Garmin GPS - Garmin's new single unit map update policy

Author

Garmin's new single unit map update policy

Mike in Utah

2007-08-23, 7:33 am

Hello all,

I recently purchased a Nuvi 660 and was lucky enough to get the free
update to City Navigator 2008, which works great in my vehicles. I also
just purchased a GPSMAP 60CSx for when I go out hiking.

Being as I have City Navigator 2008 on the Nuvi 660, I wanted to put my
State from the City Navigator 2008 maps on my 60CSx. The problem I ran
into was Garmin in all of their ultimate wisdom have recently changed
the number of units that can utilize the software packages starting with
the 2008 versions. Now with all future software updates from Garmin
only one unit can be updated. To update more that one GPS unit,
additional software packages will have to be purchased, even if you only
want to load a single State. Currently the only thing I can do is to
load the older version 8 on the 60CSx without having to purchase another
software package.

I am personally considering returning the GPSMAP 60CSx to where I
purchased it because of this issue. I really believe this new policy is
a huge mistake on the Garmin management's part.

While I was on the phone with a Garmin service representative I asked
whom I could write to about their new one unit map policy. I was given
the contact information below and want to share this information for
those of you who may want to write to Garmin about their new map policy.
Hopefully if enough folks will take the time to write, the policy will
be reconsidered. I'll bet if a couple of thousand letters show up in
these peoples inbox, things will change back quickly.

Garmin contact information follows:

Dr. Min H. Kao CEO
Garmin International
1200 East 151st Street
Olathe, KS 66062

Other officers that could use a little encouragement at the same address
are:

Min H. Kao Dr., Chmn.; C.E.O.; Dir.,
Kevin S. Rauckman, C.F.O.; Treas.,
Andrew R. Etkind, Gen. Couns.; Sec.,
Brian J. Pokorny, V.P.; Operations,
Gary V. Kelley, V.P.; Marktg.

Please take a few minutes to make your feeling known about their new map
policy. I know I will be.

Email messages can be sent to TECHSUPP@Garmin.com as well.

Please keep all correspondences sent to these people direct to the point
and professional.

FYI: Min H Kao ranked 235 among The 400 Richest Americans In 2005.

Garmin CORPORATE HEADQUARTERS
5th Floor Harbour Place
George Town, Grand Cayman
Cayman Islands

Phone: 345-946-5203
Fax: 345-945-3390

GRMN INSIDERS ON BOARD OF DIRECTORS*
Min Kao Chairman, Chief Executive Officer, Chairman of Garmin
Corporation, President of Garmin International Inc., Garmin USA Inc.,
Garmin Corporation and Garmin AT Inc., Director of Garmin Corporation,
Garmin International Inc., Garmin USA Inc., Garmin AT Inc and Garmin
(Europe) Ltd age 58

Kevin Rauckman Chief Financial Officer, Principal Accounting Officer,
Treasurer, Treasurer of Garmin International Inc. & Garmin USA Inc.,
Director of Finance - Garmin International Inc and Director of Garmin
International Inc. & Garmin USA Inc age 44

Gary Kelley Vice President of Marketing, Vice President of Marketing of
Garmin International, Director of Marketing, Garmin USA Inc. and
Director of Garmin Europe Ltd age 60

Clifton Pemble Director and Vice President of Engineering - Garmin
International, Inc 41

Other Board Members on Board of Directors*
Gary Burrell Garmin Ltd. age 69
Gene Betts Embarq Corp. age 54
Donald Eller Ph.D. Garmin Ltd. age 64
Charles Peffer Garmin Ltd. age 59
Thomas McDonnell DST Systems Inc.age 61

*Data is at least as current as the most recent Definitive Proxy.

Elmo P. Shagnasty

2007-08-23, 7:33 am

In article < Xns9994DCEE36D312345
@216.196.97.131>,
Mike in Utah < Mike6746@NOSPAMComca
st.net> wrote:

> Being as I have City Navigator 2008 on the Nuvi 660, I wanted to put my
> State from the City Navigator 2008 maps on my 60CSx. The problem I ran
> into was Garmin in all of their ultimate wisdom have recently changed
> the number of units that can utilize the software packages starting with
> the 2008 versions. Now with all future software updates from Garmin
> only one unit can be updated. To update more that one GPS unit,
> additional software packages will have to be purchased, even if you only
> want to load a single State.

Not other packages. No further software need be purchased or installed.
You need to unlock the software to use with the other unit, that's all.

richowings@gmail.com

2007-08-23, 10:33 am

You won't get anywhere. As I understand it, this is a new licensing
requirement from NAVTEQ.

Rich Owings
http://gpstracklog.typepad.com
http://gpstrackingsystems.biz

Pegleg

2007-08-23, 10:33 am

On Wed, 22 Aug 2007 22:44:48 -0500, Mike in Utah
< Mike6746@NOSPAMComca
st.net> wrote:

>I am personally considering returning the GPSMAP 60CSx to where I
>purchased it because of this issue. I really believe this new policy is
>a huge mistake on the Garmin management's part.

Returning the unit is certainly your option and there are other
manufacturers to choose from.

In the real world do you really think Garmin cares what you think or
that any of the chief executives are going to take you seriously?

The population of the USENET gps groups is so very small, compared to
the total number of users with Garmin products, the impact of a very
few here contacting Garmin would be miniscule.

Probably most people here don't like the new policy (I don't) but the
final choice is to do your due diligence on company policies and to buy
or not to buy Garmin's products.

I personally will continue to buy their products because I think they
are the best consumer gps products available.

Colin Wilson

2007-08-23, 3:33 pm

> You won't get anywhere. As I understand it, this is a new licensing
> requirement from NAVTEQ.

I think we need to get this clarified with NAVTEQ personally.

Garmin used to (possibly still do) refuse to sell european maps to
european customers without forcing the sale of hardware the customer
didn't want or need.

There was a suggestion that NAVTEQ were to blame for this restriction,
but a quick email to them quickly blew that one out of the water.

