Active 10 GPS

The message <[email hidden]>
from Ancient Brit <[email hidden]> contains these words:

Quoted message said:

I used GPS in conjunction with OS maps this summer when I climbed all
284 Munros in Scotland and most of the tops so I am speaking with
experience of use in rough mountains in bad weather conditions.

400+ tops in a single season is going some.

--
Roger Chapman
Nearest Marilyn still to be visited - Great Orme.
89 miles as the crow flies,
considerably more as the walker drives.

In message <[email hidden]>

Roger said:

The message <[email hidden]>
from Simon Challands <[email hidden]> contains these words:

big snips as I have covered many of the points in my reply to Paul.

Quoted message said:

I'll often look at a map in unfamiliar territory, but as I said
before, I can't remember when I last looked at a compass. I've never
even bothered with a GPS. It can do things that might be of interest,
but it's an additional toy IMO, at least in the places I usually go.
If you often end up trudging around moorland in atrocious weather I
imagine it could be quite useful.

I prefer to orient the map. The surest (and for that matter the easiest)
is by looking at the compass.

Indeed it is, but my point is that that is very rarely actually
required. By far and away my most common use of a compass is to try to
definitively decide what some distant feature may be. It is rarely of
any real use to me, and so I see a GPS as being even less. Well,
that's not fair. As far as getting located is concerned, it's easier,
and probably more reliable if you really can't see any features, but
my point is that I find that rarely happens. It will depend on the
places you like to go and whether or not you try to avoid bad weather.
They may well make life easier in certain conditions, but unless you
enjoy getting more out of them (records of routes and so on and so
forth), to me they just seem like an extra gimmick and extra piece of
kit to lug around that doesn't really add much to the experience (and
let's face it, one of the appeals of hills and mountains is the lack
of modern gimmickery that people seem to find so necessary nowdays)>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Society these days is far too paranoid about "what ifs", to the extent
that I've seen people on the fells in good weather looking prepared
for mountain climbing in Antarctica.

I don't think I am paranoid but then I am not best placed to judge that.
As it is you would unlikely to pick me out as an arctic numptie if we
did pass on the hills although if there is snow about I will probably be
carrying an axe and if the hills are icy crampons as well.

That's all about dealing with the reasonably expected, though.
Crampons, for example, are (presumably) necessary, or highly likely to
be necessary for a given route in winter. Personally I don't carry
them, or know what to do with them, but my range of where I would
consider going is vastly limited in wintry conditions. There is a
world of difference between taking crampons and an ice axe in winter
and taking half a ton of high-tech gimmickery in the middle of summer.
My whinge is that to all too many people there doesn't seem to be a
difference. The proliferation of such views might well be making me
over-react to people who seem to be supporting them but in reality
aren't.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

That's where experience comes in. Again, last weekend is hardly the
middle of summer. It also depends on where you're going. Personally
I'll always be carrying something to put on over the t-shirt if I set
out in one, but in summer it's hardly a major error. At this time of
year, it probably isn't all that sensible. Of course, you don't know
what someone is carrying in their sack.

Ok you have convinced me. I obviously don't have sufficient experience
to comment on these weighty matters :-) but sack? Surely they are
overdressed if they are carrying a rucksack?

Now that's just becoming sarcastic. I was hoping that this could be a
sensible discussion.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Again, a minor issue (assuming you check for ticks afterwards anyway,
which seem to be able to sneak through whatever you're wearing).

I seem to have led a charmed life but I don't (touch wood) ever remember
being ticked.

I've never either, but the risk of them is the only real reason I can
think of for being bothered about being covered up in bracken. Some
people seem to get stuck with them quite often (possibly for the same
reason that in midge-infested areas I only get a couple of bites yet
others seem to swell up from head to toe?)

Quoted message said:

Since I tend not to carry very much gear (not even a first aid kit) I
think you are barking up the wrong tree, or barking something anyway.

I'm sorry that you've felt the need to stoop to personal comments like
that. You appeared to be defending the "carry everything for every
possible emergency" view, and being against those who don't.

