Garmin launches UK OS maps

Dominic Sexton said:

Garmin have announced their UK mapping based on OS data:

http://www.garmin.com/cartography/mapSource/topogb.jsp

There is a map previewer so you can see the mapping. I'm not overly
impressed and the list price in the US is $299.

Seems strange that the contours are in feet rather than metres.
Presumably a result of Americans thinking deep inside the box?

IMHO the best way to get topographic mapping on a GPS would be to have
a facility to import a bitmap image into the GPS. This would be used
as an overlay, such that the user could specify the co-ordinates of the
upper-left and lower-right corners of the overlay and the GPS could
then plot the current position with the image as a background.
Wouldn't need much memory, and the mapping quality is as good as you
want to make it. I think you can do this with PDAs and if I ever saw
it in a regular GPS then I'd actually be tempted to buy one.

Colin

Dominic Sexton said:

Garmin have announced their UK mapping based on OS data:
http://www.garmin.com/cartography/mapSource/topogb.jsp

Thanks for the heads up.

Quoted message said:

There is a map previewer so you can see the mapping. I'm not overly
impressed and the list price in the US is $299.

Not too impressed either. Too be honest, apart from the streams and small
lakes it doesn't look much different to my current setup - roads plus free
contours. The paths are of dubious usefulness (although they do match the
map) but more importantly, crags and cliffs aren't shown. I know you can
imply them from the contours, but actually showing them would be a lot more
useful in helping to distinguish cliffs from very steep slopes.

Don't know what the UK price will be but it'll probably be far too
expensive, especially given that my current setup is almost as useful. What
really bugs me is that the unlocking process involves linking the software
to a specific GPS. I realise that they're doing that to stop people
spreading the software around, but what happens when you upgrade your GPS?
You have to buy the software again!

Can't see me buying it, unless the price plummets.

Paul

Colin MacDonald said:

Seems strange that the contours are in feet rather than metres.

No, they're in metres.

Quoted message said:

IMHO the best way to get topographic mapping on a GPS would be to have
a facility to import a bitmap image into the GPS.

I don't agree. Much as I like the look of bitmaps, they wouldn't be
practical because of the zooming. They'd only look good at one zoom level,
which would be very limiting. I often zoom in and out in order to get a
close up view when approaching a waypoint, or an overview of the wider area.
The latter is practical because the detail becomes more selective, for
example switching to only 50m contours instead of 10m contours, and only
major roads instead of all roads. It would look a complete mess if all
details were shown when you zoom out.

Quoted message said:

I think you can do this with PDAs and if I ever saw
it in a regular GPS then I'd actually be tempted to buy one.

Maybe getting a PDA is the best way to do it, if they ever find a way of
increasing the battery life, but are you really going to be looking at the
map throughout your entire walk? The PDA approach seems better suited to
just switching it on occasionally when you need more detail than you GPS can
provide, but then again, that's not much different to getting the 25k map
out of my rucksack.

For all it's limitations, I think that vector mapping is best for GPS.
People often complain that a GPS screen is too small to get a good overview
of an area, but you can, because of selective detail.

Paul

Paul Saunders said:

Not too impressed either. Too be honest, apart from the streams and small
lakes it doesn't look much different to my current setup - roads plus free
contours. The paths are of dubious usefulness (although they do match the
map) but more importantly, crags and cliffs aren't shown. I know you can
imply them from the contours, but actually showing them would be a lot more
useful in helping to distinguish cliffs from very steep slopes.

The paths and water detail looks a lot like the Magellan equivalent and
appears to suffer from the same problem - it doesn't distinguish a
physical track from a right of way. I'd be delighted to hear I'm wrong
as I haven't compared known private tracks with PROWs, but in general
it seems roads are shown as lines but paths are shown as block features
in the same way as water. This is probably a limitation of the OS
source material, which doesn't seem to be based on the raster data.

One area it does score over the magellan maps is in features - it
seems to show a good collection of pubs, car workshops etc. with
names, rather than the rather useless tourist attraction set that
the magellan data contains. This must reflect Garmin's better UK
database - the magellan road maps are similarly short on features.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

really bugs me is that the unlocking process involves linking the software
to a specific GPS. I realise that they're doing that to stop people
spreading the software around, but what happens when you upgrade your GPS?
You have to buy the software again!

Again, this is also a feature of the magellan software. You are
allowed to change the GPS though (I think some limited number of
times, though it's only policed by the PC so a new installation
would defeat it). It also requires the CD to be present which
is a nasty nuisance, especially if you travel with a laptop.

