDE."

 

So sadly, there are some exceptions, but the switch to Intel doesn't matter.

 

Paul

 

I think what he might have been trying to get at is the fact that you could now duel boot your mac, and run windows XP and osX. doing so you would totally be able to use any gps receiver you want, and any windows only software.

[+NotThePainter]

I think what he might have been trying to get at is the fact that you could now duel boot your mac, and run windows XP and osX. doing so you would totally be able to use any gps receiver you want, and any windows only software.

 

I'm not certain of that. He specifically said "compile."

 

And besides, I don't want to dual-boot. It means I have to buy a copy of XP, it means I have to buy anti-virus software, it means I have to play computer far more than I want to. I do enough of that at work.

 

Dual-Booting is not the answer. Virtual PC is not the answer. Some people choose to use MacOS because they prefer it.

 

The point I was trying to make is that have in Intel chip inside doesn't matter to the software developer all that much. I'm a software developer, all it means for me is that my Quality Assurance group has more work to do.

[ciprol]

Forget about dual boot, try virtualization! Parallel's Workstation allows us to run MapSource (Windows) under Mac OS X. I understand from a mailing list that this works and can transfer maps via USB without problem, although at USB 1.1 speed at present beta version. This would eliminate the pains of switching boot system. I haven't personally tried it yet, but will do so when I get my MacBook.

[+JohnInDC]

I have a Garmin 60csx and a Mac desktop (dual 2.0 G5s, 10.3.9) and have had pretty good success with a combination of MacGPS Pro and Virtual PC / Mapquest. There are occasional glitches (I'm about to post about one in fact) but for basic things like transferring maps and geocaches, the combination works fine. I'm eager to see what Garmin does later this year with its promised OS X support but for now I'm content.