Jump to content

Latest OpenStreeMap UK Garmin Mapsets...


Followers 32

Recommended Posts

 

Can you now drop this and move on.

 

Well you're not the moderator of this forum, so I don't see that you've got any right to try to stop me contributing to this discussion in any way I like,

<snip>

 

If you don't want to engage in a debate, then fine, but don't try to suppress freedom of speech,

<snip>

 

 

OK as you're so keen on freedom of speech then I have the freedom to tell you to drop it and move on.

 

You made a perfectly valid point in your first post, which I didn't object to and felt no need to comment. Since then you've just been tedious and repetitive, which is what finally drove me to comment.

 

It looks like you're not going to shut up so I have no choice left but to ignore your posts. Unfortunately you have taken it upon yourself to hijack a thread which I normally find useful and informative so I don't have the option of using the ignore script to ignore the entire thread.

Link to comment

For the benefit of others watching this thread qichina has not made a fair comparison his/her post. The zoom level chosen for the 2 pictures I would not use when out caching. I'd zoom in much more - at which level you'd loose the 1:50K map shown.

 

Honestly, that is simply not true about the comparison The detail shown in the OpenStreetMap extract is all that's there. It's easy to check on the OSM site. If you drill down you don't get any other features shown - they are just missing, I promise you.

Link to comment
And the argument that because something is free, it must be good, simply defies all reason. :lol:

 

No one has suggested any such thing. (Nonetheless, the massive difference in cost is one significantly attractive feature of OSM.)

It seems to be the over-riding "benefit" that people talk about. Of course, if all other things were equal, cost would be a consideration. But as I've shown, all other things are NOT equal.

 

It's fairly evident that the only ideological blindness comes on your part. Nobody has ever suggested that the actual mapping detail provided by OSM matches that provided by the Ordance Survey. Despite which you tediously insist on repeating this fact as though it were some triumphant personal revelation. We all know, we just happen to think that other factors come into play.

There's nothing ideological about expecting a workable degree of accuracy in a map. There's nothing ideological expecting a car to run reliably 97% of the time. If someone said that there's a great car-hire firm where you don't have to pay anything, you might think it sounded good, but maybe too good to be true? If someone then said that this firm's car repairs were done for free by volunteers, to unknown standards and there's no training required of the mechanics, and the cars never had to pass an MOT, then you might think that it would be better to stick with Hertz or Avis. That's exactly the situation we have with OpenStreetMap as far as PROWs are concerned.

 

Unfortunately your sneeringly simplistic analysis runs the risk of discouraging those who put their own time & effort in the Open Source project, which would be a real shame, as many of us benefit from and enjoy it enormously.

I'd make 2 points about that.

I thought you and I were having a reasonably civil discussion until you made this post. I've certainly not been sneering of your opinion, and it saddens me that you now appear to be getting nasty. Perhaps the comparison of the maps was too much of a "Slam-Dunk" for you, so now you have to start on the ad-hominem?

 

The other point is that it is completely irrelevant whether people put their time & effort into some project. That's their choice but it doesn't mean that the project is going well or is even worthwhile in the first place. Do we have to give them marks for effort and turn a blind-eye to the fact that the quality is poor? I'm glad you enjoy it - and indeed many people enjoy completely futile harmless activities - but that doesn't mean that OSM shouldn't be held up for comparison against Ordnance Survey mapping: indeed many contributors are quite clear that they are involved because they want to directly compete with Ordnance Survey because they dislike the licensing arrangements associated with it. If pointing out the appalling data quality (as it now stands) is "discouraging" for you or others, well that's just tough.

 

The first and only point of a map - any map - is that you can use it to get around. And at the detailed level needed for caching, the OSM maps aren't fit for purpose. If a map fails in its core purpose, all other supposed benefits are irrelevant.

Edited by qichina
Link to comment

Talky Toaster, Martin

 

Please keep posting the updates! They are not perfect those of us who use them are aware. I now have OS and OSM overlay now and can honestly say I use both!

 

They are not always perfect neither are OS today was a great proving point for that although with the snow I could not say what was path and what was not or I would update myself.

 

Please keep up the good work!

 

I particularly like the ability to upload the maps via Map Source.

 

Thanks Again

 

GerritS

Link to comment
But as I've shown, all other things are NOT equal.

 

You haven't 'shown' it: we all knew anyway. It's not the point, as everyone else seems to recognise.

 

There's nothing ideological about expecting a workable degree of accuracy in a map.

 

No. But the definition of 'workable degree of accuracy' is ideological. Unfortunately, your commitment to one completely arbitrary definition ("as good as Ordnance Survey") blinds you to to the fact that a great many other people find Open Source perfectly workable. I do, regularly. It's the only mapping I have on my GPSr, and I've never felt the need for anything else. As it happens, geocaching is for me a side-issue - I'm mainly interested in trigs and benchmarks, both of which require far more from GPS mapping than geocaching does. But OSM does me just fine, despite the perfectly-bleedin-obvious fact that it's not as accurate as Ordnance Survey.

 

I thought you and I were having a reasonably civil discussion until you made this post. I've certainly not been sneering of your opinion,

 

"ideological blindness"

"simply defies all reason"

"delusional groupthink"

"simply unable to recognize"

 

And at the detailed level needed for caching, the OSM maps aren't fit for purpose.

