Sign in to follow this  
Followers 31
g-o-cashers

Garmin Colorado FAQ and Issues List

1181 posts in this topic

I suggest to include information about the automatic track log archiving into the FAQ, as many users of outdoor GPS units probably aren't familiar with it. Unless they drive a motorbike and have the Zumo, too.

 

I've updated the FAQ with the tracklog information I could find. If you have a chance please review it and let me know if you see any errors.

 

FAQ and Issues List have both been updated today to pull in the latest issues that people have been sending me or posting here. Keep 'um coming.

 

Both are linked in my signature.

 

GO$Rs

0

Share this post


Link to post

This may not be an issue more than it is a "nice to have". Most color screen Garmin units (if not all) on the market have a night mode. Why then would the Colorado be missing one? It's so much easier to see the roads at night when they are contrasted by the black screen.

Edited by yogazoo
0

Share this post


Link to post

I realize now that my previous issues had already been mentioned (or at least, were already on GO$Rs list).

 

I've tried searching the forums, and haven't seen discussion of the following point. While this may be expected behavior, it's definitely a change from how previous units behaved, and I can't find any rhyme or reason to it.

 

Simply stated:

 

The specific geocaches (when uploaded to the unit as waypoints) which are displayed on the map at any given zoom level may change.

 

Meaning: If I start in zoomed all the way in on my house, and then zoom out until I can see the nearest caches - well, I see the NEAREST caches. I can zoom out a few more clicks, and still see the nearest ones, as well as the ones exposed by the now larger zoom level. All makes sense...

 

Then, I get to a certain zoom level - and the 'nearby' caches seem to disappear. It's not JUST the nearest ones - but rather, just 'random' (?) caches around the map - it's just most obvious with the nearest ones, given the nature of 'zooming out'.

 

This may not make much sense - so I'll demonstrate. Note the zoom level - these 4 screen shots should be read left to right, top to bottom (1.2m, 2m, 3m, 5m scales). You'll see in the first three zoom levels, there are caches to the NW (RyansHope and its neighbors). You continue to see these caches as I zoom out -- until I get to the 5m scale. Suddenly - those (and several other caches that were visible on the previous zoom level) have disappeared.

 

Its as if - perhaps there's some limit on the MAX number of waypoints it can/will display on the map at any given time - so, as more and more become visible, some have to disappear? I've seen this behavior in Google Earth (the KML geocache viewer) before - but I've never seen it exhibited on a GPSr. Usually, the screen just gets more and more cluttered as you zoom out, until it just looks like one solid mass of caches.

 

waypoint_zoom.jpg

 

I haven't tested the same issue when caches are loaded as POIs rather than Waypoints. I'll test that next...

 

Anyone else experiencing, or have an explanation for, this behavior?

Edited by SnoWake
0

Share this post


Link to post

In your FAQ I do miss information about:

 

1. Transfer data between two Colorado.

 

2. Hearrate and cadense pod for bicycle. How does ot work, what does it stor, who does it compare to edge 305 etc.

0

Share this post


Link to post

great list - i like it - Thanks.

 

What about the possibility to automatic save a .GPX-track on the DataCard (by JJJJMMDD.gpx) (like all newer gpsmap60 and vista-modells)

27.01.2008_11:58:53_gpx-on-datacard.gif

 

could not find any information that the colorado is able to do so

Edited by freeday
0

Share this post


Link to post

In your FAQ I do miss information about:

 

1. Transfer data between two Colorado.

 

2. Hearrate and cadense pod for bicycle. How does ot work, what does it stor, who does it compare to edge 305 etc.

 

I only have one Colorado and I don't have the Heartrate or cadence pods. If someone does and wants to share info I can add it.

 

GO$Rs

0

Share this post


Link to post

great list - i like it - Thanks.

 

What about the possibility to automatic save a .GPX-track on the DataCard (by JJJJMMDD.gpx) (like all newer gpsmap60 and vista-modells)

27.01.2008_11:58:53_gpx-on-datacard.gif

 

could not find any information that the colorado is able to do so

 

There's no automatic archiving for tracks other than what is explained in the FAQ which works a little differently. There's no auto archive every day type of feature.

 

GO$Rs

0

Share this post


Link to post

 

Its as if - perhaps there's some limit on the MAX number of waypoints it can/will display on the map at any given time - so, as more and more become visible, some have to disappear? I've seen this behavior in Google Earth (the KML geocache viewer) before - but I've never seen it exhibited on a GPSr. Usually, the screen just gets more and more cluttered as you zoom out, until it just looks like one solid mass of caches.

 

I haven't tested the same issue when caches are loaded as POIs rather than Waypoints. I'll test that next...

 

Anyone else experiencing, or have an explanation for, this behavior?

 

Hmmm, that looks like a bug. It might be worth trying with non-Geocache waypoints to see if they behave the same way.

 

GO$Rs

0

Share this post


Link to post

great list - i like it - Thanks.

 

What about the possibility to automatic save a .GPX-track on the DataCard (by JJJJMMDD.gpx) (like all newer gpsmap60 and vista-modells)

27.01.2008_11:58:53_gpx-on-datacard.gif

 

could not find any information that the colorado is able to do so

 

There's no automatic archiving for tracks other than what is explained in the FAQ which works a little differently. There's no auto archive every day type of feature.

 

GO$Rs

Thanks for the info ...

oh, that feature was great!

I wonder, why Garmin did not implement this feature again :smile::):)

 

I think they forgot this feature - there is no reason for me to remove this excellent function.