-adrian

On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 11:32:04 +0000, Adrian Godwin
<[email hidden]> wrote:

|The paths and water detail looks a lot like the Magellan equivalent and
|appears to suffer from the same problem - it doesn't distinguish a
|physical track from a right of way. I'd be delighted to hear I'm wrong
|as I haven't compared known private tracks with PROWs, but in general
|it seems roads are shown as lines but paths are shown as block features
|in the same way as water. This is probably a limitation of the OS
|source material, which doesn't seem to be based on the raster data.

No! The OS surveys at some insane accuracy, and sell licences at 1:10,000
http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/products/10kraster/
--
Dave Fawthrop <dave hyphenologist co uk>
17,000 free e-books at Project Gutenberg! http://www.gutenberg.net
For Yorkshire Dialect go to www.hyphenologist.co.uk/songs/

Paul Saunders said:

Colin MacDonald said:

Seems strange that the contours are in feet rather than metres.

No, they're in metres.

Ah, Paul, what an interesting and exciting world we would live in if we
all had your arrogance. Didn't it occur to you to stop for just a
second and think that just maybe I could tell the difference between
feet and metres?

So, let me re-phrase: it seems strange that _for some areas_ the
contours are in feet rather than metres. I'll concede that I didn't
look over the whole map.

But using the viewer on Garmin's site I can look at Moel Hebog, which
appears to have a 2460 contour around it. Is that in metres?

Colin

Colin MacDonald said:

Ah, Paul, what an interesting and exciting world we would live in if
we all had your arrogance.

Arrogance? I just looked at the sample map and saw that it was in metres.
I assumed that you were looking at the same map. I didn't notice the map
viewer when I first looked at the page.

Quoted message said:

Didn't it occur to you to stop for just a
second and think that just maybe I could tell the difference between
feet and metres?

Of course, which is why I thought it was very strange that you said that.

Quoted message said:

So, let me re-phrase: it seems strange that _for some areas_ the
contours are in feet rather than metres. I'll concede that I didn't
look over the whole map.

Quoted message said:

But using the viewer on Garmin's site I can look at Moel Hebog, which
appears to have a 2460 contour around it. Is that in metres?

Well if you want to be pedantic, actually it is. The 2460ft contour line is
really the 750m contour line, converted to feet for display purposes. The
contour lines are in 10m intervals, with a thicker contour every 50m, just
as on the OS maps (as you'd expect). Set your GPS to feet and it will
display the contours in feet. That's what they've done with their map
viewer.

Paul

Adrian Godwin said:

Quoted message said:

what happens when you
upgrade your GPS? You have to buy the software again!

Again, this is also a feature of the magellan software. You are
allowed to change the GPS though (I think some limited number of
times, though it's only policed by the PC so a new installation
would defeat it).

Ah, so you don't have to buy the software again?

I was also worried that upgrading your computer might stop the software
working.

Paul

Paul Saunders said:

Colin MacDonald said:

Ah, Paul, what an interesting and exciting world we would live in if
we all had your arrogance.

Arrogance? I just looked at the sample map and saw that it was in metres.
I assumed that you were looking at the same map. I didn't notice the map
viewer when I first looked at the page.

Fair enough. I thought you'd have looked at the viewer. :-)

Out of interest, are the contour labels on a topo map switchable
between feet and metres? I'd assumed they were just text labels such
as you'd get for a river or town, and as such you were stuck with the
units that the producers saw fit to apply.

Colin

Bitstring <[email hidden]>, from the wonderful
person Paul Saunders <[email hidden]> said

Quoted message said:

Adrian Godwin said:

Quoted message said:

what happens when you
upgrade your GPS? You have to buy the software again!

Again, this is also a feature of the magellan software. You are
allowed to change the GPS though (I think some limited number of
times, though it's only policed by the PC so a new installation
would defeat it).

Ah, so you don't have to buy the software again?

I was also worried that upgrading your computer might stop the software
working.

There is no problem moving it all to a new computer (or as many as you
like), and for most Garmin products you can get away from the 'must have
CD present' without any trouble. However you =are= limited to two unlock
codes for 2 GPS handsets (iirc Magellan only gives you one?!) which you
have to get from Garmin. This is policed by Garmin, and not by the PC,
so there's no (easy) way around it.

--
GSV Three Minds in a Can
Contact recommends the use of Firefox; SC recommends it at gunpoint.

