Jump to content

Street names don't appear with CN on Garmin Colorado


Manatee87

Recommended Posts

I've had my Colorado 400t several days now, and I haven't figured out how to get street names to display in City Navigator 2008. They show on my 60CSx. I took some photos of the two side by side.

 

Anyone have any idea why the street names aren't showing on the Colorado?

 

 

Did you try adjusting the following setting?

 

Shortcuts -> Setup -> Map -> Options -> Advanced -> Zoom Levels -> Street Label

Edited by IndyJpr
Link to comment

Yes, I've checked that. It is normally on Auto (as is my 60CSx). I tried setting it to specific thresholds (i.e. 500ft), but it didn't solve the problem, so I've put it back to Auto.

 

It does show an occasional street name when I'm driving with it in Automotive mode, but only a few streets. In birdseye view, I get no street names at all. It will display addresses when I move the poiter onto a street, but that's the only way I can see a street name.

 

Strange. And frustrating.

 

Thanks for your help.

Link to comment

not familiar with the colorado, but on the 60csx, you have the declutter option, is there a similar one on the colorado.

Good idea, but I can't find "declutter" on the Colorado. That makes the road names appear and disappear on the older units, but I don't see it on the new one.

 

Thanks.

Link to comment

Oh well... wanna swap with my 60CSx than?

Tempting, but one is enough for me (as pictured above.)

 

I'll figure out this Colorado yet...

 

I also need to find out how to name a new profile I create, and I need to find out if there is a way to enter text that appears at startup, as on the 60 series. The instructions that come with the Colorado list the menus and such, but they don't explain what anything does.

Link to comment

Oh well... wanna swap with my 60CSx than?

Tempting, but one is enough for me (as pictured above.)

 

I'll figure out this Colorado yet...

 

I also need to find out how to name a new profile I create, and I need to find out if there is a way to enter text that appears at startup, as on the 60 series. The instructions that come with the Colorado list the menus and such, but they don't explain what anything does.

 

There isn't a way to enter text for the startup screen -- I entered that as an issue with tech support a couple of days ago.

 

To change the name of a profile once you've created it connect your Colo to a PC, goto E:\Garmin\Profiles and find the file with the name "Profile X.gpf". Change the name of the file to "Whatever you want.gpf" and it should be renamed when you reboot. Not sure if that is the way Garmin intended it to work, but there you have it. Looks like this creates and extra profile which you can go back and delete from the directory once you are done. Alternately you could probably just copy a .gpf over to a new file with the name you wanted and you wouldn't have to delete the old one.

 

GO$Rs

Link to comment

To change the name of a profile once you've created it connect your Colo to a PC, goto E:\Garmin\Profiles and find the file with the name "Profile X.gpf". Change the name of the file to "Whatever you want.gpf" and it should be renamed when you reboot.

 

GO$Rs

Thanks. That works just fine.

Link to comment

For those less knowledeable about Windows, I'd like to add that E: is just a question about how many drives your PC have, and how they are mapped into drive letters. Last time I had my Colorado connected it came up as Q:.

 

When you create a profile on the Colorado, you can give it a name, can't you?

 

The modern units, like nüvis and such, don't show that much of street names on the map image. Check which font you are using. It may allow more street names with a smaller font.

Link to comment

 

When you create a profile on the Colorado, you can give it a name, can't you?

 

 

Not that I can see. You can create a new profile but it gets a default name like "Profile 6". I can't see any way to edit the name other than the workaround I suggested above. If you know of a way please share!

 

GO$Rs

Link to comment

For those less knowledeable about Windows, I'd like to add that E: is just a question about how many drives your PC have, and how they are mapped into drive letters. Last time I had my Colorado connected it came up as Q:.

 

When you create a profile on the Colorado, you can give it a name, can't you?

 

The modern units, like nüvis and such, don't show that much of street names on the map image. Check which font you are using. It may allow more street names with a smaller font.

 

Once again, there seems to be some folks who are equating or comparing this unit to the Nuvi line. This unit is NOT and should not be comparable by function as it is marketed to be a handheld. Look it up on their web site, its right there with the 60's, vistas, and rhino's and should be held to those standards. It's not marketed as a handheld car navigation device.

 

With that being said, NO you can't re-name the profiles that you create. Its just one more oversight in the firmware. Add it to the growing list.

Link to comment

When you create a profile on the Colorado, you can give it a name, can't you?

Only by renaming the file, as described above. It just gives you a default -- and meaningless -- name. Probably a feature left out in order to ship the product on time. I suspect we'll see a "rename" option in a future update.

