Re: A new, simpler GPS?

Paul Saunders wrote:

No it doesn't. The Active 10 is simpler because it has less functionality.
As I understand it, it has no choice of datums and only UK maps are
available. Fine if you only want to use it in the UK, but a normal GPS isn't
"wanting" because it has a choice of hundreds of datums, on the contrary,
that's a powerful feature which means it can be used anywhere in the world.
Many GPS units have a lot of other features that the Active 10 doesn't, but
that's not a bad thing, it's makes them more powerful.

Only if you're using those features, otherwise it makes it unnecessarily
cumbersome.

Setting the right datum isn't exactly rocket science, but it's the main
thing that trips up most newbies. I do think that units exported to
different countries should be preset to the local datum, but that would make
a lot of extra work for the manufacturers.

Well, not really...
And if you turn on an eTrex a long way from home it asks if you've moved
a long way lately as a check, so clearly there's some intelligence built
in at that level. Why not have the software ask on first turn on what
your home country is, and set it that way? PCs have first-switch-on
screens, so why not a GPS? And the answer is "nobody thought hard
enough about the user friendliness".

There you go again, pointing out exceptions to the rule as if they are
commonplace. For the average UK walker, going out with a compass and no map
would be a bit silly.

Indeed, but the compass as used by a typical UK walker is not
necessarily "commonplace". Look in the Silva website at the marine
section and you'll see what is thought of as "commonplace" by other
compass users doesn't have protractors and doesn't have roamers. You're
focusing on a very specific value of "commonplace" which isn't actually
all that common in the wider context. Marine use of maps, compasses and
GPS is quite possibly more common than land use, so don't be too sure
about "the rule".

The prime function of a GPS is to pinpoint your location, to give you
precise coordinates of your position. Everything else is extra.

Everything else is extra, yes, but how much extra you get in the context
you're using it will determine how useful it actually is. I use a
protractor compass when I'm walking, but I'll take a marine compass to
mount in the sea kayak: the extra features improve the worth of one over
the other in each context by the degree they make things easier in that
context. And similarly a GPS can be made to make things easier in
certain contexts, and the Satmap has been made to make the life of a UK
hillgoer particularly easy. Which, if they've done their job well, will
make it friendlier and easier for UK hillgoers. That's a Good Thing, if
you're a UK hillgoer.

If the mapping on a Garmin unit fails
to do that as well as the Satmap unit then it's a basic failure of
design, and that is clearly something it is fair to criticise if the
job you have is getting about the place as easily as possible.

It doesn't fail to do that as well as the Satmap

But the reviewer very clearly thought quite the opposite, and was saying
so based on direct experience. Why would he make it up?

so there's no failure of
design, so it's not fair to criticise it.

And because he clearly finds the Satmap much easier to use, for an
application the Gramins are sold for, it *is* a fair criticism.

Is it fair to criticise a DSLR for being bigger and heavier than a simple
point and shoot, even though it takes much better pictures?

Yes. That's why I carry a point and shoot.

criticise a simple point and shoot for taking crappy pictures when it's
small and light and easy to carry?

Yes, if you need top quality pictures.

The bottom line is that the Active 10 and a conventional GPS are different
types of units. They each have their advantages and disadvantages. Neither
is intrinsically better than the other, they're each better at doing
different things, so you choose the one which suits your requirements
better.

Exactly. And the reviewer was pointing out that in the context of an OS
map user in the UK hills, the Satmap is much easier to use in his
experience.

I don't disagree that it's easier to use, but it's only easier in that it's
more intuitive at first glance and doesn't require you to set the datum.
Once you've familiarised yourself with a conventional GPS (which really
isn't difficult) there's very little difference in ease of use.

Wrong. I am familiar with my eTrex and I can set the datums. I can't
look at the screen and see where I am in relation to any topography that
I haven't added myself. So it's not as easy to use.

Of course, but it's not fair to say that the alternative is "unremittingly
user hostile".

If you find that it is, then it's fair to say that.

By all means say that it's twice as easy to use, or even 10
times as easy to use, but not 1000 times easier.

What's the unit of easiness?
If you can give someone a unit and they can see what's going on, and
another unit where they can't, then right at that moment the second one
is *infinitely* harder.

That's my whole point. I'm
just disagreeing with their gross exaggeration, which implies that
navigating with a conventional GPS is like working out the direction of
north by putting twigs in the ground and studying the movement of the
shadows.

That may be what you picked up, but it's not what I picked up.

Both types of units are highly advanced, modern navigation devices. Both do
an excellent job. Each has different advantages and disadvantages. And
that's the point. They're different. Medium format cameras didn't suddenly
become obsolete when 35mm cameras were invented, because MF camera still
took better photos, and some photographers cared more about photo quality
than ease of use. Same with the Active 10. It's the GPS equivalent of a
point'n'shoot. Very pretty and easy to use, but conventional GPS units are
still better in other respects.

And in a review aimed at people who have found MF cameras awkward and
unwieldy, and who will get enough quality from a compact 35, it's stupid
or wrong to emphasize the weight, size and ease of use?