This is an extract of Garmins' response after contacting NAVTEQ:

(Laura Tomei - International Cartography Manager, Dec. 2004)

------
You are correct that this policy is not imposed by NAVTEQ. NAVTEQ has
nothing to do with the decision to sell the City Navigator Europe only
bundled with the GPS units in Europe. This decision is a Garmin
decision to protect our wide network of very supportive distributors
and dealers in Europe. If every customer would do like you have done,
purchasing the hardware in North America, we would have no business,
no support network and most of all NO SERVICE network to provide to
our customers around Europe.
If no service network was provided, who would fix or replace your unit
if it failed? You would have to send the GPS unit to the USA, which
surely you couldn't find very convenient.

Although you might think this policy is unjust, we find that this is
the best way for us to assure our presence in the European market.

Units and software sold in North America usually have less royalties
and development costs and that is the main reason why prices are lower
in the USA, and of course the current favourable currency exchange.
So we might understand that customer like you are enticed to purchase
in the USA or Canada, however our decision stands. You are correct,
it is indeed our decision to protect our business network in Europe.
------

bennor3814

2007-08-24, 10:33 am

> Now with all future software updates from Garmin
> only one unit can be updated. To update more that one GPS unit,
> additional software packages will have to be purchased, even if you only
> want to load a single State.

To be fair, Garmin did dropped the price for the update to $69 which is
apparently half of what they charge for the previous version. You were lucky
you were able to get a free update, many of us didn't and had to pay for it.

There have also been many people who complain in these boards and various
online forums about the upgrade policy, and the fact that they "feel" the
Nuvi is missing features; like route uploading from Mapsource and multiple
POI/Waypoints in a route. If your unhappy with the product, then return the
it and go with another manufacturer. That is the only way to really send a
message to Garmin about your dissatisfaction. If Garmin see's their sales
dropping on the locked map products then perhaps they'll change the policy
or drop the price. It is an unfortunate growing trend in business these days
to milk the customer for every last dime on everything.

The update can also be installed on a Windows OS based computer as well even
though it's not mentioned on the Update DVD packaging. And you can transfer
POI's into the Nuvi with the updated Mapsource that is on the Update DVD as
well, so there is no need for the Garmin POI loader program.

Here are the steps to install the CN NA NT 2008 Update to a computer. Note
you must have an account created at http://my.garmin.com for this to work.

1) Run the City Navigator North America NT 2008 Update DVD as instructed to
update your Nuvi.

2) After updating the Nuvi, locate the file called
" CNNANT2008Update_ENU
.msi" on the DVD in the Windows\MSI folder and run it.
Note, this is the English installation version, there are other language
versions in the MSI folder.

3) Proceed through the Setup program to install the update to the
computer's
hard drive.

4) After installation, launch the MapSource program. After MapSource
launches you should get a dialog box related to Unlocking the maps.

5) At this stage, log into http://my.garmin.com and select Mapsource
Unlock.
When the Unlock page appears, City Navigator North America NT 2008 Deluxe
Unlock should be listed with an Unlock Code. Copy this code.

6) Return to the MapSource program and proceed through the unlock process
and use the unlock code where indicated. You should only need to enter the
unlock code, not the registration code that was used to update the NUVI.

The city Navigator North America NT 2008 should now be available to view in
the MapSource program. If the unlock fails, the maps can still be viewed to
some extent, but no POI's are shown.

Jerry M

2007-08-24, 12:33 pm

On Aug 24, 9:14 am, "bennor3814" <ctrain...@snet.net> wrote:
>
> To be fair, Garmin did dropped the price for the update to $69 which is
> apparently half of what they charge for the previous version. You were lucky
> you were able to get a free update, many of us didn't and had to pay for it.
>
What do you mean garmin dropped the price from previous version? Last
years version eight for regular and NT version 8 for CNNA was $75.00
so with NT's 6 dollar shipping fee it is basically the same!
Jerry

bennor3814

2007-08-24, 3:33 pm

"Jerry M" <moorheadbigj@aol.com> wrote in message
news:1187970756.864940.67490@l22g2000prc.googlegroups.com...
> On Aug 24, 9:14 am, "bennor3814" <ctrain...@snet.net> wrote:
> What do you mean garmin dropped the price from previous version? Last
> years version eight for regular and NT version 8 for CNNA was $75.00
> so with NT's 6 dollar shipping fee it is basically the same!
> Jerry
>

Jerry you are correct. Folks sorry for the incorrect information about the
update for 2008 being cheaper (by half) than the v8.

I thought I read this somewhere, either on http://www.gpspassion.com/ or
http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/, but now I cannot find the thread that had
the comment. The comment where this half price statement was made was in a
lengthy thread detailing the updated unlock policy and the uproar over it on
one of the two sites I mentioned above. In this NG posting the OP was
commenting on the two unlock policy and how Garmin changed it to one. What
isn't clear is if the "update" V8 version of CN NA NT had two unlock codes.
Some people indicated it was only one unlock code
(http://forum.brighthand.com/showpos...7&postcount=110) for the
NT v8 upgrade. The full version of v8 NT had the 2 unlock policy. I may have
miss read people's comments about buying the full version of v8 NT. And who
were now upset that the newer version only had one update code. This change
in policy by Garmin has obviously lead to much confusion. Again sorry for
posting incorrect info on the pricing.

Carl Heinz

2007-08-24, 3:33 pm

On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 18:29:30 GMT, "bennor3814" <ctraining@snet.net> wrote:

>
>Jerry you are correct. Folks sorry for the incorrect information about the
>update for 2008 being cheaper (by half) than the v8.

However, Garmin has made the update available through other retail outlets
including our favorite online vendors. Street price now comes into play. A
quick look at Froogle shows several in the $53 to $60 range
--
Carl Heinz
cfheinz57@charter.net
(Remove number)

Edwin Pawlowski

2007-08-24, 10:33 pm

"bennor3814" <ctraining@snet.net> wrote in message
> There have also been many people who complain in these boards and various
> online forums about the upgrade policy, and the fact that they "feel" the
> Nuvi is missing features; like route uploading from Mapsource and multiple
> POI/Waypoints in a route. If your unhappy with the product, then return
> the it and go with another manufacturer. That is the only way to really
> send a message to Garmin about your dissatisfaction. If Garmin see's their
> sales dropping on the locked map products then perhaps they'll change the
> policy or drop the price. It is an unfortunate growing trend in business
> these days to milk the customer for every last dime on everything.

