Sorry state of affairs for handheld GPS (rant)

[+coggins]

Also of note is the oregon has the same ARM processor as el cheapo Nuvi 205. Perhaps Garmin made it bigger to trick you into thinking you're getting more for your money.

Technically you are wrong here. The Nüvi 205 has a STMicroelectronics STA5620, the Oregon has a STMicroelectronics's STA2062 "Cartesio" which is the same processor used in the PN-40 Please don't present false information as facts.

[supergerardo]

Also of note is the oregon has the same ARM processor as el cheapo Nuvi 205. Perhaps Garmin made it bigger to trick you into thinking you're getting more for your money.

Technically you are wrong here. The Nüvi 205 has a STMicroelectronics STA5620, the Oregon has a STMicroelectronics's STA2062 "Cartesio" which is the same processor used in the PN-40 Please don't present false information as facts.

 

Sorry, don't mean to start nasty rumors. I just took the part number off of the top of the chip and then put it into google. I then got a hit for a japanese webpage listing the detailed specs of the Nuvi 205, and it listed that chip.

 

Big whoop if garmin uses the same chip in different models, GM used the same V6 in different brands of cars with wildly varying prices for the last 20 years. Two factors that help justify the price of the oregon over the Nuvi are a more expensive transflective screen and a lower sales volume. This still doesn't change the fact that the Oregon comes with more AIR inside.

 

Just ran across this while I was attempting to double check my "facts":

 

The photos confirm that the Oregon uses the STMicro Cartesio GPS, same as the Nuvi 2x5 series -- they also show the antenna mounted on the PCB -- Garmin's calling this a ceramic antenna I guess.

 

Oregon MB

 

Nuvi 255 MB. Can anyone point out the Nuvi antenna? From experience it works extremely well.

 

Which all begs the question: Why does the Oregon cost 2.5 times as much as a Nuvi 205W?

 

Each has features the other lacks, by example:

 

Nuvi has that Oregon lacks:

- Rechargeable battery

- Voice quality speaker

- Much larger display

 

Oregon has that Nuvi lacks:

- Altimeter/Compass chip

- Replaceable battery holder, no batteries

- Waterproof case

 

To me these features are a wash from a cost standpoint, but at retail . . .

 

My conclusion, Garmin dominates the handheld market and can charge whatever it likes.

[+dakboy]

You're looking at/talking about 2 different chip(set)s.

 

The ARM processor is the CPU for the unit. It does all the "grunt work" of making the unit operate.

 

The Cartesio chipset is what processes the GPS signals received by the antenna. Its only job is to do the GPS math.

[supergerardo]

Ok, I think coggins and dakboy are only partially right.

 

According to this the STA2062 is a cartesio chipset with an ARM processor that is designed to work specifically with the sta5260, which is the RF chip.

 

So both the Oregon and the Nuvi 205 have a sta2062 AND a sta5260.

 

The big chip in the photo is probably the sta2062 and has garmin's name slapped on top.

 

Here's a little blurb about the release of the 2062. It mentions that the 2062 and the 5260 cost less than $10 for the pair. The screen in the Oregon must be pretty darn expensive.

[supergerardo]

Also of note is the oregon has the same ARM processor as el cheapo Nuvi 205. Perhaps Garmin made it bigger to trick you into thinking you're getting more for your money.

Technically you are wrong here. The Nüvi 205 has a STMicroelectronics STA5620, the Oregon has a STMicroelectronics's STA2062 "Cartesio" which is the same processor used in the PN-40 Please don't present false information as facts.

 

Btw, please don't present false information as fact while you're accusing other people of presenting false information as fact. And please don't get all worked up by the BS that I am spouting, I'm just a bit of a clown, and were all just here for entertainment, no?

 

Anywho, it's more complicated than that. You presented correct factual information:

 

"The Nüvi 205 has a STMicroelectronics STA5620, the Oregon has a STMicroelectronics's STA2062 "Cartesio""

 

While leaving out other factual information:

 

"The Nüvi 205 has a STMicroelectronics STA2062 "Cartesio", the Oregon has a STMicroelectronics's STA5620"

 

Which in fact made it seem like the factual information that I presented was in fact, not factual. Have you ever considered a career in politics?

[10mmAuto]

I can't help but mostly agree with the thread starter's assertion that GPS devices seem "behind", especially for what you get for the money.

