Sign in to follow this  
Followers 18
g-o-cashers

Garmin Oregon Wiki

629 posts in this topic

Regardless of all the new features that may or may not be implemented in the Colorado in the future, I think that hearing about the screen being tougher to read than the Colorado in daylight is a major downer. :D

 

It might be useful to elaborate on this a little more g-o-cashers. And by the way, thanks for all the quick info! You really are the bees-knees! :D

Edited by yogazoo
0

Share this post


Link to post

Double Post. Darn weak internet signals!

Edited by yogazoo
0

Share this post


Link to post

Regardless of all the new features that may or may not be implemented in the Colorado in the future, I think that hearing about the screen being tougher to read than the Colorado is a major downer. :D

 

It might be useful to elaborate on this a little more g-o-cashers. And by the way, thanks for all the quick info! You really are the bees-knees! :D

 

That's why you should wait for version 2.0 like me.

 

G-o-cashers!

First of all, thanks for posting the wiki! Second, do you own a Nuvi? If so can you comment on if the touch screen Oregon feels and look and act like the Nuvi? Thanks!

 

PS. The backlight on max is brighter on the Oregon but that doesn't help in the sunlight?

0

Share this post


Link to post

 

PS. The backlight on max is brighter on the Oregon but that doesn't help in the sunlight?

 

From my experience with the CO, direct sunlight easily overpowers the backlight.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I just knew there had to be a downside to the Oregon.

 

The screen brightness is a somewhat big deal for me. We went from the 60's and vista's which had excellent daylight viewing to the Colorado's which is marginal. If the Oregon is worse yet it gives me pause. The Oregon may be great for car navigation at night or outdoor use when the sun is going down or coming up, but to have to strain your eyes to read it in broad daylight?

0

Share this post


Link to post

FYI for everyone in CALI

 

Most of the REI stores received the Oregon 400t today. I am on my way right now to go pick one up.

:D

0

Share this post


Link to post

""I don't think the Oregon is as bright at the Colorado outdoors under direct sunlight at any backlight setting. The touch screen is not as reflective as the Colorado's.""

 

What does this mean exactly? "The touch screen is not as reflective as the Colorado's" are we talking about the screen surface being not as shiny or are we talking about the light rebound from the TFT screen? :D

0

Share this post


Link to post

Have you tried selecting a waypoint from the map and deleting it? I'm wondering if this will crash the OR too, or if it is a step or two ahead of the CO in that regard.

 

This works on the OR.

 

It might be useful to elaborate on this a little more g-o-cashers. And by the way, thanks for all the quick info! You really are the bees-knees! :D

 

I will. I took some pictures on the way home tonight that show it pretty well. They compare the CO the OR and the 60csx.

 

First of all, thanks for posting the wiki! Second, do you own a Nuvi? If so can you comment on if the touch screen Oregon feels and look and act like the Nuvi? Thanks!

 

PS. The backlight on max is brighter on the Oregon but that doesn't help in the sunlight?

 

I don't own a Nuvi, I have a SP2610, I've used Nuvi's. Hard to compare, navigating around menus I find pretty responsive and don't missed many strokes, panning/zooming the map is sluggish, selecting an exact point on the map is challenging for me.

 

My comment about the backlight not helping in directly sunlight stands. It gets washed out in the direct sunlight and makes little or no difference.

 

""I don't think the Oregon is as bright at the Colorado outdoors under direct sunlight at any backlight setting. The touch screen is not as reflective as the Colorado's.""

 

What does this mean exactly? "The touch screen is not as reflective as the Colorado's" are we talking about the screen surface being not as shiny or are we talking about the light rebound from the TFT screen? :D

 

I meant the surface of the screen not the TFT. The surface is textured not smooth like the CO. The TFT may be less reflective but my feeling at this point is that it is the textured surface that makes it look dimmer. Hope that clarifies the poorly written sentence above!

 

GO$Rs

0

Share this post


Link to post

Yes multiple tracks, and they can have different colors as of 2.2! I hope that the Track Manager makes it over to the CO. I predict it will, it seems like it would be purely a software function.