--
Simon Challands

The message <[email hidden]>
from Simon Challands <[email hidden]> contains these words:

big snip

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I don't think I am paranoid but then I am not best placed to judge that.
As it is you would unlikely to pick me out as an arctic numptie if we
did pass on the hills although if there is snow about I will probably be
carrying an axe and if the hills are icy crampons as well.

Quoted message said:

That's all about dealing with the reasonably expected, though.
Crampons, for example, are (presumably) necessary, or highly likely to
be necessary for a given route in winter. Personally I don't carry
them, or know what to do with them, but my range of where I would
consider going is vastly limited in wintry conditions. There is a
world of difference between taking crampons and an ice axe in winter
and taking half a ton of high-tech gimmickery in the middle of summer.
My whinge is that to all too many people there doesn't seem to be a
difference. The proliferation of such views might well be making me
over-react to people who seem to be supporting them but in reality
aren't.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

That's where experience comes in. Again, last weekend is hardly the
middle of summer. It also depends on where you're going. Personally
I'll always be carrying something to put on over the t-shirt if I set
out in one, but in summer it's hardly a major error. At this time of
year, it probably isn't all that sensible. Of course, you don't know
what someone is carrying in their sack.

Ok you have convinced me. I obviously don't have sufficient experience
to comment on these weighty matters :-) but sack? Surely they are
overdressed if they are carrying a rucksack?

Quoted message said:

Now that's just becoming sarcastic. I was hoping that this could be a
sensible discussion.

Irony.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Again, a minor issue (assuming you check for ticks afterwards anyway,
which seem to be able to sneak through whatever you're wearing).

I seem to have led a charmed life but I don't (touch wood) ever remember
being ticked.

Quoted message said:

I've never either, but the risk of them is the only real reason I can
think of for being bothered about being covered up in bracken. Some
people seem to get stuck with them quite often (possibly for the same
reason that in midge-infested areas I only get a couple of bites yet
others seem to swell up from head to toe?)

The instance I mentioned earlier in the thread was wet bracken, not
bracken per se.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Since I tend not to carry very much gear (not even a first aid kit) I
think you are barking up the wrong tree, or barking something anyway.

Quoted message said:

I'm sorry that you've felt the need to stoop to personal comments like
that. You appeared to be defending the "carry everything for every
possible emergency" view, and being against those who don't.

So it is ok for you to claim I am paranoid but not for me to suggest
that such an attitude is evidence of unreason?

--
Roger Chapman
Nearest Marilyn still to be visited - Great Orme.
89 miles as the crow flies,
considerably more as the walker drives.

In message <[email hidden]>

Roger said:

The message <[email hidden]>
from Simon Challands <[email hidden]> contains these words:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Since I tend not to carry very much gear (not even a first aid kit) I
think you are barking up the wrong tree, or barking something anyway.

Quoted message said:

I'm sorry that you've felt the need to stoop to personal comments like
that. You appeared to be defending the "carry everything for every
possible emergency" view, and being against those who don't.

So it is ok for you to claim I am paranoid but not for me to suggest
that such an attitude is evidence of unreason?

For heaven's sake, this is getting silly now. I don't recall calling
you paranoid, just the "got to cover every risk" attitude that you
seemed to be defending. If I had got the wrong idea then there was
nothing stopping you from saying so in a more adult way, but instead
you've chosen to stoop to fairly childish insults.

--
Simon Challands

Quoted post said:

Does anyone have any experience of the Active 10 GPS?
More details here http://satmap.com/

I want it for walking, as an alternative to OS maps.

I was minutes away from ordering a Garmin 60CSX, probably with UK TOPO
map. Plainly I now need to seriously consider the Active 10.

But it's also prompted me to think about yet another option. I have an
(oldish) iPAQ 2210 Pocket PC, so I could get a much smaller GPS unit,
i.e. a receiver only, such as Holux etc, with the latest sensitive
circuitry, plus appropriate cable and case. My main motive for
considering that approach is that I really baulk at paying so much
over and over again for OS maps! Active 10 'South East' 50k set
covering Hampshire, Sussex, Kent, etc, would be £50. Individual 25k
for Surrey would be £80.