The mapping software is not cheap, but the other "complaints" are unfounded.

If the buyer did some research, they find the product does what the
manufacturer says it will do. If you want other functions and features, go
elsewhere. Sort of like buying a fishing rod and become disappointed when
it does not function properly when you go deer hunting.
--
Ed
http://pages.cthome.net/edhome/

Sam

2007-08-25, 4:33 am

bennor3814 wrote:[color=darkred
]

What model unit is really better than the Nuvi? Sure, you hack into Mio
units and upload Iguidance maps but not many of us are willing or
prepared to go to that extreme? Sounds like Garmin has us by our you
know what.

Phil Wheeler

2007-08-25, 10:33 pm

Jerry M wrote:
> On Aug 24, 9:14 am, "bennor3814" <ctrain...@snet.net> wrote:
> What do you mean garmin dropped the price from previous version? Last
> years version eight for regular and NT version 8 for CNNA was $75.00
> so with NT's 6 dollar shipping fee it is basically the same!
>

Old policy is that you got unlock codes for two
units. Now only one.

Phil

Holden

2007-08-26, 4:33 am

Phil Wheeler <wt6uh-ng7@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:46d0e358$0$2351
5$4c368faf@roadrunne
r.com:

> Jerry M wrote:
>
> Old policy is that you got unlock codes for two
> units. Now only one.
>
> Phil
>

last update i saw was something like 140 or 150.. so the new price seems
like half price to me

Phil Wheeler

2007-08-26, 12:33 pm

Holden wrote:
> Phil Wheeler <wt6uh-ng7@yahoo.com> wrote in
> news:46d0e358$0$2351
5$4c368faf@roadrunne
r.com:
>
>
> last update i saw was something like 140 or 150.. so the new price seems
> like half price to me

Last update I paid (before the latest) was around
$120.

Depends of point of view: If you have two units,
price is about the same, per unit. If you have
one, the price is a better deal.

Phil

bennor3814

2007-08-27, 3:33 pm

"Sam" <nospam@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:N0Pzi.90843$fJ5.65100@pd7urf1no...
> What model unit is really better than the Nuvi? Sure, you hack into Mio
> units and upload Iguidance maps but not many of us are willing or
> prepared to go to that extreme? Sounds like Garmin has us by our you
> know what.
>

How does Garmin have "us by our you know what"? If Garmin was the only
retailer of commercial GPS units, than yes, we could be held hostage to the
whims of Garmin. But they are not. If I buy a Toyota Corolla, but really
wanted the features found in the Toyota Camery (or Honda Accord), is Toyota
holding me by my you know what? If people want features that the Nuvi
doesn't have then go with something like the StreetPilot 2820 or the Zumo
that has more/different features.

I did my research, compared the models and manufacturers, and talked (and
rode along) with several people who have automotive other GPS units; and
found the Nuvi 350 (that I purchased on sale for $349 last March) to be the
best bang for the buck. I do not regret buying it for one minute.

I suspect that people who dislike the Nuvi (for reasons other than cost)
probably had the older StreetPilot 2xxx units that had things like route
uploading/saving and auto destination sort. But those units also cost two or
three times as much as the lower priced Nuvi's like the 350. Garmin probably
did some kind of cost benefit analysis and found they could sell more, and
profit more on GPS units like the Nuvi that have a different feature set (FM
transmitter and Bluetooth for example), versus the more (traditionally)
expensive units like the StreetPilot 2xxx line that have routes, auto sort
multiple destinations, and other features not found in the Nuvi line.

Bruce.

2007-08-27, 3:33 pm

"bennor3814" <ctraining@snet.net> wrote in message
news:SzFAi.51028$YL5.34783@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
> I suspect that people who dislike the Nuvi (for reasons other than cost)
> probably had the older StreetPilot 2xxx units that had things like route
> uploading/saving and auto destination sort. But those units also cost two
> or three times as much as the lower priced Nuvi's like the 350.

In my case I had an older eMap which was signiificantly cheaper than my 650
yet it did (downloaded from a PC)multiwaypoint routes.

Bruce.

Bert Hyman

2007-08-27, 3:33 pm

noone@nowhere.com (Bruce.) wrote in
news:92GAi.52$7P7.2@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net:

> "bennor3814" <ctraining@snet.net> wrote in message
> news:SzFAi.51028$YL5.34783@newssvr29.news.prodigy.net...
>
> In my case I had an older eMap which was signiificantly cheaper
> than my 650 yet it did (downloaded from a PC)multiwaypoint routes.

But since the eMap can't do onboard route calculations, the routes
you loaded into it were static.

What everybody wants (well, what I want) is a receiver that will
accept the full route generated by MapSource, including vias, like
my old eMap did, but still auto-route if I go off the pre-loaded
route.

--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@iphouse.com

Bruce.

2007-08-27, 3:33 pm

"Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9999995E1943
8VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
> But since the eMap can't do onboard route calculations, the routes
> you loaded into it were static.
>
> What everybody wants (well, what I want) is a receiver that will
> accept the full route generated by MapSource, including vias, like
> my old eMap did, but still auto-route if I go off the pre-loaded
> route.

Yep, that's what I want too.

Bruce.

bennor3814

2007-08-27, 10:33 pm

"Bruce." <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:LkGAi.56$7P7.12@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net...
> "Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns9999995E1943
8VeebleFetzer@127.0.0.1...
>
> Yep, that's what I want too.
>
> Bruce.

Well both the GPSMAP 60 line, the and 76 line and eTrex Vista Cx and HCx
will do autorouting and routes. There may be more but those are the ones
that came up with a quick compare of units on the Garmin site. The down side
is the screens are significantly smaller and they don't have TTS (afaik)
voice announce.