 

I disagree. Lots of people disagree. Just try accepting the fact and move on.

Link to comment

if everyone who used the maps checked their local area on them and added anything missing or when out caching added the footpaths etc they use that day (which doesnt take long on the osm site) then the maps could come very reliable. Ok they are not the best thing in the world, but when you compare them against maps you have to pay for you cant complain as they are free and can only get better as more people contribute to them.

Link to comment

Talky Toaster, Martin

 

Please keep posting the updates! They are not perfect those of us who use them are aware. I now have OS and OSM overlay now and can honestly say I use both!

 

They are not always perfect neither are OS today was a great proving point for that although with the snow I could not say what was path and what was not or I would update myself.

 

Please keep up the good work!

 

I particularly like the ability to upload the maps via Map Source.

 

Thanks Again

 

GerritS

 

Echoed from me - Martin I really appreciate your hard work and the maps help me very much when out caching. Most people seem to realise the limitations and work with it.

Cheers

Dave

Link to comment

 

The first and only point of a map - any map - is that you can use it to get around. And at the detailed level needed for caching, the OSM maps aren't fit for purpose. If a map fails in its core purpose, all other supposed benefits are irrelevant.

 

You seem to be blissfully ignorant of the fact that a huge number of people do not rely on mapping on their GPS's at all when out caching.

What purpose are the OSM maps not fit for? Getting to the cache - or finding the cache? I for one do not use a map of any description to help me find a cache, and if people don't have the common sense to realise what the maps are for - and their level of accuracy - perhaps they shouldn't be out there in the first place.

Link to comment

This conversation has acquired the surreal overtones of Python's Dead Parrot sketch. According to you, OSM is just "pining for the fjords", but to me it's pretty obvious that it's a dead parrot, and it doesn't matter how optimistically you keep asserting that a dead parrot is just a good as a live one, it is, to all intents and purposes, still a dead parrot.

 

There's nothing ideological about expecting a workable degree of accuracy in a map.

No. But the definition of 'workable degree of accuracy' is ideological. Unfortunately, your commitment to one completely arbitrary definition ("as good as Ordnance Survey") blinds you to to the fact that a great many other people find Open Source perfectly workable. I do, regularly. It's the only mapping I have on my GPSr, and I've never felt the need for anything else. As it happens, geocaching is for me a side-issue - I'm mainly interested in trigs and benchmarks, both of which require far more from GPS mapping than geocaching does. But OSM does me just fine, despite the perfectly-bleedin-obvious fact that it's not as accurate as Ordnance Survey.

 

It's hardly arbitrary to pick the most widely used, recognised UK raster maps as a basis for a comparison. It's not as if I've picked some incredible laser-pinpointed high-tech 3D holographic interactive mapping system against which all other offerings would inevitably fail. OS is just the most commonly used by British walkers, and it's free to print off via StreetMap or the OS "GetaMap" page. One of OS maps benefits is that it shows footpaths as legal Rights of Way. There are tracks and old paths shown on other maps, such as Garmin Topo and the Magellan Mapsend which fail to differentiate bewteen private farm tracks and PROW that people in England & Wales have a legal right to use. OSM is similarly confused. This is important.

 

You don't get out of Scotland much do you? I say that because you don't have the same difficulty with trespass laws as we do south of Hadrian's Wall: -we don't have a law giving us "Freedom to Roam". Of course, added to the fact that you prefer trigpointing, where so many trigs are placed away from ROWs on private land, the issue of whether a footpath is marked on your map or not, isn't likely to worry you.

I thought you and I were having a reasonably civil discussion until you made this post. I've certainly not been sneering of your opinion,

"ideological blindness"

"simply defies all reason"

"delusional groupthink"

"simply unable to recognize"

The phrases which you've quoted out of context above were not used in any post addressed to you. It therefore does not excuse the fact you resort to ad hominem attacks when you felt you were losing the argument.

 

I initially raised concerns because this thread has been advertising OSM map extracts since last summer and not once has the provider issued any warnings about the variable quality and unreliability of the source mapping data. There are many families involved in caching who wouldn't see themselves as very techy-minded, but might infer from statements like: "All the maps have been tested on a Garmin Oregon 200. They have also been checked in GPSMapEdit on a Windows PC." that the quality checks on the product ensures a reasonable quality to enable them explore the footpaths of Britain.

I thought I should redress that balance -that's all - one post out of 5 pages of this thread urging caution, but that was not allowed by the Priests of the Open Source Religion. Blasphemy! Unthinkable! Deny, equivocate, ridicule and then use ad hominem attacks, on and on until the Dissenter's voice is silenced, and order is restored in the Temple of Open Source Worship.

 

As to how the maps may or may not be useful in navigating on foot to a cache - here's another example for anyone other than the High Priests following this thread - an area taken completely at random NE of Pucklechurch in Avon, near the M4.

 

Ordnance_Pucklechurch.jpg

 

The Ordnance Survey map shows the all the walking routes necessary to get from Pucklechurch in the SW, to Westerleigh or to Codrington the other side of the M4. Imaging a cache placed near the footpath near the copse "Gorse Covert". There are many ways to approach it, and all the information is there.