Leaving aside all the paper maps I've bought, I now have a raft of
digital OS 25k and 50k maps which I use with Memory-Map. I have not of
course had any mapping on my venerable GPS 12. But with my PPC loaded
with a map extracted from MM, showing my planned walk, supplemented by
a paper map and possibly even an A4 colour print-out of my planned
walk in a waterproof map-holder, I've usually been happy enough. And
of course my PPC also has 2GB of music, all my contacts, task list,
frequently-used text files, calendar, etc.

Yet another factor: my car still has no sat-nav. Maybe I should
include that in the equation in pursuit of an integrated solution?
Decisions, decisions...

--
Terry, East Grinstead, UK

The message <[email hidden]>
from Simon Challands <[email hidden]> contains these words:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So it is ok for you to claim I am paranoid but not for me to suggest
that such an attitude is evidence of unreason?

Quoted message said:

For heaven's sake, this is getting silly now. I don't recall calling
you paranoid, just the "got to cover every risk" attitude that you
seemed to be defending. If I had got the wrong idea then there was
nothing stopping you from saying so in a more adult way, but instead
you've chosen to stoop to fairly childish insults.

You have such a convenient memory.

"> That is where the 'what ifs' come in.

Society these days is far too paranoid about "what ifs""

I quote four 'what ifs'. You immediately link 'what ifs' with paranoia.
The link was immediate and obvious. Given your attitude I think I have
been restrained in this matter but in view the above nonsense you can
join a few other choice specimens in my killfile.

*Plonk*

--
Roger Chapman
Nearest Marilyn still to be visited - Great Orme.
89 miles as the crow flies,
considerably more as the walker drives.

Terry Pinnell said:

I was minutes away from ordering a Garmin 60CSX, probably with UK TOPO
map. Plainly I now need to seriously consider the Active 10.

Personally, I'd advise against that, as Mike just said.

Quoted message said:

But it's also prompted me to think about yet another option. I have an
(oldish) iPAQ 2210 Pocket PC, so I could get a much smaller GPS unit,
i.e. a receiver only, such as Holux etc, with the latest sensitive
circuitry, plus appropriate cable and case.

Sounds fiddly. Then there's battery issues and stuff. A single all-in-one
GPS is a better choice IMO.

Quoted message said:

Yet another factor: my car still has no sat-nav. Maybe I should
include that in the equation in pursuit of an integrated solution?
Decisions, decisions...

The 60CS works great in the car, you can buy a special holder for it, and a
power lead for the cigarette lighter. I think the Topo mapping is
autorouting too, but I'm not 100% sure about that.

If you want to keep the price down, forget the Topo and just download the
free contours, they're surprisingly useful on their own.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk/
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk/weblog/
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk/weblog/pic-of-the-day/henrhyd-falls/

In message <[email hidden]>

Terry Pinnell said:

Quoted post said:

Does anyone have any experience of the Active 10 GPS?
More details here http://satmap.com/

I want it for walking, as an alternative to OS maps.

I was minutes away from ordering a Garmin 60CSX, probably with UK TOPO
map. Plainly I now need to seriously consider the Active 10.

The problem I have with the Active 10 is that if you add up the total
cost of a widespread coverage of the UK at 1:50,000 and some coverage at
1:25,000 it is going to cost thousands of pounds.

Maps are "from £29.99" and there are going to be over 150 titles. so
that is more than £3000 for a complete set of maps and then you have to
pay for the Active 10 itself.

Mike
--
o/ \\ // |\ ,_ o Mike Clark
<\__,\\ // __o | \ / /\, "A mountain climbing, cycling, skiing,
"> || _`\<,_ |__\ \> | immunology lecturer, antibody engineer and
` || (_)/ (_) | \corn computer user"

In message <[email hidden]>

Roger said:

The message <[email hidden]>
from Simon Challands <[email hidden]> contains these words:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

So it is ok for you to claim I am paranoid but not for me to suggest
that such an attitude is evidence of unreason?

Quoted message said:

For heaven's sake, this is getting silly now. I don't recall calling
you paranoid, just the "got to cover every risk" attitude that you
seemed to be defending. If I had got the wrong idea then there was
nothing stopping you from saying so in a more adult way, but instead
you've chosen to stoop to fairly childish insults.

