Feature I wish my desktop GPS software had.

Use the Route Tool to layout the route, clicking where you want a via point.

When the route is done, review it by centering on those via points and use BaseCamp to search around that via point. Presto! Just what you were asking for.

Streets & Trips does that. It's called "Find Nearby Places" but the search radius is limited to 50 miles, and it also automatically fills the search area with an obnoxious yellow cross-hatching.

If I understand correctly what you want to do, S&T also helps by letting you specify rest stops at whatever interval of time you want, and for how long you want, and it automatically inserts waypoints at those intervals.

1-mile markers
2-toll plazas with amount paid in tolls so it would tell me the cost for tolls on a trip
3-food, gas loding for a interstate exit.

both topo and street atlas have similar features

Yes, but in the case of Street Altas, at least, the interface is almost as bad as Basecamp's.

The OP's wishlist sounds like the features list from Microsoft's Streets & Trips, which has an interface which one might actually call intuitive.

I have MS S&T 2011 and believe me it makes several mistakes when setting up a route, some of them totally irrational and even trying to correct/change these by adding VIA points makes no difference.

it is different, but once you get used to it you will find it better than most.

I have both S&T 2010 and 2013. There wasn't a whole lot of difference in how the programs operate a lot depends on how you set up your road preferences. What I have seen is that both BaseCamp and S&T generally will pick the same roads. I can use S&T to quickly plan a route, do the modifications through drag and drop and then go into BaseCamp set the origin and destination and then add a few "shaping" via points so when all are selected BaseCamp then creates a route that I send to my 885. (Once you create the route, delete all the waypoints leaving only the route or you wind up with the waypoints loaded to your favorites.)

Although, I agree with what Box Car says and find very few problems with S&T's routing, I've also noticed a couple of places where there are some very weird routing issues. Try having S&T 2013 route you from Phoenix AZ to Flagstaff without taking you off I-17 about half way there and then back on at the next exit. Now do the same route but from Flagstaff to Phoenix and you'll be on I-17 all the way.

Definitely strange.

That's kinda what I'm talking about but not close enough. I want the software to show me a measurement of "X" miles from a previous point.

Here's an example:
http://tinyurl.com/8obc8uo

The route tool doesn't allow me to snap a distance in a way that yields to this sort of planning easily.

Maybe I just don't think planning a route should be that hard to do.

The software provides a distance for the entire route and distances between points or maneuvers. It doesn't tell you the names of cities or points as it only knows how far it is between turns or from the start to the ending point.

Here's another strange one in S&T:

I-70 westbound as it crosses I-77 in Ohio, say from Elizabethtown to Zanesville. Eastbound is fine.

I've noticed this problem too. This problem started sometime after S&T2007, which AFAIK does not exhibit it. Both 2011 and 2013 have this problem.

If you plot a route along certain stretches of interstate highway, S&T's route will exit the interstate, go some distance along a parallel road, then come back to the interstate. Another example is for a route west along I80 from Lincoln, NE to Cheyenne, WY - S&T jumps off the highway for several miles near North Platte, NE.

IIRC, some have attributed this to incorrect info in S&T's database about highway construction - it bypasses a section of interstate highway it "thinks" is closed for construction (but the interstate sections it bypasses are almost never closed completely). But even if you use the "Update Construction Info" feature that connects to Microsoft's online database, it still does not solve this routing problem.

However, this problem only seems to happen in newer versions of S&T with the route segment preferences set to the default of "Quickest" (though the resultant route it automatically builds is neither quickest nor shortest). I have not observed S&T2007 to do this even if set to "Quickest"

If the route segment preferences are set to "preferred" for every segment, and if settings are changed (in "preferred road types") to strongly prefer Interstate highways, it solves this problem in the instances I have checked.

But unfortunately S&T does not allow the default route segment preferences to be set to "preferred" which means that every time any new segment is. added, it will always be the default of "Quickest"
This is yet another example of something Microsoft could easily fix, but they can't be bothered with making things work better, and be more useful because their too busy dreaming up the next fantastic new flop like Windows Vista was and Windows 8RT will be.

So, the easiest solution (admittedly it's a workaround) is to always remember to set route segment preferences to "preferred" for every segment, which you have to do after you create them.
If you enter the start and finish points first, then set that route segment to "preferred" then any subsequent segments added between those two original points will also be "preferred"

What are you trying to accomplish with that?

In S&T, you can set it to automatically place waypoints at whatever interval of driving time (not distance) you want, so at least on an interstate highway, those are pretty consistent with driving distances as well, because the speed it pretty consistent. So, on an interstate this does approximately "show a measurement of "X" miles from a previous point" except that it is roughly the driving distance, not the straight line distance.

