Why Chirp is a game changer

[+geojibby]

Before the emergence of the Chirp and the *need* for a wireless communication option (I mocked this option earlier in a previous thread), the GPSMAP 62 base model was nearly a nice upgradable option for we GPSMAP 60Cx folks. But now, you really have to consider a Dakota 20 with compass, altimeter, expansion card and wireless for $309 CDN vs. the feature-less GPSMAP 62 for $319 CDN. The pricing doesn't make sense, but that aside, why would anyone buy the 62 over a Dakota 20 -- especially in light of the cool possibilities Chirp brings??

 

I think Chirp is a game changer and will actually kill the GPSMAP 62 or at the very least increase 62s sales because poor upgrading schmucks like me will probably jump the extra hundred bones to get the wireless. (OR, we might "downgrade" to the Dakota 20 and save the $110 ) Any thoughts?

[Dr Jeckyl and Mr Hide]

Before the emergence of the Chirp and the *need* for a wireless communication option (I mocked this option earlier in a previous thread), the GPSMAP 62 base model was nearly a nice upgradable option for we GPSMAP 60Cx folks. But now, you really have to consider a Dakota 20 with compass, altimeter, expansion card and wireless for $309 CDN vs. the feature-less GPSMAP 62 for $319 CDN. The pricing doesn't make sense, but that aside, why would anyone buy the 62 over a Dakota 20 -- especially in light of the cool possibilities Chirp brings??

 

I think Chirp is a game changer and will actually kill the GPSMAP 62 or at the very least increase 62s sales because poor upgrading schmucks like me will probably jump the extra hundred bones to get the wireless. (OR, we might "downgrade" to the Dakota 20 and save the $110 ) Any thoughts?

 

The 62/78 also have the same wireless features, compass, altimeter, etc, as the Oregon/Dakota models.

 

Just noticed you specified the base model 62. Does it not have wireless and the other features?

 

Nope, does not. Your point makes sense.

Edited November 6, 2010 by Dr Jeckyl and Mr Hide

[+geojibby]

My features/price argument only applies to the base 62 model.

 

Before the emergence of the Chirp and the *need* for a wireless communication option (I mocked this option earlier in a previous thread), the GPSMAP 62 base model was nearly a nice upgradable option for we GPSMAP 60Cx folks. But now, you really have to consider a Dakota 20 with compass, altimeter, expansion card and wireless for $309 CDN vs. the feature-less GPSMAP 62 for $319 CDN. The pricing doesn't make sense, but that aside, why would anyone buy the 62 over a Dakota 20 -- especially in light of the cool possibilities Chirp brings??

 

I think Chirp is a game changer and will actually kill the GPSMAP 62 or at the very least increase 62s sales because poor upgrading schmucks like me will probably jump the extra hundred bones to get the wireless. (OR, we might "downgrade" to the Dakota 20 and save the $110 ) Any thoughts?

 

The 62/78 also have the same wireless features, compass, altimeter, etc, as the Oregon/Dakota models.

 

Just noticed you specified the base model 62. Does it not have wireless and the other features?

 

Nope, does not. Your point makes sense.

[NordicMan]

Well I see *Chirp* as more of an interesting curiosity, not a game changer..

 

It only works with a small selection of devices from ONE manufacturer.. if somehow the GPS manufacturing powers converged & agreed on a global standard for a chirp-style interface.. ~then~ the chirp may become a game changer..

[+Highland Horde]

My features/price argument only applies to the base 62 model.

 

Before the emergence of the Chirp and the *need* for a wireless communication option (I mocked this option earlier in a previous thread), the GPSMAP 62 base model was nearly a nice upgradable option for we GPSMAP 60Cx folks. But now, you really have to consider a Dakota 20 with compass, altimeter, expansion card and wireless for $309 CDN vs. the feature-less GPSMAP 62 for $319 CDN. The pricing doesn't make sense, but that aside, why would anyone buy the 62 over a Dakota 20 -- especially in light of the cool possibilities Chirp brings??

 

I think Chirp is a game changer and will actually kill the GPSMAP 62 or at the very least increase 62s sales because poor upgrading schmucks like me will probably jump the extra hundred bones to get the wireless. (OR, we might "downgrade" to the Dakota 20 and save the $110 ) Any thoughts?