 

Now try finding a legal right of way to it with just an OpenStreetMap.

That's right you can't. You know it's somewhere north of the M4, but if there are no footpaths signs (which we all know aren't there in many places), there is no way of knowing if there is a way to it, let alone a legal right of way. Even the road going SW down to the wood is missing.

 

OSM_pucklechurch.jpg

 

But it gets worse. The path that is shown going NE to Codrington crosses the M4. Duh, no it doesn't!

The route of this path was traced on Open Street Map in August 2008 directly from an old O-o-C 1950s OS map by an OSM mapper local to the region. Of course, since the old NPE map was published, the M4 has been built cutting right through it, requiring the footpath to be diverted. So much for the advantages of local knowledge.

This sort of incompetence is widesread though OSM. This is a classic example of how stupid OSM contributors can be, and also shows that dangerous errors like this are allowed to remain in OSM extracts for many months or years. Let's hope someone isn't stupid enough to run across the M4 on a non-existent footpath "because my SatNav/GPS told me to".

 

NPE_Pucklechurch.jpg

Old 1950s NPE map used to trace onto OSM map above

Edited by qichina
Link to comment
it doesn't matter how optimistically you keep asserting that a dead parrot is just a good as a live one, it is, to all intents and purposes, still a dead parrot.

Then how come practically everybody else can hear it squawking?

 

you don't have the same difficulty with trespass laws as we do south of Hadrian's Wall: -we don't have a law giving us "Freedom to Roam".

Off topic slightly, but we don't have 'a law giving us Freedom To Roam', we have Freedom to Roam, belatedly recorded in law. Perhaps the problem here lies with the way the English legal system persists in groveling in the face of landowners and the undue emphasis accorded to 'legal' rights of way. Would it not seem a more progressive move for geocachers, hillwalkers and outdoor people generally to challenge this feudalistic claptrap rather than acquiescing passively?

 

Of course, added to the fact that you prefer trigpointing, where so many trigs are placed away from ROWs on private land, the issue of whether a footpath is marked on your map or not, isn't likely to worry you.

That's true, it doesn't, other than as a matter of convenience.

 

this thread has been advertising OSM map extracts

'Advertising' implies promoting a commercial transaction; there is none here.

 

As to how the maps may or may not be useful in navigating on foot to a cache -

We appreciate the time you've spent trawling around for examples of what everybody knows anyway. But evidently a fair number of people can and do find OSM very useful for caching amongst other things. Why is that so hard to accept?

 

Let's hope someone isn't stupid enough to run across the M4 on a non-existent footpath "because my SatNav/GPS told me to".

Darwinism in action, I'd say.

Link to comment

REQUEST TO MODERATORS:

Can you PLEASE open a new thread along the lines of "Is OSM any good?" and move these recent ramblings to that thread so that those that choose to can ignore them. There are many of us who DO like OSM and are watching this thread for updates - after all it is a Latest OpenStreeMap UK Garmin Mapsets... thread that talkytoaster was using very effectively.

 

This way one sado who clearly has clearly lost his/her dolly from from the pram doesn't have to ruin it for the rest of us?

Link to comment

REQUEST TO MODERATORS:

Can you PLEASE open a new thread along the lines of "Is OSM any good?" and move these recent ramblings to that thread so that those that choose to can ignore them. There are many of us who DO like OSM and are watching this thread for updates - after all it is a Latest OpenStreeMap UK Garmin Mapsets... thread that talkytoaster was using very effectively.

 

This way one sado who clearly has clearly lost his/her dolly from from the pram doesn't have to ruin it for the rest of us?

 

REQUEST TO MODERATORS

 

There have been many posts on this thread since the Summer of 2009 where people have discussed the OSM extracts, raised queries, reported problems etc - it is not just a thread for TalkyToaster to exclusively announce his wares. I have been discussing quality issues and it is entirely on topic. FollowMeChaps' request is an attempt to hive off into obscurity some points of view he doesn''t want to hear, but are entirely relevant to use of OpenstreetMap mapsets.

 

I believe the use of the abusive term "sado" is a direct insult against me and contravenes the acceptable use policy of this forum. I trust moderators will take appropriate action.

Link to comment

REQUEST TO FORUM USERS:

 

Read the guidelines before posting. Otherwise, you may find your posting ability disabled for some period of time.

 

http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?act=boardrules

The forum guidelines for posting are important and should be read and accepted before you choose to participate. Groundspeak and the global geocaching community encourage contributors who are courteous, polite and respectful. We discourage those who choose to behave in a disrespectful and/or irresponsible manner. Groundspeak, its staff and volunteer moderators will take appropriate steps to ensure discussions adhere to these guidelines.

 

Here are some things to keep in mind when posting:

 

1. Forum courtesy: Please treat Groundspeak, its employees, volunteers, fellow community members, and guests on these boards with courtesy and respect. Whether a community member has one post or 5,000 posts, they should be treated fairly.

 

3. Personal attacks and inflammatory behavior will not be tolerated. If you want to praise or criticize, give examples as to why it is good or bad. General attacks on a person or idea will not be tolerated.

