OpenStreetMap compatible GPS?

Joshua Judson Rosen rozzin at geekspace.com
Fri Apr 30 21:34:53 EDT 2010


Benjamin Scott <dragonhawk at gmail.com> writes:
> On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 2:25 PM, Joshua Judson Rosen
> <rozzin at geekspace.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Route finding and estimating is useful if you're already on
> > > the road and want to make an unexpected change.  Audible turn-by-turn
> > > directions are useful if you get confused on your way to a new-to-you
> > > location.
> >
> > See, these were the things that made me think `this whole GPS thing
> > is stupid'--it's so tempting to use features like that, but I've
> > invariably found that the `seat-of-the-pants technology' results
> > in `knowing where I'm going without really having any idea where
> > I *am* at any given point in time', which is just... perturbing.
>
>   I've actually had fairly good results using GPS units belonging to
> friends.  They were not perfect, but nothing is.  I've made mistakes
> plotting routes manually, too.
>
>   I do much prefer to plan my route ahead of time, but sometimes life
> doesn't work that way.  I'd rather have the option.  To me, it seems
> stupid to deliberately avoid a capability just because it does not
> work perfectly.
> 
>   In particular, real-time routefinding with turn-by-turn directions
> wins big in situations such "the road I was planning on using is
> closed" or "I just missed my turn".

Oh, "route-finding not working properly" was never my issue.
The feature worked perfectly fine as far as I used it.

And I *would* like to have the *option* to have the device re-plot a route
for me too, myself--my issue is that that's the feature that I find least
generally-useful, but it's by far the most prominent one in the UI-design
on Garmins and TomToms that I've used--even to the point where it requires
an active effort to figure out how to avoid using it.

Yes, many people like it. Many people even think that `real-time
routefinding with turn-by-turn directions' *is* the whole of what
"GPS" means--I even used to be one of those people (hence the past-tense
conjugation of "made" in "made me think...", above). But, now....

> > I was delighted when I found applications that focused on just showing
> > me a map with a `you are here' marker and indicators as to where I was
> > in relation to where I wanted to be ...
> 
>   What were you using that couldn't do that?  I've honestly never seen
> a GPS that did not have that capability.  Indeed, that's all you had
> at first (beyond a simple lat/long readout).  Routefinding and
> turn-by-turn directions are the newer features.

It's not a question of whether the tool *can* do it, but a question
of how much effort it takes to get the tool to do it. Basically:
UI-design matters, and having a design focused on the right use-cases
is an important part of UI-design. If I just want to convert an image
to GIF format and make the background transparent, for example...,
does it really make sense to use Photoshop, or should I just use gifweasel?

I'm not avoiding *capabilities*, I'm avoiding lousy UIs that end up
making my life more difficult 90% of the time because they've
optimised for my 10% cases--just as I'd expect you to do, even if your
90:10 split is different than mine.

If you want to go down the road where we talk about `stupid', it's
stupid to choose a tool for which the 90+% designed use-case is
actually *counter* to what I want even if it technically *can* be
coerced into fitting the task at hand.

If I only ever want dynamic route-finding 10% of the time or less, and
I *never* want spoken directions (I'm not audibly-oriented, and my
wife is dis-oriented by `disembodied' voices due to having grown-up in
a deaf household--OK?), it's stupid for me to buy something in which
the UI-design is focused on those features. I don't care if it's the
99% use-case, if it's not *my* 99% use-case. I'm colour-blind, too--I
can't even see most people's favourite colour; are you going to give
me a ration of crap for not buying the red one? :)

And, oh yeah--as a more general response to the `more features == more better'
sentiment: what ever happened to the part of the unix philosophy that says
`do one thing, do it well, provide standardised interconnects'? :)

> > I use my FreeRunner :)
> 
>   I have a phone provided by work, and it's not that.  Plus

Parse error. Are you trying to say:

    I have a phone provided by work, and it's not that [great as a GPS].

... implying, by extension, that phones in general make lousy GPS units
(because of hardware issues? software issues?)?

Or are you trying to say:

    I [already] have a phone provided by work, and it's not that [one
    and I don't want to replace the one I that have with that one].

... assuming that I'm recommending the FreeRunner as a phone?

> you can generally get a bigger screen if you're not locked into the
> phone form factor.

Yes, which would be why I suggested...:

> > If I were buying something right now, the Touch Book looks really neat
> > for GPS/mapping/navigation:

... because it has a much larger display-and-interaction surface,
which people (apparently not you ;)) might find that attractive.

>   Too big to fit on my dashboard.

People have different requirements around that, too: I was somewhat
surprised, for example, to find that Nokia's N810 (GPS-enabled) tablet
comes with a dashboard-mount... that *screws into* the dashboard.

Now we know your constraints. :)

Maybe someone else will still find the suggestion useful, or at least
interesting.

>   But ultimately, if you don't want a GPS, by all means, don't buy
> one. Those of us who do want one would like to know what's good to
> buy.

Yow. It's not that I don't want a GPS, it's just that my subset of
`GPS features' is (apparently) different than yours. Recall that one
of the first things that I wrote in the message to which you are
replying was:

    >   Electronic maps do have their advantages.

    Oh, of course. The classic issue of which features are defined as
    `advantageous' varying from user to user applies as well here as
    anywhere else, though--including some `features' for one type of user
    being `misfeatures' for another.


It should be obvious that I wasn't trying to convince you to `not buy
a GPS', but was rather trying to draw out some information about what
different use-cases and needs people here have, so that we could get
somewhat more technical and discuss solutions based on criteria like
`fitness for a particular purpose' rather than, what--religion?

The reason that I suggested the Touch Book, specifically for GPS use,
is that I'd heard from other people that it seemed good for that;
and there are quite a few GPS applications (of various types, suitable
for various use-/user-cases) available on for use on GPS-enabled
Linux systems like this. Quite few FOSS ones, even.

And, as I wrote before, the `FOSS' aspect of these `FOSS GPS' options
is what really sells to me--since I've been able to implement features
that are useful to me and that the proprietary GPS devices really
*don't* have. I had expected that kind of perspective to be welcome
here, of all places. ;)

-- 
"Don't be afraid to ask (λf.((λx.xx) (λr.f(rr))))."



More information about the gnhlug-discuss mailing list