Geko 201

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

One hopes you were not influenced by the tacky computer games
(personally they put me off the Geko .. looks like a fisher-price
toy!).

The Geko is a toy! ;-)

It's not as bad as that! You don't notice the games at all unless you go
looking for them and the lurid colours of the Geko 101 and 201 are great if
you drop the thing in dense undergrowth at night. My 301 comes in undertaker
gray so I use the little Geko case which has a reflective strip on it.

Cheers, Jiffy

In a recent message <[email hidden]>, Paul Saunders
<[email hidden]> wrote.

[...]

Quoted message said:

The Geko is a toy! ;-)

What saddens me is that they've included these damn games in the latest
top of the range £500 units! How many kids are going to spend that much
on a games machine? Surely an X-Box is cheaper?

And how many adults who are prepared to spend that much on a GPS want to
play stupid kid's games on it?

[...]

On the other hand they don't, so far as I know, come along and arrest
you if you don't play the games on your Geko. Not yet, anyway <g>. Their
presence on my Geko has never caused me sturm und drang; as far as I'm
concerned it's easy enough to ignore them.

One thought, for teaching kids about using GPS systems and helping them
develop a sense of spatial awareness the games might be quite useful.

Regards,
Nick.

--
Nick Hopton and Anne Hopton
Caversham, Reading, England
<[email hidden]>

Dominic Sexton said:

Some folk might suggest you need a unit with mapping capabilities

No, you don't *need* mapping.

Quoted message said:

but
having used the maps in my eMap (including the topo maps in the USA) I
don't agree. Sure the maps are nice (and very hand for road nav) but
they are not very useful in the hills. I found with the topo maps that
they would help relate to the paper map more quickly but the small
screen size means you either have a very small area displayed or you
have to zoom out and loose detail.

What's wrong with that? Having less detail on a wider area means you
get a simple overview and you just zoom in for the detail. You don't
really need to see fine detail in a different location, and if you do
you can just pan your way over there. I don't have topo mapping yet but
from what I've seen in my new 60CS I think the mapping is very useful.
The screen is larger and higher res than the eTrex models, I certainly
wouldn't want a smaller screen. It could be larger but for the sake of
keeping the GPS to a manageable size it's fine as it is. People have
said that the 76CS is too large and bulky for walking and that was one
of the reasons I chose the 60CS instead. It's a very nice size.

Quoted message said:

Modern units have twice the resolution of the eMap screen (though a
similar size) and 256 colours instead of 4 level grey scale but I
still do not feel they are that much better in this respect.

Respectfully I disagree. I think the 256 colours makes a big difference
to the display. Different features stand out clearly which would
otherwise be lost in a maze of grey lines. Saved tracks can all be
displayed in different colours, which makes them useful for drawing your
own simplistic maps - you could trace some paths for example.

Quoted message said:

When I look as a paper map I can quickly and easily scan an area of
several km around my point of interest. That is simply not achievable
without a large, high resolution display which would be too large for
a portable device like a hand held GPS.

Of course not, but I don't think you really need to be able to do that.
If you do, then look at your map, but I think we've been spoilt by the
excellent mapping available in this country. The fact is that most of
the time you don't really need that much detail to be able to navigate
your way around. A few major contours, major streams, lakes etc, and
you can get by. Just because we have extremely detailed mapping has
brainwashed us into thinking that we actually need it. My early walks
were done with no maps at all, and in recent years I've managed to get
around unfamiliar areas quite easily with nothing more than a bunch of
pre-plotted waypoints. If it's that easy to navigate with a non-mapping
GPS, any topo data, no matter how simple, will be extremely helpful.
I'm all in favour of it (naturally, since I just bought one).

Quoted message said:

So although they are nice and
can be useful I don't think that the current offerings in mapping
units are worth the extra cash for use off the roads.

No, they aren't. Not if you just want to navigate with it. But if
you're a GPS addict, you really have to get one! :-)

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749

Jiffy said:

The AAA's may not last as long as AAs in other GPS units but they are
so light that carrying spare ones is no hardship. The Geko 301 has a
better weight/battery lifespan ratio than the Etrex range and the
Geko 201 will be even better. That ratio only improves when you add
in spare batteries to the calculation.

Are you sure about that? I don't mean in relation to the eTrex range,
but in relation to the newer models. One pair of 2300 AAs have as much
power as 6 750 AAAs. Are AAs more than three times heavier? Even if
they are, if the latest battery consumption figures are to be believed I
should be able to last a weekend on one set of AAs (but of course I'll
bring spares) I could possibly last a week on 6 AAs, although I'd
probably bring 8 (much depends on how much time is actually spent
walking, and if any of it is in the dark). Don't know how long the
battery life is for certain yet.