Edited by freeday
0

Share this post


Link to post

It's not removed, it's improved. Or so do I think, based on my experience with the 60 CSx and the Zumo 550. The Colorado has inherited the archive system from the Zumo.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Had an issue with my 400t yesterday where driving down the road the unit froze up, was in Map mode. Could not change screens, power unit off or anything else. Only way I was able to get out of this freeze up was to remove the batteries and let unit discharge.

 

I will keep watching to see if this re-occurs.

0

Share this post


Link to post

It's not removed, it's improved. Or so do I think, based on my experience with the 60 CSx and the Zumo 550. The Colorado has inherited the archive system from the Zumo.

Why is it improved

can you explain it.

 

if i want to see the tracks of 11/11/2007 - i am looking for 20071111.gpx

very easy and nothing to do - all daily .gpx are on my sd-card

Edited by freeday
0

Share this post


Link to post

As with everything else, it does of course depend upon what you want to do. Here I describe the Zumo, as I know how that works. I think the Colorado is identical, or very close.

 

First, the Zumo saves in internal memory. No need to have any card there. No problem with a write-protected card either.

 

Second, the Zumo will not split everything up in files per day. Retreiving only 20 files from my Zumo brought me data for nine months, equivalent to 270 files to keep track of with the old system. If I want a specific date, I can easily extract that in Mapsource anyway.

 

Third, the Zumo splits archived logs according to "activities", which could be power-on, but also starting routing to a new destination. This makes logical units easier to find and handle.

 

Fourth, the Zumo automatically keeps track of how much memory is left, and leaves some for other activities, like firmware updates.

 

Fifth, this archive method works well with the Zumo's capability to convert a track to a route. That's not valid for the Colorado, so if you have only that one, it doesn't matter.

 

Sixth, the Zumo filters away noise from the file. If you have a lot of tracks all over a very limited area, they aren't included in the archived log, as it's obvious that it's just GPS receiver drift that has been recorded. Makes what goes into the archives a lot more interesting, as it's actual travel, not just playing at the kitchen table.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Let me begin by saying I am a great believer of Garmin and their products. I believed in Garmin so much that at one point I purchased a significant amount of Garmin stock. I sold a good profit but that is another story ;-).

 

I have owned several Garmin units over the years upgrading as new more feature rich devices became available. My current pair of Garmin units are the 60Cx and the Legend Cx. Any new unit I would now upgrade to would have to provide significant improvement over the very effective 60Cx I use now.

 

I have been doing paperless caching now for a few years using a Palm Tungsten E to store the cache information. This has proved very effective for me, though it has required that I carry an additional (none weather proof) device with me on my treks.

 

I can assure you I have been looking forward to the holy grail of GPS; a GPS that can not only point the way to the cache but also contain all the cache details currently held on my Palm PDA. I had high hopes for the Colorado.

 

Sadly there are some issues raised here regarding the Colorado that give me reason to pause. It is true that many of the issues that have come up would likely not have come to light until the units were distributed to a larger group beyond the Beta Testers. Others seem so obvious I have difficulty understanding why testing has not lead to a fix prior to launch. Particularly the NiMH issue, backlight problem and GPX flashup slow down problem.

 

For my part I rarely load more than a few hundred caches in my PDA at one time. I have some difficulty in understanding why anyone would load more than 2000 caches in their GPS or PDA. Regardless I fail to understand why loading GPX cache files should slow the Colorado Startup Time. There does not seem to me much point in barging about <30 sec acquisition time if the unit takes several minutes before it can be used.

 

I have to admit I have not yet purchased a Colorado. I was about to... I went so far as entering my credit card details at gpscentral.ca when I came across this thread. After reviewing many of the comments here I decided to cancel my purchase until these teething problems are addressed. Perhaps till late spring. Maybe by then there will be a rebate program ;-).

 

In my experience Garmin is a great company, and I expect they will make every effort to deliver the kind of product we are expecting of them. I must applauded Garmin for taking on such a radically different and ambitious product line. There is the potential here for a magnificent PNG.

 

At the same time it would appear that Garmin may have been in a hurry to get this product to market. The fact that a number of firmware issues remain, some of them obvious seems to indicate that the early adopters (bless them all) are in reality an extension of the Garmin Beta Team. A poster in another thread indicated that when he contacted Garmin Support the technician indicated that they (support team) had not been provided with the units and knowledge base for the Colorado yet.

 

This would appear to confirm that the product suffers form a bit of RUSH to market problems.

 

That said I am confident that Garmin will address the problems that have been encountered by the community. It is reasonable to expect that most of the problems that have been listed in this thread can be corrected by firmware updates avoiding a potentially embracing and costly product recall. A few of the problems, namely the NiMH battery issue may require a revision of the hardware. I know that a recent firmware update purportedly address this issue, but following the threads the fix appears to have worked for some and not for others.

 

I'd like to take the opportunity to thank all those that have contributed to this thread. It has helped me and undoubtedly many others to make an educated decision. In my case to take a wait and see attitude to this new product.

 

I eagerly await the resolution of the many issues listed here. My current 60Cx went through many firmware updates before it became the stable workhorse it is now. I like the look of the Colorado unit and the ability to store cache descriptions / logs. It will indeed be a great day once this works as we expect.