 

The 62/78 also have the same wireless features, compass, altimeter, etc, as the Oregon/Dakota models.

 

Just noticed you specified the base model 62. Does it not have wireless and the other features?

 

Nope, does not. Your point makes sense.

 

I think they think people will compare the 62 to the 62s and go for the more features or compare the dakota 20 with the 10 cause of the missing features (no SD, no Chirp support etc.).

They seem to keep the touch screens seperate from the other models. People who like touch screens want them, people that dont....well you get my point. there doesnt seem to be much fence sitters (like me).

For me, it was a price/features thing that caused me to get the Dakota 20. Im just glad it has Chirp support. I look forward to playing with it.

[+dfx]

if somebody wants a 62 but also wants to use the chirp, they'd get a 62s. why would they get a dakota instead?

[+user13371]

I wouldn't think of the Chirp as it a "game changer" until they're in a significant percentage of caches*. And that's not likely to happen unless the beacon price comes down into happy-meal toy territory.

 

Specifically choosing to buy an ANT+ capable GPS is more likely to be for other interests. A serious geocacher, bordering on OCD, might insist on it just to be able to find a Chirp, even if there are few or none to be found yet. But it's more likely someone with a sports-oriented heart rate monitor, a bicycle power-meter, or some combination of related interests is going to choose their GPS for that feature. Geocaching by itself is not likely to drive the market segment.

 

---

* As of 10/6/2010, there are 12 beacon-attribute geocaches in the combined area of Washington,

Oregon, California, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Utah, Arizona, Colorado, and New Mexico.

Edited November 6, 2010 by lee_rimar

[+kaseym]

I don't see it as a game changer till the number of them out there starts to significantly approach the number of ammo boxes and magnetic micro's etc. that are out there. I don't think it will happen soon, if it does at all. Plenty of other caches to hunt if you don't have chirp enabled device. BTW I have a Dakota 20 and haven't looked for chirps in my area yet.

Edited November 6, 2010 by kaseym

[jholly]

I agree with Lee. I see the chirp as a flash in the pan and it will fade from the scene in a few months. As someone pointed out only a few models of a single manufacturers product line can use the devices. This does not bode well for a "game changer" device. There was lots of hoopla surrounding the announcement of Wherigo, and where has that gone?

[+geojibby]

Good insights. I think it will pave the way for other wireless ideas though, similar to the chirp. I see this kind of like the internet in its infancy. Some said it will die tomorrow, some saw possibilities, but nobody really knew the grand potential to change everything with it. Other manufacturers may get on board and create cool stuff! The heart rate monitor point is well taken.

 

@ DFX - saving $110 bucks is why I'd get a Dakota 20 over a 62s to get the same features.

[savant9]

Beside the obvious difference between the Dakota 20 and the 62s (I am using the "s" as we are comparing to the Dakota 20 and not the 10), the touch screen, there are many subtle differences which may make a difference for some users.

 

Dakota 20: Max 2000 geocaches, 200 gpx files, 1000 waypoints, 50 routes

62s : Max 5000 geocaches, 200 gpx files, 2000 waypoints, 200 routes

 

Dakota 20: USB 1.1/ no spanner mode

62s : USB 2.0/ NMEA 0183 compatible spanner mode

 

Dakota 20: 850mb onboard storage

62s : 1.7gb onboard storage

 

The 62s also has a slightly larger screen although it has the same resolution.

 

For me the USB 2.0 and 5000 caches is worth the price difference. Trying to install a couple gb of maps/birdseye imagery through a usb 1.1 interface is ridiculously slow. Granted you can remove the microsd and put it into an external reader, but you realistically would never need to remove the card from a 62s.

 

I think a closer comparison would be between an Oregon 450 and a Gpsmap 62s, where the consideration would be mainly for preference between touchscreen, screensize, and Wherigo support.

[+user13371]

Other features aside - what percentage of available caches would have to include a beacon before you'd personally base your GPS buying decision on that?

 

Right now there are about 50 "beacon" attribute caches in all of the USA. There probably are more Chirps than that -- maybe some folks didn't apply the attribute on their cache listing -- but it's still an awfully small number.

 

How long do you figure it'll take until they really catch on -- if ever?