GO$Rs

Thank you for reporting this! Yes, we can hope for this, as well as for other features to make it over to the CO!

 

Not to whine, but I'm a bit irked that here we have had the Colorado since January, we are still beta testing it, and Garmin releases the OR with most of our issues addressed on this model! Come on Garmin!

0

Share this post


Link to post

So i have paid in advance for my new Oregon.........Did i make a mistake ????......g-o-cashers THANKS for your great info.......

Edited by ervind
0

Share this post


Link to post

As far as I can gather from g-o-cachers wiki there are 3 potential design concerns.

 

1) Sensitivity: g-o-cachers has noticed a lower accuracy rating compared to the Colorado and he has lost signals inside. Possibly due to the patch antenna or a potential chipset difference.

 

2) Daylight readability: The screen is reportedly more difficult to see in daylight compared to the Colorado. To what degree remains to be seen.

 

3) Touchscreen operation: Gloves? Water? Dirt? How solid will the touchscreen interface perform in adverse conditions?

Edited by yogazoo
0

Share this post


Link to post

So i have paid in advance for my new Oregon.........Did i make a mistake ????......

 

I already ordered one and it should be here tomorrow. I'm nervous and anxious at the same time!

0

Share this post


Link to post

I would be curious about if anyone will experience any drift like on some of the colorados.

Edited by storm180
0

Share this post


Link to post

I've posted some daylight shots of the three units together with various backlight settings. Unfortunately, the OR isn't performing as well outside in my opinion. With the backlight way up it is pretty good in indirect light, however in bright sun it is harder to read than the CO and in indirect light with the backlight off it is very hard to read. After I ran the test I turned off shading on the map screen and that does help the CO and OR -- that may be an option people will need to consider when using these units outside.

 

http://garminoregon.wikispaces.com/First+Impressions#toc8

 

As for accuracy I'm saw some "not so good" stuff tonight. I ran all three GPS's side by side and got varying results (PDOP wasn't good tonight). I'm going to run some more tests tomorrow morning before posting any results. That and I need to get the configurations off all three units more or less the same.

 

Please don't conclude anything so far on touchscreen operation in adverse conditions. Anything I've said so far is just speculation on my part.

 

GO$Rs

0

Share this post


Link to post

Thanks for all the great work, Scott.

 

I was just looking at the three units together, and we need to get some Garmin designers and engineers to do the same. The benefit of the black numbers on white background speaks for itself. The other two looks like fashion statements in comparison.

 

As for turning off the shading, I do that with my Colorado -- but then I lose a lot of the benefit that it offers over the 60CSx. And in fact, I find myself using the 60CSx more and more since I've gotten over the novelty of the Colorado and its hi-res screen.

 

They need to figure out how to get the same usability of the old units with the 3-D graphics of the new units. If it takes a bigger battery pack, I could live with that.

 

So far, the one thing I really like about the Oregon is the text entry. It looks great. I like the size of the unit, but I wouldn't trade any satellite reception in exchange for it.

 

The ultimate question/test for a GPSr for me is: If I regain consciousness somewhere in the wilderness in the middle of the night, and need to get to safety, which model do I want to have with me?

 

Anyway, I'm looking forward to more reporting on the Oregon and comparisons with the older models.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I was just looking at the three units together, and we need to get some Garmin designers and engineers to do the same. The benefit of the black numbers on white background speaks for itself. The other two looks like fashion statements in comparison.

BINGO!! I was thinking the same thing. I own a 60Cx and love the unit. If it is possible to lighten the background with the black numbers on the Oregons and Colorados, then maybe you'd gain a little better readability?? I agree, why give up functionality for the sake of vanity? :D

 

Again, kudos to you g-o-cashers for your efforts here...

Edited by kcmose
0

Share this post


Link to post

It sounds/looks like we have a tradeoff here. The functionality of the touchscreen traded in for screen visibility in daylight. I was slightly dissapointed with the Colrado when I compared it to the 60 series, now the Colorado doesn't look that bad compared to the Oregon. :D Heck, the old Maggie Meridian Color's screen looks as readable as the Oregon. A shame, for me anyway. I use my GPS almost exclusively during daylight hours.

