PDA/GPS for walking and Anquet maps?

Serious walking means you need something that's durable and
easy to use. I dropped my GPS on the first day out with it
on Bleaklow. DOH! scratshed it to buggery, but otherwise OK.
The Etrexes and the like are designed for this kind of
thing, but PDAs don't tend to be, you would need some form
of ruggedised, waterproof case.

At work we use ruggedised laptops, but they fall to bits
sooner or later!

Is mapping that important? Might be best to get something
simple until someone brings out an Etrex-like device with OS
25k, it's only a matter of time. Big problem is always going
to be screen size.

Something that's not too far away is a computer screen that
you can fold like paper, or a map....

Make it waterproof, rugged, wirelessly connect it to a GPS
in your sack, and you could be onto something!

Andrew Whaley <[email hidden]> wrote

Quoted message said:

So are the days of map and compass numbered ?

Not the map, I still enjoy poring over a map rather than
looking at one on a screen. Haven't used a compass seriously
for years.
--
Gordon

"Michael Elcock" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:<[email hidden]>...

Quoted message said:

I have invested in Anquet maps (some National Parks
1:25,000 and GB
1:50,000) and they are very impressive. I would like to
update my PDA and GPS to be compatible (ie Pocket 2003
and connectable), but possible to use on serious walks.
Has anyone any recommendations?

I want to use the GPS for getting a quick position and
tracking walks and following planned routes. If used
directly with a PDA then it would give a position on
the map.

The HP 2210 looks a good bet because of its versatility,
but should I get a standalone GPS (eg Garmin eTrex Vista),
a compact flash GPS (such as Fortuna PocketXtrack) or a
bluetooth GPS (such as SysOnChip)? The former is obviously
a better GPS as such but is more expensive, but the others
can be used directly with the PDA. I believe the only
bluetooth GPS which can be used on its own is the Fortuna
GPSmart. The only combined PDA/GPS with Pocket 2003 is the
Mio 168 and this would be the neatest solution, but is it
versatile and is it easy to use in bad conditions?

I would appreciate it if anyone can recommend any of
these.

Mike Elcock

I had a similar idea. I have just bought a HP IPAQ 4150, to
be used with MemoryMap. The way the PocketPC software
provided as part of MemoryMap works is great - very easy to
install maps etc, and very easy to use.

I also have a Garmin Etrex Summit, and while that has been
fine for the past 3 years, I am hoping to connect the two
together and have OS mapping on the move. The ability to
zoom in/out of 25K, 50K and aerial photos is great. Of
course, these two must be connected by a cable (on order,
should be here in a week).

In a few months I expect to buy a Bluetooth receiver,
probably a Fortuna Clip-on, (a new version is due to be
released soon with improved firmware) and then the gps can
be left in the top pocket of the rucsac, and the PDA can be
refered to as a usual map (some kind of otterbox case for
waterproofness??).

The only problem I can see with this is that unless the PDA
is left on all the time there will be no complete tracklog
of the walk or cycle. To leave the PDA on for a 10 hour walk
will require two extended batteries! An alternative is to
get a Bluetooth gps which incorporates a data logger, but
haven't looked into this yet.

Brian

Just a little thing if you want a cheap PDA or similar have
a quick look at www.totalpda.co.uk They sell new and
refurbished PDA's cheaper than most places. Nothing to do
with me but I am tempted by one of the Dell Axims at £169!!

Cheers

Andy

"Michael Elcock" <[email hidden]> wrote
in message "]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

I have invested in Anquet maps (some National Parks
1:25,000 and GB
1:50,000) and they are very impressive. I would like to
update my PDA and GPS to be compatible (ie Pocket 2003
and connectable), but possible to use on serious walks.
Has anyone any recommendations?

I want to use the GPS for getting a quick position and
tracking walks and following planned routes. If used
directly with a PDA then it would give

a

Quoted message said:

position on the map.

