Jump to content

Garmin Dakota 10 and Dakota 20


Hairymare
Followers 4

Recommended Posts

:P "high-sensitivity GPS with HotFix™" :)

 

Looks like STM Cartesio. HotFix is a trademark for STM Cartesio.

 

Why on earth would they stick with this crappy chipset? They're putting a Mediatek designed for slow speeds in the 60CSX why not in the latest and greatest?

Link to comment

Not sure about the crossover date but not to worry, the NEW MediaTek was designed with tighter slow speed specs, faster acquisition, and more efficient power consumption. If the specs and hype are correct, it sounds like it may actually be an improvement on the SirfIII. Time will tell.

Edited by yogazoo
Link to comment

Not sure about the crossover date but not to worry, the NEW MediaTek was designed with tighter slow speed specs, faster acquisition, and more efficient power consumption. If the specs and hype are correct, it sounds like it may actually be an improvement on the SirfIII. Time will tell.

In spite of the announcement from MediaTek about their chip being used in the 60 series receivers, this is what I got back from Garmin:

 

Dear ,

Thank you for contacting Garmin International.

The Media Tek and the SirFStar III chip will function the same and we do not have any information on what will be used in the 60 series. I have contacted my engineers and they told me that they were not confirming or denying the switch and the accuracy of the units will not be effected because they are both the same high sensitivity receiver.

 

With Best Regards,

Stephen H

Product Support Specialist

Outdoor/Fitness Team

Garmin International

913-397-8200

800-800-1020

913-440-8280 (fax) Att: Stephen H

www.garmin.com

Link to comment

All I want to know is if they will eventually make the software on one of these units so that it has the same level of functions and is as customizable as the software in the 60x series.

 

What functions are missing? I'm trying to think of some since I own both but since they've added waypoint averaging I'm not coming up with any off the top of my head.

 

IMO the Oregon has much more versatility than the 60CSX. One thing you may be refering to is positional/tracklog accuracy at slow speeds and terrible WAAS pickup but that may never get fixed since the Cartesio is a different animal altogether.

Link to comment

I'm trying to figure out the main differences between the Oregon and Dakota, aside from the compass. Can anyone shed light on this?

From pure specmanship, the big difference I see is the screen.

 

The CO/OR have a large-ish, high res screen. This makes it possible to get a useful amount of data on them, but that screen density is also the reason you have to run the backlight on full (and thus kill batteries) to read them. This line seems to have a lower resolution (thus, brighter and more energy-aware) screen but that probably means less info per screen and more panning/scrolling.

 

Oh, and no Wherigo.

 

But always feel free to go to the source at https://buy.garmin.com/shop/compare.do?cID=...reProduct=14903 (and if you don't like the two I chose to compare, pick different ones)

 

So I'm left wondering at this point, having purchased a CO about a year ago that's seemingly had their firmware development abandonded if it's worth getting aboard a new ship in the hopes of not being abandoned again or if the "fool me twice" rule applies.

Edited by robertlipe
Link to comment

So I'm left wondering at this point, having purchased a CO about a year ago that's seemingly had their firmware development abandonded if it's worth getting aboard a new ship in the hopes of not being abandoned again or if the "fool me twice" rule applies.

 

Have you seen that garmin recently released 2.92Beta?

 

I wouldn't say they abandoned us but they sure as heck don't listen to us.

Link to comment

Yes, I've seen it. Compared to the current Oregon code (which should be the same, modulo rock-n-roller replaced with touch screen, right?) it's just sad. CO is a step backward from the 60CSx in many ways. OR is a step backward in fewer ways. So do you hitch to the Dakota train hoping the trend continues or reverses?

Link to comment

Garmin seems to be tripping over themselves to release new models before really developing the slightly older ones they just released. They seem to depend more on new product hype to move product rather than quality. Having owned a Colorado since Jan 08 and trading it in for an Oregon in Nov 08 I've been on the nauseating roller coaster ride hoping with each new software release that someone at Garmin steps up and makes their new lines as reliable and functional as the older models.