 

I was really on the fence about selling my Colorado and snagging one of these slick touchscreens. I'm not too sure about that now. We'll see what the "not so good" is in the morning. :D

 

Thank you g-o-cachers! :D

Edited by yogazoo
0

Share this post


Link to post

 

Please don't conclude anything so far on touchscreen operation in adverse conditions. Anything I've said so far is just speculation on my part.

 

GO$Rs

 

GO$Rs, you didn't really say anything that negative about touch-screen operation. You really didn't have to. As soon as you mention a "Touchscreen Handheld" to anyone who rides GPS's hard and puts them away wet knows the potential for issues here. Some people think that touchscreen is the way of the future for handhelds, but I disagree. Magellans implemantation, well, not so much. Garmin's remains to be seen but I'm still not convinced.

Edited by yogazoo
0

Share this post


Link to post

I'm going to wait for 2.0. It will only take 12-18 months. Not long at all!

0

Share this post


Link to post

GO$Rs

 

I went out and picked up one of these OR's today and I was wondering if you were able to find a Satellite page on the OR like on the CO? I did find out how to get the GPS accuracy but no way to see what satellites the gps is using?

 

And for every one that might be interested, this is the hardest GPS device to see out in the day light. Almost unusable. Very dissapointing :):D:D

 

Edit: Another problem i have noticed so far with the OR is the Battery Meter is way off with Nimh rechargeables.

It is saying that fresh charged Nimh batteries are almost dead after about 10 minutes. Only one bar left but the unit keeps going for hours.

 

Here we go again all kinds of problems right out of the box like the CO. I wounder if Garmin even test the units out in the field before they start selling them.

 

I bet that the OR is going to be just like the CO and start running beta firmware too.

 

For me the only thing i like about the OR over the CO is the way you have all the letters on the screen to enter text instead of having to scroll to the next letter like on the CO.

Edited by teamdw
0

Share this post


Link to post

@ GO$Rs

 

excellent fist impression review !!!! - GO$Rs you are great!!

 

Could you also share the comparsion pics in max resolution

Dim light max backlight

Direct sun no backlight

Indirect sun no backligh

Indirect sun backlight max

 

It would be easier for me to compare the quality of the screen under different light conditions.

 

One more time - great work.

 

Thank You! :D:D:D:):D

0

Share this post


Link to post

one more question: does any unit have a screen shield on your comparsion pics?

0

Share this post


Link to post

And for every one that might be interested, this is the hardest GPS device to see out in the day light. Almost unusable. Very dissapointing :):D:D

 

Sorry to say this Garmin, but no OR for me.

Hope you do read this. Why did you not learn from the message posted about CO.

 

And please make an option to invert screen color (Black letters on white background)

Edited by jotne
0

Share this post


Link to post
...

And please make an option to invert screen color (Black letters on white background)

seems to be technical very difficult :D

i also would prefer: Black letters on white background !!! :D

 

01.03.2008_17:19:05_vergleich3-1000.jpg

Edited by freeday
0

Share this post


Link to post

I think the "Dim light max backlight" picture is slightly misleading (not intentionally so, I'm sure). The Colorado has a white background picture, whereas the Oregon has a leaf and lake background picture of some sort. I don't think that applies to the other pictures though as they are on the map screen.

 

With my Colorado 300, I found the map was hard to read in the car with no backlight until I turned off the basemap (graduated topo with a green background). Grey roads on a green background didn't make for a good contrast. I suspect the Oregon is the same.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I went out and picked up one of these OR's today and I was wondering if you were able to find a Satellite page on the OR like on the CO? I did find out how to get the GPS accuracy but no way to see what satellites the gps is using?

 

Edit: Another problem i have noticed so far with the OR is the Battery Meter is way off with Nimh rechargeables.

It is saying that fresh charged Nimh batteries are almost dead after about 10 minutes. Only one bar left but the unit keeps going for hours.

