Benjamin Scott <dragonh...@gmail.com> writes: > On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 2:25 PM, Joshua Judson Rosen > <roz...@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))))." _______________________________________________ gnhlug-discuss mailing list gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss/