Garmin Maps... grrrr

[+nericksx]

Consider a movie you liked and bought on Video Cassette to watch from your Sony VHS, you didn't get free upgrades to watch it from your Sony DVD or Sony Blu-Ray players when you upgraded. You would have to purchase it again if you wanted to watch it on those alternate devices. Same thing with the Garmin Maps.

 

Jon.

 

Well no, not the same thing at all. VHS, DVD and Blu-Ray are entirely different formats that require entirely different technology and hardware to use. A more appropriate analogy would be having a Blu-Ray player in the living room, then after a couple years buying a second Blu-Ray for your bedroom and finding out that in order to use it, you have to re-purchase all your movies. That would be the most asinine thing you'd ever heard of! It's the exact same technology! You bought the movies fair and square! So what do you do? Go on a bit torrent and pirate the movies.

 

Actually Jon, thank you for your analogy because I think I was able to clarify my issue even better. People didn't hesitate to go ahead and upgrade from VHS TO DVD and re-buy the movies; at least they could watch the movies on any player from then on out. Go ahead and buy a player for every room! Toss out old players and upgrade to newer ones with better features! Garmin is discouraging people from upgrading to newer models. If you have to re-buy all the maps, why spend the money?

[+LadyBee4T]

 

The REI bundle, at least on the web, makes it clear it is a download map your getting. The Garmin site clearly, and without any special code words or other games, states it can only be downloaded to one SD card only. They also give you information for the size you need. So it should have been no surprise that you could not make another card for your etrex. Think about it for a minute. If Garmin allowed unlimited, or at least a large number, of downloads to SD cards everybody and there brother would be selling these cards on ebay. No one would buy a download, everyone would buy the $10 cards on ebay. And that would make a dent in the figures for the company producing maps.

 

Sometimes it pays to read the fine print.

 

Everybody and their brother ARE selling copies of city navigator on ebay on microSD cards starting at about $25 shipped. When you ask them they will say they are genuine garmin maps. There are tons being sold there on multiple different brands of microSD cards.

 

What bothers me is that I can't get a replacement dvd at a discount. I have the unlock code but the dvd is long gone for some reason. With that attitude at garmin and their map supplier I have no intention of buying their maps for the montana or updating my nuvi. I'll go to ebay first. Also the lifetime map updates are only good fro as long as they use the current map supplier so it's not the lifetime of the unit it's the lifetime of their contract with their supplier.

[sviking]

Garmin is discouraging people from upgrading to newer models. If you have to re-buy all the maps, why spend the money?

 

I've told them this same thing several times over the years via phonecon and email. They simply don't care...

[team tisri]

The REI bundle, at least on the web, makes it clear it is a download map your getting. The Garmin site clearly, and without any special code words or other games, states it can only be downloaded to one SD card only. They also give you information for the size you need. So it should have been no surprise that you could not make another card for your etrex. Think about it for a minute. If Garmin allowed unlimited, or at least a large number, of downloads to SD cards everybody and there brother would be selling these cards on ebay. No one would buy a download, everyone would buy the $10 cards on ebay. And that would make a dent in the figures for the company producing maps.

 

Sometimes it pays to read the fine print.

 

The thing is when people feel like they are being ripped off it's only a question of time before someone decides to solve the issue by breaking the protection, at which point anyone so inclined can download just about anything they want onto the $10 card from ebay. And from that point onwards the company gets nothing at all.

 

I haven't looked into the way the maps are locked to a unit in any great detail but it seems reasonable that it's going to be down to some combination of a code within the map data and something within the unit firmware that looks for a code and verifies it as being valid. So in theory anyone wanting to break the code would need to either figure how to generate a code that looks valid so they could patch the map data directly, or figure how the firmware verifies the code and override it.

 

Of course doing that kind of thing breaks all sorts of terms and conditions, probably breaks copyright legislation if maps are shared, not to mention voiding unit warranties. But with the price of some maps being what they are it can't be a surprise to anyone if such things are done.

[+Jonovich]

Consider a movie you liked and bought on Video Cassette to watch from your Sony VHS, you didn't get free upgrades to watch it from your Sony DVD or Sony Blu-Ray players when you upgraded. You would have to purchase it again if you wanted to watch it on those alternate devices. Same thing with the Garmin Maps.

 

Jon.

 

Absolutely not true. You are allowed to transfer it from VHS to DVD for YOUR personal use. Same as if you bought a music album on cassette and made a copy for your car, office, etc.

 

I'm confused then... are you saying all that Macrovision copyright protection for VHS recordings and the supreme caught ruling making illegal to sell or distribute macrovision defeation technology was for nothing?

 

Jon

[sviking]

The thing is when people feel like they are being ripped off it's only a question of time before someone decides to solve the issue by breaking the protection, at which point anyone so inclined can download just about anything they want onto the $10 card from ebay. And from that point onwards the company gets nothing at all.

 

That's a very good point. Here's a real world example. I built a new desktop computer last fall and was going to "pirate bay" all of MS Office. That used to be one very expensive software suite. I thought "what the heck" and looked on-line just for grins to see how much I'd be "saving" myself. I found a brand new MS Office 2010 suite for $99 and you know what? I went ahead and bought it and registered it with MS. If it have been $499 or whatever? Yup, straight to downloading. Price software, maps, whatever accordingly and more people will PAY for it, especially when the "alternative" is so easy and free...

[+baloo&bd]

First, I think people need to read the EULA on all the software they purchase. This is not unique to NAVTEQ. For the most part, you really only "rent" most software packages.

 

Second: Sorry, using the argument that people will only be dishonest if you make them pay reasonable prices (sorry, $100 for a map is not unreasonable) sounds a. foolish b.like cachers are morally bankrupt and c. blackmail. Either you give me your product for free or I will steal it.