 

Suggestions -

 

GPX Processing at startup. I'm guessing here but if the Colorado must process the GPX files to extract or sort in some way and this is what contributes to the excessive startup time perhaps another method would prove more effective. Perhaps it would be less intrusive if this processing / sorting or whatever is taking the time was done only once at the time the GPX files are uploaded to the unit and the results stored. I'm JUST Guessing...

 

Backlight - Stop acting like my mother! Give me control of the backlight. Sure you can give me a battery warning but leave the light to me, or at least give me the option to disable this auto dim function.

 

Batteries - The vast majority of GPS users use NiMH batteries. A GPS that can not effectively operate with these batteries is not going to be very popular. Sadly if the battery monitor circuitry and trigger levels are in hardware then perhaps a hardware revision is in order. I certainly hope not!

 

Canada - The 400t looks like a great device. It is essentially a 300 with topographic maps of the US. I realize Canada is a small market by comparisons, but perhaps Garmin could provide a rebate program for customers that also purchase the Canada Topo maps. The same can be said of any other geographic area with suitable topo coverage (UK).

 

Previous Garmin products (60Csx) - With few exceptions I use all the tools and functions of the 60Cx. Given the capabilities of the new device I see no reason why all of the existing functionality should not be ported to the Colorado.

 

Sylvain

 

:smile::)

0

Share this post


Link to post

@apersson850

 

6 points for the Colorado, BUT you still cannot tell me the tracks of 11/11/2007 (mentioned above)

So the Colorado is not able to show the tracks of 20071111.gpx :smile:

0

Share this post


Link to post

Batteries - The vast majority of GPS users use NiMH batteries. A GPS that can not effectively operate with these batteries is not going to be very popular. Sadly if the battery monitor circuitry and trigger levels are in hardware then perhaps a hardware revision is in order. I certainly hope not!

Just a note that I am not having any issues with my Colorado 400t (swv 2.30, GPS swv 2.60) and my NiMH batteries. It's not clear me what percentage is, because generally those that aren't having an issue aren't making any noise, they're just out caching having fun. :smile: I got over 7 hours on my 2000 mAh NiMH batteries (Eneloop), 5 of those at full backlighting before the enforced dimming (yuck).

 

--Marky

0

Share this post


Link to post

Batteries - The vast majority of GPS users use NiMH batteries. A GPS that can not effectively operate with these batteries is not going to be very popular. Sadly if the battery monitor circuitry and trigger levels are in hardware then perhaps a hardware revision is in order. I certainly hope not!

Just a note that I am not having any issues with my Colorado 400t (swv 2.30, GPS swv 2.60) and my NiMH batteries. It's not clear me what percentage is, because generally those that aren't having an issue aren't making any noise, they're just out caching having fun. :smile: I got over 7 hours on my 2000 mAh NiMH batteries (Eneloop), 5 of those at full backlighting before the enforced dimming (yuck).

 

--Marky

I get about 4 hours of usage before I get down to two bars ... then the backlighting stops working and I simply swap out the batteries because I want backlighting.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Batteries - The vast majority of GPS users use NiMH batteries. A GPS that can not effectively operate with these batteries is not going to be very popular. Sadly if the battery monitor circuitry and trigger levels are in hardware then perhaps a hardware revision is in order. I certainly hope not!

Just a note that I am not having any issues with my Colorado 400t (swv 2.30, GPS swv 2.60) and my NiMH batteries. It's not clear me what percentage is, because generally those that aren't having an issue aren't making any noise, they're just out caching having fun. :smile: I got over 7 hours on my 2000 mAh NiMH batteries (Eneloop), 5 of those at full backlighting before the enforced dimming (yuck).

 

--Marky

 

Back in the early 60cs days I remember reading posts about battery life. It was affected (primarily) by these things:

 

- Backlight

- Compass

- WAAS

 

I'm guessing WAAS and compass would have a similar affect on the Colorado? How do you guys have your WAAS and compass setup? Could that explain the differences you are seeing?

 

WAAS is under Shortcuts->Setup-System->GPS-WAAS.

 

GO$Rs

0

Share this post


Link to post

For me: WAAS on; Compass off

0

Share this post


Link to post

So the Colorado is not able to show the tracks of 20071111.gpx :smile:

Freeday, you can cool your jets a tad, I've got good news for you. When you connect your Colorado to the PC look in (drive:)/Garmin/GPX/Current/ for the Current.gpx file, and open it in Mapsource. You will see any and all waypoints, routes, and tracks you have recorded. Click on the Tracks tab and there are all the recorded tracklogs named liked this: "Current Track: 27 JAN 2008 15:49".

 

All the data we are used to seeing in the 60Cx (and other X units) is intact with no compression or loss of any kind of data. Works fine for me, and I agree with Anders that is a good method. Now, I haven't accumulated enough tracklog data with my 300 to see the archival process yet.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I never found WASS to significantly improve accuracy in Canada and Europe. I simply turn it off. While we can get some marginal gains in Southern Canada by hedging our fix on one of the WASS ground stations near the boarder, the further north we get the less it helps. In Europe it simply does not help significantly. I may be wrong here as I recall a plan to install WASS stations in the EU. No I'm not confused with DGPS. WASS uses fixed ground reference stations from which to derive a correction factor that is then uploaded to the WASS bird and finally received by your WASS enabled GPS.

 

As far as the internal Compass my 60Cx is not fitted with one, but my experience with a friend's 60Csx has lead me to the opinion that the compass is of little use. I will concede that when stopped or moving very slowly bearing / heading accuracy using GPS only can be inaccurate. Regardless I'm not a big fan of a magnetic compass on on a GPS. I always carry a real compass in my pack as a backup. Electronics have been known to fail, and when they do it's normally at the worst possible time.

