|
Cellular forums Home > Archive > GPS > May 2007 > Garmin versus Nuvi
You are viewing an archived Text-only version of the thread.
To view this thread in it's original format and/or if you want to reply to
this thread please [click here]
| Author |
Garmin versus Nuvi
|
|
| Bruce. 2007-05-24, 10:33 pm |
| I've been using a Garmin eMap for years and am shopping for a new model.
The Nuvi models have a great feature set for the price, but I've learned
something that keeps me from buying.
With the eMap, I plotted multiple routes (an entire vacation) on my PC, and
only then transferred the waypoints and routes to the eMap. Apparently
that's impossible to do the same on the Nuvi. I won't be able to plan
multiple stops and routes on my PC and then transfer those to the Nuvi.
So my question is, can TomTom do that? Plot a vacation in advance on a PC
and transfer the plan to the TomTom?
What TomTom model would you consider to be the best feature match for a Nuvi
350?
Thanks for any advice!
Bruce.
| |
|
| Hi
I have also have used for a long an Atlantic StreetPilot before switching to
up-to-date technology C550 units last year.
The philosophy of use of the new route GPS unit (the C5xx, Nüvis and Zümo)
are really different from the previous generation of mapping GPS.
As you, I have past hours preparing all the multiple route I will be
supposed to drive during my forcoming trips ! This was achieved with
MapSource on my PC.
This give the opportunity to select location and detour for agreement or
curiosity. My previous units store several routes with several viapoints. On
vacation, I frequnetly have to rename it in order to remember wich of them
were the direct route using highway,the one passing by local roads or the
one wich pass through scenic roads or spot...
This was quite an hard job. Most of the multiple route prepared was never
been used ! Due to change at last minute, out of time and weather
conditions, unexpected events...
If you are abble to prepare routes on MapSource for your eMap, it will be
kindly for you to prepare your destination WayPoints. As you eMap, the Nüvis
will receive WayPoints from MapSource.
You simply have to selected your prepared destination waypoint (store in
Favorite menu of the Nüvis) and you are on the go to it. The Nüvis allowed
one intermediate waypoint (one viapoint) during navigation to the final
destination. This is most of the time this is efficient to 'customised' your
route, in same rare case, you also have to change your navigation
preferences (shortest/fastest route, avoidance of toll raod or highway, ...)
For exemple, on the go to the hotel, it is easy to be make a detour to a
spectacular landscape or attraction by simply selecting your prepared
waypoint. Since the menu list you waypoint by proximity, on a glace, you see
wich are the closer POI . On the way, you change your mind. It is so easy to
select a new destination or viapoint and you are automatiquely re-route to
your destination , passing by the new selected viapoint.
In conclusion, don't hesitate the Nüvis is all of GARMIN plus much more
freedom. If you have already MapSource, you can immediately use your new
whith it !
P.S.: I have not speak about TMC information and handfree bluetooth phone
calling of same Nüvis with is for me of great interrest for the daily and
professional use of the unit.
Concerning the TomTom, there are softwares to transfert to it WayPoints or
ViaPoint of a route. But all route are re-calculate by the unit. Despite
Nüvis, there is a menu to modify routes, program avoidance area, forbide
usage of same specific routes and other route functions. It is quite like
the StreetPilot SP26xx and SP27xx series. But, all these functions need
extra manipulations and makes these units not so easy and simple as Nüvis
(or C550) to use.
Having using the old and new fashion of GPS guidance, I clearly prefer the
newest one since I am much more free to choose my way. Never need to
remember which route was prepared for a specific days, etc...
| |
|
| Bruce. wrote:
> I've been using a Garmin eMap for years and am shopping for a new
> model. The Nuvi models have a great feature set for the price, but
> I've learned something that keeps me from buying.
>
> With the eMap, I plotted multiple routes (an entire vacation) on my
> PC, and only then transferred the waypoints and routes to the eMap.
> Apparently that's impossible to do the same on the Nuvi. I won't be
> able to plan multiple stops and routes on my PC and then transfer
> those to the Nuvi.