You have such a convenient memory.

"> That is where the 'what ifs' come in.

Society these days is far too paranoid about "what ifs""

I quote four 'what ifs'. You immediately link 'what ifs' with paranoia.
The link was immediate and obvious. Given your attitude I think I have
been restrained in this matter but in view the above nonsense you can
join a few other choice specimens in my killfile.

Well, since you're killfiling me I don't expect you to read this, but
I'll reply anyway. I completely and utterly fail to see why you have
got so upset about this. I do think the degree of planning for "what
ifs" to the extreme these days IS paranoia, but I don't see how I've
insulted you there, or what I've said to get you so upset. What I've
said was a general opinion, and in no way could be regarded as a
personal attack. I've rarely seen such ridiculous over-reaction, even
on Usenet. If you don't agree with something then discuss it, don't
throw a wobbler.

--
Simon Challands

The message <[email hidden]>
from Simon Challands <[email hidden]> contains these words:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

I quote four 'what ifs'. You immediately link 'what ifs' with paranoia.
The link was immediate and obvious. Given your attitude I think I have
been restrained in this matter but in view the above nonsense you can
join a few other choice specimens in my killfile.

Quoted message said:

Well, since you're killfiling me I don't expect you to read this, but
I'll reply anyway. I completely and utterly fail to see why you have
got so upset about this. I do think the degree of planning for "what
ifs" to the extreme these days IS paranoia, but I don't see how I've
insulted you there, or what I've said to get you so upset. What I've
said was a general opinion, and in no way could be regarded as a
personal attack. I've rarely seen such ridiculous over-reaction, even
on Usenet. If you don't agree with something then discuss it, don't
throw a wobbler.

Still playing the injured innocence card I see but it STM that it is you
who has become upset, not me. I just don't think exchanging insults with
you is worth the effort. You are unlikely to get a civilised response
from anyone you label as paranoid and your posturing above is very much
the antithesis of the adult behaviour you imagine you are exhibiting.

As you have changed your address you now have two entries in my kill
file. But do not despair if you try really hard you might eventually
fill it up, but not for a very long time as it is currently only 3%
full. And by the time it is full I will have long since forgotten why it
was I found you a tiresome nonentity.

--
Roger Chapman
Nearest Marilyn still to be visited - Great Orme.
89 miles as the crow flies,
considerably more as the walker drives.

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

Quoted message said:

Terry Pinnell said:

I was minutes away from ordering a Garmin 60CSX, probably with UK TOPO
map. Plainly I now need to seriously consider the Active 10.

Personally, I'd advise against that, as Mike just said.

Quoted message said:

But it's also prompted me to think about yet another option. I have an
(oldish) iPAQ 2210 Pocket PC, so I could get a much smaller GPS unit,
i.e. a receiver only, such as Holux etc, with the latest sensitive
circuitry, plus appropriate cable and case.

Sounds fiddly. Then there's battery issues and stuff. A single all-in-one
GPS is a better choice IMO.

Pocket PCs suffer from being fragile, heavy, and have a battery life of
'not nearly enough'.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Yet another factor: my car still has no sat-nav. Maybe I should
include that in the equation in pursuit of an integrated solution?
Decisions, decisions...

The 60CS works great in the car, you can buy a special holder for it, and a
power lead for the cigarette lighter. I think the Topo mapping is
autorouting too, but I'm not 100% sure about that.

Yes, topo UK is auto-routing (Navteq data).

--
GSV Three Minds in a Can
10,002 Km walked. 1,952 Km PROWs surveyed. 35.5% complete.

In message <[email hidden]>

Roger said:

Still playing the injured innocence card I see but it STM that it is you
who has become upset, not me. I just don't think exchanging insults with
you is worth the effort. You are unlikely to get a civilised response
from anyone you label as paranoid and your posturing above is very much
the antithesis of the adult behaviour you imagine you are exhibiting.

For the umpteenth time, I was labelling a general view as paranoid.
Since you expressed those points in the first place then I suppose
they do indirectly imply that I thought the same of you, but quite why
you didn't simply try to argue counter to my view that the scenarios
you described were worrying too much I don't know.