 

But I digress... If you can get 5+hours out of a Colorado with backlight at 100% that is great. I see no use for WASS or the Compass. In theory turning both off should increase battery life. The 2-2.5 hours I'm reading about is really a turn off for me. Worse for me is this babe sitting function that takes it on itself to adjust MY backlight purportedly because the software knows better.

 

I also recall the early 60C (my first mapping unit) had several issues of its own that were eventually fixed via firmware fixes. I'm still confident that the good people at Garmin will eventually get it right. At which point I will jump on a Colorado 300.

 

The other models are not of much use to us that reside outside the center of the universe (USA). Sorry a pet peeve of mine that dates back to the early days of mapping GPS units when only US maps were available. It would have been nice if Garmin had included Canada in the 400t therefore making it kind to us lowly Canadians.

 

I certainly do not expect 14 hours using the Colorado with the back light at 100%. Everything I've red seems to indicate that NiMH are being incorrectly identified as low way too early. Your report that 5+ hours was archived is comforting. I wonder if the same holds true for the 300 model.

Edited by Quiet-Tiger
0

Share this post


Link to post

@apersson850

 

6 points for the Colorado, BUT you still cannot tell me the tracks of 11/11/2007 (mentioned above)

So the Colorado is not able to show the tracks of 20071111.gpx

I'm not sure what you mean about "tell me the tracks"? Do you mean finding the particular tracks for a certain date?

If so, sort the archive files according to date (or name, since they are named as they are created), look at the date last modified, open the first one that's saved after the date you are interested in, view the track window in Mapsource, select all from your date, Ctrl/C, Ctrl/A, delete, Ctrl/V, Ctrl/A, merge tracks.

 

A few more steps, yes, but for me it's well worth it to gain the other six advantages.

 

Ahh, now I noticed another answer above. That one assumes that you still have the track you are looking for within the 10000 points of the active track.

 

To add some comments to another thread above, I can tell you that the backlight issue was worse to begin with (I started with firmware 1.51), my unit has worked on NiMH, but with less hours from them than the 60 CSx gives and that several other issues have been reported, but it's not always just like that to find a clever solution, that doesn't compromise other things.

Edited by apersson850
0

Share this post


Link to post

I never found WASS to significantly improve accuracy in Canada and Europe. I simply turn it off. While we can get some marginal gains in Southern Canada by hedging our fix on one of the WASS ground stations near the boarder, the further north we get the less it helps. In Europe it simply does not help significantly. I may be wrong here as I recall a plan to install WASS stations in the EU. No I'm not confused with DGPS. WASS uses fixed ground reference stations from which to derive a correction factor that is then uploaded to the WASS bird and finally received by your WASS enabled GPS.

 

As far as the internal Compass my 60Cx is not fitted with one, but my experience with a friend's 60Csx has lead me to the opinion that the compass is of little use. I will concede that when stopped or moving very slowly bearing / heading accuracy using GPS only can be inaccurate. Regardless I'm not a big fan of a magnetic compass on on a GPS. I always carry a real compass in my pack as a backup. Electronics have been known to fail, and when they do it's normally at the worst possible time.

 

But I digress... If you can get 5+hours out of a Colorado with backlight at 100% that is great. I see no use for WASS or the Compass. In theory turning both off should increase battery life. The 2-2.5 hours I'm reading about is really a turn off for me. Worse for me is this babe sitting function that takes it on itself to adjust MY backlight purportedly because the software knows better.

 

I also recall the early 60C (my first mapping unit) had several issues of its own that were eventually fixed via firmware fixes. I'm still confident that the good people at Garmin will eventually get it right. At which point I will jump on a Colorado 300.

 

The other models are not of much use to us that reside outside the center of the universe (USA). Sorry a pet peeve of mine that dates back to the early days of mapping GPS units when only US maps were available. It would have been nice if Garmin had included Canada in the 400t therefore making it kind to us lowly Canadians.

 

I certainly do not expect 14 hours using the Colorado with the back light at 100%. Everything I've red seems to indicate that NiMH are being incorrectly identified as low way too early. Your report that 5+ hours was archived is comforting. I wonder if the same holds true for the 300 model.

 

I have a 300 and new Eneloops (Sanyo 2000mah) and can't quite get 2hrs with the backlight on high. My compass is turned off and this test has been repeated using multiple NIMH's of varying age and mah. I just can't seem to get the same results as Marky (5hrs). My friend has a 300 also and he has run this test using various NIMH rechargables. He can't get over 2hrs either.

Edited by yogazoo
0

Share this post


Link to post

 

I have a 300 and new Eneloops (Sanyo 2000mah) and can't quite get 2hrs with the backlight on high. My compass is turned off and this test has been repeated using multiple NIMH's of varying age and mah. I just can't seem to get the same results as Marky (5hrs). My friend has a 300 also and he has run this test using various NIMH rechargables. He can't get over 2hrs either.

 

You are both running 2.3/2.6 software?

0

Share this post


Link to post

To clarify my above statements.

 

When I say we got two hours, it was two hours before the backlight was auto-reduced to a much lower level, I'd say maybe alittle less than half of the brightness of 100%. The unit then goes on to be reduced one more time to very low level (barely visible) after another 3 hours or so. We can get around 12-14 total hrs from the unit with NIMH's with firmware 2.6 / software 2.3.