Of course, if you want a tool to create what you show in that image, that may not have anything to do with actually driving the route, then the closest thing S&T has is the 'Find Nearby Places' tool that will create an visible circle (black outline & yellow cross-hatching) up to 50 mile radius around any chosen point.

During my trip I decide to visit a location that is a few miles off the route. Then I decide to pick up my route further along, using a different road. However, I will not pass through one of my original via points.
WWMGD?
What will my Garnin do?

True, once you get used to it.

The set of potentially useful features Street Atlas is unmatched. It is the only program that has BOTH full-featured trip planning and a "REAL" Nav mode display (vs. the limited, tacked on Nav functions in S&T). Street Atlas' POI functionality and POI display are superior to the others, but the U/I used to work with them is also one of the most cumbersome parts of the interface.

The only other option that is vaguely compable to Street Altas is in two pieces: Basecamp and a Garmin PND (and that two-piece approach has plenty of drawbacks, too). CoPilot for Windows formerly had a setup similar to Street Atlas until about three versions ago, since then the Windows version is just about the same as the smartphone version (basically a highly-structured nav app with very limited trip planning features).

Unfortunately it has some other serious flaws besides the horribly clunky user interface, and those flaws include chronically out-of-date mapp and POI data, and a routing engine that leave more than a little to be desired.

I have Microsoft MapPoint 2011 North America, although I almost never use it (it's overkill). Out of curiosity I tried both "oddities":

re: Phoenix to Flagstaff

From what I can see, MapPoint doesn't deviate from I-17. However, the roadway does split in several places and depending on where the "17" icons appear (or don't) it can look a bit confusing in places.

re: Elizabethtown to Zanesville

Again, the I-70 highway splits at the I-77 interchange, but the driving directions never say that I'm leaving I-70.

In both cases the routes look identical to those produced by Google Maps. Here are the MapPoint directions for the second example:

I know that S&T is the "light" version of MapPoint, but you gotta figure that the routing algorithms are basically the same, right?

Automatically recalculate the route, same as any of the others being discussed here.

The only "popular" mapping/nav program that *won't* do that is google maps/nav (even if you have cached a map tile of the (maximum) 5,600 sq.mi. area) if you stray too far from the original pre-planned route and if you don't have a data connection.

Maybe MapPoint's route segment preferences strongly prefer Interstate highways by default, or maybe it's using the same routing algorithms as S&T 2007, which didn't have the routing problems discussed in this thread.

The preferences were all the default values. The segment was set to "Quickest", and the "Preferred road types" sliders are all in their middle positions.

I guess I was trying to verify whether the actual driving directions were strange, or if things just looked strange on the map view because of the placement (or non-placement) of the highway markers.

It wouldn't surprise me if MapPoint 2011 still uses the older routing algorithm S&T formerly used (which didn't have this problem). Clearly Microsoft changed something between S&T2007 and S&T2011 that caused this problem. You would think they would have fixed it in 2013, but then again, look at how many years other long-standing problems with S&T have gone untouched.

It tries to reroute you to the point you missed. Two options are to stop the route and then restart telling it you don't want to navigate to the start or edit the route and delete the waypoint you missed.

If you go off-route and go past a waypoint, and don't want to go through that waypoint, yes, of course you're going to need to delete that waypoint. No nav software or PND is going to "know" that the driver has decided to bypass a waypoint on the route. At least S&T makes it easy to delete waypoints (it would be even easier if the GPS pane and Route Planner panes could both be visible at the same time).

I'm using S&T 2013 with the newest construction information which shows NO construction on I-17 but it still takes you off the interstate at EXIT 262 and then back on again at 278. This is NORTH bound only, southbound isn't a problem.

I have given interstates the highest priority and have the only segment in this example set to Preferred.

I assume that it's routing you on AZ-69 through Humboldt and then AZ-169 back to I-17. If so, that's got to be related to map data, probably a construction-related link cost (as suggested earlier).

EDIT: I just checked MapPoint again and it showed

"Interchange Reconstruction near Arcosanti (NB) (August 31, 2011 - August 31, 2013)"

after I clicked "Update construction information". However, it did NOT change the route: it kept me on I-17 all the way to exit 341.

"Curiouser and curiouser!"

That's exactly the same as what happened in S&T2011 with the latest construction info. I can't say what would happen without it because I had already updated recently, but I updated again today.
It showed the 'Interchange Reconstruction near Arcosanti' but does not NOT change the route; it stays on I-17 (NB) all the way.