You have clearly become upset because you were the first one to
resort to personal comments. I expect a civilised response to a view
that I label as paranoid, because I truly believe that it is - dealing
with pretty unlikely "what ifs" is paranoid in my book. I'm quite
willing to have a mature discussion on the subject, to debate whether
or not my view is justified, but all I've seen is a very excessive
reaction to a different opinion. I had no intention of causing
offence, and if offence is caused by such things then debate is
impossible. If there was a misunderstanding then you could have said
so, instead of getting so worked up. Any debate will have similar
terms. Either a precaution is paranoid or it's sensible. Another
opinion on a matter is either sound or stupid. Is the only way I can
avoid upsetting you to agree with you?

My "posturing above" (snipped) is the result of your provocation;
perhaps I should have been more adult than to return like with like.

Quoted message said:

As you have changed your address you now have two entries in my kill
file. But do not despair if you try really hard you might eventually
fill it up, but not for a very long time as it is currently only 3%
full. And by the time it is full I will have long since forgotten why it
was I found you a tiresome nonentity.

I have made no effort to change my address, but it's possible that
I've got my laptop and desktop set up differently. This time it IS a
deliberate change of address. Filter on the part after the @ would be
a more reliable method, or my name, or something less easily editable
The given "from" address can be whatever the sender puts in there, and
doesn't have to be a real address, so isn't a reliable filter. These
days, with fixed IPs, that's more reliable, or a combination of both,
although the IP isn't a great one for me as I alternate between the UK
and France at the moment.

If you are so keen to killfile me, why respond to my post? If you feel
you have to respond to what I say, then why killfile me? Even 3% full
(3% of what? why is there a limit) sounds overly intolerant; the only
person I've got killfiled is a certain Angus.

--
Simon Challands

The message <[email hidden]>
from Simon Challands <[email hidden]> contains these words:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Still playing the injured innocence card I see but it STM that it is you
who has become upset, not me. I just don't think exchanging insults with
you is worth the effort. You are unlikely to get a civilised response
from anyone you label as paranoid and your posturing above is very much
the antithesis of the adult behaviour you imagine you are exhibiting.

Quoted message said:

For the umpteenth time, I was labelling a general view as paranoid.
Since you expressed those points in the first place then I suppose
they do indirectly imply that I thought the same of you, but quite why
you didn't simply try to argue counter to my view that the scenarios
you described were worrying too much I don't know.

Umpteenth? Your grip on reality is rapidly eroding.

Quoted message said:

You have clearly become upset because you were the first one to
resort to personal comments. I expect a civilised response to a view
that I label as paranoid, because I truly believe that it is - dealing
with pretty unlikely "what ifs" is paranoid in my book. I'm quite
willing to have a mature discussion on the subject, to debate whether
or not my view is justified, but all I've seen is a very excessive
reaction to a different opinion. I had no intention of causing
offence, and if offence is caused by such things then debate is
impossible. If there was a misunderstanding then you could have said
so, instead of getting so worked up. Any debate will have similar
terms. Either a precaution is paranoid or it's sensible. Another
opinion on a matter is either sound or stupid. Is the only way I can
avoid upsetting you to agree with you?

Quoted message said:

My "posturing above" (snipped) is the result of your provocation;
perhaps I should have been more adult than to return like with like.

Provocation? You really are a case. Making mountains out of molehills
doesn't begin to describe it.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

As you have changed your address you now have two entries in my kill
file. But do not despair if you try really hard you might eventually
fill it up, but not for a very long time as it is currently only 3%
full. And by the time it is full I will have long since forgotten why it
was I found you a tiresome nonentity.

Quoted message said:

I have made no effort to change my address, but it's possible that
I've got my laptop and desktop set up differently. This time it IS a
deliberate change of address. Filter on the part after the @ would be
a more reliable method, or my name, or something less easily editable
The given "from" address can be whatever the sender puts in there, and
doesn't have to be a real address, so isn't a reliable filter. These
days, with fixed IPs, that's more reliable, or a combination of both,
although the IP isn't a great one for me as I alternate between the UK
and France at the moment.