> So my question is, can TomTom do that? Plot a vacation in advance on
> a PC and transfer the plan to the TomTom?
>
> What TomTom model would you consider to be the best feature match for
> a Nuvi 350?
>
> Thanks for any advice!
> Bruce.
I am relatively new to this whole GPS/travel thing and have been following
some of these posts about waypoints and pre-plotting trips in advance with
some interest and curiosity.
So forgive my question.
But, what is the difference to you, the user, if you can plot waypoints on
your PC, or if you can store each of your planned stops as a "Favorite" on
your GPS unit? I just don't get it I guess, but to the neophyte it seems
like a lot of fuss made over very little.
In the couple of months I have owned first a Streetpilot C330, and then a
Nuvi 350, I haven't noticed a problem in taking a drive which has multiple
stops. I just put the addresses in the unit as Favorites in advance of
leaving and then head to my first "Favorite". After I'm done at my first
stop, I go back to my Favorites list and hit my next stop, etc. I think the
Garmins hold 500 Favorites. That's a heck of a lot of waypoints.
Is there something I'm missing?
| |
| Nospam 2007-05-26, 7:33 am |
| Carl,
Which of the 2 do you like best and why?
Robert
"Carl" < crothman@NOSPAMopton
line.net> wrote in message
news:jkL5i.2724$Ka2.218@newsfe12.lga...
> Bruce. wrote:
>
> I am relatively new to this whole GPS/travel thing and have been following
> some of these posts about waypoints and pre-plotting trips in advance with
> some interest and curiosity.
>
> So forgive my question.
>
> But, what is the difference to you, the user, if you can plot waypoints on
> your PC, or if you can store each of your planned stops as a "Favorite" on
> your GPS unit? I just don't get it I guess, but to the neophyte it seems
> like a lot of fuss made over very little.
>
> In the couple of months I have owned first a Streetpilot C330, and then a
> Nuvi 350, I haven't noticed a problem in taking a drive which has multiple
> stops. I just put the addresses in the unit as Favorites in advance of
> leaving and then head to my first "Favorite". After I'm done at my first
> stop, I go back to my Favorites list and hit my next stop, etc. I think
> the Garmins hold 500 Favorites. That's a heck of a lot of waypoints.
>
> Is there something I'm missing?
>
| |
| Bruce. 2007-05-26, 3:33 pm |
| "Carl" < crothman@NOSPAMopton
line.net> wrote in message
news:jkL5i.2724$Ka2.218@newsfe12.lga...
> But, what is the difference to you, the user, if you can plot waypoints on
> your PC, or if you can store each of your planned stops as a "Favorite" on
> your GPS unit? I just don't get it I guess, but to the neophyte it seems
> like a lot of fuss made over very little.
In the case of my current eMap, the Mappoint software only rarely chooses
the optimum route. Some of the paths chosen are truly bizarre and
inexplicable. It's rare when it chooses the best path, or the path I would
prefer due to my knowledge of the area. But that's no problem on my PC
because I can simple drag the route it chooses to the route I want and then
upload the result to the eMap.
So it comes down to how good of a job it does picking routes. If the Nuvi
does an excellent job at reading my mind, then yes, you're right.
Bruce.
| |
| Jack Erbes 2007-05-26, 3:33 pm |
| Carl wrote:
> Bruce. wrote:
>
> I am relatively new to this whole GPS/travel thing and have been following
> some of these posts about waypoints and pre-plotting trips in advance with
> some interest and curiosity.
>
> So forgive my question.
>
> But, what is the difference to you, the user, if you can plot waypoints on
> your PC, or if you can store each of your planned stops as a "Favorite" on
> your GPS unit? I just don't get it I guess, but to the neophyte it seems
> like a lot of fuss made over very little.
Doing route planning on a PC was almost a requisite with the early
GPSRs. And I've come to like doing it. And if you're sitting around in
the house and think about going somewhere or where a place is, having it
on a PC and using it is just a natural act.
So at that point, understanding routes, tracks, and waypoints, knowing
that routes have one or more waypoints, uploading those to the GPS, just
all became the way to do it for the most part. Not every time you went
anywhere of course but everyone who used a GPS understood all that to
some extent and used it.
