Garmin 3, Droid 0 Low number the winner! (On vacation in Arkansas)

 

Just got back from a Vacation in Arkansas... HOT but nice!

We visited a couple who retired there, and we went around the state, using My 660 (With all updates), and we had an issue trying to find Rush, Arkansas.
My GPS simply wouldn't find it.. At first I thought that because Rush, Arkansas couldn't be found because it is an abandoned Zinc Mining town, but-- The couple had a Droid, with Garmin GPS, and HIS DROID FOUND Rush, Arkansas.

So from then on, we used two GPS's simultaneously, Our 660, and his Droid.

Two more times, Our Garmin told us to turn onto a gravel county road, and the Droid said not to.. We ended up making a L shaped route on a gravel road, instead of an identical L shaped route on a paved road.

So, at the end of the week it was Garmin 3 issues, vs. Droid's No Problems.....

I had latest map, latest firmware.
Droid had Garmin GPS Technology, of un-known version...

??????

Still Like my Garmin, but occasionally it does something incorrect.

--
A 2689LMT in both our cars that we love... and a Nuvi 660 with Lifetime Maps that we have had literally forever.... And a 2011 Ford Escape with Nav System that is totally ignored!

AVOIDANCES?

cool

If I was you I would check your GPS settings for avoidance... It wont go off road unless it is set to do so.

Tools
settings
Navigation
Avoidances... Make sure there is NO check mark for unpaved roads?

--
"Destination Eternity" Garmin 765T, & Samsung Galaxy Note Edge

Sorry...

glwilbert wrote:

cool

If I was you I would check your GPS settings for avoidance... It wont go off road unless it is set to do so.

Tools
settings
Navigation
Avoidances... Make sure there is NO check mark for unpaved roads?

UNPAVED ROADS SHOULD BE CHECKED!!!

--
"Destination Eternity" Garmin 765T, & Samsung Galaxy Note Edge

I'm confused

I'm confused about what your post is attempting to say.

The OP says his Nuvi routed him down unpaved roads. If there was NO check mark beside the unpaved road avoidance entry then his Nuvi worked properly as there was no restriction to routing down unpaved roads.

If there is a "check mark" beside the unpaved roads avoidance, then his Nuvi isn't routing correctly as it shouldn't have routed him on unpaved roads, particularly since there was obviously a paved alternative as the Droid found.

Or have I missed your point altogether?

OK - I SEE YOU'VE CORRECTED YOUR INITIAL POST, THANKS

--
Nuvi 350, 760, 1695LM, 3790LMT, 2460LMT, 3597LMTHD, DriveLuxe 50LMTHD, DriveSmart 61, Garmin Backup Camera 40 and TomTom XXL540s.

Had two complaints...1.

Had two complaints...
1. That it couldn't find Rush, Arkansas as a town -- And Droid did.
2. That it selected a gravel road --- twice... And Droid Didn't...

We were literally surrounded by gravel roads...
I doubt that I would have selected it as a possibility.... I'll check tonight, but I highly doubt that it would be selected, or we would have gone on gravel roads hourly, if not daily (we were quite off the main roads...)...

But another thing to note is the Droid, out of the box... (Owner said he hadn't changed any GPS settings) Would find a town that a Garmin with latest map upgrades wouldn't find....

--
A 2689LMT in both our cars that we love... and a Nuvi 660 with Lifetime Maps that we have had literally forever.... And a 2011 Ford Escape with Nav System that is totally ignored!

Un-Paved road ARE Checked

On the 660, The path is:
Wrench icon (tools)
Navigation
Avoidance's
Press Enabled
and the avoidances checked are:
Traffic
U-Turns
Unpaved roads

Also... Route Preference is Faster Time, so that's not it either.....

Garmin=3 Droid=0, Where the lowest number wins......

--
A 2689LMT in both our cars that we love... and a Nuvi 660 with Lifetime Maps that we have had literally forever.... And a 2011 Ford Escape with Nav System that is totally ignored!

different databases

JanJ wrote:

But another thing to note is the Droid, out of the box... (Owner said he hadn't changed any GPS settings) Would find a town that a Garmin with latest map upgrades wouldn't find....