 

The modern units, like nüvis and such, don't show that much of street names on the map image. Check which font you are using. It may allow more street names with a smaller font.

I just tried changing the map text size to "small", and it didn't cause any text to appear. Maybe if I change it to "none". :D This is a major annoyance. I've e-mailed with Garmin about it, but I guess I have to get them on the phone today.

Link to comment

not familiar with the colorado, but on the 60csx, you have the declutter option, is there a similar one on the colorado.

Good idea, but I can't find "declutter" on the Colorado. That makes the road names appear and disappear on the older units, but I don't see it on the new one.

 

Thanks.

 

Have you tried changing Setup->Maps->Detail->Most ?

 

Have you tried changing Setup->Maps->Options->Advanced->Text Size->Street Label->Large ?

 

I'm grasping but wondering if these might help.

 

GO$Rs

Link to comment

Have you tried changing Setup->Maps->Detail->Most ?

 

Have you tried changing Setup->Maps->Options->Advanced->Text Size->Street Label->Large ?

 

I'm grasping but wondering if these might help.

 

GO$Rs

Yes, I've tried those. Detail --> Most lines all the main roads with every gas station and ATM, but no street names. No street label size makes them appear.

Link to comment

Silly question, but does the topo map have street names for those streets? I know that the new Topo product has lots more street names than the old one, but I'm not clear about whether all the streets are labeled. Do they show up in MapSource?

 

The names are there, they appear when you put the cursor on them...

Link to comment

Silly question, but does the topo map have street names for those streets? I know that the new Topo product has lots more street names than the old one, but I'm not clear about whether all the streets are labeled. Do they show up in MapSource?

When I uncheck City Navigator, and check Topo, so only Topo shows, I still can't get street names.

Link to comment
Once again, there seems to be some folks who are equating or comparing this unit to the Nuvi line. This unit is NOT and should not be comparable by function as it is marketed to be a handheld.
Oh yes it should. I was perhaps too fuzzy, but what I refer to is not the intended purpose of the unit, but the handling and appearance of the supported functionality. In this aspect, Garmin has tried to use design elements from the very popular nüvi line, when making the Colorado. It doesn't matter that the Colorado is mainly geared towards use off the road than on the same.

This includes the computer connection as a USB drive, for example. There are many more.

 

Now I'll go out and see if I see any street names. I've not paid attention to their absence before, as I don't see any point in displaying a lot of street names when you drive around. If I want to find a particular one, then I search for it. If not, it doesn't matter what they are called. Just messes the map up.

Edited by apersson850
Link to comment

[

I was perhaps too fuzzy, but what I refer to is not the intended purpose of the unit, but the handling and appearance of the supported functionality.

 

...

 

It doesn't matter that the Colorado is mainly geared towards use off the road than on the same.

 

Well it should - are you saying that Garmin should ignore the intended use of the Colorado when desigining the appearance and functionality of the unit? That's not going to work out very well for a company trying to make a profit.

 

I'm OK with them reusing features/functionalities but it shouldn't come at the expense of basic/core/useful features typical (or even standard) on most handheld units.

 

No matter how popular/great the Nuvi is - it's not very useful as a handheld unit....

 

Thanks,

dfg

Link to comment
When you create a profile on the Colorado, you can give it a name, can't you?

Not that I can see. You can create a new profile but it gets a default name like "Profile 6". I can't see any way to edit the name other than the workaround I suggested above. If you know of a way please share!

You do like this:

Enter Setup, then Profiles.

Now press left key, then Enter to go into profile settings. A new empty profile shows up at the bottom of the list, but just ignore that.

Turn the wheel until you reach the existing profile you want to change. Press Enter, then select Change name.

When done editing (there's more you can do), press left key again and Enter to confirm that you are leaving editing mode.

 

Note that the Delete profile option is available only for profiles not currently active.

 

I'm OK with them reusing features/functionalities but it shouldn't come at the expense of basic/core/useful features typical (or even standard) on most handheld units.

 

No matter how popular/great the Nuvi is - it's not very useful as a handheld unit....

Which features do you mean the user interface used in the Colorado prevents?

Once again, I'm not saying that the Colorado should be a nüvi. There are already many nüvis that are good at being just that, nüvis. What I'm trying to convey is that the user interface ideas from the nüvi line could very well be rewamped for another purpose. If you don't like it as it is now, then it may be because this is their first attempt at using that interface for an outdoor device, so it may not be up to its potential yet. Or it's just a question about what you prefer.

