|
Cellular forums Home > Archive > Magellan GPS > February 2008 > Navteq database correction
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 |
Navteq database correction
|
|
| Ron Hunter 2008-02-02, 10:33 pm |
| The following is the reply I received, today, about a database error I
observed on a trip to North Carolina. The GPS (eXplorist 400) reported
me driving up to 1 mile OFF the road as shown on the map screen.
Here is the reply:
Note the date!
====================
====================
====================
=========
Thank you for your recent Map Report. We have completed our
investigation of your Map Report.
For the NAVTEQ tracking number: 0051V6WWIJ30J1HB
Submitted on : 21, Feb 2007 03:19:07
Problem Description: Road track information is incorrect. From I-40 to
Gastonia the path indicated by the GPS wanders from the displayed road
on the basemap. Intersections seem to be correct, but other parts of
the road track depart from the provided track.
Our Resolution Outcome is: No Change Necessary - Database Reflects Reality
Details: The database is correct and US-321 from Gastonia to I-40
reflects reality.
For more details, proceed to your Map Report at
http://mapreporter.navteq.com
NAVTEQ delivers regularly scheduled map updates to our business partners
which include database enhancements. The commercial release dates for
these products will vary depending on each business partner’s product
plans. If your Map Report did not result in a database change, please
note that we track these items and evaluate them with our business
partners on a regular basis to enhance navigation system performance.
Having the latest map in your system makes a difference to system
performance with the latest roads, addresses and Points of Interest. If
you are interested in an updated map for your navigation system, please
contact your system provider or check our online store at
http://store.navteq.com.
We welcome your feedback on the NAVTEQ Map. Thank you for helping to
keep the NAVTEQ Map the most accurate and highest quality in the business.
Regards,
The NAVTEQ Map Reporter Team
| |
|
| Ron Hunter <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in
news:OvOdndd1jMZbiTj
anZ2dnUVZ_uyinZ2d@gi
ganews.com:
> The following is the reply I received, today, about a database error I
> observed on a trip to North Carolina. The GPS (eXplorist 400)
> reported me driving up to 1 mile OFF the road as shown on the map
> screen.
>
> Here is the reply:
> Note the date!
> ====================
====================
====================
=========
>
> Thank you for your recent Map Report. We have completed our
> investigation of your Map Report.
>
> For the NAVTEQ tracking number: 0051V6WWIJ30J1HB
> Submitted on : 21, Feb 2007 03:19:07
> Problem Description: Road track information is incorrect. From I-40
> to Gastonia the path indicated by the GPS wanders from the displayed
> road on the basemap. Intersections seem to be correct, but other
> parts of the road track depart from the provided track.
>
>
> Our Resolution Outcome is: No Change Necessary - Database Reflects
> Reality Details: The database is correct and US-321 from Gastonia to
> I-40 reflects reality.
>
> For more details, proceed to your Map Report at
> http://mapreporter.navteq.com
>
> NAVTEQ delivers regularly scheduled map updates to our business
> partners which include database enhancements. The commercial release
> dates for these products will vary depending on each business
> partner’s product plans. If your Map Report did not result in a
> database change, please note that we track these items and evaluate
> them with our business partners on a regular basis to enhance
> navigation system performance.
>
> Having the latest map in your system makes a difference to system
> performance with the latest roads, addresses and Points of Interest.
> If you are interested in an updated map for your navigation system,
> please contact your system provider or check our online store at
> http://store.navteq.com.
>
> We welcome your feedback on the NAVTEQ Map. Thank you for helping to
> keep the NAVTEQ Map the most accurate and highest quality in the
> business.
>
> Regards,
> The NAVTEQ Map Reporter Team
>
First it takes them time to send someone out to actually survey the
route.
Second what they are saying is that Magellan hasn't updated their maps
in a year or three or ...
| |
| Ron Hunter 2008-02-03, 4:33 am |
| chuck wrote:
> Ron Hunter <rphunter@charter.net> wrote in
> news:OvOdndd1jMZbiTj
anZ2dnUVZ_uyinZ2d@gi
ganews.com:
>
>
> First it takes them time to send someone out to actually survey the
> route.