If the Droid searches the web it has a much larger database at its disposal. The Garmin DB is part of the map data. I doubt the Droid could find its power connector without a connection to the cell network.

That being said, it has been known for quite a while that Garmin does not list every town just as maps don't. But when you have a couple of terabytes you can devote to maps and their data...

--
Illiterate? Write for free help.

I've never seen a Droid

I've never seen a Droid before.... Your argument makes very good sense.... He was accessing the web...

Could it be that the Garmin thought the gravel road was paved? Wasn't...

--
A 2689LMT in both our cars that we love... and a Nuvi 660 with Lifetime Maps that we have had literally forever.... And a 2011 Ford Escape with Nav System that is totally ignored!

1490T

my 1490T found rush arkansa no problem

--
the art off war is never a winning combination for any one 1490T

OK.. Find Bakersfield

OK.. Find Bakersfield Missouri.... We entered this town via Rte 101 from the North...
Garmin had us:
Take route 142 East out of Bakersfield.... to County Road 7970. This is a gravel road. Garmin had us take This south into Arkansas via County 588 to CR 587/104/ Little Creek Rd..... All Gravel roads, West to AR/87.

Droid would have us Enter Bakersfield via Rte 101, but take AR/87 South to Arkansas... All 2 lane Paved Road.

That's not right....

--
A 2689LMT in both our cars that we love... and a Nuvi 660 with Lifetime Maps that we have had literally forever.... And a 2011 Ford Escape with Nav System that is totally ignored!

Just tried again.... With

Just tried again.... With latest Maps, the 660 cannot find Rush, Arkansas!

--
A 2689LMT in both our cars that we love... and a Nuvi 660 with Lifetime Maps that we have had literally forever.... And a 2011 Ford Escape with Nav System that is totally ignored!

Microsoft Streets and trips

Microsoft Streets and trips 2009 found Rush, Arkansas, too....

Why not the latest map version on Garmin 660???????

--
A 2689LMT in both our cars that we love... and a Nuvi 660 with Lifetime Maps that we have had literally forever.... And a 2011 Ford Escape with Nav System that is totally ignored!

Re: Databases

Box Car wrote:
JanJ wrote:

But another thing to note is the Droid, out of the box... (Owner said he hadn't changed any GPS settings) Would find a town that a Garmin with latest map upgrades wouldn't find....

If the Droid searches the web it has a much larger database at its disposal. The Garmin DB is part of the map data. I doubt the Droid could find its power connector without a connection to the cell network.

That being said, it has been known for quite a while that Garmin does not list every town just as maps don't. But when you have a couple of terabytes you can devote to maps and their data...

Did the Droid work in rural areas?

What map version

What map version specifically?

Did the Droid work in rural

Did the Droid work in rural areas?
Pretty much all the time.... It dropped out at times...

The Lifetime maps in my 660 were upgraded a couple months ago... It's current...

Folks we were with had no Idea what version maps they had, because I asked, because I knew this thread had to be posted.... and their Droid was out of the box stock.... when it came to the GPS... But they said it was a Garmin GPS
I have no idea how long they had it....

--
A 2689LMT in both our cars that we love... and a Nuvi 660 with Lifetime Maps that we have had literally forever.... And a 2011 Ford Escape with Nav System that is totally ignored!

Yep...

A couple of years ago, Garmin _removed_ info from the maps. When I reported it ( http://www.poi-factory.com/node/22114 ), I was called a troll by people who simply didn't understand why anyone might want to find a ghost town.

That kind-of defeats the

That kind-of defeats the intent, doesn't it?

If Garmin removed this information, WHY IS IT IN THE DROID?

--
A 2689LMT in both our cars that we love... and a Nuvi 660 with Lifetime Maps that we have had literally forever.... And a 2011 Ford Escape with Nav System that is totally ignored!

This has been asked and

This has been asked and answered, but I believe I'm entitled to restate the answer.

Garmin Mobile XT, which I have on my Windows Mobile smartphone, functions almost identically to a dedicated GPS, in that it has a map (in my case about 1.2 or 1.3GB) stored on an external memory card plugged into the MicroSD slot on my phone along with the base software, base map, and help files (about 10MB). Therefore Garmin Mobile XT, when powered up, draws its map information from the map on the card.