After having used a Nuvi for the last six months I do really wonder what
added value the ability to upload a route has anymore. I used to upload
routes on a Garmin Vista (non-autorouting model). Now with the Nuvi, I don't
really have a problem creating a list of POI's in Mapsource (and setting up
a route) then downloading just the POI's into the Nuvi and selecting the
next POI of the route each time I stop at a current POI. The Nuvi is quick
at generating a route, even a 400 mile one I drove a few weeks ago. And the
Nuvi does allow for the inclusion of one POI as a VIA point. Plus, I have at
times seen the Nuvi generate route a little different than the Mapsource
does (it's rare but has happened).

Bruce.

2007-08-27, 10:33 pm

"bennor3814" <ctraining@snet.net> wrote in message
news:kSGAi.59$7P7.26@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net...
> Well both the GPSMAP 60 line, the and 76 line and eTrex Vista Cx and HCx
> will do autorouting and routes. There may be more but those are the ones
> that came up with a quick compare of units on the Garmin site. The down
> side
> is the screens are significantly smaller and they don't have TTS (afaik)
> voice announce.

Yes, when I bought my 650, giving up routes was a concious choice to get the
features of the 650 at that price point. I knew I was losing routes when I
bought it and it was an extremely painful choice. In the end I placed more
importance of the other features of the 650.

> After having used a Nuvi for the last six months I do really wonder what
> added value the ability to upload a route has anymore.

As I've posted here before, my current project is following Route 66.
Creating sufficient waypoints or POIs to keep the Nuvi on Route 66 and off
the newer replacement interstates would require POIs about every 10 miles,
probably many hundreds in number. That's not a manageable option for a 2500
trip.

What would be a snap to do with my eMap, the Nuvi line won't do at all. A
single downloaded route will always be MUCH easier to do and use than having
to create a zillion POIs or Favorites.

Bruce.

Bert Hyman

2007-08-27, 10:33 pm

In news:kSGAi.59$7P7.26@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net "bennor3814"
<ctraining@snet.net> wrote:

> "Bruce." <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
> news:LkGAi.56$7P7.12@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net...
>
> Well both the GPSMAP 60 line, the and 76 line and eTrex Vista Cx and
> HCx will do autorouting and routes.

I guess you haven't been following the long-running rant, most likely
from former eMap owners like me, about how the new(er) handheld
auto-routing GPSRs from Garmin treat routes you generate on your PC with
MapSource after you upload them to the receiver.

With the non-routing eMap, a route generated on a PC with MapSource
would have not just your explicitly placed waypoints, but also all of
MapSource's generated vias. With this info, you could be certain that
the route displayed on the eMap would precisely match the route you saw
on MapSource.

With the new receivers, like my current 76CSx, only the explicitly
placed waypoints are sent to the receiver, which will then independently
re-generate its own idea of what the route should be, which often
doesn't match the route shown on MapSource.

MapSource's routing preferences and algorithms apparently don't match
those of the current breed of receivers and the routes shown on the
receiver are sometimes surprising.

This is probably only an issue for users of hand-held units who like to
plan their travels ahead of time, create specific routes and load them
into their receivers before hitting the road. Folks with dedicated
automotive receivers who just do a "go to X from here" route probably
don't even understand what we're going on about :-).

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert@iphouse.com

bennor3814

2007-08-27, 10:33 pm

"Bruce." <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:2bHAi.64$7P7.44@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net...
> "bennor3814" <ctraining@snet.net> wrote in message
> news:kSGAi.59$7P7.26@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net...
>
> Yes, when I bought my 650, giving up routes was a concious choice to get
> the features of the 650 at that price point. I knew I was losing routes
> when I bought it and it was an extremely painful choice. In the end I
> placed more importance of the other features of the 650.
>
>
> As I've posted here before, my current project is following Route 66.
> Creating sufficient waypoints or POIs to keep the Nuvi on Route 66 and off
> the newer replacement interstates would require POIs about every 10 miles,
> probably many hundreds in number. That's not a manageable option for a
> 2500 trip.
>
> What would be a snap to do with my eMap, the Nuvi line won't do at all. A
> single downloaded route will always be MUCH easier to do and use than
> having to create a zillion POIs or Favorites.
>
> Bruce.

Wouldn't something like the StreetPilot 2820 or a discontinued or
refurbished StreetPilot 2xxx line unit for such a long trip be more
appropriate? If cost wasn't the main factor, what were the features of the
650 that were better than those on something like the StreetPilot 2820?

It seems like Garmin StreetPilot 2xxx line is designed for the serious road
traveler with a long route, while the Nuvi line is for Joe Six Pack and a
weekend point a to point b to point c kind of trip.

While the StreetPilot 2610 is discontinued, they can be had for as little as
$365 at places like TVNav.com and would provide the routing that would be
needed on such a long trip.

Bruce.

2007-08-27, 10:33 pm

"bennor3814" <ctraining@snet.net> wrote in message
news:ZkJAi.3811$JD.2598@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net...
> Wouldn't something like the StreetPilot 2820 or a discontinued or
> refurbished StreetPilot 2xxx line unit for such a long trip be more
> appropriate? If cost wasn't the main factor, what were the features of the
> 650 that were better than those on something like the StreetPilot 2820?

The differences are many. I wasn't considering obsolete/refurbished units
at all. Current products only.

The Nuvi is smaller and more portable. While the Nuvi 650 isn't the best
choice for GeoCaching, it is possible to use it for that, so battery
operation and battery life was an issue for me. The 2820 is external power
only.

Again, for portability, the 2820 suffers from size, almost double the
weight, and won't fit a shirt pocket like the 650 does.

The Garmin site also says "no" for "High-sensitivity receiver" for the 2820.
The 2820 also will not take SD cards.

And the 2820 is $400 more (MSRP).

And I thought the picture viewer would be a cool feature to have (turned out
to be a disappointment).

The 650 has a bigger screen.

For those multiple form and feature issues, I decided to give up routes as
the part of the price for the 650. At the time, being forced to make that
decision upset me greatly, and still does.

