GPS

wrote:

It's probably pointless to suggest it by now, but it _will_
work for them if they quit being intransigent about with their novel
technology.

No, it will work for them if they decide they want the same thing that
you evidently want. If they want something else, it will not work for
them. The problem is that you're insisting that I'm wrong for wanting
something other than the same thing that you want. You're insisting
that you know the only way anyone should ever want or need to use a
GPS receiver. Maybe the manufacturers are listening to you, which
would be a shame.

I don't suppose you have the vaguest idea how many millions of
years ago sharks stopped evolving. They found an interface with the
world that worked for them and never felt a need to ship version 2.0.

Yeah, so, everything else must also be the same?

--
Jeremy |

wrote:

It's probably pointless to suggest it by now, but it _will_
work for them if they quit being intransigent about with their novel
technology.

No, it will work for them if they decide they want the same thing that
you evidently want. If they want something else, it will not work for
them. The problem is that you're insisting that I'm wrong for wanting
something other than the same thing that you want. You're insisting
that you know the only way anyone should ever want or need to use a
GPS receiver. Maybe the manufacturers are listening to you, which
would be a shame.

I don't suppose you have the vaguest idea how many millions of
years ago sharks stopped evolving. They found an interface with the
world that worked for them and never felt a need to ship version 2.0.

Yeah, so, everything else must also be the same?

--
Jeremy |

In article , Rodney
Myrvaagnes writes
On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:32:43 +0100, Prometheus
wrote:
----Cut--------
They do use a fluxgate; I thought the GPS signal derived compass used
change in position, otherwise it would not work if you walked too
slowly.

That is true for consumer GPSRs. There are GPS compasses that use
phase differences between spaced out antennas, but they cost in the
thousands the last I saw.

I did not know about them, I can understand the price however.

Also, you wouldn't want to backpack one.

I just had a vision...

--
Ian G8ILZ

In article , Rodney
Myrvaagnes writes
On Tue, 31 Aug 2004 22:32:43 +0100, Prometheus
wrote:
----Cut--------
They do use a fluxgate; I thought the GPS signal derived compass used
change in position, otherwise it would not work if you walked too
slowly.

That is true for consumer GPSRs. There are GPS compasses that use
phase differences between spaced out antennas, but they cost in the
thousands the last I saw.

I did not know about them, I can understand the price however.

Also, you wouldn't want to backpack one.

I just had a vision...

--
Ian G8ILZ

Dave Martindale wrote:
Jeremy Nixon writes:


Unfortunately, GPS manufacturers still want to make their stuff an island
of non-interoperability, so I don't have one. Someday, one of the
companies will discover that normal people want these things too.


GPS manufacturers retain serial interfaces so their units can still be
interfaced to marine gear using the NMEA standard. USB-only GPS
receivers are completely useless for this purpose. And serial still
works just fine for position tracking. If you have a laptop with no
serial port, you can always get an adapter.

Where the serial port falls down is in loading large volumes of mapping
data into mapping GPS receivers. But there are GPS receivers that put
the mapping data onto removable flash cards, which can then be loaded
using either proprietary or standard flash card readers based on USB.

Or you can get GPS receivers with USB interfaces directly on the unit.
Maybe the manufacturers are cleverer than you think.

Dave

Last year when I researched this issue, I found NO MAPPING GPS with
either a USB interface, OR a flash card. Either would be satisfactory.
Do you have model numbers?

Dave Martindale wrote:
Jeremy Nixon writes:


Unfortunately, GPS manufacturers still want to make their stuff an island
of non-interoperability, so I don't have one. Someday, one of the
companies will discover that normal people want these things too.


GPS manufacturers retain serial interfaces so their units can still be
interfaced to marine gear using the NMEA standard. USB-only GPS
receivers are completely useless for this purpose. And serial still
works just fine for position tracking. If you have a laptop with no
serial port, you can always get an adapter.

Where the serial port falls down is in loading large volumes of mapping
data into mapping GPS receivers. But there are GPS receivers that put
the mapping data onto removable flash cards, which can then be loaded
using either proprietary or standard flash card readers based on USB.

Or you can get GPS receivers with USB interfaces directly on the unit.
Maybe the manufacturers are cleverer than you think.

Dave

Last year when I researched this issue, I found NO MAPPING GPS with
either a USB interface, OR a flash card. Either would be satisfactory.
Do you have model numbers?

Mxsmanic wrote:

Ron Hunter writes:


No, my mind is open, I just know when something has been replaced by
something significantly better ...


Not "better," just different.


... and expect devices to use technology appropriate to the requirements.


As long as it's the latest thing, eh?


I would prefer the latest thing, but technology appropriate to the task
is the important aspect. The idea of transferring megabytes of data at
serial rates of 9600bps doesn't attract me.

Mxsmanic wrote:

Ron Hunter writes:


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


Like using a a serial interface instead of a parallel interface?


I don't care WHICH type of interface it is, IF it will do the job at a
reasonable rate, and without twiddling with multitudes of settings, or
various connector types.

Mxsmanic wrote:

Ron Hunter writes:


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


Like using a a serial interface instead of a parallel interface?


I don't care WHICH type of interface it is, IF it will do the job at a
reasonable rate, and without twiddling with multitudes of settings, or
various connector types.

Prometheus wrote:

In article , Ron Hunter
writes


Fine, up the price $20 I will pay!


A lot of people will not.

That's why companies make more than one model of a device.