 

If you refer to the street names, then of course it should be able to display them, especially as there are settings specifically for this purpose. It's just that I hadn't missed them, at least not until now.

Edited by apersson850
Link to comment

I am with apersson850 on this one. It, like the 60cx is marketed as a high end handheld, but my 60c is a perfectly serviceable car navigation device with CN on it. If it had a bigger screen it would not be all that different from a Nuvi in that regard.

 

I still think it should some street names, at many as the 60c would be nice.

 

[

I was perhaps too fuzzy, but what I refer to is not the intended purpose of the unit, but the handling and appearance of the supported functionality.

 

...

 

It doesn't matter that the Colorado is mainly geared towards use off the road than on the same.

 

Well it should - are you saying that Garmin should ignore the intended use of the Colorado when desigining the appearance and functionality of the unit? That's not going to work out very well for a company trying to make a profit.

 

I'm OK with them reusing features/functionalities but it shouldn't come at the expense of basic/core/useful features typical (or even standard) on most handheld units.

 

No matter how popular/great the Nuvi is - it's not very useful as a handheld unit....

 

Thanks,

dfg

Link to comment

Which features do you mean the user interface used in the Colorado prevents?

 

Primarily using the full functionality of the GPS while connected to a PC - something that is almost standard for handheld GPS units.

 

I believe you've stated (I'm paraphrasing from memory here) that being locked into USB drive mode when connected to a PC is OK because that's how the Nuvi does it and the Colorado is loosly based on the Nuvi technology...

 

I say let them re-use any great technology they made for the Nuvi but don't forget what the intended use (and corresponding expected functionality) of the handheld GPS is....

 

Thanks,

dfg

Link to comment

When you create a profile on the Colorado, you can give it a name, can't you?

Only by renaming the file, as described above. It just gives you a default -- and meaningless -- name. Probably a feature left out in order to ship the product on time. I suspect we'll see a "rename" option in a future update.

It's already there, just takes a couple of clicks to get to.

Shortcuts->Setup->Profile Change then Options->Setup Profiles->{click on profile you want to edit}->Edit Name

 

You can use the Options to re-arrange or delete your profiles as well.

 

--Marky

Link to comment

It's already there, just takes a couple of clicks to get to.

Shortcuts->Setup->Profile Change then Options->Setup Profiles->{click on profile you want to edit}->Edit Name

 

You can use the Options to re-arrange or delete your profiles as well.

 

--Marky

Thanks. After going through several cycles of Profiles --> Options etc., I finally got to it. It kept getting confused between the *select* profile and *manage* profile menus.

 

I wonder what other features are lurking if I click around enough? Maybe I'll even run into "declutter".

 

I hope Garmin, or someone else, puts together a "map" of all the paths through the menus to reach different settings.

Link to comment

Now I'll go out and see if I see any street names. I've not paid attention to their absence before, as I don't see any point in displaying a lot of street names when you drive around. If I want to find a particular one, then I search for it. If not, it doesn't matter what they are called. Just messes the map up.

I like the street names for a few reasons:

 

1. When bicycling, I like to see what streets are coming up so I can consider my route-changing options

2. Sometimes I use the unit as a sort of reference book -- scrolling through streets the same way I'd use an atlas

3. When navigating cities on foot, where street signs aren't always present or obvious (especially in old cities outside the U.S.)

 

So far the only time I've seen any street names with the Colorado is when navigating a route. It will show a street name here and there -- but not consistently. The behavior is very similar to my nuvi.

 

Another feature I need to check for, that I love on the 60-series, is where it displays what cross-street is coming up next as you walk/ride along. I find that feature very useful. BTW, this is when *not* in navigation mode.

Link to comment

Manatee I could not agree more on the street names...when I make a service call I know the general area and don't need to use autorouting to get somewhere (it takes time to enter esp with the rock and roller set up). I can just set the zoom on 800 feet or so and see the street names come up. A map without street names is nothing more than a bunch of lines that tell me little. I wonder who's bright idea it was to not allow them to be listed. To be able to shut them off would be fine but no names, no sale on this unit for me!

Bob

Link to comment

My latest exchange with Garmin on this issue:

 

From Garmin support:

-------------------------

 

----- Original Message -----

From: ProductSupport@garmin.com

To: Peter Stelman

Sent: Wednesday, January 23, 2008 3:15 PM

Subject: RE: No street names in City Nav 2008 on Colorado (KMM2042664I10971L0KM)

 

Dear Peter Stelman,

 

Thanks for the photos. Do you have the units sent to the same zoom range? If so, the Colorado might

 

need to be zoomed in to a closer range?.

