Jump to content

SD Cards and Meridian


Followers 0

Recommended Posts

quote:
Originally posted by Curious George:

Two questions;

 

What is the biggest SD card that will work in a Meridian - and how big does it make sense to go.


I got a 128Mb SD card for $35 at Frys ($49 - $15 rebate)$35 - $50 is about the right range.

You'll need to modify the ..mapsend.INI file to allow > 64Mb uploads. Change CONV_MEMORY_SIZE=16384 to =32768, I.E. up to 4 32Mb regions. I can upload the entire west coast from San Diego to Anacortes WA in this fashion (from Streets CD) probably less area from Topo.

 

P. L. Root

Link to comment

My memory says stunod has reported in these forums using a 256 card successfully; I've heard of a handful of successes and no reports of failure.

 

If you get a big 'un, you still may want to avoid honking large files. I've heard one report of someone with a 256 card onto which he had loaded a 200MB file. It wasn't clear if the file was corrupted or it choked the Meridian, but the file itself did not seem to work well even though the card seemed to function properly.

 

Max

Often wrong but seldom in doubt

Link to comment

Yup...no problem with 256 MB SD card. And yes, you don't want to try a HUGE file. Even if the Meridian can handle it, it will take forever for MapSend to prepare it. Someone in the yahoo group tried a 200+MB file and MapSend was still crunching on it 24 hours later. I think he finally gave up.

 

homer.gif

"Just because I don't care doesn't mean I don't understand."

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by EagleI:

Magellan tech support suggested smaller map sizes, say 16mb, will give optimum performance. Larger files take longer to display and refresh when in map screen mode.


 

I experienced this first hand. I created a 120Mb map and my screen refresh was agonizingly slow. I then made four smaller maps to cover the same area and the screen refresh rate is much faster. It is very easy to switch maps when needed.

 

Imagine life in a cacheless society!

Link to comment

quote:
Originally posted by EagleI:

smaller map sizes will give optimum performance. Larger files take longer to display and refresh when in map screen mode.


That's something I hadn't considered, but makes a lot of sense.

 

Also, it's a lot easier to search for addresses with a smaller region. If your region is all of Connecticut, it's a bit tedious looking for Elm St.

 

Jamie

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 0
×
×
  • Create New...