Bruce.

bennor3814

2007-08-28, 10:33 am

"Bruce." <noone@nowhere.com> wrote in message
news:SbKAi.395$Sd4.251@nlpi061.nbdc.sbc.com...
> "bennor3814" <ctraining@snet.net> wrote in message
> news:ZkJAi.3811$JD.2598@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net...
>
> The differences are many. I wasn't considering obsolete/refurbished units
> at all. Current products only.
>
> The Nuvi is smaller and more portable. While the Nuvi 650 isn't the best
> choice for GeoCaching, it is possible to use it for that, so battery
> operation and battery life was an issue for me. The 2820 is external
> power only.
>
> Again, for portability, the 2820 suffers from size, almost double the
> weight, and won't fit a shirt pocket like the 650 does.
>
> The Garmin site also says "no" for "High-sensitivity receiver" for the
> 2820. The 2820 also will not take SD cards.
>
> And the 2820 is $400 more (MSRP).
>
> And I thought the picture viewer would be a cool feature to have (turned
> out to be a disappointment).
>
> The 650 has a bigger screen.
>
> For those multiple form and feature issues, I decided to give up routes as
> the part of the price for the 650. At the time, being forced to make that
> decision upset me greatly, and still does.
>
> Bruce.

Thanks for the reply, I do find it helpful to see what others use as their
criteria as others may use features I haven't used. I would love to see a
Garmin response as to why the removed the multi-poi route feature and
tracking feature from the Nuvi since those two features seem to be the ones
people used most on the other Garmin automotive units. And I wonder if those
features are hardware or software based. If software, then why cannot, or
will not, Garmin add it back in? The Nuvi has plenty of storage space
(either on the internal memory or the external SD card).

Couldn't agree more on the picture viewer. The only time I use it now is
just to show others that the feature is there. Now if the Nuvi could just
play video...

bennor3814

2007-08-28, 10:33 am

"Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
news:Xns9999BBF25651
CVeebleFetzer@216.250.184.7...
> In news:kSGAi.59$7P7.26@newssvr19.news.prodigy.net "bennor3814"
> <ctraining@snet.net> wrote:
>
>
> I guess you haven't been following the long-running rant, most likely
> from former eMap owners like me, about how the new(er) handheld
> auto-routing GPSRs from Garmin treat routes you generate on your PC with
> MapSource after you upload them to the receiver.
>
> With the non-routing eMap, a route generated on a PC with MapSource
> would have not just your explicitly placed waypoints, but also all of
> MapSource's generated vias. With this info, you could be certain that
> the route displayed on the eMap would precisely match the route you saw
> on MapSource.
>
> With the new receivers, like my current 76CSx, only the explicitly
> placed waypoints are sent to the receiver, which will then independently
> re-generate its own idea of what the route should be, which often
> doesn't match the route shown on MapSource.
>
> MapSource's routing preferences and algorithms apparently don't match
> those of the current breed of receivers and the routes shown on the
> receiver are sometimes surprising.
>
> This is probably only an issue for users of hand-held units who like to
> plan their travels ahead of time, create specific routes and load them
> into their receivers before hitting the road. Folks with dedicated
> automotive receivers who just do a "go to X from here" route probably
> don't even understand what we're going on about :-).
>
> --
> Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert@iphouse.com

I liked the eMap. And would have bought an eMap instead of the Vista, but
the eMap was no longer being produced and the eTrex had a smaller form
factor. I am also a follower of the gripes on the eTrex click stick (I've
grown to hate it), and having to give my eTrex the "Garmin Love Tap", that
us eTrex users have to give to our units on occasion to fix screen
corruption issues and hung click sticks.

And I can attest to the difference in routes that Mapsource generates over
the Nuvi. It doesn't happen all the time but it does happen.

Bruce.

2007-08-28, 10:33 am

"bennor3814" <ctraining@snet.net> wrote in message
news:V4VAi.47884$Um6.33445@newssvr12.news.prodigy.net...
> I would love to see a Garmin response as to why the removed the multi-poi
> route feature and tracking feature from the Nuvi since those two features
> seem to be the ones people used most on the other Garmin automotive units.

I would too. Since the functionality already exists in other Garmin units,
they had to make a conscious choice to remove that code from the Nuvi line.
The whole thing makes absolutely no sense to me.

Bruce.

Andy Waddell

2007-08-28, 10:33 pm

"What everybody wants (well, what I want) is a receiver that will

Let me chime in as a longtime GPS-V user that the -V (an autorouting-capable
unit) accepted full MapSource routes and only recalculated on diversion from
the preprogrammed route.

I just bought a 60Cx and have discovered that it always recalculates a
route, MapSource-downloaded or not.

I too would like to see the MapSource-downloaded routes remain
un-recalculated. This must be a software based feature if the -V didn't do
it but the 60Cx does, since both are autorouting devices.

Seems like there's a number of us here who would like to bring this issue
forward to Garmin. Do Jack Erbes or any of the other "old-timers/experts" of
this forum have any suggestions on how to best approach Garmin such that
they'll be most interested in listening?

--
ADW
"bennor3814" <ctraining@snet.net> wrote in message
news:xfVAi.47886$Um6.41866@newssvr12.news.prodigy.net...[color=darkred]
> "Bert Hyman" <bert@iphouse.com> wrote in message
> news:Xns9999BBF25651
CVeebleFetzer@216.250.184.7...
>
> I liked the eMap. And would have bought an eMap instead of the Vista, but
> the eMap was no longer being produced and the eTrex had a smaller form
> factor. I am also a follower of the gripes on the eTrex click stick (I've
> grown to hate it), and having to give my eTrex the "Garmin Love Tap", that
> us eTrex users have to give to our units on occasion to fix screen
> corruption issues and hung click sticks.
>
> And I can attest to the difference in routes that Mapsource generates over
> the Nuvi. It doesn't happen all the time but it does happen.
>

Jack Erbes

2007-08-28, 10:33 pm

Andy Waddell wrote:
> "What everybody wants (well, what I want) is a receiver that will
>
> Let me chime in as a longtime GPS-V user that the -V (an autorouting-capable
> unit) accepted full MapSource routes and only recalculated on diversion from
> the preprogrammed route.
>
> I just bought a 60Cx and have discovered that it always recalculates a
> route, MapSource-downloaded or not.
>
> I too would like to see the MapSource-downloaded routes remain
> un-recalculated. This must be a software based feature if the -V didn't do
> it but the 60Cx does, since both are autorouting devices.