 

To get to the satellite page tap on the the GPS signal strength meter at the bottom of the main page.

 

I noticed the issue yesterday with the battery bars too. I put in fresh 2700 mAh batteries and the meter went to 3 out of 4 bars immediately. After running yesterday almost all day with the backlight on it was down to 2 bars. Sounds like a metering issue, similar to the first COs.

 

 

Could you also share the comparsion pics in max resolution

Dim light max backlight

Direct sun no backlight

Indirect sun no backligh

Indirect sun backlight max

 

If you contact me through my profile I'll send them to you.

 

one more question: does any unit have a screen shield on your comparsion pics?

 

Only the 60csx! The OR and CO are naked!

 

I think the "Dim light max backlight" picture is slightly misleading (not intentionally so, I'm sure). The Colorado has a white background picture, whereas the Oregon has a leaf and lake background picture of some sort. I don't think that applies to the other pictures though as they are on the map screen.

 

That's is a good point. With all that I was trying to do yesterday I didn't have time to get the all white back ground on. However, the pictures in the direct and indirect sunlight should be a fair comparison between the OR and CO because they are on the map page. In dim light they are all pretty good in my opinion.

 

GO$Rs

0

Share this post


Link to post

I just got mine in about an hour ago. going to get City Nav right now.

0

Share this post


Link to post
As for turning off the shading, I do that with my Colorado -- but then I lose a lot of the benefit that it offers over the 60CSx. And in fact, I find myself using the 60CSx more and more since I've gotten over the novelty of the Colorado and its hi-res screen.
For me this is a very telling comment. Readability is paramount, whistles & bells are second.

 

I experienced the same thing yesterday on a hike, I had my new Nuvi 205W and an old color eTrex. The eTrex lost signal repeatedly whereas the Nuvi never lost signal. Yet when I needed to know where I was in the heavy timber, the infinitely more readable eTrex was what I pulled out.

 

Here's a screenshot of the Nuvi's tracklog:

SpoutLake.gif

0

Share this post


Link to post

As has been mentioned (at least IMO), the Colorado screen and the 60Csx screens are nearly the same with regard to readability. The "problem" is that some colour schemes are poor on the CO.

 

On the map page simply turn off the basemap and any DEM maps and it is just as bright and readable as the 60Csx.

 

On another subject, a 205W has track logs?? My 250W does not. I find the Nuvi screens very readable....

0

Share this post


Link to post
Readability is paramount, whistles & bells are second.

Actually, I'd say accuracy is paramount. Something the Colorado seems to struggle with sometimes.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I just put up an Oregon 400t first impressions post. I tried to cover some areas GO$RS hasn't gotten to yet, but man, it's hard to keep up with him! :D

 

Hmm, I see that my images stacked instead of going side-by-side. Crap!

 

OT to Red 90...yes, the nuvi 205W will show tracklogs. Surprised me too. I have one of them in for review as well.

0

Share this post


Link to post

OT to Red 90...yes, the nuvi 205W will show tracklogs. Surprised me too. I have one of them in for review as well.

 

Does Garmin say this anywhere that you know of? I can't seem to see it. What bugs me about these things is that you KNOW they all have the same software and are purposely disabling features to justify the price differences.

 

As to the accuracy comment. People really need to be careful using that word. They do not really have an "accuracy" problem. There is a calculation problem that is (mostly rarely) happening. It may seem like semantics to some, but people are confusing the issue.

0

Share this post


Link to post

I just put up an Oregon 400t first impressions post. I tried to cover some areas GO$RS hasn't gotten to yet, but man, it's hard to keep up with him! :D

 

Nice job Rich! I missed the fact that you can move the red pin to a new location by dragging the map under it. This was the hardest thing for me to do using the touch screen and that actually makes it much easier.

 

GO$Rs

0

Share this post


Link to post

Is it still a single axis compass?