 

With Best Regards,

 

Michael M

 

Senior Product Support Specialist

Outdoor/Fitness Team

Garmin International

 

My response:

---------------

 

Dear Michael,

 

In the photos, both are set the same. In the first photo, both are zoomed to 800 ft. In the second photo, both are zoomed to 300 ft. That is certainly close-in enough to display street names, and it is a zoom level that one would typically use when walking or bicycling with the Colorado.

 

A few of us have been discussing this (and other issues with the Colorado) on the Groundspeak.com forums, and I listed the reasons why displaying the street names is important to me:

 

1. I use it when bicycling -- so I know which streets are coming up, and I can decide which route to take.

2. When I use the unit for reference -- scrolling around the screen to find streets -- and their names -- for deciding on routes, giving directions to others, and so forth

3. When travelling in foreign cities where street signs are either missing or difficult to find.

 

These are all uses that do not involve the navigation function -- just walking or riding along with the Colorado displaying what is coming up next. Showing the names might not be very important in an automobile GPS, which is usually used in navigation mode (giving the driver instructions), but it can be very important in a hand-held multi-use unit. I hope Garmin has not lost sight of this in all the excitement over the Nuvi models. I love the Nuvi 660 that I use in my car, but I have very different needs for a hand-held unit like the Colorado.

 

Please let me know the real reason why the street names are not appearing. Surely the engineers who designed the Colorado know what features they put in, and which they left out. I should not have to experiment with it to determine its capabilities.

 

Looking forward to your response, and possibly to a big firmware update, ;-)

 

Peter Stelman

Link to comment
Primarily using the full functionality of the GPS while connected to a PC - something that is almost standard for handheld GPS units.
It's true, you can't. But why would you? I don't use that on my 60 CSx, even if I can. But I get better access to the Colorado in USB drive mode than I ever get with the 60 CSx.

I understand that you must be doing something I don't, but for me it's loosing very little to win significantly more.

 

Now you've got two descriptions regarding how to rename the profiles!

 

No, there's no declutter, unless this thing that it refuses to display street names is a hidden declutter, maybe...

 

It doesn't work, no matter what you do, but you don't need to pester Garmin's support about that issue. I've already conveyed it to the engineers.

Link to comment
Primarily using the full functionality of the GPS while connected to a PC - something that is almost standard for handheld GPS units.
It's true, you can't. But why would you? I don't use that on my 60 CSx, even if I can. But I get better access to the Colorado in USB drive mode than I ever get with the 60 CSx.

 

For using the laptop for navigating in the car.

 

Large screen, voice navigation. It is quite common for many people. Manditory when power caching and your the navigator.

Link to comment
Primarily using the full functionality of the GPS while connected to a PC - something that is almost standard for handheld GPS units.
It's true, you can't. But why would you? I don't use that on my 60 CSx, even if I can. But I get better access to the Colorado in USB drive mode than I ever get with the 60 CSx.

 

For using the laptop for navigating in the car.

 

Large screen, voice navigation. It is quite common for many people. Manditory when power caching and your the navigator.

 

Yes - what Red90 said.

 

Also, on the 60/76 you could turn on USB drive mode any time you wanted so I can't see any advantage to how it's done on the Colorado...

 

Someone noted on another thread that Garmin support said if you wanted this functionality you could get it using their mini-USB to serial cable....so if I

- pay $23 for a new cable

- put up with a MUCH slower connection (serial vs usb)

 

I can have the functionality that every other handheld has....

Edited by IndyJpr
Link to comment

All right, then I see one reason.

 

I never use a laptop in my car. Far too bulky. When going to the cache area (by car), I use the nüvi 760 or the Zumo 550. When I come close, I change to the GPSmap 60 CSx or the Colorado 300.

 

You don't need any more speed than what the RS232 can give you, as the position update isn't very fast anyway. You only get some position data, unless you go NMEA style, in which case you can have more data sent. Larger problem is then probably that many laptops today don't have RS232, only USB.

 

On a 60 CSx, you can't reach anything except the memory card in USB drive mode. The Colorado provides access to a lot of the internal memory as well. To me, that's worth a lot more than using it as a simple GPS puck.

If I did have any boat, then RS232 would often be necessary for interfacing with autopilots etc anyway.

Link to comment

 

1) I understand that you must be doing something I don't, but for me it's loosing very little to win significantly more.

 

2) It doesn't work, no matter what you do, but you don't need to pester Garmin's support about that issue. I've already conveyed it to the engineers.