If you downloaded a route from MapSource to the -V, it would be the same
data elements that are sent to any other GPS, a collection of locations.
And you're saying that the -V did not calculate a route? I just read
the GPS-V manual and think it basically works the same way as any of the
others. It take the locations in your route and uses the internal base
map and any supplemental detail mapping that may be available to come up
with a route. What makes you think that is not what is happening?

This is an issue that seems to come up frequently and it sort of baffles
me that people expect to be able to do this.

You have two different processors involved (the PC and the GPS receiver)
and each processor has data subsets to work with. There is no guarantee
that the data will be the same in both places although it can happen to
be that way.

Each processor takes the user data (waypoints or via points) and looks
through the mapping data (road vectors, place names, etc.) and
calculates and displays a graphic image of the route that best suits the
settings and preferences the user has set.

That graphically displayed route exists only in program memory. It
cannot be saved or sent to another place. As soon as you exit the
program or turn the processor off, that route is gone. It does not
exist in any form. You can save the data subset (i.e., the collection
of waypoints or via points) that generated the route and send that to
another processor and that is what we do when we upload a route.

> Seems like there's a number of us here who would like to bring this issue
> forward to Garmin. Do Jack Erbes or any of the other "old-timers/experts" of
> this forum have any suggestions on how to best approach Garmin such that
> they'll be most interested in listening?

Is there an avenue for bringin the issue forward to GArmin? I'd think
you would first have to get Garmin's attention. Maybe you can do that
by saying something like "here is a revolutionary concept that will make
a lot of money for Garmin".

Quite frankly, I do not think there is anything missing here now. You
have processors that calculate routes based on user selected data and
criteria and hashing it against stored data. If you have the same data
and criteria in both places (on the PC and in the GPS) you should get
the same result in both places.

I get the same result in both places all the time using City Navigator
and BlueChart mapping in MapSource and uploading routes to my 2610,
2620, and 76Cx.

I don't fully trust the via points you get when you click on various map
objects to create a route. That has produced some mysterious results
occasionally so I take the extra trouble to place waypoints at most or
all of the spots I would click on and then I click on my waypoints when
building routes. A side effect of doing it that way is that I can
change the properties (name, location, elevation, etc.) and add a
comment to my waypoints whereas I cannot do that for the via points.

Don't misunderstand me, I have nothing against your getting what you
want to have, I just don't see the neeed for it.

Jack

Bruce.

2007-08-28, 10:33 pm

"Andy Waddell" <andywaddell@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:p5Sdne3yQNZ0OUn
bnZ2dnUVZ_r2nnZ2d@co
mcast.com...
> I too would like to see the MapSource-downloaded routes remain
> un-recalculated. This must be a software based feature if the -V didn't do
> it but the 60Cx does, since both are autorouting devices.
>
> Seems like there's a number of us here who would like to bring this issue
> forward to Garmin. Do Jack Erbes or any of the other "old-timers/experts"
> of this forum have any suggestions on how to best approach Garmin such
> that they'll be most interested in listening?

I couldn't agree more. The inability to *control* routing on the PC and
then download those choices to a Nuvi is a serious and glaring omission from
the Nuvi models. If my ancient eMap can do it, surely they can get
MapSource and a modern Nuvi to work together better. As it is, MapSource on
a PC is almost useless for the Nuvi line.

Bruce.

Andy Waddell

2007-08-29, 7:33 am

Jack, I know for certain the GPS-V doesn't do it because the recalculation
process on it is fairly lengthy with it's older processor. You know for SURE
when the thing is doing a recalc, and it doesn't on a downloaded route. It
just picks up the route and starts using it immediately.

--
ADW
"Jack Erbes" <jacker@midmaine.com> wrote in message
news:46d4c354$0$1893
3$4c368faf@roadrunne
r.com...
> Andy Waddell wrote:
>
> If you downloaded a route from MapSource to the -V, it would be the same
> data elements that are sent to any other GPS, a collection of locations.
> And you're saying that the -V did not calculate a route? I just read the
> GPS-V manual and think it basically works the same way as any of the
> others. It take the locations in your route and uses the internal base
> map and any supplemental detail mapping that may be available to come up
> with a route. What makes you think that is not what is happening?
>
> This is an issue that seems to come up frequently and it sort of baffles
> me that people expect to be able to do this.
>
> You have two different processors involved (the PC and the GPS receiver)
> and each processor has data subsets to work with. There is no guarantee
> that the data will be the same in both places although it can happen to be
> that way.
>
> Each processor takes the user data (waypoints or via points) and looks
> through the mapping data (road vectors, place names, etc.) and calculates
> and displays a graphic image of the route that best suits the settings and
> preferences the user has set.
>
> That graphically displayed route exists only in program memory. It cannot
> be saved or sent to another place. As soon as you exit the program or
> turn the processor off, that route is gone. It does not exist in any
> form. You can save the data subset (i.e., the collection of waypoints or
> via points) that generated the route and send that to another processor
> and that is what we do when we upload a route.
>
>
> Is there an avenue for bringin the issue forward to GArmin? I'd think you
> would first have to get Garmin's attention. Maybe you can do that by
> saying something like "here is a revolutionary concept that will make a
> lot of money for Garmin".
>
> Quite frankly, I do not think there is anything missing here now. You
> have processors that calculate routes based on user selected data and
> criteria and hashing it against stored data. If you have the same data
> and criteria in both places (on the PC and in the GPS) you should get the
> same result in both places.
>
> I get the same result in both places all the time using City Navigator and
> BlueChart mapping in MapSource and uploading routes to my 2610, 2620, and
> 76Cx.
>
> I don't fully trust the via points you get when you click on various map
> objects to create a route. That has produced some mysterious results
> occasionally so I take the extra trouble to place waypoints at most or all
> of the spots I would click on and then I click on my waypoints when
> building routes. A side effect of doing it that way is that I can change
> the properties (name, location, elevation, etc.) and add a comment to my
> waypoints whereas I cannot do that for the via points.
>
> Don't misunderstand me, I have nothing against your getting what you want
> to have, I just don't see the neeed for it.
>
> Jack

Bert Hyman

2007-08-29, 10:33 am

jacker@midmaine.com (Jack Erbes) wrote in
news:46d4c354$0$1893
3$4c368faf@roadrunne
r.com:

>
> If you downloaded a route from MapSource to the -V, it would be the
> same data elements that are sent to any other GPS, a collection of
> locations. And you're saying that the -V did not calculate a route?
> I just read the GPS-V manual and think it basically works the same
> way as any of the others. It take the locations in your route and
> uses the internal base map and any supplemental detail mapping that
> may be available to come up with a route. What makes you think
> that is not what is happening?