Google Maps Mobile on Windows Mobile is a 1.1MB download and it is the ONLY thing Google offers on their site. So, where are the maps in the download? The answer is that there are no maps in the download. These maps are stored on Google's servers. Google Maps Mobile doesn't store maps on a Micro SD card like Garmin Mobile XT does. Therefore, whenever Google Maps Mobile is fired up, whether on a Droid or on a Windows Mobile smartphone, it has to download the maps from Google's servers to program memory on the phone. When the program is shut down, the maps are lost.

The reason Google Maps can pull this "ghost" town and Garmin can't is all due to space. Google likely has a terabyte's worth of map data on the world (including street views and air photos). That terabyte is a lowball estimate because they likely have a hell of a lot more data. Even so, using the terabyte figure I gave earlier their North America data likely tips the scales at about 20% of that terabyte. A terabyte is 1,000 gigabytes. Therefore, North America alone would be approximately 200 gigabytes worth of data.

Do you have a 200GB drive in your Droid? I think not. If Google eliminated Street View and Satellite View from the Google Maps Mobile, the maps then could fit on a SD card, although you'd need at least a 2GB card to make the best use of the data. Google though wants to provide satellite views, and that alone means no memory card is going to be able to store the data.

Garmin, in providing a solution that doesn't require an Internet connection, doesn't have the space in internal memory to support such detailed mapping, so they made the choice to ditch things like ghost towns. Something I'm ok with.

Now...does this answer your question?

--
"Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job." --Douglas Adams

.

Why would anyone want to do cloud computing? The risks are enormous, security-wise. I'll stay with dedicated devices, thanks.

--
nüvi 3790T | nüvi 775T | Those who make peaceful revolution impossible, will make violent revolution inevitable ~ JFK

.

I get kicks out of guys defending Garmin and their lack of memory. Last time I looked flash memory is dirt cheap. It would only cost Garmin pennies to increase the flash memory on these units to 4gb or 8gb.

And considering the current NA map is around 2gb, that means Garmin could double the map information.

Cheap memory

GadgetGuy2008 wrote:

I get kicks out of guys defending Garmin and their lack of memory. Last time I looked flash memory is dirt cheap. It would only cost Garmin pennies to increase the flash memory on these units to 4gb or 8gb.

And considering the current NA map is around 2gb, that means Garmin could double the map information.

With thin profit margins, I can understand Garmin pinching pennies. But with map sizes constantly growing, I think it is irresponsible for them not to increase the standard memory size as GadgetGuy suggests. Memory is dirt cheap these days.

Ahem!

GadgetGuy2008 wrote:

I get kicks out of guys defending Garmin and their lack of memory. Last time I looked flash memory is dirt cheap. It would only cost Garmin pennies to increase the flash memory on these units to 4gb or 8gb.

And considering the current NA map is around 2gb, that means Garmin could double the map information.

I hope you were not referring to my post, for if you were, then you missed the entire point of my post.

I neither defend nor condemn Garmin for its choices.

--
"Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job." --Douglas Adams

double post

double post

--
A 2689LMT in both our cars that we love... and a Nuvi 660 with Lifetime Maps that we have had literally forever.... And a 2011 Ford Escape with Nav System that is totally ignored!

Well since we purchased the

Well since we purchased the Garmin to be able to search for locations, and if Garmin removed locations (Why I still don't understand, I've got plenty of memory left, and I'm not referring to the memory card slot )....

What Garmin did is counter productive toward the task at hand..... Searching for towns and cities...

By doing what they did, they shot themselves in the foot, making other products look better than their own products!!!

Dumb! Counter-Productive!!! (Embarrassing, too!)

I understand that working on a server will expand memory capability.... But Garmin should understand this too..... and REMOVING data just makes Garmin look less of a bargin than their competitors.... Which has the opposite reaction to what (I Hope) Garmin is trying to do.... Create a great product!
(That's what I mean by Counter Productive)

And then there's the two times it sent us off on gravel roads for a few miles......