Colin MacDonald said:

Fair enough. I thought you'd have looked at the viewer. :-)

I'd have missed that if you hadn't mentioned it.

Quoted message said:

Out of interest, are the contour labels on a topo map switchable
between feet and metres?

Yes, on the GPS and in the software, but the contour lines remain the same.

Paul

On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:13:56 -0000, "Paul Saunders"
<[email hidden]> wrote:

|Colin MacDonald wrote:
|
|> Fair enough. I thought you'd have looked at the viewer. :-)
|
|I'd have missed that if you hadn't mentioned it.
|
|> Out of interest, are the contour labels on a topo map switchable
|> between feet and metres?
|
|Yes, on the GPS and in the software, but the contour lines remain the same.

Then which one is inaccurate? or perhaps both?
--
Dave Fawthrop <dave hyphenologist co uk>
17,000 free e-books at Project Gutenberg! http://www.gutenberg.net
For Yorkshire Dialect go to www.hyphenologist.co.uk/songs/

Bitstring <[email hidden]>, from the wonderful person
Dominic Sexton <[email hidden]> said

Quoted message said:

Garmin have announced their UK mapping based on OS data:

http://www.garmin.com/cartography/mapSource/topogb.jsp

There is a map previewer so you can see the mapping. I'm not overly
impressed and the list price in the US is $299.

Having just run a small segment of Shropshire (around Wheathill), which
I happen to know rather well, I'm not impressed either. They have =some=
ROWs/paths shown, but about 2x as many (including some large Bridleways)
missing. No rhyme or reason - presumably the OS sold them all the data,
so why did they edit it away?? Looks incredibly similar to the mistakes
that Magellan made/make with their offering.

The streams and contours are right, and the roads etc. look fine, and
the POI will be useful for a period (until the pubs close, garages move,
etc.). But $299 (+£300 by the time it gets here?) is too steep IMO. I
note this is 'v2' .. maybe V3 will be better??

I don't see the 'access land/ right to roam' areas spelled out either -
would have thought that was practically a 'must have' for a 2005/6
product launch aimed at walkers etc.

--
GSV Three Minds in a Can
Contact recommends the use of Firefox; SC recommends it at gunpoint.

In article <[email hidden]>, Paul Saunders
<[email hidden]> writes

Quoted message said:

Adrian Godwin said:

Quoted message said:

what happens when you
upgrade your GPS? You have to buy the software again!

Again, this is also a feature of the magellan software. You are
allowed to change the GPS though (I think some limited number of
times, though it's only policed by the PC so a new installation
would defeat it).

Ah, so you don't have to buy the software again?

I was also worried that upgrading your computer might stop the software
working.

Garmin's map products usually come with two unlock codes allowing you to
use the maps with two receivers (however the involvement of the OS
probably means this case is different). Upgrading the PC is no problem
as long as you don't loose the codes.

If you want to use the maps with more than two receivers you can
purchase more unlock codes.

Our ex-regular Alan White posted on alt.satellite.gps that he has
checked the availability and price with Garmin Europe who have said it
should be available in about three weeks for £176 inc. VAT.

--

Dominic Sexton

Dave Fawthrop said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Out of interest, are the contour labels on a topo map switchable
between feet and metres?

Yes, on the GPS and in the software, but the contour lines remain
the same.

Then which one is inaccurate? or perhaps both?

Well since the contours were surveyed in metres I presume that would be the
most accurate, but only as accurate as the survey was in the first place.

Conversion to feet is subject to rounding errors, and metres are a lower
resolution measurement than feet anyway. For example, the 2460ft contour
line shown on the Garmin Map viewer displays as 2461ft on my GPS. I don't
think such small errors make much difference anyway.

Regarding the free contours that I'm using, there are places where they are
probably much less accurate than the OS data. I've seen discrepancies of
over 20m in deep forested valleys - perhaps the tree heights affected the
data?

Paul

Bitstring <[email hidden]>, from the
wonderful person Dave Fawthrop <[email hidden]>
said

Quoted message said:

On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:13:56 -0000, "Paul Saunders"
<[email hidden]> wrote:

|Colin MacDonald wrote:
|
|> Fair enough. I thought you'd have looked at the viewer. :-)
|
|I'd have missed that if you hadn't mentioned it.
|
|> Out of interest, are the contour labels on a topo map switchable
|> between feet and metres?
|
|Yes, on the GPS and in the software, but the contour lines remain the same.

Then which one is inaccurate? or perhaps both?