The HP 2210 looks a good bet because of its versatility,
but should I get

a

Quoted message said:

standalone GPS (eg Garmin eTrex Vista), a compact flash
GPS (such as

Fortuna

Quoted message said:

PocketXtrack) or a bluetooth GPS (such as SysOnChip)? The
former is obviously a better GPS as such but is more
expensive, but the others can

be

Quoted message said:

used directly with the PDA. I believe the only bluetooth
GPS which can be used on its own is the Fortuna GPSmart.
The only combined PDA/GPS with Pocket 2003 is the Mio 168
and this would be the neatest solution, but is

it

Quoted message said:

versatile and is it easy to use in bad conditions?

I would appreciate it if anyone can recommend any of
these.

Mike Elcock

Lewis said:

Is mapping that important? Might be best to get something
simple until someone brings out an Etrex-like device with
OS 25k, it's only a matter of time.

It's practically here (see my recent posts in the "Sorry -
another GPS question" thread. This page shows the Garmin 24k
topo mapping and what it looks like on computer screen and
GPS screen. OS mapping is coming soon.
garmin.comtopo24knp.jspOpen ↗

The examples on the page above don't use the very latest
models which have 256 colour displays.

Quoted message said:

Big problem is always going to be screen size.

The latest GPS units (76 & 60 series) have quite good
resolution and decent screen size, without being overly
large. The real trick is in the zooming, at each zoom
level different amounts of detail are shown, so you get a
lot of detail up when you zoom in but less when you zoom
out - so you get an overview of the larger area without
too much clutter.

Paul
--
wilderness-wales.co.ukwilderness-wales.co.ukOpen ↗
wildwales.fsnet.co.ukwildwales.fsnet.co.ukOpen ↗
photosig.comuserphotosOpen ↗

Brian Hosty said:

I had a similar idea. I have just bought a HP IPAQ 4150,
to be used with MemoryMap. The way the PocketPC software
provided as part of MemoryMap works is great - very easy
to install maps etc, and very easy to use.

I also have a Garmin Etrex Summit, and while that has been
fine for the past 3 years, I am hoping to connect the two
together and have OS mapping on the move. The ability to
zoom in/out of 25K, 50K and aerial photos is great. Of
course, these two must be connected by a cable (on order,
should be here in a week).

In a few months I expect to buy a Bluetooth receiver,
probably a Fortuna Clip-on, (a new version is due to be
released soon with improved firmware) and then the gps can
be left in the top pocket of the rucsac, and the PDA can
be refered to as a usual map (some kind of otterbox case
for waterproofness??).

The only problem I can see with this is that unless the
PDA is left on all the time there will be no complete
tracklog of the walk or cycle. To leave the PDA on for a
10 hour walk will require two extended batteries! An
alternative is to get a Bluetooth gps which incorporates a
data logger, but haven't looked into this yet.

It's a trade-off, but I'd suggest that your old setup (PDA
+ Cable + Etrex) might be better. The Etrex can produce
the tracklog, which you can download and mix with the maps
later. Because the PDA can be switched off most of the
time, you only need small (standard) batteries to power
the device.

I'd look at whether the PDA could be left in a pouch
attached to shoulder strap, with cable routed along the
shoulder strap. That should allow enough freedom to move it
to view, yet keep it tethered to the GPS (which can live in
the rucksac top pocket). If the cable is really
unnacceptable, I don't know if anyone offers a wireless
cable replacement for a generic RS232 lead ?

Wireless systems all carry a fairly significant power
demands, which in turn need more batteries.

--
NC - Webmaster for 2mm.org.uk2mm.org.ukOpen ↗ Replies to
newsgroup postings to the newsgroup please.

That looks really impressive, actually! A colour screen
would help, because it's easier to seperate features out and
make sense of it all if the display is colour.

I think for something like this to be useful you'd need
something about twice the area of an Etrex screen, colour
and readable in daylight. And backlit.