>
> Second what they are saying is that Magellan hasn't updated their maps
> in a year or three or ...
>
But does it actually SAY that? It appears that they are just telling my
that my observations were in error (which they weren't), rather than
saying that the data in my GPS was in error, and that the error had been
corrected in a later version. NOT what they said.
| |
| Jack Erbes 2008-02-03, 10:33 am |
| Ron Hunter wrote:
<snip>
<snip>[color=darkred]
> But does it actually SAY that? It appears that they are just telling my
> that my observations were in error (which they weren't), rather than
> saying that the data in my GPS was in error, and that the error had been
> corrected in a later version. NOT what they said.
What road did you see yourself as being one mile off of? If you can
tell us that and the approximate lat/long or a cross road, maybe we
could tell you if the Garmin MapSource mapping (which uses NavTeq data)
has same error. That might narrow it down to being a Magellan error and
not a NavTeq error.
Another way is to look at the location in Google maps. If both the map
and satellite photos show the road in the same place, then it would
definitely seem to be an error in the data as presented by the Magellan.
Jack
| |
| Ron Hunter 2008-02-04, 4:33 am |
| Jack Erbes wrote:
> Ron Hunter wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> <snip>
>
> What road did you see yourself as being one mile off of? If you can
> tell us that and the approximate lat/long or a cross road, maybe we
> could tell you if the Garmin MapSource mapping (which uses NavTeq data)
> has same error. That might narrow it down to being a Magellan error and
> not a NavTeq error.
>
> Another way is to look at the location in Google maps. If both the map
> and satellite photos show the road in the same place, then it would
> definitely seem to be an error in the data as presented by the Magellan.
>
> Jack
That information was in the original post. The road (321) between
Gastonia and I40 in North Carolina was off by up to a mile, showing me
west of the roadway on the map display, except at intersections with
other highways, where it came back into correspondence with the map
display. I have seen the same type of errors on some county roads south
of Ft. Worth, TX., but those are trivial, and may have to do with not
having enough satellites in range, since the errors there were on the
order of 100ft or so, but this was not the case with the North Carolina
trip. I suspect that NAVTEQ was trying to say that the database
(current) was correct, but that Magellan had used an older database, but
if so, they said it very poorly.
Generally, the map display and position sensing are accurate enough to
determine what lane I am in at an interchange, which I find amazing.
Get off the main roads, though, and the database seems to get less
accurate.
I realize that these companies make money selling their database
information, but I feel that the GPS using public deserves at LEAST an
accurate to that date, database when the device is purchased. One
should be able to get ONE database update when the device is purchased,
and reasonably priced updates annually after that. Sadly, these
companies seem to think that we should buy the database anew, each time.
BAD BUSINESS.
| |
| Jack Erbes 2008-02-04, 10:33 am |
| Ron Hunter wrote:
<snip>
> That information was in the original post. The road (321) between
> Gastonia and I40 in North Carolina was off by up to a mile, showing me
> west of the roadway on the map display, except at intersections with
> other highways, where it came back into correspondence with the map
> display. I have seen the same type of errors on some county roads south
> of Ft. Worth, TX., but those are trivial, and may have to do with not
> having enough satellites in range, since the errors there were on the
> order of 100ft or so, but this was not the case with the North Carolina
> trip. I suspect that NAVTEQ was trying to say that the database
> (current) was correct, but that Magellan had used an older database, but
> if so, they said it very poorly.
My point was that, if the roads are seen in the correct place on both
the online NavTeq maps and the photographic maps, as those are displayed
in Google, then NavTeq's data may not be in error here. The problem may
lie with the "business partner", Magellan in this case.
NavTeq is not saying anything as to the quality of the mapping you saw
the error in. They are not providing you with a report or evaluation of
the accuracy of the data in Magellan's implementation of a mapping
product using the NavTeq data.
