GPS

On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:09:54 -0500, Ron Hunter
wrote:

Mxsmanic wrote:

Jeremy Nixon writes:


The normal consumer doesn't buy GPS units because they're too complicated
and have things like serial ports.


The normal consumer doesn't buy GPS units because he has no use for
them.


Basically every normal consumer I know, apart from my parents, wants a
GPS unit but hasn't bought one because there isn't one made for them.
Myself included.


They just want gadgets. In that case, anything will do.


That's because the only ones they're buying are the ones installed in their
cars.


They aren't much use in the home, since homes hardly ever move.



I use mine on trips. Very handy, and I am never lost with it is with me.


It's hard to find a laptop these days that has one.


Ah, laptops. I wouldn't know, as I've never found a use for a laptop.


I have use for one, but the ease with which one can be stolen, or
damaged has deterred me from buying one.


Desktop computers aren't nearly as relevant since they're not portable.


I can't imagine anyone dragging a laptop around in any situation that
would justify a GPS for navigation.


If you choose to purchase your GPSR at a place like Office
Depot or Staples, you can go just a few aisles away and purchase a
stock of paper and pencils. They are entirely adequate for recording
coordinates if a laptop is not desirable. For simple navigation, you
don't need a laptop.




Huh? How about a person who does research on his ancestry and visits
cemetaries, and other places, like old homes? Being able to pinpoint a
grave is a very useful feature, if one needs to return to it, or
reference it for others.

Tell that to a normal, non-geek person.


They find that out for themselves.


And the average consumer doesn't *care* about the technical potential to
interoperate with anything given enough work.


A lot of GPS buyers are not average consumers.

True, and will remain true until GPS receivers become easier to use, and
getting rid of a complex and bothersome (and SLOW) RS232 serial port
sure would HELP.

Is Jeremy sharing his popsicle sticks with you?

On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 21:09:54 -0500, Ron Hunter
wrote:

Mxsmanic wrote:

Jeremy Nixon writes:


The normal consumer doesn't buy GPS units because they're too complicated
and have things like serial ports.


The normal consumer doesn't buy GPS units because he has no use for
them.


Basically every normal consumer I know, apart from my parents, wants a
GPS unit but hasn't bought one because there isn't one made for them.
Myself included.


They just want gadgets. In that case, anything will do.


That's because the only ones they're buying are the ones installed in their
cars.


They aren't much use in the home, since homes hardly ever move.



I use mine on trips. Very handy, and I am never lost with it is with me.


It's hard to find a laptop these days that has one.


Ah, laptops. I wouldn't know, as I've never found a use for a laptop.


I have use for one, but the ease with which one can be stolen, or
damaged has deterred me from buying one.


Desktop computers aren't nearly as relevant since they're not portable.


I can't imagine anyone dragging a laptop around in any situation that
would justify a GPS for navigation.


If you choose to purchase your GPSR at a place like Office
Depot or Staples, you can go just a few aisles away and purchase a
stock of paper and pencils. They are entirely adequate for recording
coordinates if a laptop is not desirable. For simple navigation, you
don't need a laptop.




Huh? How about a person who does research on his ancestry and visits
cemetaries, and other places, like old homes? Being able to pinpoint a
grave is a very useful feature, if one needs to return to it, or
reference it for others.

Tell that to a normal, non-geek person.


They find that out for themselves.


And the average consumer doesn't *care* about the technical potential to
interoperate with anything given enough work.


A lot of GPS buyers are not average consumers.

True, and will remain true until GPS receivers become easier to use, and
getting rid of a complex and bothersome (and SLOW) RS232 serial port
sure would HELP.

Is Jeremy sharing his popsicle sticks with you?

Jeremy Nixon wrote:
Big Bill wrote:


So you're saying that the reason people (who, according to you, want
to buy them) won't buy a GPS is because they can't figure out how to
use a serial port?


Nope. I'm saying that's part of it; it's a symptom of the fact that GPS
manufacturers aren't making units for normal people. And I can see why,
when there are all these folks who so strongly insist that people
should not be allowed to have one that works the way they would want
it to, and should instead have to adapt to the technology.


Worse, that they should adapt to ancient techonolgy that is nor
appropriate to the needs of today.

