Mapsource Routing

[Guest Schdp]

Got the MetroGuide the other day and wanted to plan a route. The route it came up with was just plain wrong. I mean, it got me from point A to point B but it was really bad. Went to the Yahoo maps and did a route, came out fine the way we normally go. After placing waypoints at Interstates I wanted to take and such it finally gave me a resonable route.

 

Is this common for everyone? I just figured since I spent money on a Mapping package that I'd get better results.

 

(Using a Legend and latest MapSource)

[Guest alligator]

I've only plotted a few routes, and they seem reasonable. Did you check the preferences to see if you were "walking" or taking a "car"? Maybe this could affect it.

 

I was also disappointed because I wanted to use the Metroguide to plot running routes when I go running - but if you try to double back, it thinks you want the shortest route - which isn't always the case.

 

What really disappointed me though was the fact that the software wasn't up to the level I expected. It took me 3 minutes to find out how to find an address, and I still can't find some addresses! For software that is $125, you'd think it would be better designed. Overall, I'm not impressed. Mapquest is about 10 times better - and free. It's too bad I can'd download maps to my emap from Mapquest.

[Guest Rootbeer]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Schdp:

The route it came up with was just plain wrong. I mean, it got me from point A to point B but it was really bad.

---

 

It's tough for a computer program to plan a route as well as a person can, especially if the person knows what to optimize for.

 

The route you got was certainly optimized for something, but maybe not for what you wanted. Maybe it was the quickest route (according to the possibly-erroneous data that the program had available). Maybe it was the shortest, or the one with the least amount of travel on dangerous roads. Maybe it had the fewest turns. Maybe it avoided steep hills, or roads which are difficult to use during bad weather. Or it could have simply been avoiding highway markers with the number "13" on them.

 

Everybody's routing program will give you a funny route from time to time. The better programs will let you choose what to optimize for. The best will let you reject part of a route (because you know that highway 7 is closed this morning due to an accident) and retry.

 

Here's a trick that may help: If you can see that you want to take a route through a certain point, plot two routes. The first gets you from the start to that point, and the second goes from that point to your destination.

 

Good luck with it!

[Guest Rootbeer]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Schdp:

The route it came up with was just plain wrong. I mean, it got me from point A to point B but it was really bad.

---

 

It's tough for a computer program to plan a route as well as a person can, especially if the person knows what to optimize for.

 

The route you got was certainly optimized for something, but maybe not for what you wanted. Maybe it was the quickest route (according to the possibly-erroneous data that the program had available). Maybe it was the shortest, or the one with the least amount of travel on dangerous roads. Maybe it had the fewest turns. Maybe it avoided steep hills, or roads which are difficult to use during bad weather. Or it could have simply been avoiding highway markers with the number "13" on them.

 

Everybody's routing program will give you a funny route from time to time. The better programs will let you choose what to optimize for. The best will let you reject part of a route (because you know that highway 7 is closed this morning due to an accident) and retry.

 

Here's a trick that may help: If you can see that you want to take a route through a certain point, plot two routes. The first gets you from the start to that point, and the second goes from that point to your destination.

 

Good luck with it!