Only possible? Don't be silly. It is a fact that you used a different
address for the first time in this thread after I kill filed you.

As for the unnecessary advice I prefer to keep things simple so you now
have three entries in my killfile.

Quoted message said:

If you are so keen to killfile me, why respond to my post? If you feel
you have to respond to what I say, then why killfile me? Even 3% full
(3% of what? why is there a limit) sounds overly intolerant; the only
person I've got killfiled is a certain Angus.

You are kill filed so I don't need to respond to you pretentious
nonsense in the future. As you have gone out of your way to make sure I
see your replies it is only polite to respond.

Going though my killfile I can find only one other who is/was a regular
in this ng and as I can no longer remember why he has been reinstated.
Most entries were regular bulk trollers or spammers in other ngs who
have long since disappeared over the horizon. But you are right in one
respect. I am intolerant. I don't suffer fools gladly and in my book
your pretentious posturing puts you firmly in the fools category however
clever you might be otherwise.

--
Roger Chapman
Nearest Marilyn still to be visited - Great Orme.
89 miles as the crow flies,
considerably more as the walker drives.

In message <[email hidden]>

Roger said:

Quoted message said:

If you are so keen to killfile me, why respond to my post? If you feel
you have to respond to what I say, then why killfile me? Even 3% full
(3% of what? why is there a limit) sounds overly intolerant; the only
person I've got killfiled is a certain Angus.

You are kill filed so I don't need to respond to you pretentious
nonsense in the future. As you have gone out of your way to make sure I
see your replies it is only polite to respond.

OK, final one, then, whether or not you respond to this. I don't see
how you can use the word "polite" in this context. You've started
getting rude ever since there was a difference of opinion over a
serious matter (and what is sensible equipment and precautions to take
on the hills and what is just being paranoid is a serious matter
worthy of debate). All you have done since then is insult me. I've
seen your posts in this ng before and thought you were a reasonable
type of person, but this wholly unexpected vitriol has caught me by
surprise and saddened me. Almost every time you reply to a point it's
not to answer, but just to hurl abuse. I'm afraid to say you're just
coming across as a deeply unpleasant person. The way you're carrying
on anyone would think I'd accused you of being a murderer rather than
indirectly implying a paranoid attitude, which, true or not, is hardly
a killing insult.

As I said, I'm not going to dig out another address to reply
(admittedly I think I said that last time). There is no point in
talking to someone who perceives deliberate personal attacks, reacts
to them like a spoiled child, and apparently refuses to try to see if
there's been a genuine misunderstanding. Not receiving a reply from
such a person in the future due to being killfiled is no great loss.

--
Simon Challands

GSV Three Minds in a Can said:

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

Quoted message said:

Terry Pinnell said:

I was minutes away from ordering a Garmin 60CSX, probably with UK TOPO
map. Plainly I now need to seriously consider the Active 10.

Personally, I'd advise against that, as Mike just said.

Quoted message said:

But it's also prompted me to think about yet another option. I have an
(oldish) iPAQ 2210 Pocket PC, so I could get a much smaller GPS unit,
i.e. a receiver only, such as Holux etc, with the latest sensitive
circuitry, plus appropriate cable and case.

Sounds fiddly. Then there's battery issues and stuff. A single all-in-one
GPS is a better choice IMO.

Pocket PCs suffer from being fragile, heavy, and have a battery life of
'not nearly enough'.

Fragile yes, and battery life rather variable, but heavy? Mine weighs
less than my GPS12 - OK so I'm comparing apples and oranges but my PDA
is not a massive beast otherwise I wouldn't carry it around all day
every day.

--
Phil Cook, last hill: Geal Charn above Glen Markie
http://www.p-t-cook.freeserve.co.uk/Oct07/wh11.htm

The message <[email hidden]>
from Simon Challands <[email hidden]> contains these
words:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

If you are so keen to killfile me, why respond to my post? If you feel
you have to respond to what I say, then why killfile me? Even 3% full
(3% of what? why is there a limit) sounds overly intolerant; the only
person I've got killfiled is a certain Angus.