 

The only power issues that exist for me and my buddy who also has a 300 are these:

 

1) The auto backlight reduction needs to be scaled back to allow the user more time on 100% backlight at the cost of shorter total runtime.

 

2) The battery meter should be tweaked to be more accurate. We get almost 5 hrs at the end of the 12-14hr run cycle with the meter showing only one red bar. If I would see one red bar on any of my other electronics I would think it would be time to change the battery but the colorado 300 continues on for hours and hours at this level.

 

I honestly can't imagine that the 300 is any more inefficient power wise than the 60CSX. It is my belief that these issues CAN be fixed with a firmware update.

 

I wait.

Edited by yogazoo
0

Share this post


Link to post

 

I have a 300 and new Eneloops (Sanyo 2000mah) and can't quite get 2hrs with the backlight on high. My compass is turned off and this test has been repeated using multiple NIMH's of varying age and mah. I just can't seem to get the same results as Marky (5hrs). My friend has a 300 also and he has run this test using various NIMH rechargables. He can't get over 2hrs either.

 

You are both running 2.3/2.6 software?

I also have the 300, using Sanyo Eneloop 2000mah, and I've tried my older NiMH ones as well, and I concur with seeing about 2 hrs till backlight quits. I have compass Off, but WAAS On. With my Sanyos I can still operate but the 300 shuts down after about 7 hrs due to having an indicated red one-half bar. Oh, I'm running the 2.3/2.6 software, too.

Edited by Timpat
0

Share this post


Link to post

As with everything else, it does of course depend upon what you want to do. Here I describe the Zumo, as I know how that works. I think the Colorado is identical, or very close.

 

First, the Zumo saves in internal memory. No need to have any card there. No problem with a write-protected card either.

 

Second, the Zumo will not split everything up in files per day. Retreiving only 20 files from my Zumo brought me data for nine months, equivalent to 270 files to keep track of with the old system. If I want a specific date, I can easily extract that in Mapsource anyway.

 

Third, the Zumo splits archived logs according to "activities", which could be power-on, but also starting routing to a new destination. This makes logical units easier to find and handle.

 

Fourth, the Zumo automatically keeps track of how much memory is left, and leaves some for other activities, like firmware updates.

 

Fifth, this archive method works well with the Zumo's capability to convert a track to a route. That's not valid for the Colorado, so if you have only that one, it doesn't matter.

 

Sixth, the Zumo filters away noise from the file. If you have a lot of tracks all over a very limited area, they aren't included in the archived log, as it's obvious that it's just GPS receiver drift that has been recorded. Makes what goes into the archives a lot more interesting, as it's actual travel, not just playing at the kitchen table.

All that is of no use to me.

One of the main reasons to buy the 60 CSX was, that it can be used as a simple, but effective tracklogger, and I don't need to care about this feature, the trackpoints are just there on the SD card, and I can rely on that nothing is missed.

It especially disturbs me that it looks like the Colorado doesn't log on the SD card, only the active log seems to be there, and that there seems to be no continuous automatic logging on the SD card.

 

I also don't want something like an automatic filter which reduces the trackpoints with some algorithm.

 

I just need every single trackpoint continuously logged to the SD card, regardless if noise or receiver drift!

So it looks like the Colorado is not the device for me, because for me this is an absolute killer feature, and I'll not own and use a 2nd GPS device, just because my new Super-GPS is not able to log like it's predecessor.

Edited by NewZealand
0

Share this post


Link to post

Garmin will eventually fix the NiMH problem. It may take a bit of time and several firmware revisions. In the worst case scenario I'll have to wait till the next hardware revision to fix the battery problem.

 

But for goodness sake Garmin if you are listening please give us the option of disabling this annoying auto dimming. yes the backlight is a power hog we get that, but live it to the user to determine if the light should be dimmed or not.

0

Share this post


Link to post

@apersson850

 

6 points for the Colorado, BUT you still cannot tell me the tracks of 11/11/2007 (mentioned above)

So the Colorado is not able to show the tracks of 20071111.gpx

I'm not sure what you mean about "tell me the tracks"? Do you mean finding the particular tracks for a certain date?

If so, sort the archive files according to date (or name, since they are named as they are created), look at the date last modified, open the first one that's saved after the date you are interested in, view the track window in Mapsource, select all from your date, Ctrl/C, Ctrl/A, delete, Ctrl/V, Ctrl/A, merge tracks.

 

A few more steps, yes, but for me it's well worth it to gain the other six advantages.

 

Ahh, now I noticed another answer above. That one assumes that you still have the track you are looking for within the 10000 points of the active track.

 

To add some comments to another thread above, I can tell you that the backlight issue was worse to begin with (I started with firmware 1.51), my unit has worked on NiMH, but with less hours from them than the 60 CSx gives and that several other issues have been reported, but it's not always just like that to find a clever solution, that doesn't compromise other things.

>>Do you mean finding the particular tracks for a certain date? YES

of course there is a workaround - but if i have 200 track-logs/year the "old" system was much better for me - i will send my track-log to you for converting it for every day :(

Maybe you do not need this feature - but i do, and also NewZealand

i never thought that GARMIN will remove this feature because people will not need it.

0

Share this post


Link to post
It especially disturbs me that it looks like the Colorado doesn't log on the SD card, only the active log seems to be there, and that there seems to be no continuous automatic logging on the SD card.

 

I also don't want something like an automatic filter which reduces the trackpoints with some algorithm.