--
A 2689LMT in both our cars that we love... and a Nuvi 660 with Lifetime Maps that we have had literally forever.... And a 2011 Ford Escape with Nav System that is totally ignored!

Nope.

"Garmin, in providing a solution that doesn't require an Internet connection,..."

Which of course, explains why everyone with a Garmin GPS needed an Internet connection before they removed these locations. [rolleyes]

Well then I'm in the vast

Well then I'm in the vast minority, because no one needs an Internet connection to be able to find something. All they really need is a library, an atlas, and some time.

Having an Internet connection just makes looking for information a lot more convenient.

Now...with that said, other than occasionally trying to find an address by the locally known name of the street instead of the official name, the only time I ever had difficulty in finding a place was because it was so new that it hadn't yet appeared on the maps in the GPS.

Google Maps I agree would NOT have had that problem since they update their data based on satellite photos and street views. However, Google Maps requires an Internet connection. Therefore Google Maps is really not a good choice for anything but a secondary GPS solution.

Any smartphone, in order to be able to effectively use it, requires a data plan. This means it requires access to the phone's network. With all cellular phone networks, to varying degrees depending on carrier, there will be sections of the country where there is no network. This means you lose Internet connectivity in these dead zones. This also means programs like Google Maps Mobile cannot update their maps, which can cause trouble.

A dedicated GPS unit is far more reliable. It doesn't require an Internet connection and therefore in situations where the phone can lose signal the GPS will not. It does this at a price. The map data is behind what Google has, and the company may in fact exclude what it considers irrelevant data.

I'd rather have the reliability over the comprehensive data. But in all cases, there should still be a road atlas in the car.

----------------------------------------------------

I've seen on similar threads the thought that Garmin can add additional memory to the units for fractions of a dollar. This is absolutely true, but what isn't being taken into account is that Garmin, as any other company producing these units, seeks to profit from it. They don't seek to profit from it through goodwill, but money. Thus the price of a GPS will go up when more memory is installed which is NO benefit to us. The math is simple. Put 16GB of memory into a GPS and see your purchase price rise about $30 (the current going price of a 16GB MicroSD).

The people on this forum are very vocal, but they simply are a tiny fraction of the total number of people with GPS units. And sometimes the vocal few put forth ideas that simply aren't realistic. Adding memory and not expecting Garmin to charge more for the privilege is one of them.

--
"Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job." --Douglas Adams

Lucky

JanJ wrote:

Garmin=3 Droid=0, Where the lowest number wins......

It was fortune to have the DROID at that critical moment. Since it has proven three times to be better, I guess you can safely make the choice to stick with a DROID. You never know then, when the 660 is wrong. Why stick with that?

love garmin, not so much

"They don't seek to profit from it through goodwill, but money. "

the problem most companies don't realize is the goodwill will generate sales which will generate profits. Case in point I have one of the nuvi 765t that has the screen touch problem and the firmware issue, I am on my third unit and it still has the screen touch problem, when you combine it with
the delay issue it can be real frustrating doing searches. Guess what, my next unit will not be a Garmin, will my not buying another garmin bother them, probably won't even be on their radar, but what if a lot of the people that have the 765t problem do the same thing, and tell their friends. What effect would that have on Garmin, maybe a lot.

"Put 16GB of memory into a GPS and see your purchase price rise about $30 (the current going price of a 16GB MicroSD)."

that would be the single unit cost, I suspect if your were to buy thousands the cost would come down a bit.

Oh believe me, I agree with

Oh believe me, I agree with you. It's simply that companies care about one thing: profit. To them, the customer complaints regarding the 765 are a nuisance, because they're already working on the nuvi that will supersede the 765.

Sadly, it costs money to rewrite code, and Garmin doesn't want to spend that money. To them, you not buying their product is an acceptable risk to them. There will be plenty of people that will buy regardless.

I'm well aware that buying in bulk means the price goes down, and I figured that Garmin's cost would be pennies on the dollar for a single 16GB memory chip. The price I quoted is what would be passed on to us, the consumer, if Garmin put 16GB of memory in their GPSrs.

--
"Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job." --Douglas Adams

Weird

driver4107 wrote:

my 1490T found rush arkansa no problem

Weird, my 1490T with 2011.10 maps will not find Rush Arkansas.