When creating a route with MapSource and tranferring it to a
non-routing receiver like the eMap, it wasn't just the user's
explicitly set waypoints (usually just the start and end points) that
get sent. MapSource also created "vias" for each and every turn on
the route and those got sent to the receiver as well.

I suppose this behavior could be reproduced with a routing receiver
if the user set an explicit waypoint for every turn on his route that
he cared about, but there's still no guarantee that the resulting
route will match what is expected, since the receiver will always
re-calculate the route from its current location to the next
waypoint.

If there was an option in MapSource to send the internally generated
vias, then the discussion would end.

--
Bert Hyman | St. Paul, MN | bert@iphouse.com

Jack Erbes

2007-08-30, 7:33 am

Andy Waddell wrote:
> Jack, I know for certain the GPS-V doesn't do it because the recalculation
> process on it is fairly lengthy with it's older processor. You know for SURE
> when the thing is doing a recalc, and it doesn't on a downloaded route. It
> just picks up the route and starts using it immediately.
>

When you select the route from a list of routes and activate it, right?
The instant you press Enter, you see the route? That's one dynamite
processor compared to the newer models.

It might be a case of it's doing it differently more than not doing it.
They had to throw us a bone to get us to buy the newer models, maybe
they added a "running bunny" in the form of a route calculation popup.
These folks may have worked for Micro$oft in another life. :> )

When you put the route on the -V (uploaded the list of waypoints), no
road vectors were selected and highlighted. When you activate the route
to use it, road vectors get selected and become highlighted. That is
the process that is referred to here as "recalculation". In fact, it is
the initial calculation of the route by that processor using the
available data. And the result is only in volatile memory, will change
or go away when you recalculate the route, stop navigation, or turn the
power off, and cannot be stored or forwarded.

Jack

--
Jack Erbes in Ellsworth, Maine, USA - jackerbes at adelphia dot net
(also receiving email at jacker at midmaine.com)

Jack Erbes

2007-08-30, 7:33 am

Bert Hyman wrote:
> jacker@midmaine.com (Jack Erbes) wrote in
> news:46d4c354$0$1893
3$4c368faf@roadrunne
r.com:
>
>
> When creating a route with MapSource and tranferring it to a
> non-routing receiver like the eMap, it wasn't just the user's
> explicitly set waypoints (usually just the start and end points) that
> get sent. MapSource also created "vias" for each and every turn on
> the route and those got sent to the receiver as well.

If I build a route in MapSource now, by clicking on points on the map
(not on my waypoints) I get a route. If I look at the route properties
I see a list of points that are collectively called "via points" in the
title bar of the properties menu. If I look at the properties of the
individual via points, they are described at "map lines", "map points",
or some other term that is associated with the data element that I
clicked on.

When I upload the route to the GPS, I see the same points. No where in
the process is a waypoint created or uploaded but the collection of
points in the route is exactly the same in both places.

If I create a route on a City Navigator map and then change to U.S.
topo, the route is still seen even if there are no roads. If I tell it
to recalculate the route, it will give me a new and different point to
point route hashing my via points against the topo data instead of the
City Navigator data. If then I change to MetroGuide 4.02, I see a point
to point route. If I recalculate that, it will give me a new follow
road route using the MetroGuide road vectors.

That is the way it works, it always hashes your selected points against
the current data.

> I suppose this behavior could be reproduced with a routing receiver
> if the user set an explicit waypoint for every turn on his route that
> he cared about, but there's still no guarantee that the resulting
> route will match what is expected, since the receiver will always
> re-calculate the route from its current location to the next
> waypoint.

There is a guarantee if you have the same mapping data in both places
and have setting and preferences that will produce the same result.

> If there was an option in MapSource to send the internally generated
> vias, then the discussion would end.

That is actually what is happing now. The vias are being sent. Does
that mean the discussion is over?

Jack

--
Jack Erbes in Ellsworth, Maine, USA - jackerbes at adelphia dot net
(also receiving email at jacker at midmaine.com)

Andy Waddell

2007-08-30, 10:33 pm

"When you select the route from a list of routes and activate it, right?
> The instant you press Enter, you see the route?"

Correct.

--
ADW
"Jack Erbes" <jackerbes@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:46d6ab1e$0$3250
0$4c368faf@roadrunne
r.com...
> Andy Waddell wrote:
>
> When you select the route from a list of routes and activate it, right?
> The instant you press Enter, you see the route? That's one dynamite
> processor compared to the newer models.
>
> It might be a case of it's doing it differently more than not doing it.
> They had to throw us a bone to get us to buy the newer models, maybe they
> added a "running bunny" in the form of a route calculation popup. These
> folks may have worked for Micro$oft in another life. :> )
>
> When you put the route on the -V (uploaded the list of waypoints), no road
> vectors were selected and highlighted. When you activate the route to use
> it, road vectors get selected and become highlighted. That is the process
> that is referred to here as "recalculation". In fact, it is the initial
> calculation of the route by that processor using the available data. And
> the result is only in volatile memory, will change or go away when you
> recalculate the route, stop navigation, or turn the power off, and cannot
> be stored or forwarded.
>
> Jack
>
> --
> Jack Erbes in Ellsworth, Maine, USA - jackerbes at adelphia dot net
> (also receiving email at jacker at midmaine.com)

Andy Waddell

2007-08-30, 10:33 pm

"have setting and preferences that will produce the same result."