Jeremy Nixon wrote:
Big Bill wrote:


So you're saying that the reason people (who, according to you, want
to buy them) won't buy a GPS is because they can't figure out how to
use a serial port?


Nope. I'm saying that's part of it; it's a symptom of the fact that GPS
manufacturers aren't making units for normal people. And I can see why,
when there are all these folks who so strongly insist that people
should not be allowed to have one that works the way they would want
it to, and should instead have to adapt to the technology.


Worse, that they should adapt to ancient techonolgy that is nor
appropriate to the needs of today.

Prometheus wrote:

In article ,
writes

On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 09:23:42 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote:

----------Cut---------

More standardised like being able to use a three-wire connection with
software flow control. Auto-detect of baud rate etc. Perhaps your
devices missed out on that?


I'd forgotten about that. My blood glucose meter connects
using a cable with only a tip, ring and ground plug on the meter end
and a DB-9 on the computer end. The app has no trouble finding it,
shaking hands and carrying on an intimate conversation with no
intervention on my part. Even shuts the meter down after they're
finished chatting.


I am afraid that Rod Hunter believes that is not possible, it is an
article of faith with him that "RS-232" serial connections must always
be purgatory.


They have always been, and I have been dealing with them for about 37
years! I read the instructions that came with the program I bought to
transfer data to my GPS and I was stumped at the first decision, which
protocol to use, and what settings I needed to set in the COM: port to
do the connection, since each was different. I probably could have
leaped that hurdle had the program not been written in a totally
non-intuitive way, and the instructions looked like they were written by
the programmer. It was hopeless. When a modern interface exists for
data transfer between my computer and a GPS, then I will buy a new one,
not before.

Prometheus wrote:

In article ,
writes

On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 09:23:42 GMT, "David J Taylor"
wrote:

----------Cut---------

More standardised like being able to use a three-wire connection with
software flow control. Auto-detect of baud rate etc. Perhaps your
devices missed out on that?


I'd forgotten about that. My blood glucose meter connects
using a cable with only a tip, ring and ground plug on the meter end
and a DB-9 on the computer end. The app has no trouble finding it,
shaking hands and carrying on an intimate conversation with no
intervention on my part. Even shuts the meter down after they're
finished chatting.


I am afraid that Rod Hunter believes that is not possible, it is an
article of faith with him that "RS-232" serial connections must always
be purgatory.


They have always been, and I have been dealing with them for about 37
years! I read the instructions that came with the program I bought to
transfer data to my GPS and I was stumped at the first decision, which
protocol to use, and what settings I needed to set in the COM: port to
do the connection, since each was different. I probably could have
leaped that hurdle had the program not been written in a totally
non-intuitive way, and the instructions looked like they were written by
the programmer. It was hopeless. When a modern interface exists for
data transfer between my computer and a GPS, then I will buy a new one,
not before.

Prometheus wrote:

In article , Ron Hunter
writes

Prometheus wrote:

In article , Ron Hunter
writes

--Cut----------

In short, you are really WAY off on this one.

You are amazing! We were discussing a connecting a GPS receiver to
a PC. The GPS Rx has only three data pins (TD, RD, GND), the start,
stop, data and parity are fixed, the cable with the correct
connectors if not supplied with it is on the hook next to it in the
shop, the supplied software sets the PC for these parameters and can
not be altered by the user. It is possible for the user to mismatch
the Bd rate and the protocol at the two ends, but that is because
the international standard for communicating with GPS devices has
been revised and your new receiver must be backward compatible. Have
you used a GPS with a PC? Have you used a GPS with other serial
equipment? I have, I connect them, they work; the work because
nothing needs changing.
Besides a sub-miniature Dee connector is far more rugged for field
use that a USB.
In short you have no idea.

I read the instructions for MY GPS for the transfer. I concluded that
it would be more trouble to set the thing up than I was willing to
deal with. Your system may be different. Mine was more trouble than
I was willing to deal with for the minimal gain. The software wad
indechipherable. Case closed.


Unfortunately there are badly written user manuals, there are also
people who can not comprehend a well written user manual, using USB does
not eliminate these problems.

N.B. A GPS receiver without a serial port is not NEMA compliant, a
laptop without a serial port is not NEMA compliant. If I wanted to use a
laptop with a GPS receiver I would buy one that has a serial port, in
fact I would want a serial port anyway.