From day one, the routing choices made by the software was an issue.
You probably would not believe the hoops you had to jump through to make
you GPSR take you somewhere exactly the way you wanted to go. So when
multiple destination routing (MDR) showed up as a feature it was the
catalyst for having full control of routing.
Imagine being a salesman or someone that has to go to a lot of places in
a specific sequence or who wants to hit them all in the most efficient
sequence. Imagine the joy of having all your stops uploaded in a route.
You could go from having all kinds of yellow stickies and notes to
being paperless in the car and on the road.
I personally feel that having MDR and full control of routing is one of
the all time best features that evolved I'm not likely to ever buy a
GPS that will not do that. That and automatic route recalculation.
And having tracks was anywhere from interesting to essential for
gathering the details of the times and places you traveled to. Imagine,
a complete history of your travels, complete with times and dates. And
the stuff that you can get from that. How long a trip takes, how the
time of day changes that, average speeds, etc.
So Garmin pretty much perfects the process and then starts abandoning
what I see as key features and it just does not make sense to me. I'm
not sure that the is a "lot of fuss" about it but we're never going to
forget it existed.
In some ways it is like Garmin was trying to sell cheaper but dumber
units that would have the users upgrading as soon as the figured out
what they are missing. I still can't help but wonder if that was not
part of the plan, to get them started and then have them wanting the
model with more features. And product pages that don't really let you
figure it all out with buying it or talking to a lot of other GPS users.
> In the couple of months I have owned first a Streetpilot C330, and then a
> Nuvi 350, I haven't noticed a problem in taking a drive which has multiple
> stops. I just put the addresses in the unit as Favorites in advance of
> leaving and then head to my first "Favorite". After I'm done at my first
> stop, I go back to my Favorites list and hit my next stop, etc. I think the
> Garmins hold 500 Favorites. That's a heck of a lot of waypoints.
I don't think I've ever said it can't be done easily enough with the
nuvi and c330. It is just that there are, at least arguably, better ways.
> Is there something I'm missing?
I think you've missed doing it the other way, with a GPSR with MDR,
route optimization, having the mapping available on a PC for planning,
etc. When and if you ever do that, it would be to hear your opinion of
it all.
Its like I can't get excited about having a Bluetooth phone interface or
using it as a MP3 player. In fact I see those features as an
unnecessary distraction and maybe even dangerous. But maybe someday
I'll have a GPSR with those kinds of bells and whistles on it and my
attitude will change.
Jack
| |
|
| Nospam wrote:
> Carl,
> Which of the 2 do you like best and why?
>
Sorry for the late response but the holiday weekend set me behind on my
usenet threading... :-) I decided I preferred the Nuvi but not necessarily
for the "right" reasons.
I am a gadget freak and love the small, compact size of the Nuvi, along with
its inherently greater satellite sensitivity. As well as its greater ease of
removability from the car.
But, in practice, the C330 was probably the better choice for my needs. One
of my cars is a convertible. I found the audio to be more sufficient when
the top was down and I was at highway speed. I also felt the C330 had a
brighter screen and was more visible on a sunny day, again with that top
down. To be clear though, the Nuvi manages to be adequate enough under
those circumstances, but not nearly as comfortably.
I lost the C330 to a theft and replaced it with the Nuvi, which, as you
might guess, never stays in the car... ;-)
[color=darkred]
> Robert
>
> "Carl" < crothman@NOSPAMopton
line.net> wrote in message
> news:jkL5i.2724$Ka2.218@newsfe12.lga...
| |
|
| Bruce. wrote:
> "Carl" < crothman@NOSPAMopton
line.net> wrote in message
> news:jkL5i.2724$Ka2.218@newsfe12.lga...
>
> In the case of my current eMap, the Mappoint software only rarely
> chooses the optimum route. Some of the paths chosen are truly
> bizarre and inexplicable. It's rare when it chooses the best path,
> or the path I would prefer due to my knowledge of the area. But
> that's no problem on my PC because I can simple drag the route it
> chooses to the route I want and then upload the result to the eMap.