An it should be able to use the aerial photos in MM.

And a built in camera, phone, calender, space invaders
game..... Oh and a breathaliser activated get-you-home-from-the-
pub facility! With voice control.

Then I want 25 gazillion amp hour AA batteries so it works
for more than 5 minutes.

The future's bright!

Lewis

This is the conclusion I am coming to. I have my eyes on
the eTrex Vista because it has a lot of functionality which
a bluetooth or compact flash GPS won't have (as far as I
can ascertain). I am also not sure whether they will use
OSGB grid references? I will be interested to see how good
the maps are on the iPAQ for walking when I take delivery
of it this week. If they are not too good, I can then use
the Vista stand-alone, and, as you say, the battery power
will be less.

Does anyone know if the Magellan Meridien Gold is better
than the Vista at about the same price? It seems to offer
similar features but is a bit bigger.

Michael Elcock

"NC" <[email hidden]> wrote in message news:2gojtrF53j7cU1@uni-
berlin.de...

Quoted message said:

Brian Hosty said:

I had a similar idea. I have just bought a HP IPAQ 4150,
to be used with MemoryMap. The way the PocketPC software
provided as part of MemoryMap works is great - very easy
to install maps etc, and very easy to use.

I also have a Garmin Etrex Summit, and while that has
been fine for the past 3 years, I am hoping to connect
the two together and have OS mapping on the move. The
ability to zoom in/out of 25K, 50K and aerial photos is
great. Of course, these two must be connected by a cable
(on order, should be here in a week).

In a few months I expect to buy a Bluetooth receiver,
probably a Fortuna Clip-on, (a new version is due to be
released soon with improved firmware) and then the gps
can be left in the top pocket of the rucsac, and the PDA
can be refered to as a usual map (some kind of otterbox
case for waterproofness??).

The only problem I can see with this is that unless the
PDA is left on all the time there will be no complete
tracklog of the walk or cycle. To leave the PDA on for a
10 hour walk will require two extended batteries! An
alternative is to get a Bluetooth gps which incorporates
a data logger, but haven't looked into this yet.

It's a trade-off, but I'd suggest that your old setup (PDA
+ Cable +

Etrex)

Quoted message said:

might be better. The Etrex can produce the tracklog,
which you can

download

Quoted message said:

and mix with the maps later. Because the PDA can be
switched off most of the time, you only need small
(standard) batteries to power the device.

I'd look at whether the PDA could be left in a pouch
attached to shoulder strap, with cable routed along the
shoulder strap. That should allow

enough

Quoted message said:

freedom to move it to view, yet keep it tethered to the
GPS (which can

live

Quoted message said:

in the rucksac top pocket). If the cable is really
unnacceptable, I don't know if anyone offers a wireless
cable replacement for a generic RS232

lead

Quoted message said:

?

Wireless systems all carry a fairly significant power
demands, which in

turn

Quoted message said:

need more batteries.

--
NC - Webmaster for 2mm.org.uk2mm.org.ukOpen ↗ Replies to
newsgroup postings to the newsgroup please.

Lewis said:

That looks really impressive, actually! A colour screen
would help, because it's easier to seperate features out
and make sense of it all if the display is colour.

The latest colour screens look even better apparently.

Quoted message said:

I think for something like this to be useful you'd need
something about twice the area of an Etrex screen,

60 and 76 series screens are about 150% the size of the
eTrex with over
4.5 times as many pixels.

eTrex - screen size: 2.1 x 1.1, resolution: 128 x 64
5/76 - screen size: 2.2 x 1.5, resolution: 240 x 160

Quoted message said:

colour and readable in daylight. And backlit.

Yep, they've got all that. Backlight is multi-level
adjustable.

Quoted message said:

An it should be able to use the aerial photos in MM.

:-) It's vector not raster!

Quoted message said:

And a built in camera, phone, calender, space invaders
game..... Oh and a breathaliser activated get-you-home-from-the-
pub facility! With voice control.