 

The first statement alludes to : mutual exclusivity, why does that have to be, why not have both?

 

I'm not even going to comment on the second one!

 

Norm

Link to comment

Someone noted on another thread that Garmin support said if you wanted this functionality you could get it using their mini-USB to serial cable....so if I

- pay $23 for a new cable

- put up with a MUCH slower connection (serial vs usb)

I can have the functionality that every other handheld has....

 

I too have a a navigator using a laptop, we use Mac, there aren't DB9 (serial) ports on Macs,

at least non of the three I've had since OS7.5. NEMA over USB would make perfect sense,

lack thereof wouldn't.

 

Norm

Link to comment

This is what you get when you have a bunch of engineers beta test GPS's. It begs the classic question: Do the people who design (beta test) this stuff actually use it?

 

Obviously the beta testers, Garmin, or both dropped a huge ball on this one. There are problems and shortcomings oozing out of the woodwork. And I WILL continue to "pester" the Garmin Tech support until the problems are solved regardles of what they've been told already. I didn't pay $600 for equipment riddled with faults and problems. I work in natural resources for a government agency and use a GPS every day of my life, I need it to work properly like all the units before have. It really burns me up to hear the condescention toward users problems as if we are all a bunch of dumb whiners. The Garmin Colorado is a tool to me more than anything else and it simply has to work flawlessly. It's far from that.

Link to comment
Once again, there seems to be some folks who are equating or comparing this unit to the Nuvi line. This unit is NOT and should not be comparable by function as it is marketed to be a handheld.
Oh yes it should. I was perhaps too fuzzy, but what I refer to is not the intended purpose of the unit, but the handling and appearance of the supported functionality. In this aspect, Garmin has tried to use design elements from the very popular nüvi line, when making the Colorado. It doesn't matter that the Colorado is mainly geared towards use off the road than on the same.

This includes the computer connection as a USB drive, for example. There are many more.

 

Now I'll go out and see if I see any street names. I've not paid attention to their absence before, as I don't see any point in displaying a lot of street names when you drive around. If I want to find a particular one, then I search for it. If not, it doesn't matter what they are called. Just messes the map up.

 

Just last night I was looking for an address. I had the wrong spelling of the street. As I approached the area, I saw the street I was looking for coming up on the GPS V I have. I identified the street I was looking for several blocks away, way before I could read the street sign. This prevented me from driving at a much slower speed, then slamming on ,my brakes to make a turn.

 

If garmin didn't want the 300/400 used for street nav, with the driveing profile?

Link to comment

This is what you get when you have a bunch of engineers beta test GPS's. It begs the classic question: Do the people who design (beta test) this stuff actually use it?

 

Obviously the beta testers, Garmin, or both dropped a huge ball on this one. There are problems and shortcomings oozing out of the woodwork. And I WILL continue to "pester" the Garmin Tech support until the problems are solved regardles of what they've been told already. I didn't pay $600 for equipment riddled with faults and problems. I work in natural resources for a government agency and use a GPS every day of my life, I need it to work properly like all the units before have. It really burns me up to hear the condescention toward users problems as if we are all a bunch of dumb whiners. The Garmin Colorado is a tool to me more than anything else and it simply has to work flawlessly. It's far from that.

Magellan (WAASless) XL presently, need I say more?

 

Norm

 

P.S. :

 

The Colorado is still in the running though, w/ all the B$ w/ Maggie it's down to the 400T & PN-20 on the

home stretch.

Link to comment

The first statement alludes to : mutual exclusivity, why does that have to be, why not have both?

 

I'm not even going to comment on the second one!

 

Norm

As they have found out, at Garmin, that many users have trouble using their GPS units, due to them being too complex and stuffed with too many different features. So they try to make it easier by making as much as possible automatic, or at least not user adjustable. Sometimes then some things are sacrificed to make other things easier to do. It will not suit everyone, of course.

That's not an issue for people who write here, of course, as they are often more experienced than many other users.

 

I can't speak for all, but I do know one beta tester who certainly uses the units under test. Every day.

But there are of course things that pass by. One example is using nRoute. I've used it once with an eTrex Vista, to see if it worked, then ditched it as too inconvenient and bulky a thing to bring along in my car. Besides, if I did want that, I would much prefer one of these small GPS pucks as a position transmitter, not a unit like the Colorado. So I didn't see the lack of support for that, via USB, as any issue at all.