While I very well understand that different people need different things, it would be interesting to understand why this is a problem to you?

 

There are no tracks at all logged to the card. They are in the other flash memory, inside the unit, a memory that's always there, so it works regardless of whether you have any card or not. Why is that a problem to you?

 

For what purpose do you need 248 track points collected around your kitchen table, when you "played" with the unit at home?

Now I don't know if the Colorado will skip such "clouds" of points, but the Zumo tries to, at least. To me, that's good, as it's just noise with no real information inside.

 

but if i have 200 track-logs/year the "old" system was much better for me - i will send my track-log to you for converting it for every day

Maybe you do not need this feature - but i do, and also NewZealand

Could you tell me what such a day-by-day based log is useful for? Would be interesting to know, as I don't see the need for it.
I never thought that GARMIN will remove this feature because people will not need it.
To me, that seems like a perfect reason? Edited by apersson850
0

Share this post


Link to post

I enable automatic logging on my gpsmap60csx

it doesnt make any difference if it logs on the internal memory or SD-card (that is NOT the reason)

 

i have nothing to do (convert, save it with timestamp,...) with my gpsmap60csx

you need to do so with a Colorado

 

example 1:

When i need a specific track e.g. on the first friday in November (on mountain XXX) because a Friend also wants to go there - it is very easy to find it.

I do not need to manage my tracks or convert them, because they are all saved automatically.

Just pick it from the SD-card

 

example 2:

if i get a speed ticket on 10-11-2007

just look at the log and see the timestamp and location .... the easiest way to controll it.

 

example 3:

last year i was on island XXX

i thought i would never be there one more time.

 

But now my wife and i decided to go there one more time.

juist look at GPX-logging holiday from 1. may - 5. may 2007

10 Seconds to go to see the tracks of this holiday trip

 

You do not have to make these boring gpx converting and splitting.

You do not have to make a structure for the tracklog because it sorts automatically by timestamp day after day - great -i like it.

Edited by freeday
0

Share this post


Link to post

Hi,

thanks for your interest, I'll explain:

 

It especially disturbs me that it looks like the Colorado doesn't log on the SD card, only the active log seems to be there, and that there seems to be no continuous automatic logging on the SD card.

 

I also don't want something like an automatic filter which reduces the trackpoints with some algorithm.

While I very well understand that different people need different things, it would be interesting to understand why this is a problem to you?

 

There are no tracks at all logged to the card. They are in the other flash memory, inside the unit, a memory that's always there, so it works regardless of whether you have any card or not. Why is that a problem to you?

First reason is, the memory will be at some time to small, and part of the track will be deleted.

E.g. at a 2 months trip through New Zealand I doubt that a log with 20 times 10000 points would correctly log the whole journey. Sometimes, in uninhabited areas on the southern island, I tracked every second or every 10 meters, instead of automatically, so many trackpoints are collected in a given time interval.

At the end of the journey I have a detailed report of tracks, day by day.

 

Second, but most important: At our emergency service we do not rely on that a GPS unit always will come back undamaged from every operation, but we rely at least on that the SD-card is undestroyed and the data on it are readable.

If the GPS unit is damaged in the Colorado case, all track data are lost. This is a severe flaw for us.

If the GPS unit is damaged in the 60 CSX case, in nearly all cases the track data are still readable on the SD-card.

Based on the logs we have an exact calendar, which operations happened on every day of the year, and a map with the respective tracklogs is just one mouseclick away.

We need the units for really serious emergency cases and their documentation. That leads to the next point:

 

For what purpose do you need 248 track points collected around your kitchen table, when you "played" with the unit at home?

Now I don't know if the Colorado will skip such "clouds" of points, but the Zumo tries to, at least. To me, that's good, as it's just noise with no real information inside.

We need that, because nobody here in the emergency unit trusts any computerprogram which reduces trackpoints automatically.

The reduction, if any, is done later manually with a track management software. However, the original tracks are always archived.

 

I bet, that if you go along a circle with 20 meters diameter, the software will remove the trackpoints or some of them, because it believes it is just noise.

This is to dangerous, we need to rely on the fact that every single trackpoint is logged, and especially logged to a removable SD-card, and not to the unit itself which may be destroyed.

Cheers, NZ

Edited by NewZealand
0

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks for the information.

 

I'll give one example, just to try to convey how I may use it, so that you understand that to some people, another view may be viable.

If I want to recover a track for a certain place, I look for places, not dates. The date I probably don't know, at least not exactly. Usually I may know that it was sometime in spring 2007, for example.

Then I have a significantly smaller task of checking four files from that time, archived during two months by the Zumo, by viewing them in Mapsource and look for some that covers the particular area I'm interested in, compared to examining 60 files (one for each day) saved by a 60 CSx.

The same goes for geotagging images after the fact. One or two files are equivalent to 10-20 files, representing a holiday trip.

 

I haven't deleted any archive file on my Zumo yet. It started to work April 11, 2007. It's now almost 90% full. The Zumo is used almost every day.

 

I nearly never use anything but automatic track logging. Saving points with a certain time interval makes me miss interesting information between some points, but saves a lot that contains no additional data.

 

Information you use, data you store. Significant difference.

 

As for the emergency service application, I'd say it's obviously so specific, that the solution must be just as obvious: Get the 60 CSx.

 

The same does of course go for those who considers sorting by date to be the best, if that's the most important thing to them.