The 60 series has games included.
garmin.comgpsmap60csOpen ↗

You'll have all the rest in your mobile phone!

Quoted message said:

Then I want 25 gazillion amp hour AA batteries so it works
for more than 5 minutes.

They reckon 20 hours for the altimeter/compass version, 30
hours for the standard, using just two AAs.

Paul
--
wilderness-wales.co.ukwilderness-wales.co.ukOpen ↗
wildwales.fsnet.co.ukwildwales.fsnet.co.ukOpen ↗
photosig.comuserphotosOpen ↗

The futures also orange. Have you been tangoed.

Mike

"Lewis" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
"]news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

That looks really impressive, actually! A colour screen
would help,

because

Quoted message said:

it's easier to seperate features out and make sense of it
all if the

display

Quoted message said:

is colour.

I think for something like this to be useful you'd need
something about twice the area of an Etrex screen, colour
and readable in daylight. And backlit.

An it should be able to use the aerial photos in MM.

And a built in camera, phone, calender, space invaders
game..... Oh and a breathaliser activated get-you-home-from-the-
pub facility! With voice control.

Then I want 25 gazillion amp hour AA batteries so it works
for more than 5 minutes.

The future's bright!

Lewis

Michael Elcock said:

Does anyone know if the Magellan Meridien Gold is better
than the Vista at about the same price? It seems to offer
similar features but is a bit bigger.

I have a Meridian Platinum, which is almost identical to the
Gold (it just adds compass & barometer). I would say the
major advantages it has over the equivalent Garmins are :

- unrestricted cheap storage space for maps
- unrestricted space for saving tracks
- ability to use USB SD card reader to install large maps
- better reception under tree cover than etrex series
- better engineered PC connection
- car mount automatically makes power connection
- cheaper (than the GPSMAP 76 which is probably the nearest
Garmin model)
- larger screen (albeit at lower resolution) which makes it
easier for car use
- floats in water
- street routing software available

On the down side, there are disadvantages too :

- no easy way to attach the unit to rucksac/clothing
- waterproof battery cover is a bit fragile
- some PC software doesn't support magellan
- bigger than etrex (but bigger screen!)
- Garmin firmware is more mature : both have bugs, but
Garmin seem to have spent longer providing indicators for
walking time, average speed etc.

Note that I don't own an etrex and it's difficult to compare
fairly without making extensive use of both. The above
points are the reaons I originally chose the magellan,
modified with some practical points I noticed after using it
for a while.

No current GPS that I'm aware of is perfect - they all
compromise for different uses and you have to choose the one
that does what you find important. In some circumstances
even the much simpler, cheaper Geko could be the ideal
choice. I would think the etrex is very inconvenient in a
car while the Meridian is a reasonable compromise between
car and walking use. However, even if you intend to use the
unit only for walking (and you might change your view once
you get one) the Meridian appears to have more reliable
reception, especially if you walk in wooded areas. The only
Garmin that I think will beat the Meridian on all counts is
the new GPSMAP 60. And even that has much more restricted
map storage.

-adrian

So are the days of map and compass numbered ?

--
Andrew Whaley, author of :-

Trailgauge - Shareware 3D GPS Mapping Software
Free Download from trailgauge.comtrailgauge.comOpen ↗

The OS data is vector? I thought they always made it
available in raster? I assumed the Memory Map map is just a
big bitmap?

Lewis

Andrew Whaley said:

So are the days of map and compass numbered ?

Map? Compass? What are they?

Recently climbed a mountain in thick hill fog without either
of them...

Paul
--
wilderness-wales.co.ukwilderness-wales.co.ukOpen ↗
wildwales.fsnet.co.ukwildwales.fsnet.co.ukOpen ↗
photosig.comuserphotosOpen ↗

My map and compass are just there for backup, I also used to
carry a petrol can in the car in case my new fangled fuel
gauge didn't work right one day, but haven't for years!