 

My dad and a good friend have moved (separately) to Arizona and I've been toying with getting a GPS for navigation, especially when dad & I take the Rhino out into BLM land. If you're not careful, one wash looks like another and we've gotten kind of turned around before and a GPS unit would be real helpful and allow us to explore further out.

 

But every time I've looked at them I've been kind of disappointed -- too-small screens, blocky, low-res maps, and expensive if you want one with any decent features and especially if you have to buy additional maps to get the locations/resolution you want.

 

I guess the killer comparison is with laptops -- you can get a gig or 2 of memory, a large color screen, hard disk, and the OS for $600 pretty easily. Now I know this isn't a completely fair comparison, since miniaturization and ruggedization matter, and there are economies of scale that aren't the same, although the cell phone world certainly seem to contribute a lot of parts at good economies of scale.

 

Anyway, I have a trip out to Bisbee in February and the Colorado/Oregon units seem like they've raised the bar enough that I might jump in.

[+TotemLake]

I can't help but mostly agree with the thread starter's assertion that GPS devices seem "behind", especially for what you get for the money.

 

My dad and a good friend have moved (separately) to Arizona and I've been toying with getting a GPS for navigation, especially when dad & I take the Rhino out into BLM land. If you're not careful, one wash looks like another and we've gotten kind of turned around before and a GPS unit would be real helpful and allow us to explore further out.

 

But every time I've looked at them I've been kind of disappointed -- too-small screens, blocky, low-res maps, and expensive if you want one with any decent features and especially if you have to buy additional maps to get the locations/resolution you want.

 

I guess the killer comparison is with laptops -- you can get a gig or 2 of memory, a large color screen, hard disk, and the OS for $600 pretty easily. Now I know this isn't a completely fair comparison, since miniaturization and ruggedization matter, and there are economies of scale that aren't the same, although the cell phone world certainly seem to contribute a lot of parts at good economies of scale.

Anyway, I have a trip out to Bisbee in February and the Colorado/Oregon units seem like they've raised the bar enough that I might jump in.

Add lack of ruggedness to keep it affordable if you're going to do proper comparisons. A couple of drops or a single dunking and the phone is toast. I've had my GPS (not my current one yet {knock on wood}) fall off my Jeep at 30MPH with minor damage. Six years later, I finally retired it. Do that with a cell phone and see how many pieces you can locate much less keep usable.

 

You might also want to look at the Delorme package for the PN-40. For the same cost as the Oregon, you get the power package, plus Topo7 map with the GPS. With the Oregon, you have to buy sepearate map packages to do the same thing the T7 does as an all-in-one package. Add $30 per year and you have an all you can eat buffet of satellite, aerials, and USGS 24k scale maps; all uploadable to the GPS. All these downloads are yours to keep even after the subscription runs out. The aerials I've been downloading have been as of 2006 and in some cases, appear to be more up to date than Google Earth.

[+baloo&bd]

After all this discussion, about the only thing that would make me replace my 60cs is a model that would hold the user waypoints (i.e. geocaches) on the SD card.

 

Other than that I can see WiFi becoming more common, however beyond that these units give pretty good bang for the buck, even compared to cell phones.

 

Look at Verizon and the Blackberry Curve. $399 or $99 with two year contract, that means with a basic contract of around $40 bucks, and good luck finding that, with no internet access and limited messaging, that "cheap" cellphone tech costs at least $1020 and that's if you only limit your use to the minutes allotted. Any real use, see how well it works after that two years. I have had my 60CS around 5 years, it cost me around $300 with discounts I was offered if memory serves.

 

With the fact that my GPS is usable virtually anywhere and a cell only within my plan. Dollar for dollar, I just don't see cell phones being that much more advanced.

[+TotemLake]

After all this discussion, about the only thing that would make me replace my 60cs is a model that would hold the user waypoints (i.e. geocaches) on the SD card.

 

Other than that I can see WiFi becoming more common, however beyond that these units give pretty good bang for the buck, even compared to cell phones.

 

Look at Verizon and the Blackberry Curve. $399 or $99 with two year contract, that means with a basic contract of around $40 bucks, and good luck finding that, with no internet access and limited messaging, that "cheap" cellphone tech costs at least $1020 and that's if you only limit your use to the minutes allotted. Any real use, see how well it works after that two years. I have had my 60CS around 5 years, it cost me around $300 with discounts I was offered if memory serves.