Link to comment

I initially raised concerns because this thread has been advertising OSM map extracts since last summer and not once has the provider issued any warnings about the variable quality and unreliability of the source mapping data. There are many families involved in caching who wouldn't see themselves as very techy-minded, but might infer from statements like: "All the maps have been tested on a Garmin Oregon 200. They have also been checked in GPSMapEdit on a Windows PC.

What are you implying? All my statement clearly says is that I have tested that the maps are functional; i.e. that they render correctly on a GPSr and in other tools and that they don't crash the GPSr.This is not a statement about the quality of the mapping data as this is beyond my control and my free time. I compile these maps for my own use and share the maps fro FREE with others that want to try or use them alongside, or in place of other mapping solutions for Garmin GPSrs, nothing more, nothing less.

 

In fact I clearly state "The only downside it that they are a work in progress and missing some footpaths/bridleways but for most of the GB/Ireland the road data is complete and many paths/tracks are included. If you like them then you can help by mapping where you travel and upload your track logs for use by the community to help improve the maps."

 

So, as you can see I do mention that they are not complete and that the data may be variable and anyone that has contacted me can attest to this as I suggest they look on the OpenStreetMap site at the area they are interested in using the maps for hiking/walking/cycling/geocaching or whatever they plan on using the maps for.

 

Did you miss the fact that the maps are FREE?

 

Regards,

Martin

Edited by talkytoaster
Link to comment

Martin,

 

I was referring to all the update posts you have made on this forum that are devoid of any 'health warnings'. I think that if you are going to say that the mapsets have been quality checked in terms of them working on a Garmin (meaning just technically), then you should also include a caveat about the unreliability of the OSM PROW data in the interests of openness and clarity. Otherwise you are using the forums to present a one-sided picture of the product.

 

As for it being "free", well as I said before, plenty of people spend their time doing all sorts of things for free, it doesn't mean that the outcome has any worth.

 

Qichina

Link to comment

Might I say a big thanks to Martin for all the work he does on the Open Source Maps and that I and many others appreciate it, we also realise that the maps are not perfect and will probably never be as good as OS maps.

I am amazed that one individual can find so much to be negative about when there are som many that accept the non perfectness of the mapsets.

Link to comment

Might I say a big thanks to Martin for all the work he does on the Open Source Maps and that I and many others appreciate it, we also realise that the maps are not perfect and will probably never be as good as OS maps.

I am amazed that one individual can find so much to be negative about when there are som many that accept the non perfectness of the mapsets.

 

Seconded! Love the maps and am grateful that TalkyToaster is prepared to make the effort to compile them and to share them.

 

And as my nan would say, if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all!

Edited by *mouse*
Link to comment

I was referring to all the update posts you have made on this forum that are devoid of any 'health warnings'. I think that if you are going to say that the mapsets have been quality checked in terms of them working on a Garmin (meaning just technically), then you should also include a caveat about the unreliability of the OSM PROW data in the interests of openness and clarity. Otherwise you are using the forums to present a one-sided picture of the product.

No, the health warning is on my site; I don't include all the data in my postings here as that would be advertising (as you call it).

 

The postings here are just a courtesy to let those that already use the FREE maps I compile that there is a new update available, it isn't a full run down as that is not the purpose of them, nor would it be welcome on this forum. I think the moderators would take a very dim view if I did that. Those who are new to OSM and curious can read the FULL details on my site, this is as it should be.

 

As a final note: I did mention right at the beginning that I use both OSM and OS maps myself (both electronic and paper versions). There is no one-size-fits-all solution; some prefer OS others OSM or Topo and long may it stay that way, if we were all the same, and liked the all the same things it would be a very drab and uninteresting world.

 

Whatever happens I will continue to compile the GB & Ireland mapsets as I see them as useful to me (if others find them useful then that's a bonus). I'm currently in Austria working, and using OSM Austria maps, are they perfect? No, but they are pretty near spot on so far. This area I'm in isn't a big city, it is a town but well mapped on OSM and I've had similar experiences all over the world using OSM, however I also use my common sense too. I trust no data source 100% and neither should anyone else.

 

Regards,

Martin

Link to comment

Martin,

 

I was referring to all the update posts you have made on this forum that are devoid of any 'health warnings'. I think that if you are going to say that the mapsets have been quality checked in terms of them working on a Garmin (meaning just technically), then you should also include a caveat about the unreliability of the OSM PROW data in the interests of openness and clarity. Otherwise you are using the forums to present a one-sided picture of the product.

 

As for it being "free", well as I said before, plenty of people spend their time doing all sorts of things for free, it doesn't mean that the outcome has any worth.

 

Qichina

 

Qichina,

 

I supose you are a believer in all the other health and saftey rubbish that is out there? Do you want wanring signs on hills say "Caution Cliff"? On beaches stating "Deep Water"? on your toilet door stating "Wash your hands after use".

 

Yes we have all seen these signs but do we really need them? What ever the map/ chart I go out the house with I am more than aware of there deficiencys.

 

Next you will be suggesting checklist JSA's Toolbox Talks Passage plans to be be completed (in duplicate of course) before you get out of the car... Then reviewed if the situation changes...