 

2-axis, but yes it works like the 60csx and CO compass. Calibration is identical other than you have to exit the compass page, goto Setup->Heading->Calibrate Compass, run the calibration, exit and return to Compass. Why can't Garmin put these options right on the Compass tool page!

 

GO$Rs

0

Share this post


Link to post

I'm sure that I read somewhere that the OR has a patch antenna. If this is the case, you will need to hold it flat for best reception when testing.....

 

The other thing is that you do need to be careful comparing two units TOGETHER. It is well know that two units in close proximity will affect each other's performance.

Edited by Red90
0

Share this post


Link to post

More updates this morning: GPS accuracy, City Nav and a bunch of miscellaneous stuff.

 

http://garminoregon.wikispaces.com/First+Impressions#toc9

 

GO$Rs

 

Thank you so much for the accuracy comparison testing -- I'm sure you'll do much more.

 

I returned my Colorado 400t to REI. I couldn't tolerate the extreme position drifts I was seeing on the Colorado in the mountainous / forested terrain I hike.

 

So far your tests indicate that the Oregon "drift" is not as significant as the Colorado "drift". I should have an Oregon 400t sometime next week, and I'll see if I get similar results. I sure hope so....

 

Regards...

0

Share this post


Link to post

I'm sure that I read somewhere that the OR has a patch antenna. If this is the case, you will need to hold it flat for best reception when testing.....

 

I thought I had read that as well, if anyone can find it please send a pointer.

 

I did try holding the unit flat (reminds me of my trusty GPS12) but I couldn't see any noticeable difference between horizontal and vertical.

 

GO$Rs

0

Share this post


Link to post
On another subject, a 205W has track logs?? My 250W does not.
Obviously, you can see it in the screenshot. Import the file into Mapsource and do what you will with the tracklog just like any other tracklog capable GPS.

 

The file is a bit different. On my eTrex the tracklog is saved as YYYYMMDD.gpx, one file per day of use. The Nuvi tracklog is saved as Current.gpx with no obvious date. If you create 3 tracks over many days, they show up in Mapsource as 3-lines in the track list. Small tradeoff.

 

I find the Nuvi screens very readable....
Under what circumstances? In a car connected to 12V, sure. With the backlight set to 100%, pretty good. Set the backlight to 0%, absolutely unreadable. Whereas, a color eTrex at 0% backlight is very readable under almost all outdoor light except pitch black.

 

As to a Colorado vs. a 60/76, I'll defer, I've never held either.

0

Share this post


Link to post
Readability is paramount, whistles & bells are second.
Actually, I'd say accuracy is paramount. Something the Colorado seems to struggle with sometimes.

IMO, this whole forum is obsessive compulsive about accuracy, wasting untold amounts of e-ink going in circles. For my purposes, backpacking in Colorado's mountains, anything within 50-feet is awesome. I have eyes and a brain, which are my primary navigation tools, the GPS and more specifically the maps within help me make decisions about the path to take, often like the screenshot, where no path exists, just black timber.

0

Share this post


Link to post

IMO, this whole forum is obsessive compulsive about accuracy, wasting untold amounts of e-ink going in circles. For my purposes, backpacking in Colorado's mountains, anything within 50-feet is awesome. I have eyes and a brain, which are my primary navigation tools, the GPS and more specifically the maps within help me make decisions about the path to take, often like the screenshot, where no path exists, just black timber.

 

Ummmm, THIS forum is all about using a GPS for GEOCACHING and accuracy IS paramount. For OTHER uses it may not be. Please remember where you are.... :D

Edited by Red90
0

Share this post


Link to post

"The OR has no equivalent of the CO's ability to mark a waypoint at your current location with a button push. You have to use the Mark Waypoint Tool on the Main page which means leaving, say, the Compass or Map page, marking the waypoint and returning. I was hoping there might be something like writing a giant "M" or "W" on the screen that might do something equivalent on the OR."

 

Zoom in and tap your current position. Gets you very close. First try I got within 16 feet.