Normally I use 4 AAs per day with my GPS12, so I'll bring 16-20
batteries for a long weekend. That sort of weight adds up, so carrying
only 4 for a whole trip will feel like nothing.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749

Dave Fawthrop said:

Most things now suffer from "Have computer, must think of something
to do with it". The cost of adding a game or two *to the
manufacturer* is minisiscule.

Nothing to do with cost. The internal memory could be better used for
something else and so could the design time. There are plenty of GPS
features that could be enhanced instead. Why not provide 20,000 track
points instead of 10,000 for example? Or allow saved tracks that don't
strip out the time and date data, it's not as if modern GPS units aren't
powerful enough. Other manufacturers like Lowrance have done this, but
Garmin prefers to stick with these unnecessary limitations and give us
some childish games instead.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749

Dave Fawthrop said:

A GPS with an accuracy of 5m is an overkill for use on a
1:25,000 Explorer map which one can only read to 10 metres if you are
lucky.

True. An accuracy of 10m is quite sufficient for navigation with a 25k
map.

Quoted message said:

The width of a path *line* on the Explorer is almost exactly 10m
whereas a real path is usually between 300mm and 1m wide, and one has
to take into account printing errors on the map. This is an
inevitable result of drawing a map on paper, so

Quoted message said:

to distinguish between
the correct fork in a path, and a false trail that starts 10m away.

one needs a larger scale map about 1:2,500.

So you want 10x magnification? Fair enough.

Quoted message said:

Also paths do not stay in the same line.

True, but let's not get into that now.

Quoted message said:

The OS could produce such a map because it's surveying accuracy is
greater than that,

They could, but why should they be bothered? The do produce far more
accurate surveys of built up areas but there's really no reason to
survey the countryside at such a huge scale. Such accuracy just isn't
necessary for a mere walk.

Quoted message said:

but the paper of an Explorer map is ATM unwieldy,
and IMO about as big as I can handle. The alternative is a GPS with
mapping software accurate to 1:2,500 and a display which will show
detail at 1:2,500.

Okay.

Quoted message said:

The mapping GPSs are ATM nothing like as good as
that. Maybe in 10 years time technology will have improved to do it.

10 years time? We've already got better than that. We may not have the
super accurate maps yet but we've already got the technology.

Let's analyse this. On a 25k scale map, 1mm = 25m. You want 10x that,
i.e. 1mm = 2.5m.

So lets' check my brand new Garmin 60CS. There's a map scale marker in
the corner of the screen. Zooming in to the largest scale, the marker
represents 5m. Measuring it I find it to be 8mm long, therefore 2.5m is
4mm in length. 1mm represents just 0.6m. That's a scale of 1:625, four
times better than the resolution you crave.

Now let's consider screen area. The usable area of the screen is 36mm x
61mm. At maximum zoom this shows an area 22.5m x 38m in size. On a 25k
scale map this would be only 0.9mm x 1.5mm in size. Pretty impressive.

So what about the resolution I hear you say? Well the screen res is 160
x 240 pixels, thus each pixel represents only 0.14m (that's 1/7th of a
metre). To put it another way, there are 7 pixels per metre.

Of course, the accuracy is nowhere near as good as the resolution, but
the resolution is already there.

Quoted message said:

IMO this will never happen because when walking one only needs to know
position within 100m, or so, plus a compass reading to a few degrees,
and can read the ground for the rest of the detail.

Aside from the fact that it already has happened, you are correct that
we don't need that much accuracy for mere walking. However I strongly
disagree that 100m is sufficient. You're still living in the world of 6
figure grid refs. Once you've been using a GPS for a while you soon
realise that 100m accuracy just doesn't hack it anymore. You need at
least 8 figures in your grid ref these days. But 10 are superflous to
requirements.

A lot can happen in 100m. That can put you on the wrong side of a
river, or a cliff (not that you'd be stupid enough to walk off it, but
if someone gave you a 6 figure grid ref with a cliff running through it,
how would you know whether they meant the top or the bottom of the
cliff?)

Of course, in good visibility 6 figures is usually plenty, but we don't
always have the luxury of good visibility. In the worst hill fog you
may only be able to see 10 metres, so that's when an 8 figure grid ref
comes in really handy, especially if you need to find a bridge across a
river, or the start of a descent down a dangerously steep slope. And of
course the same applies to walking at night, or in forests.

Even with good visiblity there are plenty of reasons for accurate grid
refs. For example the grid ref of a wild camp site, or a foreground for
a photograph, or a route through a bog, or the location of a food cache.
When you've never been used to GPS accuracy you tend to dismiss it. We
never needed it before so why do we need it now? But once you get used
to it you start taking it for granted and you end up expecting it.