 

I trust you do look to check it not a one way street before you turn when your Sat Nav turns left, Or your A2Z says it not a one way street? ITS COMMON SENCE

 

You are writing these posts for free, I can assure you in my opinion (and I am sure alot of other peoples) they are not worth whilst and certainly not apprechiated.

 

I think we all have enough common sence to look before we leap, now PLEASE stop wasting all our time...

 

Your point was apprechiated by all who watch this thread first time round, we all are aware of the faults etc etc Now let us get on with our own mistakes...

 

Gerrit

 

PS Martin Keep up the good work and ignor him :)

 

PPS Editted to remove the worst of my spelling, mistakes (before you start, yes English is my first language :unsure:)

Edited by GerritS
Link to comment

Try to shut me up all you like,

but OSM is still a dead parrot!

 

dead%20parrot.jpg

As a walking instructor I use OS maps if I want to navigate with sub 50m accuracy in zero vis. If I'm out for a stroll or caching the OS map is in the backpack and the OSM maps on my GPS gives me enough stituation awareness to make me confident (having planned my route before hand and using map memory)

 

Each to their own!

 

Many thanks to Martin as I personally am pleased he finds the time to compile the map sets.

 

I've listerned to your point of view (several times), so unless you've got anything new, I suggest you go out with your maps and take a long walk

Link to comment

Try to shut me up all you like,

 

It's not about trying to shut you up, but about asking you to realise and admit that a great many people successfully use OSM for geocaching and other outdoor activities, and are not only aware of its limitations but perfectly happy with them. Unfortunately, that seems too much to ask.

Link to comment

Try to shut me up all you like,

 

It's not about trying to shut you up, but about asking you to realise and admit that a great many people successfully use OSM for geocaching and other outdoor activities, and are not only aware of its limitations but perfectly happy with them. Unfortunately, that seems too much to ask.

I totally agree, you've voiced your opinion because thankfully it's a free world we live in. Most people don't agree so why keep saying the same thing in ever more bizarre ways which kind of negates your rational points and wastes everyones time.

Link to comment

Try to shut me up all you like,

but OSM is still a dead parrot!

 

dead%20parrot.jpg

I think your point has been made. I think that anyone knows that if you are using something beyond what the manufacturer provides for software, that you are taking a chance. I think that those that use this are willing to take that chance. Using your illustrative manner, I think you are to the point of sounding like...

 

broken-record-300x300.jpg

Edited by mtn-man
Link to comment
Martin,

 

I was referring to all the update posts you have made on this forum that are devoid of any 'health warnings'. I think that if you are going to say that the mapsets have been quality checked in terms of them working on a Garmin (meaning just technically), then you should also include a caveat about the unreliability of the OSM PROW data in the interests of openness and clarity. Otherwise you are using the forums to present a one-sided picture of the product.

 

As for it being "free", well as I said before, plenty of people spend their time doing all sorts of things for free, it doesn't mean that the outcome has any worth.

 

Qichina

 

 

 

Qichina, I'm fully behind you with this, I have compared local Ordnance Survey maps with the Open Street maps, and the data is poor, and that is in a town. I would not dare use these in anything other than a town, take them off road and they could lead to dangerous situations.

 

Just a thought, is a coffin and associated funeral costs more than Garmin Topo maps?

 

Ordnance Survey data based maps all the way here, someones pet project does not have the investment and quality equipment of the Ordnance Survey, there GPSr can measure within milimeters and not meters, as they use military bands and not the public bands.

Link to comment

Otherwise you are using the forums to present a one-sided picture of the product.

 

The forum is being used to provide updates to a product that many other people already use.

 

As for it being "free", well as I said before, plenty of people spend their time doing all sorts of things for free, it doesn't mean that the outcome has any worth.

 

Of course it has some worth! OSM users think it is wonderful! The alternative is we all beaver away on our own creating our own Garmin map layers from the OSM data, duplicating effort. Martin decided to share his hard work with us ad for that we are very grateful.

 

For me OSM is less of a dead parrot, more of a hatching egg. There are plenty of us who have contributed so far and plenty who are willing to nurture it all the way to a fully grown adult Norwegian Blue!

Link to comment

there GPSr can measure within milimeters and not meters, as they use military bands and not the public bands.

 

That's true, here we see an Ordnance Survey field surveyor in action (he's the one at the front holding the GPSr antenna :unsure:

 

coldstream.JPG

 

 

(sorry couldn't resist, as soon as I read that sentence I had the strange image of the Coldstream Guards marching over the moors following a surveyor in wellies!)

Link to comment

Again I would like to thank Martin for his time in producing the maps into gpsr format for us, its always will be a work in progress, yet the ones who moan about it are usually the ones who dont ever contribute towards their accuracy and information i.e. adding footpaths that are not already on the database.

 

Yes there are also maps out there that you can pay for and looking at the poster up above moaning about OSM maps it looks like he is happy with his paid for maps which if thats what he wants then fair play. Not everyone is the same and what might suit one, wont suit another and that is clearly the case.

 

If you dont like OSM maps then you dont like them, but many people here do and MANY people here do contribute (for free). If it was such a dead parrot then why do so many people contribute to it and why does it have so much information if it was (as you put it) a dead parrot?

 

Im currently looking at some paid for maps, but so far more and more people recommend the OSM project for when you need to get down to very small areas (something to do with vectors if i remember correctly).