--
Nuvi 350, 760, 1695LM, 3790LMT, 2460LMT, 3597LMTHD, DriveLuxe 50LMTHD, DriveSmart 61, Garmin Backup Camera 40 and TomTom XXL540s.

Not found on 265 with latest

Not found on 265 with latest maps.Also tried mapsource and not found.Did find with Google maps and Google Earth.

--
Charlie. Nuvi 265 WT and Nuvi 2597 LMT. Android Here WeGo - Offline Maps & GPS.

Keep in mind that the OP

Keep in mind that the OP pointed out that the town in question is a ghost town. Since by definition ghost towns are completely abandoned, I can understand why Garmin took them out of its maps. The exception is where the ghost town is an attraction. In those cases, they are a POI.

The problem here was the OP misunderstanding how Google Maps Mobile on smartphones work compared to a Garmin and expecting Garmin to have the same level of detail as Google Maps. Garmin freely admits to massaging the data, and taking out ghost towns is one of those cases.

I would hope the OP saved his friend's place as a favorite, so it could route him there in the future.

--
"Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job." --Douglas Adams

I would hope the OP saved

I would hope the OP saved his friend's place as a favorite, so it could route him there in the future.

No, it was a one time visit, and that doesn't matter.... It SHOULD be able to find a town.....

Being able to mark it as a favorite AFTER I find it isn't the reason I bought it, Nor is it something that Garmin would be apt to use as a selling tool:

"Hey, Folks -- we removed that town! If You can't find it on a Search, When (and If) you do, you can then add it as a favorite for next time"!!

COUNTER PRODUCTIVE! That's NOT why we bough it, (To find out that it's been removed)...

How can they say it has a Search feature, if some of the destinations have been removed?

And for the 3rd or 4th time.... Let me bring up the Gravel Roads issue again..... It shouldn't have done that....

Both of these are things it should do.... Making excuses as to why it didn't..... is conjecture, unless you work for Garmin and have explicit knowledge of the issues... and I do understand the reasoning behind your posts... But it still shouldn't have happened.

But in each of the cases, it did something that it shouldn't have, and to find out the possibility that towns have been removed from Search..... Is Counter Productive toward the intent of the product as it was presented to us at the time of sale....

--
A 2689LMT in both our cars that we love... and a Nuvi 660 with Lifetime Maps that we have had literally forever.... And a 2011 Ford Escape with Nav System that is totally ignored!

Stop. If it was a normal,

Stop.

If it was a normal, inhabited town and the GPS couldn't find it, then I would say that your complaint has merit. But, Rush, Arkansas is a ghost town. In other words, a town that either has very few or no inhabitants compared to its peak population in the past. Please explain to me why Garmin is supposed to put a town that for all intents and purposes is deserted on their maps, because I'm just not understanding it. Putting a town with few or no inhabitants into the map simply does not make any sense whatsoever.

I haven't dwelt on the gravel roads thing, but while one person asked about avoidances, no one I believe has asked whether your GPS was set to faster time or shorter distance. It does make a difference, especially if you mentioned the GPS wanting to take you on paved roads all the way in. If I understand how the GPS functions, it takes into account general speed limits based upon the type of road in making its calculations. If correct in this hypothesis, your GPS routed you onto faster roads, namely the paved ones. It would ignore the gravel roads unless it had no choice except to route you onto them. Shorter distance, if I understand things correctly, ignores speeds in figuring its route and only cares about the avoidances you have set up.

Ignoring the gravel roads issue because I think it has little bearing on the discussion at hand, by my understanding of what you are expecting, you expect Garmin to put in every single last town on the map, especially if it's deserted. Am I correct in this being what you expect out of Garmin?

Lastly, have you complained to Garmin?

--
"Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job." --Douglas Adams

Not in

Not in Magellan's data base either.

--
Nuvi-3760 *** Magellan-5045

New Model

Garmin's New Model (Sixth Sense) see's Ghost Towns

--
Nuvi-3760 *** Magellan-5045

Gotta disagree with you

Strephon: Gotta disagree with you....