 

With the fact that my GPS is usable virtually anywhere and a cell only within my plan. Dollar for dollar, I just don't see cell phones being that much more advanced.

I hear ya. It's my hope the waypoint and track management on the PN-40 is udpated to be better handled. Beyond those two issues, this is a pretty cool GPS. The tracks start and stop on the same session without joining. So if I haven't reached 100% on the track capacity, I can maintain mulitple expeditions on one "track" slot. I can work with this. Even though my hiking and caching needs don't call for 1000 caches to be loaded, it would be nice to have some personal waypoint layers that don't intermingle with the play waypoint layers.

[+coggins]

Also of note is the oregon has the same ARM processor as el cheapo Nuvi 205. Perhaps Garmin made it bigger to trick you into thinking you're getting more for your money.

Technically you are wrong here. The Nüvi 205 has a STMicroelectronics STA5620, the Oregon has a STMicroelectronics's STA2062 "Cartesio" which is the same processor used in the PN-40 Please don't present false information as facts.

 

Sorry, don't mean to start nasty rumors. I just took the part number off of the top of the chip and then put it into google. I then got a hit for a japanese webpage listing the detailed specs of the Nuvi 205, and it listed that chip.

 

Big whoop if garmin uses the same chip in different models, GM used the same V6 in different brands of cars with wildly varying prices for the last 20 years. Two factors that help justify the price of the oregon over the Nuvi are a more expensive transflective screen and a lower sales volume. This still doesn't change the fact that the Oregon comes with more AIR inside.

 

Just ran across this while I was attempting to double check my "facts":

 

The photos confirm that the Oregon uses the STMicro Cartesio GPS, same as the Nuvi 2x5 series -- they also show the antenna mounted on the PCB -- Garmin's calling this a ceramic antenna I guess.

 

Oregon MB

 

Nuvi 255 MB. Can anyone point out the Nuvi antenna? From experience it works extremely well.

 

Which all begs the question: Why does the Oregon cost 2.5 times as much as a Nuvi 205W?

 

Each has features the other lacks, by example:

 

Nuvi has that Oregon lacks:

- Rechargeable battery

- Voice quality speaker

- Much larger display

 

Oregon has that Nuvi lacks:

- Altimeter/Compass chip

- Replaceable battery holder, no batteries

- Waterproof case

 

To me these features are a wash from a cost standpoint, but at retail . . .

 

My conclusion, Garmin dominates the handheld market and can charge whatever it likes.

Um, that's a Nüvi 255 you are displaying, not a Nüvi 205. They are not the same. Here is a Nüvi 205:

 

And a teardown report of the unit in English: http://www.techonline.com/product/underthe...10602046?pgno=2

 

Feel free to post your Japanese source.

Edited December 27, 2008 by coggins

[MtnHermit]

Um, that's a Nüvi 255 you are displaying, not a Nüvi 205. They are not the same. Here is a Nüvi 205:

Do you believe that a 255 and a 205 differ in any significant way in hardware? I know that a 255 offers street name speaking and the 205 does not. That should NOT require different hardware, simply a speech synthesizer, on board the Cartesio chip, to convert text to speech. In any case, the Oregon would be more like the 205, since no speech is required.

 

I'm curious as to your reply as I'm not totally confident I know for sure.

[+user13371]

...ruggedness ... A couple of drops or a single dunking and the phone is toast. I've had my GPS ... fall off my Jeep at 30MPH with minor damage... Do that with a cell phone and see how many pieces you can locate much less keep usable.

Like this?

 

Ruggedness is important. But it's neither difficult nor expensive to design into a product.

Edited December 27, 2008 by lee_rimar

[+TotemLake]

...ruggedness ... A couple of drops or a single dunking and the phone is toast. I've had my GPS ... fall off my Jeep at 30MPH with minor damage... Do that with a cell phone and see how many pieces you can locate much less keep usable.

Like this?

 

Ruggedness is important. But it's neither difficult nor expensive to design into a product.

I'll lay even money that is an exception and not the rule. Being that it was probably laying flat, the damage would have been minimal even when being run over by a rubber tire. Bounce it on pavement off one of its corners at 30MPH and advise me how well it goes.

 

Even better, dunk it for 30 minutes at less than 3 feet and let me know how well it works.

Edited December 27, 2008 by TotemLake

[+user13371]

I'll lay even money that is an exception and not the rule. Being that it was probably laying flat, the damage would have been minimal even when being run over by a rubber tire.