 

Like I have already said OS have been going for a good 200 years and at a guess im guessing OSM has probably been running less than 10 years (i cannot find out when they started unless someone can find out). So im guessing if this OSM continued for another 190 years it would be close if not better than OS maps. Perhaps researching OS you will find they didnt get to where they are today in five minutes and im guessing they still havent finished as new housing estates go up, footpaths close or get redirected etc.

 

No map is going to 100% correct but like OS, OSM contributers work hard to ensure the information is correct and correct any that isnt (that they come across). Like any apple cart you will find a bad apple trying to ruin it for all, like some muggles in geocaching.

 

In short i think the broken record needs to be stopped now as we know a poster above doesnt like OSM while many others do and I firmly believe all those on this thread are aware of it now. Just go enjoy your OS maps and leave those who enjoy the OSM project to get on with it.

Link to comment

yet the ones who moan about it are usually the ones who dont ever contribute towards their accuracy and information i.e. adding footpaths that are not already on the database.

Is that true? It certainly isn't true of me. I have created originating entries for a large part of the Essex Way and all of St Peters Way (OSM Long-Distance Path projects) plus loads of corrections and additions all over Essex based on personal GPS traces. But as I said before, for every correction I made, there would be many other num-nuts writing over the data or creating inaccurate stuff based on old NPE maps. Like painting the Forth Bridge, you can get swamped in a permanent maintenance exercise without moving anything forward. Without a professional version-control release system, the project is always going to suffer from this.

 

MANY people here do contribute (for free). If it was such a dead parrot then why do so many people contribute to it and why does it have so much information if it was (as you put it) a dead parrot?

To answer your question, there aren't that many that contribute in the UK. There are thousands of registered OSM users but very few active editors. There are a few hardcore contributors who attend mapping parties, but the usual pattern is for someone to sign up as a user, dabble a bit and then lose interest. As a result, they don't get very proficient with the map editing software, and often leave ways (eg roads or areas) that are often inaccurately placed, or inappropriately designated.

It has a lot of information about streets in middle-class towns, but rural areas are abysmal in terms of completeness. But it's not just coverage, it's quality that is the problem. A 100% coverage of paths would be a lot of "information", but if those paths were all in the wrong place it would be zero information.

 

So im guessing if this OSM continued for another 190 years it would be close if not better than OS maps.

Yes, in theory it could overtake OS maps a lot sooner than that. But I'm talking about what is there now. THE OSM community are always talking it up with evangelical public relations, but it is really like software companies talking up vapourware about all the wonderful potential of their unfinished product. It's about what it does or doesn't do today that matters.

No map is going to 100% correct but like OS, OSM contributers work hard to ensure the information is correct and correct any that isnt (that they come across).

It's not like OS at all, they employ professional cartographers and analysts,who employ a systematic approach to mapping, and whose minds are focussed by the ultimate penalty of getting the sack if they screw up. There is no equivalent incentive to get things right for crowdsourced projects. Some OSM contributors work hard. Some don't. Some work hard but are still stupid, or incompetent. Some are lazy, and stupid, and incompetent. And some are malevolent.

 

Since my initial quietly-worded post on 8th January, simply urging caution, there have been 41 posts from users arguing that I'm wrong and that they don't like me coming back to argue with the points/criticism they have posted. I have only made 13 posts in reply - all of them made honestly and (I think) coherently argued, apart from the one joke post with the picture of the dead parrot. There are many posts I would have liked to have taken issue with but I decided to let them go, but even the limited right of reply I've chosen to exercise is too much for you people. Unfairly, I get lambasted for my contributions, not all the others who insist on having the last word. This is the equivalent of the albino crow where the rest of the black crows gang up and peck it to death.

 

I've given this a lot of thought and it seems to me that evidence-based rationality has departed and "tribalism" has replaced it. Two tribes at war - a very asymmetric war from my POV. The only way I can explain the vehement defence of OSM to myself is that it is seen as a Standard (flag) that the tribe feels compelled to defend as a symbol of something.

And I'm begining to think that one of the reasons for liking OSM maps is that they look prettier than boring Garmin Topo maps. I mean Magpies can't resist the lure of shiny objects either, but it isnt immediately obvious what benefit they get from it in terms of practicality or survival.

 

There's also a computer-geek element in it. Remember all those LCD digital wrist watches with inbuilt calculator from 20 years ago? A celebration of the "We do it, just because we can" principle. They were just about OK to read the time on the tiny display, but impossible to use the miniscule calculator buttons without a pin. 98-functions in a little bit of cheap plastic before they went wrong. But for many, they were the pinnacle of their techie-desires.

 

Add to this the phenomenon of people's love of a bargain. Last year my, other half came home with "useful" 3-way plastic gizmo that she got free, which never gets used because there are proper, better tools for the jobs it claims to do. But that is not the point - it was free, a bargain - a little personal triumph for the avarice and hunter-gatherer that's inside us all. But completely irrational.

 

As for dragging this 'discussion' out, well it takes two to tango. If you don't want me to engage with you, just ignore me. But don't be hypocritical in prolonging the argument by posting yet more mob-rule invective and then not expect me to reply.