It would cost the manufacture money to redesign the integrated circuit
to provide USB in addition to NEMA, the customer would have to pay for
that through increased price.

Fine, up the price $20 I will pay!

Prometheus wrote:

In article , Ron Hunter
writes

Prometheus wrote:

In article , Ron Hunter
writes

--Cut----------

In short, you are really WAY off on this one.

You are amazing! We were discussing a connecting a GPS receiver to
a PC. The GPS Rx has only three data pins (TD, RD, GND), the start,
stop, data and parity are fixed, the cable with the correct
connectors if not supplied with it is on the hook next to it in the
shop, the supplied software sets the PC for these parameters and can
not be altered by the user. It is possible for the user to mismatch
the Bd rate and the protocol at the two ends, but that is because
the international standard for communicating with GPS devices has
been revised and your new receiver must be backward compatible. Have
you used a GPS with a PC? Have you used a GPS with other serial
equipment? I have, I connect them, they work; the work because
nothing needs changing.
Besides a sub-miniature Dee connector is far more rugged for field
use that a USB.
In short you have no idea.

I read the instructions for MY GPS for the transfer. I concluded that
it would be more trouble to set the thing up than I was willing to
deal with. Your system may be different. Mine was more trouble than
I was willing to deal with for the minimal gain. The software wad
indechipherable. Case closed.


Unfortunately there are badly written user manuals, there are also
people who can not comprehend a well written user manual, using USB does
not eliminate these problems.

N.B. A GPS receiver without a serial port is not NEMA compliant, a
laptop without a serial port is not NEMA compliant. If I wanted to use a
laptop with a GPS receiver I would buy one that has a serial port, in
fact I would want a serial port anyway.

It would cost the manufacture money to redesign the integrated circuit
to provide USB in addition to NEMA, the customer would have to pay for
that through increased price.

Fine, up the price $20 I will pay!

Prometheus wrote:

In article ,
writes

On Mon, 30 Aug 2004 06:16:02 +0100, Prometheus
wrote:


* Strictly speaking "RS-232" only reefers to the 25 way sub-miniature
connector and not the electrical connexions to the pins which are other
standards.


Are you sure? I believe I heard years ago that it defined only
signal levels (and maximum supported distance criteria for copper) for
25 lines and was otherwise connector-agnostic.

I may well be wrong -- it happened once. A long time ago.


I think you could be right, it was along time ago for me also. I just
did a bit of research, it seems it was originally a nine wire system.

Yes, in a 25 pin connector. Wonder why... The 9-pin connector came later.

wrote:

On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 03:53:00 -0500, Ron Hunter
wrote:


Prometheus wrote:

In article , Ron Hunter
writes


Mxsmanic wrote:


Jeremy Nixon writes:


And can you really think that RS-232 is just as easy for a normal
person
as USB?

Yes.


Amazing!
So, tell me. For a Supra Modem built in 1998, which pins are active
(necessary), and which are not needed, and what plug type is needed on
each end? What is the maximum baud rate, and what are the start and
stop bits to be set at?
Now a USB user would have the answer for all of those questions, and
be up and online before you figured out which connector, male or
female, was needed, and is it 9 or 25 pin, and which pin is strobe.

In short, you are really WAY off on this one.


You are amazing! We were discussing a connecting a GPS receiver to a PC.
The GPS Rx has only three data pins (TD, RD, GND), the start, stop, data
and parity are fixed, the cable with the correct connectors if not
supplied with it is on the hook next to it in the shop, the supplied
software sets the PC for these parameters and can not be altered by the
user. It is possible for the user to mismatch the Bd rate and the
protocol at the two ends, but that is because the international standard
for communicating with GPS devices has been revised and your new
receiver must be backward compatible. Have you used a GPS with a PC?
Have you used a GPS with other serial equipment? I have, I connect them,
they work; the work because nothing needs changing.

Besides a sub-miniature Dee connector is far more rugged for field use
that a USB.

In short you have no idea.

I read the instructions for MY GPS for the transfer. I concluded that
it would be more trouble to set the thing up than I was willing to deal
with. Your system may be different. Mine was more trouble than I was
willing to deal with for the minimal gain. The software wad
indechipherable. Case closed.


Correction -- mind closed.

No, my mind is open, I just know when something has been replaced by
something significantly better and expect devices to use technology
appropriate to the requirements.