VersatileGuy - if you could check this same route (west on I-80 from Lincoln, NE to Cheyenne, WY) in MapPoint, I'd appreciate it.

S&T diverts off of I-80 near North Platte, NE.
I wonder if MapPoint does the same.

re: Lincoln to Cheyenne

I get the same directions as you did, including the "Keep STRAIGHT onto US-30" nags.

MapPoint does give me a construction notice, however:

"Interchange Reconstruction near Brady (WB) (July 2, 2012 - November 30, 2012)"

Thanks for checking. At least now we know where a genuine, repeatable flaw exists.

Yeah, I got that construction notice in S&T2011 too, and it shows up in orange on the map. I omitted it from the list of directions I posted because Brady is over 22 miles before North Platte, so that construction should not be able to cause the unexpected detour off of I-80 near North Platte.

[/quote] I've also noticed a couple of places where there are some very weird routing issues. Try having S&T 2013 route you from Phoenix AZ to Flagstaff without taking you off I-17 about half way there and then back on at the next exit. Now do the same route but from Flagstaff to Phoenix and you'll be on I-17 all the way.[/quote]

That is the exact same situation I am referring to, only in a totally different area of North America.

S&T won't allow any waypoints to be added to the westbound side of I-80 in the area near North Platte where the route detours off of I-80. Waypoints can be added to the Eastbound side or the nearby (parallel) outer road in the same area, but not I-80W itself. It's as if S&T "thinks" that section of I-80 westbound does not exist.

So I guess this could be the test for any routing problem like this: try to add a waypoint on the "bypassed" section of highway. Anywhere S&T won't do that, it's got a problem.

Well it's MicroSoft. What does one expect..!!..?

Nuvi1300WTGPS

GoogleEarth does a pretty good job.

Last month my son and I drove from Winnipeg to the Battle of the Little Bighorn (Montana) and back in his VW Westphalia. I used GoogleEarth to plan - streetview is a bonus here as it allowed us to check out KOAs along the way.

I then created a driving gpx file of campgrounds, restaurants and geocahes for the 2700km (1600m) trip. I brought along my Garmin Nuvi 1350and Orgeon 550, my son brought along paper maps. We ended up using both media as the Nuvi never did find the road we were on to Devil's Tower on the way home - good times anyway.

What we are missing on any GPS or map software is the "scenic route" option. Once you set your destination, other than fastest, shortest, and economy, how wonderful it would be having the "scenic route" option. Taking you to destination through known scenic routes and alert you to upcoming look out points, and attractions.

Easier said than done... how could a "scenic route" be defined in terms utilizable by routing algorithms?
I guess it would have to be based on POIs that aren't Points of Interest, but "Routes of Interest."

It would still be a cool feature. Even if it's difficult to define.

I have created my own scenic route using paper maps as my source. What a PITA. It is easier to save just the start point to favorites, then follow the highway signs along the road.

In addition to "Fastest", "Shortest", etc. my TomTom also has an "Avoid Highways" option. While there's no guarantee that the route will be "scenic" it often is.

Superseded

As I use BaseCamp, the Routing Tool, I move the pointer around to locate the next point, the distance between the last point and the location of the pointer (potential new point) is displayed so I know the distance between points as I set them.

I just checked this in S&T2011 (with latest construction info) and I do not see the same anomaly that exists on I-80W near North Platte, NE

Here are the directions for that route along I-70 westbound in Ohio:

**************************
Time Mile Instruction For Toward
Summary: 32.4 miles (29 minutes)
9:00 AM 0.0 Depart Elizabethtown on SR-285 [Morgans Way] (South) 65 yds
9:00 AM 0.1 Bear LEFT (South) onto US-40 [SR-285] 0.3 mi
9:01 AM 0.3 Take Ramp (RIGHT) onto I-70 31.5 mi I-70 W
9:28 AM 31.9 At exit 155, take Ramp (RIGHT) onto Elm St 0.3 mi SR-60 / SR-146 / Underwood St
9:28 AM 32.1 Turn LEFT (South) onto SR-146 [SR-60] 0.3 mi
9:29 AM 32.4 Arrive Zanesville

SUMMARY
Driving distance: 32.4 miles
Trip duration: 29 minutes
Driving time: 29 minutes
**********************

The only thing on this route that even looks like a deviation that I can see is when I-70 itself splits into two discrete lanesets (i.e.: the median becomes very wide) which happens at the I-77 junction (exit 180) and again near exit 164.

FWIW, you got the same results that I got when I tried it a few days ago in MapPoint 2011 (again, with updated construction information).

Yea, I try to not to light the Macro$lop fan's fire but yes, you're right. Can't trust it.