0

Share this post


Link to post

More FAQ (v1.4) updates:

 

- Added Elevation / Altimeter section

- Updated Tracks section based on input from Anders

- Added FAQ on backup

- Added/updated Performance section

- Updated Map section with information about preloaded Topos.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I have looked for this info, but have not found the answer.

 

How do I change from upper case to lower case when I am naming a waypoint?

 

Thanks!

0

Share this post


Link to post

I have looked for this info, but have not found the answer.

 

How do I change from upper case to lower case when I am naming a waypoint?

 

Thanks!

Continue to wheel around the alphabet, there are upper and lower case letters to select. Very clunky I must say. Maybe an update can change this?

0

Share this post


Link to post

I have looked for this info, but have not found the answer.

 

How do I change from upper case to lower case when I am naming a waypoint?

 

Thanks!

Continue to wheel around the alphabet, there are upper and lower case letters to select.

Duh!

 

Thanks.

0

Share this post


Link to post

In the list of questions and issues this one kind of strikes me as odd -

 

1/23/08: Garmin says when connecting to a PC or AC adapter that the device will go into USB mode. May be fixed. To connect to nRoute you need to buy a serial cable. To use an DC adapter you need to use the new Garmin supported adapter.

 

Buy a serial cable? How many laptops today have a serial connection. Most all are USB. So now we buy a $500.00 plus dollar GPS and then have to purchase a Garmin DC cable and a Garmin Serial Cable? Why not just let the GPS work with the cables that we all have already? I know the answer is to get us to spend more $$$$ for the cables, but come on now.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Gobler,

 

I think it has been identified as a problem that needs correcting in the firmware. When I talked to the Garmin tech we tried out various cables and power adapters and upon the unit defaulting to the USB mode on several of the them he said that it was a problem and he'd put it on the list. Sounds like it will be fixed in future firmware/software. We wait.

0

Share this post


Link to post

So, I'm out geocaching. From the Geocaching menu, I select the nearest geocache. Hopefully it's near my location because once you select a geocache, the map won't pan anymore. I go read the description and the hint, then come back to the compass screen (since I can't use the map screen to get close to a cache). After finding the cache, in order to get the GCxxxx number I have to go back to shortcuts and select "Where to" and "Waypoints". I log the cache on my phone (wap.geocaching.com). Now, in order to delete the waypoint, I have to go back to shortcuts and select waypoint manager.

 

Doesn't this seem like a lot of extra work? :rolleyes:

0

Share this post


Link to post
Doesn't this seem like a lot of extra work? :rolleyes:

Yep, it does. Hopefully all us early adopters can help them "get it right" with regards to geocaching. I suppose I should go out and do some caching huh? I did go for a night cache FTF last night but the Colorado was 50 feet off! Of course, the cache title was called "50FeetOff", so I guess I was right on the money. :lol:

 

--Marky

0

Share this post


Link to post
Doesn't this seem like a lot of extra work? :rolleyes:

Yep, it does. Hopefully all us early adopters can help them "get it right" with regards to geocaching. I suppose I should go out and do some caching huh? I did go for a night cache FTF last night but the Colorado was 50 feet off! Of course, the cache title was called "50FeetOff", so I guess I was right on the money. :lol:

 

--Marky

Well, buying a brand new GPSr has renewed my interest in geocaching. Gotta make $600 worth it. :) I just wish the Colorado was ready for market.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I was wondering, is it just me or does the GUI on the Colorado seem like it would work alot better and just maybe it's more ment for a touchscreen type application. All the pull down menus and having to really look through all the menus just to move from one page to another. To me it just seems like more of a touch screen type interface.

 

I really wouldn't want a touchscreen on a handheld GPS anyways just because of when I put it in my pocket.

I'm just courious if it's just me since I work on a lot of Crestron, AMX, Pronto, and other touchscreen type remotes.

0

Share this post


Link to post

In the list of questions and issues this one kind of strikes me as odd -

 

1/23/08: Garmin says when connecting to a PC or AC adapter that the device will go into USB mode. May be fixed. To connect to nRoute you need to buy a serial cable. To use an DC adapter you need to use the new Garmin supported adapter.

 

Buy a serial cable? How many laptops today have a serial connection. Most all are USB. So now we buy a $500.00 plus dollar GPS and then have to purchase a Garmin DC cable and a Garmin Serial Cable? Why not just let the GPS work with the cables that we all have already? I know the answer is to get us to spend more $$$$ for the cables, but come on now.

 

The funny thing is most laptops sold today don't have serial ports. So you would go from usb to serial and back to usb via usb serial adaptor. :rolleyes:

0

Share this post


Link to post

So, I'm out geocaching. From the Geocaching menu, I select the nearest geocache. Hopefully it's near my location because once you select a geocache, the map won't pan anymore. I go read the description and the hint, then come back to the compass screen (since I can't use the map screen to get close to a cache). After finding the cache, in order to get the GCxxxx number I have to go back to shortcuts and select "Where to" and "Waypoints". I log the cache on my phone (wap.geocaching.com). Now, in order to delete the waypoint, I have to go back to shortcuts and select waypoint manager.

 

Doesn't this seem like a lot of extra work? :rolleyes:

 

I actually just responded to a very seasoned cacher who posted on another thread that the Colorado works just as good as the older Garmins in regards to many of the features. The poster actually felt loading caches as both waypoints and as a GPX file is acceptable. I have to agree with you that this platform is NOT geocaching friendly. You have to jump through 10 hoops just to do what Vista HCx can do. Sure you don't have the cache description on an HCx, but an HCx and a basic PDA combo are half the price.