They're accurate in whatever they were surveyed in (one hopes). In the
case of OSGB that is now metres. The 'feet' is just a conversion, using
whatever conversion factor Garmin have programmed, which is why you get
strange numbers .. just like buying timber in the UK . It's all metric,
except it comes in at multiples of 25.4mm. 8>.

By the way, I think I figured why some ROWs are there and some aren't -
actually it looks like =NO= ROWs, per se, are there. What are there are
the things that show on OS maps as 'tracks' (sometimes those are under a
ROW, but mostly not or you wouldn't see them). I guess that's what
Garmin chose to convert, since they don't actually have a polyline type
for 'ROW' only for track/trail, 'unpaved road' etc.

You'd think they might have asked someone (or that the OS might have
told them ..).

--
GSV Three Minds in a Can
Contact recommends the use of Firefox; SC recommends it at gunpoint.

Dominic Sexton said:

Garmin's map products usually come with two unlock codes allowing you
to use the maps with two receivers (however the involvement of the OS
probably means this case is different). Upgrading the PC is no problem
as long as you don't loose the codes.

Well at least that would allow for one GPS upgrade, and I don't buy new ones
very often!

Quoted message said:

If you want to use the maps with more than two receivers you can
purchase more unlock codes.

At a reduced price I hope?

Quoted message said:

Our ex-regular Alan White posted on alt.satellite.gps that he has
checked the availability and price with Garmin Europe who have said it
should be available in about three weeks for £176 inc. VAT.

Well that's not so bad I suppose. With a bit of a discount I might be
tempted.

One more thing I've just noticed, Gower is represented with 5m contour
lines, as per the 25k maps, which is good. I gather that flatter areas tend
to have 5m contours instead of the usual 10m contours. Where the
transitions are though, I have no idea.

Threecliffs is represented in suprising detail compared to the free contours
(6 detailed contours instead of 1 simple contour), clearer than the 25k map
in fact, and the high tide mark is represented in fine detail too (I note
that the tide is now in rather than out). Clearly the data is based on the
25k mapping rather than the 50k, which is obviously a good thing.

Paul

On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 14:41:22 +0000, GSV Three Minds in a Can
<[email hidden]> wrote:

|By the way, I think I figured why some ROWs are there and some aren't -
|actually it looks like =NO= ROWs, per se, are there. What are there are
|the things that show on OS maps as 'tracks' (sometimes those are under a
|ROW, but mostly not or you wouldn't see them). I guess that's what
|Garmin chose to convert, since they don't actually have a polyline type
|for 'ROW' only for track/trail, 'unpaved road' etc.

Thanks I will give it a miss. Nothing but full Explorer 1:25,000 will do
for me. I'll stick to paper maps for a while yet. Maybe in five to ten
years.
--
Dave Fawthrop <dave hyphenologist co uk>
17,000 free e-books at Project Gutenberg! http://www.gutenberg.net
For Yorkshire Dialect go to www.hyphenologist.co.uk/songs/

Dave Fawthrop said:

On Thu, 19 Jan 2006 11:32:04 +0000, Adrian Godwin
<[email hidden]> wrote:

|The paths and water detail looks a lot like the Magellan equivalent and
|appears to suffer from the same problem - it doesn't distinguish a
|physical track from a right of way. I'd be delighted to hear I'm wrong
|as I haven't compared known private tracks with PROWs, but in general
|it seems roads are shown as lines but paths are shown as block features
|in the same way as water. This is probably a limitation of the OS
|source material, which doesn't seem to be based on the raster data.

No! The OS surveys at some insane accuracy, and sell licences at 1:10,000
http://www.ordnancesurvey.co.uk/oswebsite/products/10kraster/

The accuracy's excellent. However, my point was re the distinction between
private tracks and PROWs. Obviously, these are shown differently on
the raster maps, but both the Magellan and (apparently) the Garmin
fail to distinguish between them on their GPS topo maps.

I was told by the Magellan developer that the topo maps are not based
on translations from raster into vector maps, but from newer OS data
obtained from photographs. I don't know why this is the case, but
it's possibly because the raster maps don't match up as well to GPS
locations as the new data. Given the visual similarity between the
Magellan and Garmin maps, the same may be true for Garmin.

I can imagine that taking new, photographically-based surveys and
correlating them with existing raster maps showing PROWs would
be a massive undertaking. So issuing maps with all paths shown
the same (and visible only where photographic data shows them)
would be a reasonable halfway stage.

OK, it's all just supposition. Isn't that a Usenet tradition ?

-adrian