 

Finally, I wanted to inform you about that you don't have to spend time on the phone, writing e-mails, sending letters or generating smoke signals to tell Garmin about that particular issue, as it's already where they need to know to fix it. If you consider your efforts in describing the problem to them would bring a solution out sooner or better, then by all means, feel free to communicate it to them as you like. I was simply giving a friendly hint to tell you that your valuable time could be used pursuing other bugs, so that it may add more improvements to the Colorado.

Link to comment

Finally, I wanted to inform you about that you don't have to spend time on the phone, writing e-mails, sending letters or generating smoke signals to tell Garmin about that particular issue, as it's already where they need to know to fix it. If you consider your efforts in describing the problem to them would bring a solution out sooner or better, then by all means, feel free to communicate it to them as you like. I was simply giving a friendly hint to tell you that your valuable time could be used pursuing other bugs, so that it may add more improvements to the Colorado.

I think one consideration in contacting Garmin, even when they already know about an issue, is to give them a measure of how important it is. It's like voting. The more people who report a specific bug, or complain about a certain feature, the higher it will go in the "to be resolved" queue. Or as we say in English, "the squeaky wheel gets the grease."

 

I appreciate that you are well-connected with Garmin. Your feedback on various issues is very valuable. Still, all of us "plain old users" have to make our voices heard. :D

Link to comment

Finally, I wanted to inform you about that you don't have to spend time on the phone, writing e-mails, sending letters or generating smoke signals to tell Garmin about that particular issue, as it's already where they need to know to fix it. If you consider your efforts in describing the problem to them would bring a solution out sooner or better, then by all means, feel free to communicate it to them as you like. I was simply giving a friendly hint to tell you that your valuable time could be used pursuing other bugs, so that it may add more improvements to the Colorado.

I think one consideration in contacting Garmin, even when they already know about an issue, is to give them a measure of how important it is. It's like voting. The more people who report a specific bug, or complain about a certain feature, the higher it will go in the "to be resolved" queue. Or as we say in English, "the squeaky wheel gets the grease."

 

I appreciate that you are well-connected with Garmin. Your feedback on various issues is very valuable. Still, all of us "plain old users" have to make our voices heard. :D

Plus, one voice is one opinion. Other people have other issues that apersson850 has seemed to dismiss as not important. Well ... to some people they ARE important so Garmin needs to hear from those who think that a pan/track North issue, for example, is important.

Link to comment

Anders:

As I have commented before, the over head view of maps with the street names is a must..not an "it would be a nice feature" to have. I have 2008CN USA NT on order with the Colorado 300 and the Auto Nav. kit. I don't care if it comes from the factory with an auto default to off for less detail as long as I can change it. This is a feature that I use often at around 800 ft resolution. You mentioned that to you you felt that it caused to much clutter but for me thats what I think of the 3D view...I would prefer to see the unit display as my 76S did with just the lines with street names...in color of course :D as my 76S lacked that.

Thanks again for your time and information...I hope that Garmin is considering a fix for this!

 

PS I agree on the laptop in the Auto. I used my 15" laptop in the Astro van (first hooked to the 76S and later to MS Streets puck) and even in a large van (on a swivel mount) its a bit to bulky for me too. I will be looking at the new Garmin 5000 series for auto travel but I'd like to see it offered with a few less "extras" on it and a better price point but its just announced so I will wait a while on that one. I do like the larger screen size and touch screen. But for now the Colorado 300 will have to serve for both geocaching and auto.

Bob

Link to comment

The first statement alludes to : mutual exclusivity, why does that have to be, why not have both?

 

I'm not even going to comment on the second one!

 

Norm

As they have found out, at Garmin, that many users have trouble using their GPS units, due to them being too complex and stuffed with too many different features. So they try to make it easier by making as much as possible automatic, or at least not user adjustable. Sometimes then some things are sacrificed to make other things easier to do. It will not suit everyone, of course.

That's not an issue for people who write here, of course, as they are often more experienced than many other users.

 

I can't speak for all, but I do know one beta tester who certainly uses the units under test. Every day.

But there are of course things that pass by. One example is using nRoute. I've used it once with an eTrex Vista, to see if it worked, then ditched it as too inconvenient and bulky a thing to bring along in my car. Besides, if I did want that, I would much prefer one of these small GPS pucks as a position transmitter, not a unit like the Colorado. So I didn't see the lack of support for that, via USB, as any issue at all.