Edited November 7, 2010 by lee_rimar

[+geojibby]

I don't see this as limited only to Chirp. I see it as a developing aspect of geocaching/tours which, if a person is upgrading GPSr units, one would be wise to have accommodated for it now which is why I brought up this discussion in the first place. Not having the wireless feature (in addition to having no microSD slot) is a really big killer for the GPSMAP 62. You can get it all and the wireless with a Garmin Dakota 20 for less money. It just doesn't make any sense.

 

The wireless part is another variable that will be a cool feature in the next couple years - potentially. Better to have it just in case IMHO.

[+user13371]

...Not having the wireless feature (in addition to having no microSD slot) is a really big killer for the GPSMAP 62. ... It just doesn't make any sense.

No, it makes very good marketing sense.

 

This has always been the case with Garmin; hundreds of different models with diverse feature sets. For everyone who looks at a specific model and says "Who the heck wants THAT?" -- someone else thinks it's the perfect model for their own needs.

 

Geocaching is a tiny part of the overall GPS market. Just like folks who wear heart rate monitors when jogging or put power meters on their bikes are a tiny part of the fitness market. For everybody else, the ANT+ capability isn't a "neat to have" feature, it's a "why would I want that?" feature. Ditto on memory, expandable or not. Both the 62 and the 62s have 1.7GB internal memory. More than enough to hold a complete road map of the USA. Some folks will think that's enough, some will want more, and some might think it's more than they'll ever need. And so on with touch screen versus buttons... or any other model & feature comparison.

 

When you look at one model and say "It just doesn't make sense" you're talking as though your specific wish list is representative of Garmin's entire audience.

Edited November 8, 2010 by lee_rimar

[+geojibby]

You missed my overall point - which includes pricing. You'd have to be a complete moron to spend more money to get less features - I don't care what feature set you want. If I can get a "loaded" GPS (Dakota 20) for less cash than the feature-less GPSMAP 62, why would I buy it?! That doesn't make any sense.

 

When you look at one model and say "It just doesn't make sense" you're talking as though your specific wish list is representative of Garmin's entire audience.

[ChefHazmat]

What i wanna know is what keeps the Chirp from being taken from the cache?

[+MaliBooBoo]

What i wanna know is what keeps the Chirp from being taken from the cache?

How about this: don't have it in a cache in the first place.

[+EraSeek]

What i wanna know is what keeps the Chirp from being taken from the cache?

In the world as it should be: honesty, civility, and knowing right from wrong. In the world as it is: hide it near the cache or as a step to a cache in a well concealed and camouflaged spot.

[jholly]

What i wanna know is what keeps the Chirp from being taken from the cache?

In the world as it should be: honesty, civility, and knowing right from wrong. In the world as it is: hide it near the cache or as a step to a cache in a well concealed and camouflaged spot.

The big chain keeping it chained to the tree also helps.

[+Highland Horde]

You missed my overall point - which includes pricing. You'd have to be a complete moron to spend more money to get less features - I don't care what feature set you want. If I can get a "loaded" GPS (Dakota 20) for less cash than the feature-less GPSMAP 62, why would I buy it?! That doesn't make any sense.

 

When you look at one model and say "It just doesn't make sense" you're talking as though your specific wish list is representative of Garmin's entire audience.

How is the 62 "featureless"? has spanner mode (dakota does not) holds 5000 caches (dakota only holds 2000)

They both support Chirp.

 

I did buy the Dakota 20 cause of pricing though but comparing the dakota and the GPSMAP units isnt really a fair comparison. if you dont like touch screen you arent gonna look at the dakota/oregon models. If you want touch screen you arent gonna look at the GPSMAP units.

 

BACK OT:

I am lookin forward to getting a chance to play with a Chirp but I think it is up in the air if it will be a game changer. Sometimes technology doesnt evolve by what is "best" but what is marketed better (if you are old enough to remember the VHS vs. BETA....) Man i feel old now

[+dfx]

You missed my overall point - which includes pricing. You'd have to be a complete moron to spend more money to get less features - I don't care what feature set you want. If I can get a "loaded" GPS (Dakota 20) for less cash than the feature-less GPSMAP 62, why would I buy it?! That doesn't make any sense.

you'd have to direct this question either at someone who actually bought a 62 and decided against a dakota, or at garmin's marketing dept.

 

my personal guess would be that garmin figured they could ask more money for the 62 because the 60 was/is so insanely popular, so everyone who (used to) swear by the 60 would only ever consider buying a 62 and never a dakota, even if it's relatively overpriced.

