Bookmark this page:
- Suggestions-for-new-GPS
- 06-18-2010
   Re: Suggestions for new GPS
| Craig Wallace | 06-18-2010 |
  Re: Suggestions for new GPS
| Mark Illingwort... | 06-18-2010 |
  Re: Suggestions for new GPS
| Mark Illingwort... | 06-18-2010 |
| Re: Suggestions for new GPS
| LightByrd | 06-20-2010 |
 Re: Suggestions for new GPS
| readerquick | 06-20-2010 |
| Re: Suggestions for new GPS
| LightByrd | 06-21-2010 |
| Re: Suggestions for new GPS
| Carl Heinz | 06-21-2010 |
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
> Klatch wrote:
> >> Klatch wrote:
> >> Thanks for your extensive answer. I did some further research and
> >> discovered (while reading the manuals) that the Oregon and Dakota
> >> do not have the possibilty to look for an address, while the
> >> 78 and 60 (and so the 62 I assume) have this possibility.
> >> And since I like that feature, I think my shortlist is
> >> now narrowed between 78, 78s and 62S (No 62, because 62 can not
> >> use memory cards; no versions with internal map because I either
> >> want a free map or a (good) detailed map). But next week I will
> >> get an opportunity to use a Oregon 450 for some time,
> >> and maybe that will change my shortlist :).
> >> Wim
> >> Thanks for your extensive answer. I did some further research and
> >> discovered (while reading the manuals) that the Oregon and Dakota
> >> do not have the possibilty to look for an address, while the
> >> 78 and 60 (and so the 62 I assume) have this possibility.
> >> And since I like that feature, I think my shortlist is
> >> now narrowed between 78, 78s and 62S (No 62, because 62 can not
> >> use memory cards; no versions with internal map because I either
> >> want a free map or a (good) detailed map). But next week I will
> >> get an opportunity to use a Oregon 450 for some time,
> >> and maybe that will change my shortlist :).
> >> Wim
> >
> > I believe a call to Garmin is in order before you make a purchase decision
> > based solely on the apparent lack of ability of the Oregon series to look
> > for an address.
> > I believe a call to Garmin is in order before you make a purchase decision
> > based solely on the apparent lack of ability of the Oregon series to look
> > for an address.
>
> I posten this question at some GPS forum, and a owner of a Oregon
> confirmed that, for example with City Navigator, you can search
> for an address. So that puts the Oregon back on the shortlist :).
>
> Wim
> I posten this question at some GPS forum, and a owner of a Oregon
> confirmed that, for example with City Navigator, you can search
> for an address. So that puts the Oregon back on the shortlist :).
>
> Wim
I don't own the Oregon, 76 etc.. to know much about them. But I do own
5-6 regular Garmin GPSes and I can tell the difference between older and
newer.
- Older generation like StreetPilot the built-in addresses database (like
phonebook or addressbook) is little different than the newer generation.
The advantage that it will give/display the NEAR BY address then you find
it manually.
- Newer genration has more complete address database, but if the address is
not in the database then it will report NO FOUND.
In this case I like the older generation better as it can lead me to the
right location, or the address usually within few blocks/houses.
>> Klatch wrote:
>> >> Klatch wrote:
>> >> Thanks for your extensive answer. I did some further research and
>> >> discovered (while reading the manuals) that the Oregon and Dakota
>> >> do not have the possibilty to look for an address, while the
>> >> 78 and 60 (and so the 62 I assume) have this possibility.
>> >> And since I like that feature, I think my shortlist is
>> >> now narrowed between 78, 78s and 62S (No 62, because 62 can not
>> >> use memory cards; no versions with internal map because I either
>> >> want a free map or a (good) detailed map). But next week I will
>> >> get an opportunity to use a Oregon 450 for some time,
>> >> and maybe that will change my shortlist :).
>> >> Wim
>> > I believe a call to Garmin is in order before you make a purchase
>> > decision
>> > based solely on the apparent lack of ability of the Oregon series to
>> > look
>> > for an address.
>> >> Thanks for your extensive answer. I did some further research and
>> >> discovered (while reading the manuals) that the Oregon and Dakota
>> >> do not have the possibilty to look for an address, while the
>> >> 78 and 60 (and so the 62 I assume) have this possibility.
>> >> And since I like that feature, I think my shortlist is
>> >> now narrowed between 78, 78s and 62S (No 62, because 62 can not
>> >> use memory cards; no versions with internal map because I either
>> >> want a free map or a (good) detailed map). But next week I will
>> >> get an opportunity to use a Oregon 450 for some time,
>> >> and maybe that will change my shortlist :).
>> >> Wim
>> > I believe a call to Garmin is in order before you make a purchase
>> > decision
>> > based solely on the apparent lack of ability of the Oregon series to
>> > look
>> > for an address.
>> I posten this question at some GPS forum, and a owner of a Oregon
>> confirmed that, for example with City Navigator, you can search
>> for an address. So that puts the Oregon back on the shortlist :).
>> Wim
>> confirmed that, for example with City Navigator, you can search
>> for an address. So that puts the Oregon back on the shortlist :).
>> Wim
> I don't own the Oregon, 76 etc.. to know much about them. But I do own
> 5-6 regular Garmin GPSes and I can tell the difference between older and
> newer.