You are kill filed so I don't need to respond to you pretentious
nonsense in the future. As you have gone out of your way to make sure I
see your replies it is only polite to respond.

Quoted message said:

OK, final one, then, whether or not you respond to this. I don't see
how you can use the word "polite" in this context.

Don't be silly. Ignoring people is never polite. Responding must thus be
the polite thing to do.

Quoted message said:

You've started
getting rude ever since there was a difference of opinion over a
serious matter (and what is sensible equipment and precautions to take
on the hills and what is just being paranoid is a serious matter
worthy of debate).

Round and round we go. You think you have a licence to call me (and for
that matter many others who subscribe to this ng) paranoid and then
climb on your high horse in response to a throwaway comment. Paranoia is
indeed a very serious condition which is why I took exception to it
being applied to me.

Quoted message said:

All you have done since then is insult me.

Not so. Apart from the traditional Usenet fare of exchanging insults I
have also highlighted the inconsistencies in your few (not umpteen)
responses since you first claimed I was paranoid.

Quoted message said:

I've
seen your posts in this ng before and thought you were a reasonable
type of person, but this wholly unexpected vitriol has caught me by
surprise and saddened me. Almost every time you reply to a point it's
not to answer, but just to hurl abuse. I'm afraid to say you're just
coming across as a deeply unpleasant person. The way you're carrying
on anyone would think I'd accused you of being a murderer rather than
indirectly implying a paranoid attitude, which, true or not, is hardly
a killing insult.

Look in a mirror Simon. You are guilty of everything you have accused me
of. I am a great believer in reason but if you had been reading this ng
for any length of time you should have been aware that I don't take
insults lying down. I have been playing this particular exchange quite
low key. Had I been really angry I would have gone for the jugular
which, in your case, is the imbalance between your public image as a
fair weather walker of limited experience and your desire to determine
what is appropriate for all and sundry.

Quoted message said:

As I said, I'm not going to dig out another address to reply
(admittedly I think I said that last time). There is no point in
talking to someone who perceives deliberate personal attacks, reacts
to them like a spoiled child, and apparently refuses to try to see if
there's been a genuine misunderstanding. Not receiving a reply from
such a person in the future due to being killfiled is no great loss.

Mirror, mirror on the wall ...

--
Roger Chapman
Nearest Marilyn still to be visited - Great Orme.
89 miles as the crow flies,
considerably more as the walker drives.

Phil Cook said:

GSV Three Minds in a Can said:

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

Quoted message said:

Terry Pinnell wrote:

> I was minutes away from ordering a Garmin 60CSX, probably with UK TOPO
> map. Plainly I now need to seriously consider the Active 10.

Personally, I'd advise against that, as Mike just said.

> But it's also prompted me to think about yet another option. I have an
> (oldish) iPAQ 2210 Pocket PC, so I could get a much smaller GPS unit,
> i.e. a receiver only, such as Holux etc, with the latest sensitive
> circuitry, plus appropriate cable and case.

Sounds fiddly. Then there's battery issues and stuff. A single all-in-one
GPS is a better choice IMO.

Pocket PCs suffer from being fragile, heavy, and have a battery life of
'not nearly enough'.

Fragile yes, and battery life rather variable, but heavy? Mine weighs
less than my GPS12 - OK so I'm comparing apples and oranges but my PDA
is not a massive beast otherwise I wouldn't carry it around all day
every day.

Indeed - much lighter. In its leather case, my iPAQ 2210 is 211 gm and
has accompanied me on every walk for years without misfortune. My
Garmin GPS 12 in its case is 316 gm, 50% heavier.

Last night I decided to experiment with an alternative approach to the
60CSX. I've ordered a Qstarz BT-Q818 Bluetooth Sat Nav GPS Receiver
from ebay UK trader SuperGPS, cost £23.99 incl delivery. I plan to use
that with my iPAQ 2210 Pocket PC, which I can load with maps from
Memory-Map, and thus avoid the very high expense of buying OS maps all
over again.

Although I have no worries about robustness or weight, I *do* about
visibility. The 2210 has a nice screen - but that's when viewed
indoors. Outside in bright conditions it's pretty poor. Of course,
this assumes I can get it working OK - I've never used my PPC in
Bluetooth mode before.