 

Finally, I wanted to inform you about that you don't have to spend time on the phone, writing e-mails, sending letters or generating smoke signals to tell Garmin about that particular issue, as it's already where they need to know to fix it. If you consider your efforts in describing the problem to them would bring a solution out sooner or better, then by all means, feel free to communicate it to them as you like. I was simply giving a friendly hint to tell you that your valuable time could be used pursuing other bugs, so that it may add more improvements to the Colorado.

 

I personally don't like the way the industry is going. If Anders is right, they are dumbing things down at the sacrafice of advanced features that qualify's consumer GPS's as serious data collection and navigation tools. Here's a solution, why don't they just give you an option in the unit software to go "advanced" or "simple". Give us choices on how we want to use the GPS, don't dumb it down and take away what we have relied upon for so long. Seems simple enough to do. I don't have the money for a trimble, nor will I ever, but it seems as though the push to get a larger share of the market to buy and use GPS technology is leaving advanced consumer users like those in this forum in the margins. If you ask me, thats not very savvy on Garmin's, Magellan's, or anyones part.

 

I reiterate, the smart thing to do would be not to take features away, just give us the choice. Don't take the position of "well the new way is better so just get used to it". In some instances that may be correct but in many its not. GIVE ME THE CHOICE! That's all we are asking here. Simple solution, write it in the unit software.

Link to comment

The first statement alludes to : mutual exclusivity, why does that have to be, why not have both?

 

I'm not even going to comment on the second one!

 

Norm

As they have found out, at Garmin, that many users have trouble using their GPS units, due to them being too complex and stuffed with too many different features. So they try to make it easier by making as much as possible automatic, or at least not user adjustable. Sometimes then some things are sacrificed to make other things easier to do. It will not suit everyone, of course.

That's not an issue for people who write here, of course, as they are often more experienced than many other users.

 

I can't speak for all, but I do know one beta tester who certainly uses the units under test. Every day.

But there are of course things that pass by. One example is using nRoute. I've used it once with an eTrex Vista, to see if it worked, then ditched it as too inconvenient and bulky a thing to bring along in my car. Besides, if I did want that, I would much prefer one of these small GPS pucks as a position transmitter, not a unit like the Colorado. So I didn't see the lack of support for that, via USB, as any issue at all.

 

Finally, I wanted to inform you about that you don't have to spend time on the phone, writing e-mails, sending letters or generating smoke signals to tell Garmin about that particular issue, as it's already where they need to know to fix it. If you consider your efforts in describing the problem to them would bring a solution out sooner or better, then by all means, feel free to communicate it to them as you like. I was simply giving a friendly hint to tell you that your valuable time could be used pursuing other bugs, so that it may add more improvements to the Colorado.

 

I personally don't like the way the industry is going. If Anders is right, they are dumbing things down at the sacrafice of advanced features that qualify's consumer GPS's as serious data collection and navigation tools. Here's a solution, why don't they just give you an option in the unit software to go "advanced" or "simple". Give us choices on how we want to use the GPS, don't dumb it down and take away what we have relied upon for so long. Seems simple enough to do. I don't have the money for a trimble, nor will I ever, but it seems as though the push to get a larger share of the market to buy and use GPS technology is leaving advanced consumer users like those in this forum in the margins. If you ask me, thats not very savvy on Garmin's, Magellan's, or anyones part.

 

I reiterate, the smart thing to do would be not to take features away, just give us the choice. Don't take the position of "well the new way is better so just get used to it". In some instances that may be correct but in many its not. GIVE ME THE CHOICE! That's all we are asking here. Simple solution, write it in the unit software.

 

and an option to "reset to working defaults".... I tried the secret code on my GPSv, only to find out the removed it in later firmware.

Link to comment

I personally don't like the way the industry is going. If Anders is right, they are dumbing things down at the sacrafice of advanced features that qualify's consumer GPS's as serious data collection and navigation tools. Here's a solution, why don't they just give you an option in the unit software to go "advanced" or "simple". Give us choices on how we want to use the GPS, don't dumb it down and take away what we have relied upon for so long. Seems simple enough to do. I don't have the money for a trimble, nor will I ever, but it seems as though the push to get a larger share of the market to buy and use GPS technology is leaving advanced consumer users like those in this forum in the margins. If you ask me, thats not very savvy on Garmin's, Magellan's, or anyones part.

 

I reiterate, the smart thing to do would be not to take features away, just give us the choice. Don't take the position of "well the new way is better so just get used to it". In some instances that may be correct but in many its not. GIVE ME THE CHOICE! That's all we are asking here. Simple solution, write it in the unit software.