 

Now if you load the caches as POI's, then you have another half dozen hoops.

0

Share this post


Link to post

Now i know what Garmin is thinking about the Bugs and the new Colorado: :lol:

(mail sent to techsupp.europe (X) garmin.com)

 

MAIL TO GARMIN:

...

I am interested to buy a Colorado BUT there is NO DAILY AUTOMATIC GPX-Logging like on the gpsmap60csx

Now i hesitate to buy a colorado because it is a very important function for me.

Do you know if Garmin will implement a function that allows to create automatic gpx-track-loggin like on a gpsmap60CSX or vistaHCX (e.g. 20080101.gpx)

Which email-adress do i need to report this function

There exists also a list of bugs http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dgs8g624_27dj2b9php

i am not shure if GARMIN knows about it.

....

 

REPLY:

....

Thank you for contacting Garmin(Europe)Ltd.

I am not aware of any plans to change the software to allow the tracklog recording to card, like with the GPSMAP 60CSx.

I have looked at the link below which include many 'reported' issues to the forum, a have tried to replicate a few but was not able to and others are more suggestions than software changes.

The Colorado is not yet released anyway, by the time it is available if you have any issues please let us know.

 

Kind regards

...

 

:rolleyes: did i choose a false email address?

I do not know why they could not replicate the problems

0

Share this post


Link to post

Now i know what Garmin is thinking about the Bugs and the new Colorado: :lol:

(mail sent to techsupp.europe (X) garmin.com)

 

MAIL TO GARMIN:

...

I am interested to buy a Colorado BUT there is NO DAILY AUTOMATIC GPX-Logging like on the gpsmap60csx

Now i hesitate to buy a colorado because it is a very important function for me.

Do you know if Garmin will implement a function that allows to create automatic gpx-track-loggin like on a gpsmap60CSX or vistaHCX (e.g. 20080101.gpx)

Which email-adress do i need to report this function

There exists also a list of bugs http://docs.google.com/View?docid=dgs8g624_27dj2b9php

i am not shure if GARMIN knows about it.

....

 

REPLY:

....

Thank you for contacting Garmin(Europe)Ltd.

I am not aware of any plans to change the software to allow the tracklog recording to card, like with the GPSMAP 60CSx.

I have looked at the link below which include many 'reported' issues to the forum, a have tried to replicate a few but was not able to and others are more suggestions than software changes.

The Colorado is not yet released anyway, by the time it is available if you have any issues please let us know.

 

Kind regards

...

 

:rolleyes: did i choose a false email address?

I do not know why they could not replicate the problems

 

I've sent the same link with an offer to help/assist in reproducing or clarifying the issues (both via email and on the phone) but I haven't received anything in response. I think part of the problem is the mindset of Garmin vs. the community of users who are using the 60csx. You see it come through in the email above and I've experienced it in my communications with Garmin as well. There are relatively few "defects" with Colorado: resets, freezes, location instability, etc. Everyone including Garmin agrees these need to be fixed and they seem to be addressing them. The problem is with the significant number of issues that have been raised because the Colorado doesn't support some feature that the 60csx family does. 60csx users see these as bugs, Garmin doesn't - they seem them as "new features".

 

This goes back to one of the earlier threads. If Garmin expects the Colorado line to eventually replace the 60csx then they are going to have to treat these "feature parity" issues as bugs and fix them. In the software world I work in you never remove functionality (or if you do there are very strict procedures for how that happens and is documented to the customer). On the other hand, if the two units are going to live on in the product line together then Garmin needs to be clear that some stuff isn't going to ever be available on the Colorado and users will have to choose the one that best meets their needs. Until we have that discussion/understanding between the user community and the company we'll continue to debate these details.

 

GO$Rs

0

Share this post


Link to post

So, I'm out geocaching. From the Geocaching menu, I select the nearest geocache. Hopefully it's near my location because once you select a geocache, the map won't pan anymore. I go read the description and the hint, then come back to the compass screen (since I can't use the map screen to get close to a cache). After finding the cache, in order to get the GCxxxx number I have to go back to shortcuts and select "Where to" and "Waypoints". I log the cache on my phone (wap.geocaching.com). Now, in order to delete the waypoint, I have to go back to shortcuts and select waypoint manager.

 

Doesn't this seem like a lot of extra work? :rolleyes:

 

Agreed it is extra work and the GCID should be on the cache summary page along with the coordinates for the cache which are also missing. I'll add it to the Issues List.

 

BTW, there is another way to get the GCID but I'm not sure it is any faster. From the Cache summary page hit Back->Options->Show GC ID. You'll get the lGeocache list with GCID's, however, you won't be selecting the cache you just came from, you'll be at the start of the list. Before you hit Show GCID if you look at the distance/bearing of your selected cache you should be able to scroll back down and find the cache which is the same distance/bearing away. FWIW!

 

GO$Rs

0

Share this post


Link to post

@g-o-cashers

...if you do there are very strict procedures for how that happens and is documented to the customer...

This is absolutely true - and i bet only a few people do know that the colorado is not a better gpsmap - it is a different type of gps

The Colorado is NOT the next step/generation after the gpsmap60CSX or Vista HCX

 

Garmin has to tell this to their customers.

on Garmins website, you cannot see, that colorado-users will miss gpsmap/vista-functions

https://buy.garmin.com/shop/compare.do?cID=...pareProduct=310

Edited by freeday
0

Share this post


Link to post

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 31