0

Share this post


Link to post

"The OR has no equivalent of the CO's ability to mark a waypoint at your current location with a button push. You have to use the Mark Waypoint Tool on the Main page which means leaving, say, the Compass or Map page, marking the waypoint and returning. I was hoping there might be something like writing a giant "M" or "W" on the screen that might do something equivalent on the OR."

 

Zoom in and tap your current position. Gets you very close. First try I got within 16 feet.

 

So nothing like on a Nuvi where tapping the "vehicle" marks a waypoint at the current location?

0

Share this post


Link to post
Readability is paramount, whistles & bells are second.
Actually, I'd say accuracy is paramount. Something the Colorado seems to struggle with sometimes.

IMO, this whole forum is obsessive compulsive about accuracy, wasting untold amounts of e-ink going in circles. For my purposes, backpacking in Colorado's mountains, anything within 50-feet is awesome. I have eyes and a brain, which are my primary navigation tools, the GPS and more specifically the maps within help me make decisions about the path to take, often like the screenshot, where no path exists, just black timber.

Geocaching requires a bit more accuracy than it takes to choose which trail to take, I think. Besides, the technology is capable of delivering 10-15ft accuracy and considering the premiums paid for these devices, they should deliver with consistency.

0

Share this post


Link to post
I returned my Colorado 400t to REI. I couldn't tolerate the extreme position drifts I was seeing on the Colorado in the mountainous / forested terrain I hike.
Could you quantify this statment please. Did you make any screenshots?

 

Thanks

0

Share this post


Link to post

IMO, this whole forum is obsessive compulsive about accuracy, wasting untold amounts of e-ink going in circles. For my purposes, backpacking in Colorado's mountains, anything within 50-feet is awesome. I have eyes and a brain, which are my primary navigation tools, the GPS and more specifically the maps within help me make decisions about the path to take, often like the screenshot, where no path exists, just black timber.

 

Why don't you just use a paper map then? With "eyes and a brain" you should be able to get close enough with a USGS quad. The visibility in daylight would be excellent and the battery life phenominal!! :D:D

Edited by yogazoo
0

Share this post


Link to post
Readability is paramount, whistles & bells are second.
Actually, I'd say accuracy is paramount. Something the Colorado seems to struggle with sometimes.

IMO, this whole forum is obsessive compulsive about accuracy, wasting untold amounts of e-ink going in circles. For my purposes, backpacking in Colorado's mountains, anything within 50-feet is awesome. I have eyes and a brain, which are my primary navigation tools, the GPS and more specifically the maps within help me make decisions about the path to take, often like the screenshot, where no path exists, just black timber.

Besides, the technology is capable of delivering 10-15ft accuracy and considering the premiums paid for these devices, they should deliver with consistency.

Couldn't agree more.

 

Edit: I've given some more thought to this reply.

 

I believe Garmin is missing a major market opportunity here. I've been continually astonished at the prices people are willing to pay for these GPSr's, theirs no apparent limit. Given that, not only should Garmin meet the accuracy of existing units, but Garmin should significantly improve on preceeding units. Theirs no technical barriers, just cost/performance tradeoffs. Doing so would allow even higher price points and further cement their standing as the leading consumer GPS provider.

Edited by MtnHermit
0

Share this post


Link to post

IMO, this whole forum is obsessive compulsive about accuracy, wasting untold amounts of e-ink going in circles. For my purposes, backpacking in Colorado's mountains, anything within 50-feet is awesome. I have eyes and a brain, which are my primary navigation tools, the GPS and more specifically the maps within help me make decisions about the path to take, often like the screenshot, where no path exists, just black timber.

Why don't you just use a paper map then? With "eyes and a brain" you should be able to get close enough with a USGS quad. The visibility in daylight would be excellent and the battery life phenominal!!

That's easy, I have the whole state of Colorado on a fingernail sized memory card inside my GPS. That's some 1500 paper Quads, I can't carry or index that much paper. The GPS makes all that trivial. Also, a paper map is meaningless, just because I have it, I no not my position on it. The GPS Position Marker tells me where on the map I'm standing. If it can locate me within 50-feet of true, heaven!!!

 

But, you already knew all this without asking.

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 18