I gave someone a grid ref by phone once and when he turned up at the
rendezvous he complained that my tent was in the wrong place, 5m away
from the grid ref I gave him! Luckily visibility was good and he was
able to use his skilled eyesight to locate my tent, but had he been 100m
away at night or in thick fog it would have been a different matter.

I once turned up for a night time wild camp rendezvous on Dartmoor and
the grid ref I'd been given was 200-300m out. It was surprisingly
difficult to locate the others. Even with lots of shouting and shining
of torches, they couldn't hear us because of the river and couldn't see
the torches because of undulations in the terrain. We really could have
done with an accurate grid ref that night! (But it's all part of the
fun really...)

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749

Nick Hopton said:

On the other hand they don't, so far as I know, come along and arrest
you if you don't play the games on your Geko. Not yet, anyway <g>.
Their presence on my Geko has never caused me sturm und drang; as far
as I'm concerned it's easy enough to ignore them.

True, I'm just annoyed by the innapropriateness of such games. That
would be like putting a transistor radio into a camera. There's no
reason for it and it just consumes resources that could be put to better
use. There's no shortage of items on the wish lists of GPS users, but
instead of adding something genuinely useful that improves the function
of the product we get some useless [censored] that hardly anyone is going to
use.

Quoted message said:

One thought, for teaching kids about using GPS systems and helping
them develop a sense of spatial awareness the games might be quite
useful.

Fair enough, that's a justification for putting them in the cheap
colourful models, but why add them to the top of the range models? Like
I said, no kid is going to spend that sort of money to play games and
anyone who's willing to spend that much on a GPS is highly unlikely to
want to play games on it.

I certainly wouldn't let a kid run around with my expensive new
investment...

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Nothing to do with cost. The internal memory could be better used for
something else

But don't they use different types of memory? The inbuilt software will be
on one type of memory and waypoints, routes, etc on another? Something like
ROM and RAM? I'm not saying I'm right by the way, just wondering.

Cheers, Jiffy

Jiffy said:

Quoted message said:

Nothing to do with cost. The internal memory could be better used
for something else

But don't they use different types of memory? The inbuilt software
will be on one type of memory and waypoints, routes, etc on another?
Something like ROM and RAM?

Probably, but they could use the ROM for something else. And they must
be using some RAM because they keep a record of all your scores.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749

In a recent message <[email hidden]>, Paul Saunders
<[email hidden]> wrote.

[...]

Quoted message said:

And they must be using some RAM because they keep a record of all your
scores.

[...]

Ha-ha, the plot thickens! How do you know this, you must have been
playing the games <g>.

Regards,
Nick.
--
Nick Hopton and Anne Hopton
Caversham, Reading, England
<[email hidden]>

Paul Saunders <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Probably, but they could use the ROM for something else. And they must
be using some RAM because they keep a record of all your scores.

Paul

How do you know?

Boo-Boooomm!
--
Gordon

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

The Geko 301 has a
better weight/battery lifespan ratio than the Etrex range and the
Geko 201 will be even better. That ratio only improves when you add
in spare batteries to the calculation.

Are you sure about that? I don't mean in relation to the eTrex range,
but in relation to the newer models.

My comment specifically mentioned the Etrex range so yeah, I'm sure! I'm not
talking about newer, GPS models, just the Etrex range. But, since you asked,
let's see how the 301 compares to the 60CS in terms of weight v battery
life.

Quoted message said:

One pair of 2300 AAs have as much
power as 6 750 AAAs. Are AAs more than three times heavier?

A quick look at Google shows AAA's usually weigh 12 grams and AA's weigh
about 27 grams. That means AAA's weigh 16g per amp and AA's weigh 11.7g per
amp.

Quoted message said:

Even if
they are, if the latest battery consumption figures are to be believed I
should be able to last a weekend on one set of AAs (but of course I'll
bring spares)

Pretty amazing. 20 hours on one set of AA's!!! The 301 does 9 hours on 2
AAA's so that works out at 2.667 grams per hours for the 301 and 2.7 grams
per hour for the 60CS. To put it another way, the 301 consumes 167mAh per
hour and the 60CS consumes 215mAh per hour. Pretty good going consider its a
much bigger device powering a colour screen! However, in terms of weight
versus battery life it does lose out to the Geko and that's before we
address the fact the 60CS weighs 2.2 times what the Geko 301 does.

<snip>

Quoted message said:

Normally I use 4 AAs per day with my GPS12, so I'll bring 16-20
batteries for a long weekend. That sort of weight adds up, so carrying
only 4 for a whole trip will feel like nothing.