>
> So it comes down to how good of a job it does picking routes. If the
> Nuvi does an excellent job at reading my mind, then yes, you're right.
>
> Bruce.
Point well taken. My Nuvi is never right when I'm in my own neighborhood. I
know the ways I want to go. But I guess I got it for those places I've
never been. And for those places, it manages to get me there.
| |
|
| Jack Erbes wrote:
> Carl wrote:
>
> Doing route planning on a PC was almost a requisite with the early
> GPSRs. And I've come to like doing it. And if you're sitting around
> in the house and think about going somewhere or where a place is,
> having it on a PC and using it is just a natural act.
>
> So at that point, understanding routes, tracks, and waypoints, knowing
> that routes have one or more waypoints, uploading those to the GPS,
> just all became the way to do it for the most part. Not every time
> you went anywhere of course but everyone who used a GPS understood
> all that to some extent and used it.
>
> From day one, the routing choices made by the software was an issue.
> You probably would not believe the hoops you had to jump through to
> make you GPSR take you somewhere exactly the way you wanted to go. So when
> multiple destination routing (MDR) showed up as a feature it
> was the catalyst for having full control of routing.
>
> Imagine being a salesman or someone that has to go to a lot of places
> in a specific sequence or who wants to hit them all in the most
> efficient sequence. Imagine the joy of having all your stops
> uploaded in a route. You could go from having all kinds of yellow
> stickies and notes to being paperless in the car and on the road.
>
My brother-in-law's girlfirend is a real estate salesperson. Until a year
ago she was relying on those yellow stickies and paper maps. Then I
convinced him to buy her a GPS unit as a gift. She knows nothing from
waypoints but she's thrilled just the same. She saves hours a day finding
her stops.
>
> I personally feel that having MDR and full control of routing is one
> of the all time best features that evolved I'm not likely to ever
> buy a GPS that will not do that. That and automatic route recalculation.
>
Being a hobbyist type- and a techno-type person, I can relate to this.
>
> And having tracks was anywhere from interesting to essential for
> gathering the details of the times and places you traveled to. Imagine, a
> complete history of your travels, complete with times and
> dates. And the stuff that you can get from that. How long a trip
> takes, how the time of day changes that, average speeds, etc.
>
> So Garmin pretty much perfects the process and then starts abandoning
> what I see as key features and it just does not make sense to me. I'm
> not sure that the is a "lot of fuss" about it but we're never going to
> forget it existed.
>
> In some ways it is like Garmin was trying to sell cheaper but dumber
> units that would have the users upgrading as soon as the figured out
> what they are missing. I still can't help but wonder if that was not
> part of the plan, to get them started and then have them wanting the
> model with more features. And product pages that don't really let you
> figure it all out with buying it or talking to a lot of other GPS
> users.
>
> I don't think I've ever said it can't be done easily enough with the
> nuvi and c330. It is just that there are, at least arguably, better
> ways.
>
> I think you've missed doing it the other way, with a GPSR with MDR,
> route optimization, having the mapping available on a PC for planning,
> etc. When and if you ever do that, it would be to hear your opinion
> of it all.
>
I actually didn't want to get that involved in the technical aspects of GPS
at this time. I wanted a plug n play unit. For the past couple of years I've
been using a Dell Axim X50v with the bluetooth GPS unit and Pharos software.
I had to sit down and pre-plan my routes just to make sure I had the correct
maps loaded. One missing map and the routing wouldn't work. I got tired of
trying to figure it all out.
>
> Its like I can't get excited about having a Bluetooth phone interface
> or using it as a MP3 player. In fact I see those features as an
> unnecessary distraction and maybe even dangerous. But maybe someday
> I'll have a GPSR with those kinds of bells and whistles on it and my
> attitude will change.
>
I agree with you fully on this. I would rather the Nuvi had some greater
user controllability and don't care that it plays mp3's or interface with my
cell phone. It would be great if it had a "Learn" function and could learn
the ways we prefer to go.
>
> Jack
|
|
|
|
|