System was set for faster time (Gravel roads could hardly have a faster speed limit than 2 laned paved roads).... and Avoidance were set to Avoid Gravel roads. So this shouldn't have happened.... And it happened twice! I only posted the first time it happened... I'm not certain where the 2nd time was....

I agree with you about the Ghost Town thing... Of Course I Didn't Know it was a Ghost Town until we got there......

"Where are we going today? Rush??? Are you sure of the spelling, the GPS can't find it!!"

But by the time we got there, The folks with us were saying their 8 month old Droid with 'out of the box' settings Garmin maps was more accurate than our GPS...... And our GPS was a Garmin with the latest maps!!!

I did not know that Garmin had removed some towns from their database... Until someone else posted it earlier in this thread.... Up till then I was willing to let this whole thing go as a couple mistakes in road judging, and the fact that Rush, Arkansas was a Ghost Town....

BUT.... Knowing that Garmin Intentionally removed some town names from their database....... That's COUNTER-PRODUCTIVE, and that has been the repeating complaint that I have posted.... and no amount of explanation can change this!

It's just DUMB that they would remove town names from a search database!

--
A 2689LMT in both our cars that we love... and a Nuvi 660 with Lifetime Maps that we have had literally forever.... And a 2011 Ford Escape with Nav System that is totally ignored!

Garmin admits that they

Garmin admits that they "massage" the data they get from Navteq. That's why their maps are a year or more out of date. Heck, the current map update still doesn't completely show the new I-195/I-95 interchange in Providence, and that road work was essentially completed last year. Supposedly, Garmin deleted all towns with zero population in order to improve searches. Rush is the example that proves this, but I think you're tilting at windmills a little bit, because if it's a town with a normal population, you're still going to be able to find it, like Bakersfield, MO.

Counter-productive? I don't think that word means what you think it means. smile

The word you want is "counter-intuitive", since it doesn't make sense to you that Garmin should take out town names. But, as noted already, the towns they did take out are zero population towns, as you experienced. This makes perfect sense to me, and it gets my stamp of approval.

The ghost towns POI or the Post Office POI, possibly both, would restore access to those zero population towns that Garmin removed.

I misread what you had said about gravel roads. However, there has to be a rational reason as to why it took you the way it did. Now, I wonder if the GPS still has New Rome, OH on it, since New Rome no longer exists as a separate town? I'll have to check that out.

--
"Anyone who is capable of getting themselves made President should on no account be allowed to do the job." --Douglas Adams

Interesting words

counterproductive - tending to hinder rather than serve one's purpose.

counterintuitive - contrary to what common sense would dictate.

I think both terms fit in JanJ's context, but they do put different meanings to the statement.

--
Alan - Android Auto, DriveLuxe 51LMT-S, DriveLuxe 50LMTHD, Nuvi 3597LMTHD, Oregon 550T, Nuvi 855, Nuvi 755T, Lowrance Endura Sierra, Bosch Nyon

Meh.

Strephon_Alkhalikoi wrote:

The ghost towns POI or the Post Office POI, possibly both, would restore access to those zero population towns that Garmin removed.

You're defending removing features without notice. Garmin continues to advertise their maps as "the most detailed street maps available." That's obviously not true, and Garmin has deliberately removed detail.

Anyone who bought a Garmin a couple of years ago, then then spent money on a supposed map "upgrade," would find the newer maps to have less utility. Garmin did this with no mention or warning. It's not optional, so if you want updated roads, you have to give up other details.

There really is no excuse, except the ramblings of fanboys, for this behavior. That you don't find a capability useful doesn't mean others don't. And that is indeed the case, hence this discussion.

To say that people should go to extra effort to find and install similar information ignores the simple fact that it is a feature which was removed. AND, it is completely at odds with your arguments about saving memory space.

Your claim that doubling flash from 8 to 16 GB would cost $30 is just silly. 8 GB of flash isn't more than $5-6 at the OEM level. More flash would be useful, but isn't needed. Mapsource allows one to selectively limit the size of maps.

I've got Mapsource and a

I've got Mapsource and a 2720 Streetpilot with City Navigator NT 2009 maps on both. Both Mapsource and the 2720 can find Rush, Arkansas and Bakerfield, MO.