[+user13371]

...I don't care what feature set you want. If I can get a "loaded" GPS (Dakota 20) for less cash than the ... GPSMAP 62, why would I buy it?

I'm not saying you personally should buy a 62. But some of the features you don't personally care about do matter to others. You personally want the ANT+, the microSD card slot, and the compass; no problem. But someone else might think these features of the 62 matter...

 

- Buttons vs touchscreen

- Quadrifilar helix antenna vs patch

- NMEA output for interfacing with other software

- More internal memory without adding a microSD card

- More waypoints and routes available in active memory

- "Picture navigation" (hah, I don't need that one either )

 

... and anyone who wants any of those would not choose the Dakota.

 

---

For reference, see also:

https://buy.garmin.com/shop/compare.do?cID=...reProduct=30926

Edited November 8, 2010 by lee_rimar

[+geojibby]

When I look at the comparison page at Garmin, I see exactly the differences between the Dakota 20 and the GPSMAP 62. (There is an active thread discussing this already, so I won't re-hash it in this one). My original query was how the advent of Chirp/other wireless beacon possibilities would make poor schmucks like me who were considering upgrading to the 62 base model (for all the reasons you guys have listed) actually go for the Dakota 20 rather than jumping up the $110 for the 62s to get ANT+. It makes me rethink my upgrading strategy and I will probably go for the Dakota 20! Which, is probably the opposite direction Garmin wants me to go. So, the marketing is puzzling, the pricing is odd in my opinion. Perhaps I am the only one who thinks this way. I'm ok being a loner though.

[+user13371]

.

Edited November 9, 2010 by lee_rimar

[+bcblues]

I see the chirp as an interesting and potentially fun aside to the traditional cache. Nothing more. Nothing less.

[+geojibby]

..

[jholly]

... ,, .

[+Prime Suspect]

I think the make-or-break question of the chirp is not how many people will buy it, but how many people will buy a replacement, when one gets taken or destroyed. How many are willing to throw good money after bad, at $20 a pop. I can buy a sack full of lock-n-locks for that.

[Suscrofa]

Why didn't they use Bluetooth for their wireless connection ? So, other equipments could detect it.

[+user13371]

Why didn't they use Bluetooth...

Battery life. ANT+ transmitters can run for years on a tiny CR2032 or similar battery. Edited November 9, 2010 by lee_rimar

[+ecanderson]

Why didn't they use Bluetooth...

Battery life. ANT+ transmitters can run for years on a tiny CR2032 or similar battery.

Not so sure about the plural years for an ANT device, but similarly, Bluetooth devices can sit in a very low power receive mode as well, waiting to respond to a "ping". You don't see very many being made, but Class III BT devices are very low power -- about the same kind of RF output as a Chirp. They're only rated for 10m distance. Same spec otherwise, just very low RF power.

[+geojibby]

I thought about the whole theft thing too. I guess you'll have to hide the chirp better than the cache! Where I see coolness with it is on a self guided tour, like an outdoor GPS walk through some historic town or what not. You wouldn't need to mess up architecture with a bunch of signs or plaques or what have you. The chirp could tell you the interesting quip you need to know about said history. That'd be neat.

[+user13371]

Not so sure about the plural years for an ANT device...

Hey, I read it on the internet so it must be true You can read the (biased) comparison here.

 

Suscrofa's question was why ANT+ over Bluetooth, and my first thought/reply was power consumption. But there's probably more to it than that (cost, circuit board size, coding requirements, manufacturers' kickbacks, etc). I'd look at other applications already in use (heart rate monitors, bicycle power meters, etc) to see which technologies are winning over more manufacturers.

 

And admittedly I haven't kept up or taken a close enough look at these. What do more wireless HRM's or cycling computers use? Any Bluetooth enabled ones? How many compared to ANT+ family?

Edited November 9, 2010 by lee_rimar

[+ecanderson]

Hard to say which is the more cost effective. The hardware won't be expensive in either case. Licensing stacks for Bluetooth will certainly add cost unless they are developed in-house, and there aren't many companies in that business.