Of course this is the exception. Each time it took a hit (at least three*) it was lucky enough to have a soft flat landing. It surely didn't survive by good solid engineering. Just exceptionally lucky.

 

*At least three? Dropped onto the roadway, run over by a truck, landing in a ditch. Possibly more, it may have been run over other times before the owner got back to see it get hit by the truck.

 

Bounce it on pavement off one of its corners at 30MPH and advise me how well it goes ... even better, dunk it for 30 minutes at less than 3 feet .

Luke 4:9-12?

 

I've dropped my own phone a few times and don't care to again, neither as a test of faith nor an engineering protocol. As for the dunk test, the suggestion is interesting because the iPhone is NOT designed to be waterproof. Full of holes -- headset jack, microphone and speaker grills. So I'll skip that test also. But you know what? Put it in a Ziploc (or better yet, an Aqupac) and presto - it's waterproof! Designing a device to be waterproof from the start? Adds about as much weight and expense as a plastic bag.

 

The point I'm trying to make - which some seem to deny or ignore - is that ruggedness & waterproofing are NOT expensive or difficult. Making those qualities out as a great differentiation between an expensive GPS and some other cheap gadget is a straw man.

Edited December 28, 2008 by lee_rimar

[+qlenfg]

As far as the waterproofing and padding -- you can probably wrap a baby in enough bubble-wrap and drop him off a roof, down a cliff and into a lake and he'll probably survive. However, it may take all day to change a diaper with that level of added protection installed.

 

Same with electronics. You can add waterproofing and padding to any device and make it more durable, but it will probably make it harder to use. And if your home-brew -proofing doesn't work, well DUH! Better to start off with something made for what you are going to use it for.

[+TotemLake]

Luke 4:9-12?

Funny.

 

Your points are taken... to a point. My point is the devices are built for the environment they are expected to work in. If it is so inexpensive, then why not build it into the cell phone? Answer: They were designed as disposables... commodities with expectations of lasting less than 2 years before they are somehow mangled or upgraded.

 

My MeriPlat took more spills off the Jeep than I personally care to admit to. More falls from stumbles with the face down on sharp rocks. Slippage from precarious placements on rocks. I would never think to do that with my cell phone costiing half as much and I see you're of the same mind. It wouldn't be able to stand the abuse. So yes, ruggedness and how it is packaged is an issue.

 

You build a cell phone like that and it will not be a big seller. It'll be too bulky. My cell phone goes in the backpack in a well padded location for my accidental spills of which I can't seem to avoid sometimes.

 

Likewise if you put too much into a GPS, it will be a jack of all trades and a master at none. The battery will be useless for any real duration for a handheld device.

 

So the debate it can be built with all the neat features like a cell phone... sure it can, but will anybody really buy it to make it worth the manufacturer's investment? I don't think there could ever be a big enough market for it. The cell phone market is already crowded with pseudo GPS recievers. I'm curious how many people are really using it? Most of them are too slow. The iPhone makes great use of a fast processor to pull up Google Earth and use it, but not many phones are there yet. Again, this is after over 20 years of development of the cell phone technology which has been heavily consumer driven since the mid 90's.

 

Handheld GPS technology as the type being used by the majority of users here has been heavily consumer driven for far less time. The vendors are still getting a feel for what the majority of the market wants out of these receivers. The fringe will remain left wanting for a while longer.

[+coggins]

Do you believe that a 255 and a 205 differ in any significant way in hardware? I know that a 255 offers street name speaking and the 205 does not. That should NOT require different hardware, simply a speech synthesizer, on board the Cartesio chip, to convert text to speech. In any case, the Oregon would be more like the 205, since no speech is required.

 

I'm curious as to your reply as I'm not totally confident I know for sure.

Having read through both data sheets from STM, I would say that the STA5620 and the STA2062 are two different animals. The first being a "fully integrated RF front-end" that would be a peripheral chip, and the second being a "application processor with embedded GPS". Links to both are posted above, view them for yourself, if you doubt me. I would say that on the surface, you can't see much difference between a Nüvi 205 and a Nüvi 255 as they are packaged very much the same and run very similar software with similar features. In any case, The OP writing that an Oregon has the same chip as a Nüvi 205 and then posting a picture of a Nüvi 255 as proof is a bit of a stretch, two wrongs generally don't make a right.