> - Older generation like StreetPilot the built-in addresses database (like
> phonebook or addressbook) is little different than the newer generation.
> The advantage that it will give/display the NEAR BY address then you find
> it manually.
> - Newer genration has more complete address database, but if the address
> is
> not in the database then it will report NO FOUND.
> In this case I like the older generation better as it can lead me to the
> right location, or the address usually within few blocks/houses.
> 5-6 regular Garmin GPSes and I can tell the difference between older and
> newer.
> - Older generation like StreetPilot the built-in addresses database (like
> phonebook or addressbook) is little different than the newer generation.
> The advantage that it will give/display the NEAR BY address then you find
> it manually.
> - Newer genration has more complete address database, but if the address
> is
> not in the database then it will report NO FOUND.
> In this case I like the older generation better as it can lead me to the
> right location, or the address usually within few blocks/houses.
Plus the fact that any renaming of an area throws everything off!
Here in Ontario CA, we had this work of the devil called "amalgamation."
I was supposed to be "more efficient" and to save taxpayer dollars. :<)
So a place like Springmount or Shallow Lake or Hepworth no longer exist!
They are now Georgian Bluffs. CNNA 2010 knows that, but when I search for
an address I KNOW is in Hepworth...Nada!
--
Regards,
Richard Harison
>Plus the fact that any renaming of an area throws everything off!
>Here in Ontario CA, we had this work of the devil called "amalgamation."
>I was supposed to be "more efficient" and to save taxpayer dollars. :<)
>So a place like Springmount or Shallow Lake or Hepworth no longer exist!
>They are now Georgian Bluffs. CNNA 2010 knows that, but when I search for
>an address I KNOW is in Hepworth...Nada!
>Here in Ontario CA, we had this work of the devil called "amalgamation."
>I was supposed to be "more efficient" and to save taxpayer dollars. :<)
>So a place like Springmount or Shallow Lake or Hepworth no longer exist!
>They are now Georgian Bluffs. CNNA 2010 knows that, but when I search for
>an address I KNOW is in Hepworth...Nada!
MapSouce searches don't find Alta Loma, but it can find Rancho Cucamonga.
Guess what, we're just north of you in Alta Loma. :>)
--
Carl Heinz
cfheinz57@charter.net
(Remove number)
On 6/21/2010 5:00 PM, Carl Heinz wrote:
>> Plus the fact that any renaming of an area throws everything off!
>> Here in Ontario CA, we had this work of the devil called "amalgamation."
>> I was supposed to be "more efficient" and to save taxpayer dollars. :<)
>> So a place like Springmount or Shallow Lake or Hepworth no longer exist!
>> They are now Georgian Bluffs. CNNA 2010 knows that, but when I search for
>> an address I KNOW is in Hepworth...Nada!
>> Here in Ontario CA, we had this work of the devil called "amalgamation."
>> I was supposed to be "more efficient" and to save taxpayer dollars. :<)
>> So a place like Springmount or Shallow Lake or Hepworth no longer exist!
>> They are now Georgian Bluffs. CNNA 2010 knows that, but when I search for
>> an address I KNOW is in Hepworth...Nada!
> MapSouce searches don't find Alta Loma, but it can find Rancho Cucamonga.
> Guess what, we're just north of you in Alta Loma. :>)
> Guess what, we're just north of you in Alta Loma. :>)
How old a map are you using?
MapSource has no trouble finding Alta Loma on my map.
Dave S.
>On 6/21/2010 5:00 PM, Carl Heinz wrote:
>>> Plus the fact that any renaming of an area throws everything off!
>>> Here in Ontario CA, we had this work of the devil called "amalgamation."
>>> I was supposed to be "more efficient" and to save taxpayer dollars. :<)
>>> So a place like Springmount or Shallow Lake or Hepworth no longer exist!
>>> They are now Georgian Bluffs. CNNA 2010 knows that, but when I search for
>>> an address I KNOW is in Hepworth...Nada!
>>> Here in Ontario CA, we had this work of the devil called "amalgamation."
>>> I was supposed to be "more efficient" and to save taxpayer dollars. :<)
>>> So a place like Springmount or Shallow Lake or Hepworth no longer exist!
>>> They are now Georgian Bluffs. CNNA 2010 knows that, but when I search for
>>> an address I KNOW is in Hepworth...Nada!
>> MapSouce searches don't find Alta Loma, but it can find Rancho Cucamonga.
>> Guess what, we're just north of you in Alta Loma. :>)
>> Guess what, we're just north of you in Alta Loma. :>)
>How old a map are you using?
>MapSource has no trouble finding Alta Loma on my map.
>Dave S.
2011.1 and the current version of MapSource. The map shows Alta Loma, but it
>MapSource has no trouble finding Alta Loma on my map.
>Dave S.
doesn't recognize it as a valid city in the Search.
--
Carl Heinz
cfheinz57@charter.net
(Remove number)
- GPS, GLONASS and GALILEO ?
- Satellite Navigation
- 2005-09-08
- Bluetooth GPS
- Satellite Navigation
- 2005-08-29
- Opinion about buying a Gps
- Garmin GPS
- 2009-12-15
- Hacking GPS - Free Book
- Magellan GPS
- 2009-02-09