Looks like you pay to upgrade and lose data. LOL

--
Ed - Garmin Zumo 550 (have 2)

mike_s Your Post is much

mike_s Your Post is much more elegant than mine.
Thank You...
You described: Counterproductive better than I did!

--
A 2689LMT in both our cars that we love... and a Nuvi 660 with Lifetime Maps that we have had literally forever.... And a 2011 Ford Escape with Nav System that is totally ignored!

Thanks for the heads up OP

Guess I'll be going for the Droid next time I upgrade my cell . . . Droid 2 comes out in August, if I'm not mistaken.

Just out of curiosity I

Just out of curiosity I looked for Rush, AR on the 3 versions of maps I have in MapSource. It was found on Metroguide North America v7, and City Navigator North America v8, but not on City Navigator North America NT 2010.3 And, I found it in Microsoft Streets & Trips 2006.

--
"Recalculating... drive 0.2 miles, then abandon vehicle." ------------- [ETrex Venture CX; Nüvi 40]

Rush, Arkansas

Rush, Arkansas http://bit.ly/9sr72b

My Droid-X uses Google Maps for navigation with GPS. There is an app that allows offline maps to be used thereby solving the connectivity problem.

I have both a Garmin Nuvi 650 and a Droid-X. I prefer the Garmin for long range navigation and the Droid-X for local navigation so that I can access Google to find the latest locations and info and then navigate to them.

I am a retired Geographic Information System specialist. I am not a programmer but I do understand the technology behind these devices pretty well. My understanding is that the Garmin uses an onboard, local map database and that the Droid smartphones use online map databases. Advantages and disadvantages to both. I am glad I have both as my Nuvi froze recently on a trip and I had to use my Droid-X to navigate for the last 300 miles of the trip.

This is an interesting thread. Thanks everyone for your great viewpoints on this issue and thanks to the OP for starting this up.

--
Garmin Emap, Garmin C340, Garmin Nuvi650

interesting

The times that I've used the Droid X it's been flawless. My hunch is you've got a combination of a google phone, google maps, droid operating system, and a new phone all working to the plus side.

I too have a 660 and it generally works well with a 2009 map, with the exception of taking a long time to get a satellite and obviously the map is not up-to-date. It can't get us to a new mall because obviously the roads to the mall don't exist. That should never happen with the Droid, and the Droid will never need updates. The only thing stopping me is having to buy yet another windshield mount for the Droid, and also the question of what happens when you get a phone call (VZW--maybe the LTE network answers this question).

The paradigm is changing, and I truly believe the days of the $420+ (i.e. 3790T) gps units are really numbered.

~

johnnatash4 wrote:

...and also the question of what happens when you get a phone call (VZW--maybe the LTE

Presently on VZW, what happens is the phone rings, and it's data transfer goes to sleep... depending on how much map data is cached, and how long you're on the phone, the mapping will take time to recover when the phone call ends.

Verizon's present technology does not support voice & data simultaneously. LTE will - and if all the cellphone gossip sites can be believed, LTE will be fully deployed by 2013.

--
*Keith* MacBook Pro *wifi iPad(2012) w/BadElf GPS & iPhone6 + Navigon*

Rush, AR

is not found on my 1690 either.
2011.20

Here are the coordinates for Rush, AR as furnished by Google Maps:
36.131473,-92.56892

--
nuvi 1690 with ecoRoute HD, SP2610 (retired), Edge 305, Forerunner 405

Try this with your Garmin

Quote:

WaveSecure may be one of the most important Android apps you'll ever install. If your Droid X is missing, WaveSecure's Web site lets you remotely activate the phone's GPS system and pinpoint its exact location. If it turns out the phone's fallen into the wrong hands, one more click will remotely wipe all of your personal data from the device. And if the thief tries to swap out the SIM card, WaveSecure will automatically lock the phone down.

The WaveSecure app itself is free, but in order to use the service beyond its seven-day trial period, you'll need to pay an annual subscription fee of about $20 a year.

http://www.pcworld.com/article/201244/verizons_droid_x_12_ap...

https://www.wavesecure.com/