 

Besides, with all the alternatives available that are not only free, but in many ways superior or more accurate, people still try to steal the software. Even the CO said he didn't want to bother with installing the alternatives because of the learning curve (albeit very shallow curve), indicating they wanted the documentation or support that requires less thought on the users part from the company that comes with the pay version. Things that all cot money.

 

Funny, some of you complaining about this have no issue paying a buck or better for water (which works out to $12 + per gallon), a readily available, free commodity.

[sviking]

Second: Sorry, using the argument that people will only be dishonest if you make them pay reasonable prices

 

What? That makes no sense if the prices are reasonable.

 

Either you give me your product for free or I will steal it.

 

Are you referencing my post about MS Office? If so, read it...AGAIN... I paid for that MS product because they decided to sell it at a REASONABLE price. MS isn't stupid. If they priced it at $99, it's because they COULD...and I'm sure it's still profitable at that price.

[team tisri]

First, I think people need to read the EULA on all the software they purchase. This is not unique to NAVTEQ. For the most part, you really only "rent" most software packages.

 

Second: Sorry, using the argument that people will only be dishonest if you make them pay reasonable prices (sorry, $100 for a map is not unreasonable) sounds a. foolish b.like cachers are morally bankrupt and c. blackmail. Either you give me your product for free or I will steal it.

 

Besides, with all the alternatives available that are not only free, but in many ways superior or more accurate, people still try to steal the software. Even the CO said he didn't want to bother with installing the alternatives because of the learning curve (albeit very shallow curve), indicating they wanted the documentation or support that requires less thought on the users part from the company that comes with the pay version. Things that all cot money.

 

Funny, some of you complaining about this have no issue paying a buck or better for water (which works out to $12 + per gallon), a readily available, free commodity.

 

One of the Dilbert cartoons summed it up pretty well, breaking down the population into four sections based on smart/dumb and rich/poor.

 

As he said the dumb poor are useless, the dumb rich will hand over money willingly. The smart rich will figure a way to sue you and get your product for free, the smart poor with figure a way to steal it and so get it for free.

 

I don't have a problem paying a reasonable price for anything. If I dislike the price I don't buy, I'm not into this whole thing about bleating about being "forced" to pay for something that isn't essential for life. For me if I consider the price of something to be excessive I just won't pay it. Others will figure a way to rip it off.

 

Yes, people should read the EULA. In practise anything that sits in a tiny window and consists of multiple pages of legalese isn't going to be read by very many people. Either way when people realise (through reading the EULA or finding their product doesn't work any more) that they are so heavily restricted they are likely to be annoyed, which may result in lots of whining and dutiful handing over of more money, may result in people deciding not to deal with the company any more, and may result in people using hacked versions instead. Two out of three cases leaves the company not making any money at all.

 

In Garmin's case, since they make the hardware and license the data from elsewhere, it means people are less likely to upgrade their hardware. So Garmin has a major potential downside and little if any potential upside from an overly restrictive licensing regime. Which makes it appear even more strange that they don't seem to care about it.

[sviking]

The smart rich will figure a way to sue you and get your product for free, the smart poor with figure a way to steal it and so get it for free.

 

So, who's really smarter? The "smart poor", who will actually get it for FREE, unlike the "smart rich" who sue?

 

The TRULY "smart rich" will get it absolutely for free, too.

[sviking]

In Garmin's case, since they make the hardware and license the data from elsewhere, it means people are less likely to upgrade their hardware. So Garmin has a major potential downside and little if any potential upside from an overly restrictive licensing regime. Which makes it appear even more strange that they don't seem to care about it.

 

Exactly. I've seen it posted, here and otherwise, over and over again how Garmin's "hands are tied" because of NAVTEQ's "issues"...

 

BS. Garmin needs to be the 800lb gorilla in the ring, on behalf of its customers, and give NAVTEQ the "what for" about loosening up their map licensing agreement some. I don't know, but I'm willing to bet Garmin sells a HUGE percentage, as compared to of all other NAVTEQ mapping data combined. Garmin could definitely make a difference...if they cared, which doesn't appear to be the case...

[jholly]

In Garmin's case, since they make the hardware and license the data from elsewhere, it means people are less likely to upgrade their hardware. So Garmin has a major potential downside and little if any potential upside from an overly restrictive licensing regime. Which makes it appear even more strange that they don't seem to care about it.

 

Exactly. I've seen it posted, here and otherwise, over and over again how Garmin's "hands are tied" because of NAVTEQ's "issues"...

 

BS. Garmin needs to be the 800lb gorilla in the ring, on behalf of its customers, and give NAVTEQ the "what for" about loosening up their map licensing agreement some. I don't know, but I'm willing to bet Garmin sells a HUGE percentage, as compared to of all other NAVTEQ mapping data combined. Garmin could definitely make a difference...if they cared, which doesn't appear to be the case...

I'm betting that most of the NAVTEQ based maps are used in auto units, not handheld units. Folks buy a Nuvi and are happy with what they get. I bet that less than half that buy their Nuvi's with the free updates bother to update the units. Given this Garmin probably does not see the NAVTEQ licensing "issues" as a problem that needs to be addressed by bringing out the bats. Garmin probably has no interest in fixing something they do not view as a problem. When you go into Best Buy and see what they have on display for GPS units and they are *all* auto units you start to realize where handhelds fit in the scheme of things.

[sviking]

I'm betting that most of the NAVTEQ based maps are used in auto units, not handheld units.

 

Maybe... But, multi-use units like the Oregon have been out for years. And, now there's the awesome Montana. I just bought one and have CNNA 2013.10 on the micro SD card. And, no, I won't tell you where I got that map.