Link to comment

Since my initial quietly-worded post on 8th January, simply urging caution, there have been 41 posts from users arguing that I'm wrong and that they don't like me coming back to argue with the points/criticism they have posted.

 

Sorry. No!

 

We're not saying you are wrong.

Everybody here agrees with you - the maps aren't perfect, they're full of flaws, they are capable of being edited by numpties, they leave users open to prosecution for trespass, and OS maps are better.

 

We know all of this, and more.

 

What you don't seem to grasp is - WE DON'T CARE.

 

We're all (probably) as old as you, as mature as you, as well informed as you - and just as capable of making our own decisions as you are.

 

You've made your point. We accept that OSM mapping has errors and flaws, and will never replace a proper, fully surveyed and engineered mapping system.

 

But that's not going to stop us using it.

 

So please, unless you have something new to say, please leave your comments on this thread until such time as you do have something new or constructive to say.

Alternatively, if you do feel that your argument has validity and will pull in enough response to justify it's existence, at the top right of the forum page you should find a "new topic" button. Click this, feel free to rant to your hearts content, and leave this thread for the purpose it was created for - namely, to inform those of us who ARE interested that there are updates to the mapping we CHOOSE to use on our GPSrs'

Link to comment

Since my initial quietly-worded post on 8th January, simply urging caution, there have been 41 posts from users arguing that I'm wrong and that they don't like me coming back to argue with the points/criticism they have posted.

 

Sorry. No!

 

We're not saying you are wrong.

Everybody here agrees with you - the maps aren't perfect, they're full of flaws, they are capable of being edited by numpties, they leave users open to prosecution for trespass, and OS maps are better.

 

We know all of this, and more.

 

What you don't seem to grasp is - WE DON'T CARE.

 

We're all (probably) as old as you, as mature as you, as well informed as you - and just as capable of making our own decisions as you are.

 

You've made your point. We accept that OSM mapping has errors and flaws, and will never replace a proper, fully surveyed and engineered mapping system.

 

But that's not going to stop us using it.

 

So please, unless you have something new to say, please leave your comments on this thread until such time as you do have something new or constructive to say.

Alternatively, if you do feel that your argument has validity and will pull in enough response to justify it's existence, at the top right of the forum page you should find a "new topic" button. Click this, feel free to rant to your hearts content, and leave this thread for the purpose it was created for - namely, to inform those of us who ARE interested that there are updates to the mapping we CHOOSE to use on our GPSrs'

 

I think maybe people do not care, but these maps should not be used any further off road than you can see your car.

 

I have spent an afternoon looking at the compiled data in many areas which I know and the best these maps are a danger.

 

On area near me has a foot path leading onto a Motorway, OK you might think that not that bad as you would know; but in fog well I would think the line of the path if followed could lead a person into a very dangerous situation.

 

Local roads where I live are not there, 25% with a visual, and these are not new roads, many are Victorian and Georgian, some of the roads mapped in a few areas I know well, do not follow an accurate line a quick walk up one of them with my GPSr gives it between 36 to 63 meters out, but laid on an OS map the tracklog is as good as I would expect.

 

There is an old saying in mapping "that the map is only as good as the moment the surveyor left" and it is true that in time a map becomes more of a historic document and less of a useful tool, and my view is that these are like history.

 

I'm not saying that people should not use these, but they should be aware that.

  • They are inaccurate in towns and cities and other built up areas.
  • Large areas of the maps are incomplete.
  • Some of the mapping data is of exceptionally poor quality.
  • They have little in the way of good topological detail, so should never be used in open country.
  • They are at best a feel good "I have maps on my GPRr."

Link to comment
  • They are inaccurate in towns and cities and other built up areas.
  • They are at best a feel good "I have maps on my GPRr."

 

Some towns are very good. As an example, the OSM maps of Dublin are far superior to the 1:50k maps, by a long shot in my opinion.

 

Ditto that.

 

In fact the only place I've run into problems (haha) so far has been on the Gower where a couple of back lanes were missing.

Link to comment
If you don't want me to engage with you, just ignore me. But don't be hypocritical in prolonging the argument by posting yet more mob-rule invective and then not expect me to reply.

 

It would be a sign that you you were actually interested in engaging with anyone if you could, as already suggested,

 

realise and admit that a great many people successfully use OSM for geocaching and other outdoor activities, and are not only aware of its limitations but perfectly happy with them. Unfortunately, that seems too much to ask.
Link to comment
  • They have little in the way of good topological detail, so should never be used in open country.

 

I've walked hundreds - possible thousands - of miles in open country using OSM mapping. The contour detail is supplied by the SMC, and is excellent.

Emmm. well if you use this kind of mapping in open country it shows a disregard to MROs and CROs, who advise for all people to use up to date Ordnance Survey maps.

 

Problem with the majority of Geocachers, is that they have little real outdoor knowledge, I have seen some with the most appalling outdoor wear attempting caches in the mountains.

Link to comment
  • They have little in the way of good topological detail, so should never be used in open country.

 

I've walked hundreds - possible thousands - of miles in open country using OSM mapping. The contour detail is supplied by the SMC, and is excellent.

Emmm. well if you use this kind of mapping in open country it shows a disregard to MROs and CROs, who advise for all people to use up to date Ordnance Survey maps.