In one aspect, yes, but not in others. So it's not better, it's different.
It's an alternative.

And the reviewer was highlighting the aspect in which it *is* better.
That is actually useful information to many potential users who've
looked at existing units and thought <bof>.

Again you seem to be purposely misunderstanding what I wrote. I never said
that GPS doesn't have room for improvement. When the 60CS came out I had no
doubt it was superior to the GPS12 in every respect, but it's not the case
here. Battery consumption is worse, there are fewer features, no altimeter
etc. It's not an unqualified improvement on existing technology. Now if the
OS mapping could be combined with all the features of the 60CS, that would
be a clear improvement. But as things stand, my 60CS is still better at some
things, while the Active 10 is better at others.

Paul, in a recent thread you went on at great length at how GPS was
better than a paper map because it made life simpler. Now someone
creates a GPS aimed at making life simpler and you respond in the first
instance that there's nothing complicated about GPS really. Well there
obviously is for some people, which is why that review got written the
way it was. In the paragraph above you've changed your tune rather.

Easy - easier. Correct.

Easy - unremittingly user hostile. Wrong! Blatant exaggeration.

From your perspective, yes, but not from others.

UNIX command line: easy for habitual users of UNIX command line.
UNIX command line: can't do anything /at all/ if you don't know UNIX
command line. So is that easy to use, or not? Who are you asking?

Of course there is, but you're missing my point again. It's the exaggeration
that I disagree with, not that it's easier to use.

So why did you spend so much time saying that existing units /are/ easy
to use?

But I don't believe that easier is better if you lose functionality.

It depends if you want or need the functionality. The things you
typically describe when detailing how you use your GPS are things some
people really don't give a damn about, so losing excess complication is
making it better in that particular context. Look at the eTrex manual
and it's all about emphasizing how easy the unit is to use, to the
extent the useful stuff tends to be found in appendices! if you're
trying to make a user-friendly unit (and it looks the marketing people
wanted that, even if the engineers weren't on board) then having to be
constantly reassured by a dumbed-down manual that it *is* user-friendly
is a worse way to go about it than actually making it user friendly.

You say the prime job of a GPS is to tell you were you are... Turn on an
eTrex and a Satmap: the Satmap not only tells you, it shows you in a
picture worth 1000 words. The eTrex tells you... that it's "ready to
navigate", *nothing* more. The eTrex could be made more user friendly
relatively easily, through nothing but software.
Another case of crappy UI design for no reason other than not thinking
is projecting waypoints. In a unit that works down to 1m resolution,
the waypoint projection takes a minimum figure of a single decimal
place, so that'll be 100m best resolution. So put yourself at the
summit of the Ben, and you see from your map that the safe walk off is
150m in a given direction. Putting in the waypoint where you are is
easy enough, but you /can't/ project it 150m because it's not a multiple
of 100m. So you can either do some mental arithmetic and keep an eye on
the grid numbers as you move, or alter a waypoint copy in a rather
clumsy way with more menatl arithmetic, possibly in a blizzard, or turn
the unit to miles and go 1/10th of a mile (~160m)... That's bonkers, how
can you describe that as /anything/ other than user-hostile? Especially
compared to just looking at a picture of where you are and seeing you're
not on top of Five Finger Gully yet?

Remember the hype surrounding compacts when they first appeared? "Take a
perfect picture every time". Yeah right, even cameras with the most advanced
scene recognition software still haven't mastered that. You still can't beat
doing it manually if you want the best results.

Only if you have the time and expertise /and the inclination/ as well as
the equipment. *I* will get a better picture with a point and shoot.

Now that's a good example of a comparison with something that really is user
hostile.

[UNIX command line]
But it isn't in an objective sense: it's remarkably flexible and
powerful and easy for people that know it.

But since you mention it, if you're talking about actual file
management, I can't stand Windows, and I don't use it. I use Windows
Commander, which is basically a Windows version of Norton Commander, a DOS
program. You might remember it. I use it constantly for all my file
management activities. It even has a command line option which I use for
bulk file renaming and suchlike. So no, I don't think Windows is better.
It's prettier to look at, but a pain in the arse to use for anything more
than the simplest of operations.

I don't mean Windows the program so much as the windowing GUI interface.
A job like changing all instances of mydomain.com to mynewdomain.com in
files altered after a certain date in subdirectories of a certain name
anywhere in a filesystem is a one line command in UNIX if you pipe
together find and sed. I'd have to look up how to do it and it would
take longer than filling in a dozen boxes in a GUI, but I know people
who'd have it finished before I'd even got the right window open. So
which is more user hostile, the one that takes the Wizard 5 minutes, or
the one that takes him 15 seconds?

Now you're confusing ease of use with ease of learning. You're not seriously
suggesting that someone would buy a GPS, put it in their rucksack and forget
all about it, waiting before they get into a difficult navigation situation
before switching it on for the first time, then thinking "now then, how does
this work?".