If I can't live with the poor visibility I'll go for the 60CSX, which
I gather has a clearly visible screen in sunlight.

--
Terry, East Grinstead, UK

Bitstring <[email hidden]>, from the
wonderful person Phil Cook <[email hidden]> said

Quoted message said:

GSV Three Minds in a Can said:

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

Quoted message said:

Terry Pinnell wrote:

> I was minutes away from ordering a Garmin 60CSX, probably with UK TOPO
> map. Plainly I now need to seriously consider the Active 10.

Personally, I'd advise against that, as Mike just said.

> But it's also prompted me to think about yet another option. I have an
> (oldish) iPAQ 2210 Pocket PC, so I could get a much smaller GPS unit,
> i.e. a receiver only, such as Holux etc, with the latest sensitive
> circuitry, plus appropriate cable and case.

Sounds fiddly. Then there's battery issues and stuff. A single all-in-one
GPS is a better choice IMO.

Pocket PCs suffer from being fragile, heavy, and have a battery life of
'not nearly enough'.

Fragile yes, and battery life rather variable, but heavy? Mine weighs
less than my GPS12 - OK so I'm comparing apples and oranges but my PDA
is not a massive beast otherwise I wouldn't carry it around all day
every day.

Hmm, Ok, maybe I am thinking of older generations of pocket-PC and added
GPS attachments, plus cases etc. Guess it depends how much screen area
you actually want. The GPS12 is not the smallest GPS unit you can carry
around (but nor is the 60C/S/X which I use).

--
GSV Three Minds in a Can
10,002 Km walked. 1,952 Km PROWs surveyed. 35.5% complete.

Mike Clark said:

The problem I have with the Active 10 is that if you add up the total
cost of a widespread coverage of the UK at 1:50,000 and some coverage at
1:25,000 it is going to cost thousands of pounds.

Maps are "from £29.99" and there are going to be over 150 titles. so
that is more than £3000 for a complete set of maps and then you have to
pay for the Active 10 itself.

Why would you buy a complete set of maps? The whole of GB 2 card set
is 'widespread coverage of the UK at 1:50,000' and that costs
£164....or you can have half the country for £99.....all of the
national parks at 1:50,000 on one card costs only £40.....way cheaper
than paper maps. If you need some coverage at 1:25,000 it's £99 per
National Park and for that you also get the same area at
1:50,000...admittedly not so good value but far less 'than more than
£3000'.

In message <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Mike Clark said:

The problem I have with the Active 10 is that if you add up the total
cost of a widespread coverage of the UK at 1:50,000 and some coverage at
1:25,000 it is going to cost thousands of pounds.

Maps are "from £29.99" and there are going to be over 150 titles. so
that is more than £3000 for a complete set of maps and then you have to
pay for the Active 10 itself.

Why would you buy a complete set of maps? The whole of GB 2 card set
is 'widespread coverage of the UK at 1:50,000' and that costs
£164....or

OK so that is starting to look a bit more comparable with something like
MM or Anquet for the whole country

Quoted message said:

you can have half the country for £99.....all of the national parks at
1:50,000 on one card costs only £40.....way cheaper than paper maps.
If you need some coverage at 1:25,000 it's £99 per National Park

Well I tend to use 1:25,000 paper maps quite a lot, particular for
national parks so that's going to add about £500 just for those.

Quoted message said:

and for that you also get the same area at 1:50,000...admittedly not
so good value but far less 'than more than £3000'.

OK so yes you could get reasonable coverage of the UK perhaps for about
£700 plus the cost of the unit. Of course it will almost certainly be
restricted to the usual OS licensing agreements so that substantive
future updates of the hardware or software may require the purchase of
new versions of the maps as has happened for MM and Anquet.

Mike
--
o/ \\ // |\ ,_ o Mike Clark
<\__,\\ // __o | \ / /\, "A mountain climbing, cycling, skiing,
"> || _`\<,_ |__\ \> | reader in immunology, antibody engineer and
` || (_)/ (_) | \corn computer user"