You'll be saving upto 16x27g=432g, almost a full pound in weight! Your total
GPS weight for a long weekend is now just 266g. For the Geko 301 the
equivalent figure would be 179g which is a poor saving really when you
consider all the extra features of the 60CS. Best of all, the 60CS also
comes with GAMES!!!!

Cheers, Jiffy

"Jiffy" <[email hidden]> schreef in bericht
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

<snip>

If you go to the toilet before you start walking you save weight also.
Better still : don't drink all day ;-)

Theo

Nick Hopton said:

Ha-ha, the plot thickens! How do you know this, you must have been
playing the games <g>.

I tried one game once (the non-GPS game incidentally) and even with the
help of the so called help file I had no idea how I was supposed to win
it. Afterwards it reported: "Played 1, Lost 1".

It'll probably stay that way forever.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749

Gordon said:

How do you know?

Intellectual curiosity.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749

The message <[email hidden]>
from "Paul Saunders" <[email hidden]> contains these words:

[60CS]

Quoted message said:

Now let's consider screen area. The usable area of the screen is 36mm x
61mm.

A review I read said screen area was 38 x 56. (Summit would appear to be
30 x 55).

--
Roger Chapman so far this year 39 summits
New - 22 (Marilyns 8, Sweats 5, Outlying Fells 11)
Repeats - 17( Marilyns 6, Sweats 12, Wainwrights 11)
Knackered knee - 4 times

Roger said:

Quoted message said:

Now let's consider screen area. The usable area of the screen is
36mm x 61mm.

A review I read said screen area was 38 x 56. (Summit would appear to
be 30 x 55).

Well that's what I measured. By useable I mean the area used by the
map. There's a menu bar type thing along the top so the full screen
size is 36x65mm. At least that's what I just measured.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749

theo said:

If you go to the toilet before you start walking you save weight also.
Better still : don't drink all day ;-)

Good point. But drinking caffeine is supposed to suppress your
appetite.

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749

theo <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

"Jiffy" <[email hidden]> schreef in bericht
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

<snip>

If you go to the toilet before you start walking you save weight also.
Better still : don't drink all day ;-)

I bought a bathroom scale which measures weight to 0.1 lb and %age body
fat. I can get rid of 0.6lbs on a toilet visit.

You didn't really want to know that, did you?

The body fat reading can vary quite a lot, it's usually fairly high in
the morning, and reduces during the day.

Morning maximum has been 26%, and evening minimum about 21%, both within
the scale of 'healthy' for my age.
The maximum was achieved the morning after knocking back a few Baileys,
with a drop of brandy added. Coincidence perhaps?
--
Gordon

"Dominic Sexton" <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Yes, I usually use WAAS mode in the hope that EGNOS will start
working.

I wouldn't / don't bother. Until the system is fully functional any
"corrections" you may get from it could make the receiver less

accurate.

Quoted message said:

The current test signals (last few months) are being broadcast from

just

Quoted message said:

one satellite which is located over the equator in the Indian Ocean.
Hence the signal from the satellite is rather difficult to receive and
easily blocked in the UK.

Quoted message said:

One of these days it will. In about three months apparently.

It was supposed to be April this year but that date came and went. I
have not seen a new date from the Euro Space Agency (the folk putting
EGNOS together) so I would

I read a recent document which claimed it would be operational by the
end of the third quarter of this year.

Quoted message said:

I could be wrong but any almanac would just be used in the case of

using

Quoted message said:

the satellite for ranging (part of the position solution like a normal
GPS satellite). Currently ESTB (EGNOS System Test Bed) does not

provide

Quoted message said:

ranging anyway.

I think it is the grid of ionospheric corrections that takes time to
download to the receiver. That is then used by the receiver to

determine

Quoted message said:

the ionospheric corrections for each satellite at its location.

That sounds like what I read.

Quoted message said:

Any user with a serious interest in accuracy should not use ESTB /

EGNOS

Quoted message said:

until it has been demonstrated to actually improve matters.

Doesn't seem that I have any choice with my Garmin.

It may be of interest that a recent Egnos newsletter stated the
following;

"Performance
Our first EGNOS performance results based on SIS-1 (16 RIMS, 1 MCC, 1
NLES and 1 GEO) are very encouraging. Together with our IMAGE
(Independent Monitoring Assessment of GNSS signal-inspace Emission)
partners, we have measured accuracies of 1-2m (95%) horizontal, and
1-2 m (95%) vertical. These are far better the 7.7 m (95%) specified and
are a testament
to all who have been involved in the EGNOS development.
http://esamultimedia.esa.int/docs/egnos/estb/newsletter.htm

Paul
--
http://www.wilderness-wales.co.uk
http://www.wildwales.fsnet.co.uk
http://www.photosig.com/go/users/userphotos?id=118749