I'd be OK with that; I don't care if the GPS itself recalculates the route,
but there's nowhere on the GPS to set the preferences like you can in
MapSource. You can only select things like "Best" or "Better" route, "Car"
or "Bicycle", "Avoid U turns", that kind of thing. I think maybe the
differences in routes are being caused by the slider that sets "prefer minor
roads" or "prefer highways", and there is no such setting on the GPS itself.

--
ADW
"Jack Erbes" <jackerbes@adelphia.net> wrote in message
news:46d6aed5$0$4044
$4c368faf@roadrunner
.com...
> Bert Hyman wrote:
>
> If I build a route in MapSource now, by clicking on points on the map (not
> on my waypoints) I get a route. If I look at the route properties I see a
> list of points that are collectively called "via points" in the title bar
> of the properties menu. If I look at the properties of the individual via
> points, they are described at "map lines", "map points", or some other
> term that is associated with the data element that I clicked on.
>
> When I upload the route to the GPS, I see the same points. No where in
> the process is a waypoint created or uploaded but the collection of points
> in the route is exactly the same in both places.
>
> If I create a route on a City Navigator map and then change to U.S. topo,
> the route is still seen even if there are no roads. If I tell it to
> recalculate the route, it will give me a new and different point to point
> route hashing my via points against the topo data instead of the City
> Navigator data. If then I change to MetroGuide 4.02, I see a point to
> point route. If I recalculate that, it will give me a new follow road
> route using the MetroGuide road vectors.
>
> That is the way it works, it always hashes your selected points against
> the current data.
>
>
> There is a guarantee if you have the same mapping data in both places and
> have setting and preferences that will produce the same result.
>
>
> That is actually what is happing now. The vias are being sent. Does that
> mean the discussion is over?
>
> Jack
>
>
> --
> Jack Erbes in Ellsworth, Maine, USA - jackerbes at adelphia dot net
> (also receiving email at jacker at midmaine.com)

Bert Hyman

2007-08-30, 10:33 pm

In news:46d6aed5$0$4044
$4c368faf@roadrunner
.com Jack Erbes
<jackerbes@adelphia.net> wrote:

> Bert Hyman wrote:
>
>
> There is a guarantee if you have the same mapping data in both places
> and have setting and preferences that will produce the same result.

There are no such settings and prefereces in the 76CSx that I'm aware
of; do you know of any?

>
> That is actually what is happing now. The vias are being sent.

Then why don't I see them in the route, and why doesn't my 76CSx use
them?

> Does that mean the discussion is over?

With you? Maybe.

--
Bert Hyman St. Paul, MN bert@iphouse.com

Jack Erbes

2007-08-30, 10:33 pm

Andy Waddell wrote:
> "have setting and preferences that will produce the same result."
>
> I'd be OK with that; I don't care if the GPS itself recalculates the route,
> but there's nowhere on the GPS to set the preferences like you can in
> MapSource. You can only select things like "Best" or "Better" route, "Car"
> or "Bicycle", "Avoid U turns", that kind of thing. I think maybe the
> differences in routes are being caused by the slider that sets "prefer minor
> roads" or "prefer highways", and there is no such setting on the GPS itself.
>

That might be what is causing the difference. About the only setting I
ever change from the defaults in the MapSource Preferences is to change
from statute to nautical units and whether to use Autorouting or Direct
Routes. I have renamed a couple of the waypoint categories I use
regularly also.

Of course, you can't reset the preferences in MapSource to defaults.
You have to uninstall it (making sure to get rid of all *.ini files) and
then reinstall it to get all the settings back to defaults. Boy, is
that dumb or what?

MapSource is an anachronism of sorts. It has been around a long time
and seems to be more of an old software with a lot of fixes and band
aids added than it does a recent effort. Considering the number of
products that can be used with it and the age of some of the hardware
and software involved, I guess it is a pretty good product.

But the little details like the differences in the terminologies and
names of preferences and setting between MapSource and the newer GPS
receivers, it is probably a miracle that it works as well as it does.

It makes me mad as hell that Garmin does not host any technical support
forums for their customers. It would only take a few people to
represent the company in something like that and it would give them some
feedback on what works well and what does not. And it would also give
them an input for designing hardware and software and feedback on how
will liked their various product lines are.

Instead Garmin has themselves completely isolated from feedback from or
any discussion with their customers. They just do not seem to give a
damn, there is no better way to describe it.

Consumers are clueless about Garmin plans for fixes and updates, Garmin
is clueless as to what fixes and updates are most wanted or needed.

Hello out there! Gary Burrell, David Casey, Min Kao and Paul Shumaker,
are you listening? If I'm wrong, step in here and correct my mistaken
impression. Your company is doing well but don't you want to be liked
too?

Jack

Jack Erbes

2007-09-03, 11:11 am

Jack Erbes

2007-09-03, 11:11 am

Jack Erbes

2007-09-03, 11:11 am

Jack Erbes

2007-09-03, 11:11 am

Richard

2008-01-22, 12:33 pm

How about my 545! It lacks any direct means to hook up this marine unit to a
PC. Garmin expects you to purchase their $400 software upgrade card to
enable the unit to do its own navigation. I have yet even figured out how to
get this unit to act as a GPS for my mapping software on my PC.

Richard

Jack Erbes

2008-01-22, 10:33 pm

Richard wrote:
> How about my 545! It lacks any direct means to hook up this marine unit to a
> PC. Garmin expects you to purchase their $400 software upgrade card to
> enable the unit to do its own navigation. I have yet even figured out how to
> get this unit to act as a GPS for my mapping software on my PC.
>
> Richard

Its the dumbed down chart plotter for the dumbed down generation that
buys the dumbed down nuvis and StreetPilots for use in their cars.

The assumption is that the buyers don't know enough need all that stuff
that your excess of knowledge makes you want.

Here is one guy's experience with it and the reply he got from Garmin:

http://forums.topografix.com/index.php?showtopic=1258

An excerpt:

"Thank you for contacting Garmin International,
There is not a way to interface the computer with the 545. There is not
a cable that will connect to the 545 and a serial connection for the
computer..."

Jack

--
Jack Erbes in Ellsworth, Maine, USA - jackerbes at adelphia dot net
(also receiving email at jacker at midmaine.com)

LinkBot