I think the situation is similar with a lot of high-tech things: When the technology is new, and only in the hands of the (relatively) early adopters, the engineers who produce the technology cater to all the needs of the tech-nerds they can possibly fill. The market is small anyway, and they're fleshing out the technology.

 

When the technology goes mainstream, it has to be "dumbed down" to appeal to people who have only a casual interest in the techology. The company wants to sell to as large a market as possible. The small and specialized tech-nerd group becomes a relatively minor consideration, and they are marginalized. It no longer makes economic sense to produce a product that appeals to only a small niche in the population. Also, all the "power" that an extensive feature list provides can also result in customer service headaches (and expense) for the company.

 

Still, it would be nice if companies like Garmin could continue to make full-featured flexible products -- but price them at the high end, where the casual consumer won't even see it on his radar screen (or in Best Buy), and the margin is still sufficient to make it bearable for the company to produce. Think about high-end "pro level" video and audio equipment -- not priced or spec'ed for the average consumer, but available to those who are willing to pay for it.

 

Peter

Link to comment
I think one consideration in contacting Garmin, even when they already know about an issue, is to give them a measure of how important it is. It's like voting. The more people who report a specific bug, or complain about a certain feature, the higher it will go in the "to be resolved" queue. Or as we say in English, "the squeaky wheel gets the grease."

 

I appreciate that you are well-connected with Garmin. Your feedback on various issues is very valuable. Still, all of us "plain old users" have to make our voices heard. :D

Sure. I also understood that what I wrote there could be misunderstood. Hence the clarifying post.

 

As you probably have noticed, I've spent some time trying to give you experienced geocachers an idea of what the Colorado is all about. As I've had it for a longer time, I've also tried to convey my feelings about the issues that have emerged. Sometimes it's simply so, that what doesn't work for one person, is no problem to another. But sometimes the case is that what doesn't work to somebody would work if they gave it a chance, by approaching it from another direction. An eye-opener, so to speak.

 

Increase the number of requests for having the street names shown on the map map give that particular task a higher priority, that's right. They do keep statistics, for sure, as the statistics gathered regarding questions about the user interface and functionality in units like the GPSmap 60 CSx or the StreetPilot 2820 were one of the key factors into giving the design of the functions and user interface you now are experiencing in the Colorado a high priority.

 

What I can't understand for my life is why they at Garmin consistently refuse to give their devices an "activate advanced functions" menu setting? A unit like a Colorado could be even easier to use, if you remove a bunch of features that aren't necessary for someone who just wants to be able to find the car again, after picking berries in the woods. The the advanced mode would make several other options and settings appear. Like my cameras (Canon EOS) have the infamous "idiot modes", which prevent more than 90% of the possible settings to be anything than the default. There is the green rectangle, which is reasonably good for everything as well as the more specialized, but still pre-designed, blocks of settings for specific tasks. But if you turn the mode selector to the other side of the green rectangle, then the whole arsenal of settings available in a reasonably advanced digital SLR camera is available, including these you can pre-program yourself. This is similar to the pre-made and user createable profiles on the Colorado, so there's a great deal of similarity there. The difference is that on the Colorado, everything you can do is always available to you. Hence a pre-programmed mode is neither easier nor more complex than a custom one.

 

Now I see the same idea was carried forward in some posts further above. Sorry for repeating. I didn't read all in the thread quick enough, but decided not to delete my last paragraph.

Link to comment

Anders, man, I agree with you totally...

 

"What I can't understand for my life is why they at Garmin consistently refuse to give their devices an "activate advanced functions" menu setting? A unit like a Colorado could be even easier to use, if you remove a bunch of features that aren't necessary for someone who just wants to be able to find the car again, after picking berries in the woods. The the advanced mode would make several other options and settings appear. Like my cameras (Canon EOS) have the infamous "idiot modes", which prevent more than 90% of the possible settings to be anything than the default. There is the green rectangle, which is reasonably good for everything as well as the more specialized, but still pre-designed, blocks of settings for specific tasks. But if you turn the mode selector to the other side of the green rectangle, then the whole arsenal of settings available in a reasonably advanced digital SLR camera is available, including these you can pre-program yourself. This is similar to the pre-made and user createable profiles on the Colorado, so there's a great deal of similarity there. The difference is that on the Colorado, everything you can do is always available to you. Hence a pre-programmed mode is neither easier nor more complex than a custom one."

 

There is quite a huge gap between new users and us crusty musties who are creating our own maps and custon projections and know GPS's inside and out. Anders suggestion (and mine) would solve it all, have an "advanced features" mode. We can dream can't we?

Link to comment

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...