I always hated using a map and compass, it just distracted
me from enjoying the walk.

Lewis said:

The OS data is vector?

The GPS data is vector. They have to convert the OS data.

Quoted message said:

I thought they always made it available in raster? I
assumed the Memory Map map is just a big bitmap?

Yep.

I've always thought that the original OS data was stored in
vector format, and that maps are printed from such data.
Also, I've always assumed that the bitmaps used by
Streetmap, Anquet and so on were also generated from vector
data, although someone (I can't remember who) recently
insisted that OS data is stored in bitmap format. I still
don't really believe that until I see some definite proof
one way or the other. But even if it is stored in vector
format, it will still have to be converted to the specific
format that Garmin and Magellan use.

Paul
--
wilderness-wales.co.ukwilderness-wales.co.ukOpen ↗
wildwales.fsnet.co.ukwildwales.fsnet.co.ukOpen ↗
photosig.comuserphotosOpen ↗

Gordon said:

Not the map, I still enjoy poring over a map rather than
looking at one on a screen. Haven't used a compass
seriously for years.

Neither have I. Maps are cool though. What would be really
nice is to be able to print my own 25k maps for just the bit
that I'm visiting. I'm fed up of real maps falling apart
after a bit of use in the outdoors. I don't know how many
times I've bought the Beacons 25k maps. I need to replace
them yet again (the double sided (west/central) sheet is
always on the wrong side whenever I want to use it).

Paul
--
wilderness-wales.co.ukwilderness-wales.co.ukOpen ↗
wildwales.fsnet.co.ukwildwales.fsnet.co.ukOpen ↗
photosig.comuserphotosOpen ↗

Gordon said:

Not the map, I still enjoy poring over a map rather than
looking at one on a screen. Haven't used a compass
seriously for years.

Yep. First there's the expectation of going on a trip with
lot of maps to study first. And then there's the studying
of the maps after the walking. You just can't get rid of
the maps ...

--
Andy Howell Birmingham, UK

Paul Saunders said:

I've always thought that the original OS data was stored
in vector format, and that maps are printed from such
data. Also, I've always assumed that the bitmaps used by
Streetmap, Anquet and so on were also generated from
vector data, although someone (I can't remember who)
recently insisted that OS data is stored in bitmap
format. I still don't really believe that until I see
some definite proof one way or the other. But even if it
is stored in vector format, it will still have to be
converted to the specific format that Garmin and
Magellan use.

Might have been a posting I made. I was repeating what the
developer from Wherefromhere told me on Magellan's stand at
the Outdoor show. I can't vouch for him, but he undoubtedly
knows more than me.

He explained that all the raster maps still contain large
amounts of hand-drawn information and are stored as scans. I
would imagine that they're actually heavily layered and some
of the layers will have been generated with a CAD system,
but the point about raster maps is that although the
features can perhaps be controlled there's no indexing and
so it's very difficult to filter the maps for use in a
smaller database, as on a GPS.

It may also be that it's hard to integrate hand-edited data
from scanned maps with newer sources such as SRTM height
data, because the older maps contain some positioning
errors. These are less important when features (for example)
have been added by hand to a contour map, but if you then
remove the original contours and replace them with a new set
derived from another source, the errors will no longer be
systematic .. so a building shown correctly in a valley on
the original map might be shown on a cliff top after the
countours have been moved by a hundred feet. Not helpful.
Maybe you could extract the countours from the original
maps, correlate them with SRTM data (or whatever the OS use
for accurate elevation data) and use the result to distort
the remainder of the maps to fit the new elevation plots ..
but I don't know whether this is practical - it sounds
difficult.

The vector data is newly captured, largely from photographs.
I would expect this to be much more difficult than
vectorising maps, but again it would be difficult to cope
with systematic errors, so would need a lot of manual input.
However, I understood that the new maps would now be
developed until they contain as much information as the
existing raster maps.

-adrian