 

The fact that the newer models have severely short and uninformative owners manuals seems to indicate their reliance on the Garmin good name and NEW product hype rather than putting time and resources into making good quality product packed with features.

 

What changed at Garmin? Did they outsource the code writing? Is someone incompetent now in charge of the outdoor handheld department? Are there communication breakdowns between engineers and software developers/writers? Merely speculation but something seems very different in the way they now do things.

 

It's funny to watch as each new firmware release is unveiled to see all the new bugs that are introduced. They obviously don't test it, they obviously don't know how to properly write it, and they take their sweet time doing it wrong. For me, this time, I'll wait a year or two, read the reviews religously, and until things change I'll hold on to my money. "Fool me once" definately applies here.

Edited by yogazoo
Link to comment

I just realized what one of the major differences between the Dakota and the Oragon/Colorado is. Aside from the obvious size, screen resolution, and battery life, the Dakota line doesn't display terrain shading. Major bummer. At least I can't find anything on Garmins website or anywhere else that mentions terrain shading and none of their images shows terrain shading on the screen.

 

WOW, major bummer for me. I just bought the new Topo 24K for my region and it was mainly for the 10meter DEM shading that comes with it. Heck, I was looking forward to seeing the much brighter screen and how the shading would look. :)

 

Terrain shading probably requires a certain pixel resolution to display effectively. Since the Dakota is at about 50% pixel density compared to the Oregon/Colorado lines that would make sense.

 

Save the touchscreen, why wouldn't I just buy a 60csx? I'd prefer the SirfIII/newer Mediatek over the Crap-tesio anyday.

Edited by yogazoo
Link to comment

I just realized what one of the major differences between the Dakota and the Oragon/Colorado is. Aside from the obvious size, screen resolution, and battery life, the Dakota line doesn't display terrain shading. Major bummer. At least I can't find anything on Garmins website or anywhere else that mentions terrain shading and none of their images shows terrain shading on the screen.

 

WOW, major bummer for me. I just bought the new Topo 24K for my region and it was mainly for the 10meter DEM shading that comes with it. Heck, I was looking forward to seeing the much brighter screen and how the shading would look. :)

 

Terrain shading probably requires a certain pixel resolution to display effectively. Since the Dakota is at about 50% pixel density compared to the Oregon/Colorado lines that would make sense.

 

Save the touchscreen, why wouldn't I just buy a 60csx? I'd prefer the SirfIII/newer Mediatek over the Crap-tesio anyday.

 

That's exactly what I feared as well, until I found this:

http://www.garminonline.de/common/pdf/pres..._PMD_Dakota.pdf

Link to comment

Paperless caching?

 

True, true. But doesn't the Nuvi macro work with the 60csx?

 

As for terrain shading on the Dakota, I'm still not fully convinced it has shading. The picture in that PDF file from Germany is obviously photo-shopped as are many of Garmins product photo's. Judging from the information and scaling on the screen it appears to me to be a screen-shot from the Oregon line. A mistake by Garmin?

 

Garmin's official website mentions nothing about 3-D view, which is in my opinion worthless, but may speak to the larger issue of simply not displaying DEM information. Is there anyone out there who had a production model to review who could speak to this first hand?

Edited by yogazoo
Link to comment

Paperless caching?

 

True, true. But doesn't the Nuvi macro work with the 60csx?

 

As for terrain shading on the Dakota, I'm still not fully convinced it has shading. The picture in that PDF file from Germany is obviously photo-shopped as are many of Garmins product photo's. Judging from the information and scaling on the screen it appears to me to be a screen-shot from the Oregon line. A mistake by Garmin?

 

Garmin's official website mentions nothing about 3-D view, which is in my opinion worthless, but may speak to the larger issue of simply not displaying DEM information. Is there anyone out there who had a production model to review who could speak to this first hand?

 

 

I had a conversation with a Garmin Tech yesterday on a mapping issue ...he has had a chance to use the Dakota and said it had terrain shading but no 3D.

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 4
×
×
  • Create New...