NavTeq is saying their data was good. Nothing more. I suppose they
really don't want to get into the quality of Magellan's mapping product
as that would threaten the "business partner" relationship.
> Generally, the map display and position sensing are accurate enough to
> determine what lane I am in at an interchange, which I find amazing. Get
> off the main roads, though, and the database seems to get less accurate.
I was using Magellan maps up until about two years ago, now I'm using
Garmin. I generally found that location cursor and my tracks were near
the lines showing streets and two lane road. And on divided roads,
freeways or Interstates, I could generally tell which side of the
divided highway I was using. Maybe even the specific lane occasionally.
But I have seen bizarre discrepancies somewhat like the one you report.
I've reported one of them to Garmin and never got any feedback about
it. I also reported that one to NavTeq and did not hear anything from
them either.
> I realize that these companies make money selling their database
> information, but I feel that the GPS using public deserves at LEAST an
> accurate to that date, database when the device is purchased. One
> should be able to get ONE database update when the device is purchased,
> and reasonably priced updates annually after that. Sadly, these
> companies seem to think that we should buy the database anew, each time.
> BAD BUSINESS.
Your emotional ties to your wallet is clouding your thinking a little.
Magellan buys the data from NavTeq and then has to process and package
it to their unique characterization, put in in their proprietary format
and packaging, and package and sell it. So that is the point where you
have acquired their most recent data (if you've purchased the most
recent edition). It's reasonable for them to expect to recover their
costs and make a profit isn't it?
As for updates, it would be nice if they were free but they are not.
Normally it is cheaper to buy an update than to buy the next edition at
the full price each time. That's my reward for having bought their
product and if free is not in order it is some satisfaction.
Mapping data never has been and never will be perfect.
Jack
| |
| Ron Hunter 2008-02-05, 4:33 am |
| Jack Erbes wrote:
> Ron Hunter wrote:
> <snip>
>
> My point was that, if the roads are seen in the correct place on both
> the online NavTeq maps and the photographic maps, as those are displayed
> in Google, then NavTeq's data may not be in error here. The problem may
> lie with the "business partner", Magellan in this case.
>
> NavTeq is not saying anything as to the quality of the mapping you saw
> the error in. They are not providing you with a report or evaluation of
> the accuracy of the data in Magellan's implementation of a mapping
> product using the NavTeq data.
>
> NavTeq is saying their data was good. Nothing more. I suppose they
> really don't want to get into the quality of Magellan's mapping product
> as that would threaten the "business partner" relationship.
>
>
> I was using Magellan maps up until about two years ago, now I'm using
> Garmin. I generally found that location cursor and my tracks were near
> the lines showing streets and two lane road. And on divided roads,
> freeways or Interstates, I could generally tell which side of the
> divided highway I was using. Maybe even the specific lane occasionally.
>
> But I have seen bizarre discrepancies somewhat like the one you report.
> I've reported one of them to Garmin and never got any feedback about
> it. I also reported that one to NavTeq and did not hear anything from
> them either.
>
>
> Your emotional ties to your wallet is clouding your thinking a little.
> Magellan buys the data from NavTeq and then has to process and package
> it to their unique characterization, put in in their proprietary format
> and packaging, and package and sell it. So that is the point where you
> have acquired their most recent data (if you've purchased the most
> recent edition). It's reasonable for them to expect to recover their
> costs and make a profit isn't it?
>
A profit, yes, a killing, no. I bought the Mapsend Direct Route V2
program (and database). I KNOW this version was a year or two old, but
it was the most current available at that time. If I want a map update,
I must buy V3 (at full price), and the map database will STILL by old.
Since most of the data is the same as the old version, I feel that this
pricing structure is quite unfair to the consumer.
> As for updates, it would be nice if they were free but they are not.
> Normally it is cheaper to buy an update than to buy the next edition at
> the full price each time. That's my reward for having bought their
> product and if free is not in order it is some satisfaction.
>
Unfortunately, that doesn't seem to apply in this case.
> Mapping data never has been and never will be perfect.
>
> Jack
|
|
|
|
|