 

I found this little quip on the ANT site a bit disingenuous: "Bluetooth is designed for audio bandwidth and is not capable of running from a coin cell." You can run anything you like from a coin cell if you provide the requisite silicon - stuff is operating at unbelievably low voltage these days. There is nothing inherent to Bluetooth that prevents "coin cell" operation. The Bluetooth 4.0 spec explains how the "Low Energy" version can be expected to work, and they also fully expect a 1 year life on a coin cell, depending upon how often it's being pinged. Rather than shlogging through the 4.0 spec, there's some Wiki stuff on it here:

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluetooth_low_energy

[+Hank30721]

Back to the OP's comment...In my very unsophisticated opinion, the chirp might actually reach fad status for a short period. However, most GPS users - even cachers probably don't run out and buy the latest device offered by any manufacturer, for they usually stick with what works/what is dependable.

 

There will be many 60(Csx),76(Csx), PN-20,30,40, etc users that will have to have their GPS'r pried from their cold dead hands.

 

If there are chirp only caches, I'll be left out as will many others. I haven't gone diving for caches nor walked more than 6 miles to retrieve a cache neither. The sport will continue either way - and that's a great thing!!

[+user13371]

...You can run anything you like from a coin cell if you provide the requisite silicon - stuff is operating at unbelievably low voltage these days. There is nothing inherent to Bluetooth that prevents "coin cell" operation. The Bluetooth 4.0 spec explains how the "Low Energy" version can be expected to work, and they also fully expect a 1 year life on a coin cell, depending upon how often it's being pinged. Rather than shlogging through the 4.0 spec, there's some Wiki stuff on it here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluetooth_low_energy

Funny. The article you point to support Bluetooth (low energy) actually does more to answer why folks are currently implementing ANT+ instead:

... The first Bluetooth low energy single-mode chip solutions were released to mass-market in October 2010, with more chips expected to follow in Q1-2011. The first consumer products using Bluetooth low energy is expected to debut in first half of 2011.

A product that is actually shipping has a market advantage over one that isn't. Edited November 9, 2010 by lee_rimar

[+ecanderson]

Funny. The article you point to support Bluetooth (low energy) actually does more to answer why folks are currently implementing ANT+ instead:

... The first Bluetooth low energy single-mode chip solutions were released to mass-market in October 2010, with more chips expected to follow in Q1-2011. The first consumer products using Bluetooth low energy is expected to debut in first half of 2011.

A product that is actually shipping has a market advantage over one that isn't.

The timing of the Chirp was just about coincident with the BLE parts. The primary difference is that Garmin has a financial stake in ANT and not Bluetooth. It's not like there was a lot of development time involved for Garmin -- they were already in the ANT business. I suspect there will be quite a number of BLE devices that do make it to market. There will be VASTLY more devices out there that could support those vs. a very few for ANT devices. No reason why, down the road, BT enabled phones, computers, etc. won't deal with any new BLE device that comes along if someone wants to add the application. The core technology will already be there. Can't say that for ANT. Edited November 9, 2010 by ecanderson

[+user13371]

I suspect there will be quite a number of BLE devices that do make it to market. There will be VASTLY more devices out there that could support those vs. a very few for ANT devices.

Thie latter is true (vastly more devices to support BLE), but I'd take a big "wait and see" to the former (quite a number of BLE devices coming to market).

 

To me, the whole ultra-low power beacon idea -- whether for geocaching or fitness gear -- will remain a niche product as long as they cost more than a few cents. I do see a lot of potential in the IDEA, just don't think it'll catch on in a big way unless you can convince big groups of people about the usefulness, and/or provide them at ultra low cost.

 

For general usefulness you have to find more applications and users than just joggers and geocachers. To get ultra low cost, you'd have to go to something like bulk-printed RFIDs.

[John E Cache]

Why didn't they use Bluetooth for their wireless connection ? So, other equipments could detect it.

Garmin acquired the company that invented and owns the proprietary ANT technology. It is a technology disparately looking for uses.

[+ecanderson]

Or as we say in the business, "... a solution looking for a problem".

[+The Kamikaze Clan]

Or as we say in the business, "... a solution looking for a problem".

 

Is that like "a tech product looking for tech suckers?" Tech suckers = problem?

 

Maybe the Chirp is like the laser technology. No real use for it until it suddenly is very needed.

 

I like the ordinary cache with little or no frills, but if anyone like more tech stuff Chirp is good for them.

Edited November 10, 2010 by The Kamikaze Clan