No, but let's go back to the waypoint projection case. It's just bloody
awkward at best, and stupidly inaccurate at worst. Yet our potential
hypothermia victim who's coming down with exhaustion might have to
account for that sort of nonsense instead of thinking "mustn't fall down
5 finger gully... GPS *shows* me I'm nowhere near it, I'm okay!".

But it is simpler! It has no choice of datums, which makes it easy for
newbies, but useless for anyone wanting to use it in a different country.

So no use for me, as I want one for Norway. But how often do people do
overseas trips where they need a GPS, compared to, say, wandering around
the UK where they live and go out every weekend? The market presence of
this thing suggests a fair few don't let that point worry them.

But they also shouldn't be any more complicated!

Why not? It depends what the extra complexity entails.

Why not? Because it makes things harder than necessary.

If it means more
features then there's nothing wrong with that.

If it makes the basic task harder to do then there *is* something wrong
with that. That's why pocket calculators have much smaller keypads than
PCs: they don't need the letters, and giving them the letters would just
get in the way.

but extra features are a good thing, especially if
you use them (I use the sunrise/sunset and barometer features a lot).

Not "especially", but "only".

Want to go back to command line interfaces on your computer?

I still use it for some things.

Some users use it for all things, because for power users it really can
be easier. All you need is the skill and knowledge.

Bottom line is that most things have to be learned! There's very little that
is truly intuitive without previous experience of something else.

Yet the reviewer, with knowledge of maps, found a Satmap very easy to
use, and traditional GPS units awkward. So given the typical knowledge
of a prospective UK GPS using hillwalker it looks like it really might
be genuinely intuitive.

The Active 10 is only intuitive because it uses what people already know.

Well yes, but the point is rather that they *do* already know it. It's
not as if assuming that book buyers can read before they pay up is a
risky business strategy...

It's actually cheaper.

Prices have come down since I last looked, fairy nuff.

The steeper learning curve is negligible, it doesn't take long. Learning
to use a GPS isn't as hard as you seem to be suggesting.

So you say. The OM reviewer doesn't appear to think they're that easy.
Folk I've lent the ski club eTrexen too comment that it's not really
that easy.

Actually they don't. They may get to the feature they want to reach, but
that feature may not be exactly where the map says it is.

Fine. I want to get where I'm going. That's good enough for me.

Obviously this wouldn't be an issue in good visibility, and even in poor
visibility it's often not that bad, but if you're in thick fog with only 10m
visibility, trying to find a cairn that's 30m away could be a problem. Not
an insurmountable one, you could simply wander around until you find it, but
surely it would be better to use a more accurate map in the first place?

If all else were equal, but all else isn't with OS's silly costings on
1:25K!

One really good thing about GPS is that a big coverage of 1:25K doesn't
take up any more physical space than 1:50K, which is good. Been looking
at the Garmin Mapsource for bits of Norway and while useful I can't say
I'm that whelmed compared to the paper mapping.

Pete.
--
Peter Clinch Medical Physics IT Officer
Tel 44 1382 660111 ext. 33637 Univ. of Dundee, Ninewells Hospital
Fax 44 1382 640177 Dundee DD1 9SY Scotland UK
net p.j.clinch@xxxxxxxxxxxx http://www.dundee.ac.uk/~pjclinch/
.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: A new, simpler GPS?
    ... "unremittingly user hostile" are poles apart. ... I never said that the Active 10 isn't easier to use than a conventional GPS. ... and you can take the map out and use ... Battery consumption is worse, there are fewer features, no altimeter ...
    (uk.rec.walking)
  • My comments about the etrex Vista C
    ... with walking excursions at sea level. ... I have had GPS before so the behaviour is more or less like a etrex ... altimeter is sure to indicate a change in elevation. ... The Metroguide map is in general very accurate where there is map;) I ...
    (sci.geo.satellite-nav)
  • Re: GPS Vs COMPASS
    ... > using my compass to orient my map and to take bearings when it is not ... > Clearly you must be using your GPS merely as an emergency device ... > checking your route is correct by consulting your map in combination ...
    (uk.rec.walking)
  • Re: gps recommendations?
    ... examples of gps units and software that talk to topo maps and merge waypoints to the map, ... The minimal features you need in the GPS receiver are creating an automatic "track log" that records where you went, and connecting the GPS receiver to a computer, so that the software can make good use of the information about where you went. ... And it also appears that they have a basic model called SporTrak which seems to be analogous to the Garmin eTrex in that the "plain" SporTrak meets the minimal requirements and then they have a series of more expensive models (SporTrak Pro, SporTrak Color, SporTrak Map, SporTrak Topo, etc.) with additional features. ...
    (rec.skiing.nordic)
  • Re: portable GPS recommendation?
    ... The c550 is my first true GPS/auto unit, so I guess I fall into the "new user" category. ... Both TomTom and Magellan have been plagued by mounting hardware issues, and Garmin has hit a home run with this very simple, yet highly effective, mount. ... You attach the c550 to the mount by simply applying pressure until you hear the ball on the mount click into the back of the Garmin StreetPilot c550. ... Garmin got the angle just right, so the 3D is just as easy to read on the map as 2D. ...
    (alt.sys.pc-clone.dell)