Back400 Posted July 30, 2006 Share Posted July 30, 2006 Why are both capable of storing 150 track files when the 210 has 22mb user memory and the 200 only has 8mb? Is only 8mb available for storing track files? Also is the 8mb used for the Base Map available to store user data such as track files? A friend has the 200 and believes he has 16mb of memory to store tracks and way points, but this is his first GPS. I have yet to purchase my first and am still very much in the process of getting up to speed on terminology. Thanks! Quote Link to comment
+EScout Posted July 30, 2006 Share Posted July 30, 2006 A Track of a 3 mile hike set with the highest frequency of track points makes a file of bout 18KB. Set on Auto-detailed is about half of that. A 200 point Geocache file is about 32KB. A regular waypoint file of 500 points is about 30KB. Regardless of the file sizes, you want the 210 because it has a computer interface and you can load these files as well as maps. Please get the 210. Trust us, its the better choice. Quote Link to comment
Dale_Lynn Posted July 30, 2006 Share Posted July 30, 2006 I would give up 50 track files for computer interface... Also on 200 how are you going to do future firmware updates or map updates ... 210 is updateable just by downloading new firmware and installing it....... After a time adding waypoint data manually gets really old.... Computer interface is fast convienient.... If it does not have computer interface its almost a paperweight.... Dale Quote Link to comment
Back400 Posted July 31, 2006 Author Share Posted July 31, 2006 I was mainly looking for an answer as to why both the 200 and 210 have the same track file storage (as described on the Magellan website) when the 210 has 14mb more user memory. Quote Link to comment
+Ollivander Posted August 1, 2006 Share Posted August 1, 2006 I was mainly looking for an answer as to why both the 200 and 210 have the same track file storage (as described on the Magellan website) when the 210 has 14mb more user memory. It's probably just hardcoded into the firmware. It's anyone's guess why, but here are a couple of possibilities: - Since tracks grow as you travel, allowing unlimited expansion will eventually fill up your memory - creating problems if you are trying to download new maps, POIs, Geocaches, etc. - It may have a fixed maximum due to whatever coding is used to display information on the "map" screen - for performance or other reasons (known only to the programmers.) As an FYI - I have used both the 200 and the 210 and I agree with other posters - the computer interface in the 210 is a real benefit. Using GSAK, I can download geocaches directly to the 210 without the need for any intermediate software. (The 210 mounts as an external drive, so in GSAK, I generate the files and save them directly to the 210.) Quote Link to comment
duke87 Posted August 1, 2006 Share Posted August 1, 2006 I would give up 50 track files for computer interface... Also on 200 how are you going to do future firmware updates or map updates ... 210 is updateable just by downloading new firmware and installing it....... After a time adding waypoint data manually gets really old.... Computer interface is fast convienient.... If it does not have computer interface its almost a paperweight.... Dale I ordered a 3rd party PC cable for my Explorist 200.... I should be getting it later today, I'll let ya know if I have any luck with it, if anyone's interested. I mainly use my 200 as a backup, but even still I'd much prefer to input waypoints via PC. Quote Link to comment
duke87 Posted August 2, 2006 Share Posted August 2, 2006 I ordered a 3rd party PC cable for my Explorist 200.... I should be getting it later today, I'll let ya know if I have any luck with it, if anyone's interested. FYI, the cable works fine using EasyGPS- I just set it as a Magellan Meridian and have successfully downloaded/uploaded waypoints and downloaded a track log. Great news for anyone who has a 200.... but more on topic, if I was buying one now, I too would go for the 210. Quote Link to comment
+Watts5 Posted August 2, 2006 Share Posted August 2, 2006 I ordered a 3rd party PC cable for my Explorist 200.... I should be getting it later today, I'll let ya know if I have any luck with it, if anyone's interested. FYI, the cable works fine using EasyGPS- I just set it as a Magellan Meridian and have successfully downloaded/uploaded waypoints and downloaded a track log. Great news for anyone who has a 200.... but more on topic, if I was buying one now, I too would go for the 210. I have the 200 and i dont see any place to plug a cable into it. I went from the 200 to the 500 and love it. dont have to enter the waypoints the computer does it all for me. Would buy the 210 or better you will have more fun and less work Quote Link to comment
duke87 Posted August 2, 2006 Share Posted August 2, 2006 I have the 200 and i dont see any place to plug a cable into it. It's under/between the batteries- there's a small square of rubber covering 4 small holes that have metal contacts inside them. Quote Link to comment
+embra Posted August 2, 2006 Share Posted August 2, 2006 I have the 200 and i dont see any place to plug a cable into it. It's under/between the batteries- there's a small square of rubber covering 4 small holes that have metal contacts inside them. Photo. Quote Link to comment
duke87 Posted August 2, 2006 Share Posted August 2, 2006 (edited) I have the 200 and i dont see any place to plug a cable into it. It's under/between the batteries- there's a small square of rubber covering 4 small holes that have metal contacts inside them. Photo. Right, except I went with the USB version of the cable, which eliminates the need for a seperate power supply- part no: USGMGS. Works good. Edited August 2, 2006 by duke87 Quote Link to comment
+Watts5 Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 I have the 200 and i dont see any place to plug a cable into it. It's under/between the batteries- there's a small square of rubber covering 4 small holes that have metal contacts inside them. Photo. Right, except I went with the USB version of the cable, which eliminates the need for a seperate power supply- part no: USGMGS. Works good. Well i learned something new today thanks did not know that was there Quote Link to comment
tttedzeins Posted August 3, 2006 Share Posted August 3, 2006 (edited) Why are both capable of storing 150 track files when the 210 has 22mb user memory and the 200 only has 8mb? Is only 8mb available for storing track files? Also is the 8mb used for the Base Map available to store user data such as track files? A friend has the 200 and believes he has 16mb of memory to store tracks and way points, but this is his first GPS. I have yet to purchase my first and am still very much in the process of getting up to speed on terminology. Thanks! The 200 has 8mb base map memory and 8mb to store user data ie. Tracks, wpts, etc The 210 has 8mb base map memory and 22mb to store user data. Base map memory cannot be used to store user data. I was mainly looking for an answer as to why both the 200 and 210 have the same track file storage (as described on the Magellan website) when the 210 has 14mb more user memory. The firmware has a certain address space that it uses (basically the number of spots to put stuff) I would assume from the description on Magellans website that the 210 is an upgraded 200 this particular memory space was not part of the upgrade. Edited August 3, 2006 by tttedzeins Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.