 

Problem with the majority of Geocachers, is that they have little real outdoor knowledge, I have seen some with the most appalling outdoor wear attempting caches in the mountains.

That's a bit of a generalisation on two counts.

 

1) How do you know what level of experience any cachers have? I for one am very experienced (and I use OSM as well as OS)

2) I've also seen non-cachers who are totally unprepared for the terrain they are in (mountainous or otherwise).

Link to comment

Emmm. well if you use this kind of mapping in open country it shows a disregard to MROs and CROs, who advise for all people to use up to date Ordnance Survey maps.

 

I always carry a Landranger, but rarely use it, as I find the OSM detail sufficient for most navigation.

 

Problem with the majority of Geocachers, is that they have little real outdoor knowledge, I have seen some with the most appalling outdoor wear attempting caches in the mountains.

 

Often true. But I'm a hillwalker first, and a geocacher second or third, so it doesn't apply in this case.

Edited by agentmancuso
Link to comment

I'd be very surprised if a cacher went out on the fells with just a GPS loaded with OSM as their only maps. Surely most cachers who'd go into properly wild country are more intelligent than that? But on the small screens, the maps give a decent idea of the terrain.

 

As for OS maps giving definitive footpaths. No they don't - it specifically states on the maps that they don't. OS maps don't include LOADS of defacto paths around here, and show paths where none exist and some paths that would be dangerous to follow. So OS Maps are not perfect either.

 

But I'd not like the conversation with my friends in Mountain Rescue if they came out to me and I hadn't actually planned ahead and only had my GPS-based OSM.

 

Maybe you should add a 'donate to Mountain Rescue' button on your site? :ph34r:

Link to comment

The real rogue elements do much worse. Kent and Essex have been plagued by a contributor called Liam123 (but who knows how many other pseudonyms he has) which the OSM refused to ban. He's already made 13 large scale edits in 2010, where he gets perverse pleasure from subtlely vandalizing the map. In the past he's moved electricity pylons, changed footpaths to unclassified roads or vice-versa, changed streams into bridleways, and changed roundabouts into one-way systems. His biggest series of less-subtle edits involved extending the London Underground out into the depths of Essex and Kent (via a new Thames Estuary tunnel!) with a series of completely fictititious new Tube stations. Eventually other people went through the laborious task of changing it back, but he and many like him are at it all the time without any checks on their behaviour.

 

I won't go into detail on the philosophy of not reviewing all edits made to the map, since it's far beyond the scope of this discussion, other than a valid point that should be kept in mind when using the maps as your only canonical source of map data.

 

Anyway, the 'liam123 issue', several very strongly worded emails have been sent to the noted contributor who has not responded to any contact. At the time, there was no per-user banning system implemented on the OSM website (this has since been done), and a hard IP-block would be impossible after analysis of the IP ranges he was connecting from.

It was also believed that he would simply circumvent any blocks placed on him by creating a new account.

 

It was decided that a soft-revert approach would be best to counter his vandalism. As yet, it appears that he has not realised that all his edits are being automatically fixed to the state before he touched them.

Further details of this revert procedure are available here.

 

As to the rest of this insanely long argument over verifiability and reliability of OSM data - I have too little time to read the pages of arguments that I've probably heard elsewhere before.

Link to comment

As stated on another thread, we're going to Helsinki and Tallinn shortly.

 

Ordinarily I prefer 'bought' maps as I'm not computer literate and like the accuracy and reliability etc. But I would be quite happy to download openstreet maps to use on short trips. I don't see any point in forking out shed loads to buy a map that's onlygoing to be used on one trip.

 

That being said, are there any idiot (and I mean idiot!) guides, that walk you slowly through getting the openstreet maps onto a 60CSx?

 

 

PS - I think the whys and wherefores / for and against debate for openstreet maps is a bit of a false debate as it's pretty obvious that those that use them are aware of their limitations. It's all about choice surely?

Link to comment
That being said, are there any idiot (and I mean idiot!) guides, that walk you slowly through getting the openstreet maps onto a 60CSx?

 

http://garmin.na1400.info/routable.php

 

This is a webpage that allows you to select areas of the world you are visiting, it then compiles them into a single map suitable for the GPS. The maps come with an installer that will install them to MapSource, allowing you to install them to the GPS in the usual way.

 

Follow the instructions below the map for usage of the tool.

Link to comment
That being said, are there any idiot (and I mean idiot!) guides, that walk you slowly through getting the openstreet maps onto a 60CSx?

 

http://garmin.na1400.info/routable.php

 

This is a webpage that allows you to select areas of the world you are visiting, it then compiles them into a single map suitable for the GPS. The maps come with an installer that will install them to MapSource, allowing you to install them to the GPS in the usual way.

 

Follow the instructions below the map for usage of the tool.

 

Brilliant! I'm so glad you put us lot before your university studies! :huh:

Link to comment

It was decided that a soft-revert approach would be best to counter his vandalism. As yet, it appears that he has not realised that all his edits are being automatically fixed to the state before he touched them.

Further details of this revert procedure are available here.

 

Excellent, thanks for that, I'd never heard of General Dreedle before.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

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

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

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

Loading...
Followers 32
×
×
  • Create New...