... the user friendly GPS tool


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Suggestions after prerelease 1.28.13
#1
1. I like the way speed now shows the speed at under 10km/h as it has to be of benefit to walkers and bicycle riders, at a minimum. For consistent display, you might want to add that one decimal place to all speed entries. While trivial for those running at 100km/h it is still of interest, and might prove useful if challenging a speeding ticket <grin>

2. It would be nice, from my viewpoint, if when I asked the program to get rid of all 0 meter movement records, it were to leave the first and the last should I so desire, so that I could see the 0 km/h speed points, when the car was actually standing still. That is only possible now if I manually go through the track after selecting all of the 0 meter traveled points and unselect one at the end or start to force the program to leave 2 so that the 0 movement is only removed leaving the first and last entries at that point behind.

3 I still have to choose between having the location or having the postal address, as, for example, in a shopping trip ALL of the locations are in Lansing, but the postal address keeps changing, and NONE of the postal addresses contain the word 'Lansing'... Oh well...

4. If I accidentally ask for the positions to be numbered twice, I end up with the number at the front of the line twice... The way to get rid of that is to re-do Add Postal Address and then re-do add position number as there is no way to 'remove' the position number if it has accidentally been added twice <grin>

5. While the duration is one value, and an important one, the driving time is not readily available unless the 0 movement seconds can be removed, which leads back to another reason #2 above is useful, at least to me, as it permits me to more easily compute driving time since I can then calculate the 0 movement time. That could be automated, I suspect, to have the program compute both duration and travel time, which are very different in my case, since I leave the GPS on when I go shopping, and therefore often remove thousands of points from the gross track, as there are 3600 points per hour that might be 0 movement! I grant that is a nice to have, and that I can actually get it using Street Atlas, but I'd rather do it in one program if possible. There is absolutely no urgency in it, however.

6. 1 meter is 3.28083989501312336 feet and 1 mile is 1.609344 kilometers, if you need these values.
Reply
#2
(26.07.2009, 03:48)RsH Wrote: 1. I like the way speed now shows the speed at under 10km/h as it has to be of benefit to walkers and bicycle riders, at a minimum. For consistent display, you might want to add that one decimal place to all speed entries. While trivial for those running at 100km/h it is still of interest, and might prove useful if challenging a speeding ticket <grin>

How accurate is the speed information? I thought its not more than 10 to 20%. Actually that was the reason why I limit the number of decimal place.

(26.07.2009, 03:48)RsH Wrote: 2. It would be nice, from my viewpoint, if when I asked the program to get rid of all 0 meter movement records, it were to leave the first and the last should I so desire, so that I could see the 0 km/h speed points, when the car was actually standing still. That is only possible now if I manually go through the track after selecting all of the 0 meter traveled points and unselect one at the end or start to force the program to leave 2 so that the 0 movement is only removed leaving the first and last entries at that point behind.

Ok, I understand the use case as one which is targetted at the post-processing of tracks. The program currently aims at supporting the conversion of tracks to routes. I'm really interested in supporting more use cases without increasing the complexity of the program. Any ideas how to achieve this for the 0 movements?

(26.07.2009, 03:48)RsH Wrote: 3 I still have to choose between having the location or having the postal address, as, for example, in a shopping trip ALL of the locations are in Lansing, but the postal address keeps changing, and NONE of the postal addresses contain the word 'Lansing'... Oh well...

Frankly, I have no idea how to solve this.

(26.07.2009, 03:48)RsH Wrote: 4. If I accidentally ask for the positions to be numbered twice, I end up with the number at the front of the line twice... The way to get rid of that is to re-do Add Postal Address and then re-do add position number as there is no way to 'remove' the position number if it has accidentally been added twice <grin>

Ok, put it on my todo list.

(26.07.2009, 03:48)RsH Wrote: 5. While the duration is one value, and an important one, the driving time is not readily available unless the 0 movement seconds can be removed, which leads back to another reason #2 above is useful, at least to me, as it permits me to more easily compute driving time since I can then calculate the 0 movement time. That could be automated, I suspect, to have the program compute both duration and travel time, which are very different in my case, since I leave the GPS on when I go shopping, and therefore often remove thousands of points from the gross track, as there are 3600 points per hour that might be 0 movement! I grant that is a nice to have, and that I can actually get it using Street Atlas, but I'd rather do it in one program if possible. There is absolutely no urgency in it, however.

Duration and travel time... I guess another post-processing use case.

(26.07.2009, 03:48)RsH Wrote: 6. 1 meter is 3.28083989501312336 feet and 1 mile is 1.609344 kilometers, if you need these values.

Thank you. Wikipedia helped me already.
--
Christian
Reply
#3
(26.07.2009, 17:55)routeconverter Wrote:
(26.07.2009, 03:48)RsH Wrote: 4. If I accidentally ask for the positions to be numbered twice, I end up with the number at the front of the line twice... The way to get rid of that is to re-do Add Postal Address and then re-do add position number as there is no way to 'remove' the position number if it has accidentally been added twice <grin>

Ok, put it on my todo list.

And solved it in the current prerelease 1.28.15.
--
Christian
Reply
#4
(26.07.2009, 17:55)routeconverter Wrote: [quote='RsH' pid='2700' dateline='1248576492']
1. I like the way speed now shows the speed at under 10km/h as it has to be of benefit to walkers and bicycle riders, at a minimum. For consistent display, you might want to add that one decimal place to all speed entries. While trivial for those running at 100km/h it is still of interest, and might prove useful if challenging a speeding ticket <grin>


How accurate is the speed information? I thought its not more than 10 to 20%. Actually that was the reason why I limit the number of decimal place.

For my purposes, it is extremely accurate as long as the position information is correct AND the computation of the distance between the two points is correct as well. I have observed that with the ASUS R300, the position information IS extremely accurate if I keep the sat. information correct, using their GPS Catcher program to advise the R300 where the sats have moved that day. The speeds seem to accurate to within one km and that extra decimal place simply makes it all line up correctly throughout. The speed under 10 km/h with the added decimal place gets rid of the 0 km when I am ambling along, which is often the case, or when I am taking photos while walking, or when the ship is crawling through the Panama Canal, and while I do not really care about the precise accuracy at 100 km/h, IF I get stopped for being over the speed limit, and it IS 100 km/h, it would be interesting to see what the record really shows. We CAN challenge radar readings in court, but need to know what the GPS was showing we were really traveling at the time, and that extra decimal place, while not vital, WILL indicate a value that is more likely to be accepted than a whole number value, psychologically. If we are going to convince a judge, the less the degree of ambiguity, the more likely we can win the case <grin> even if it is based on total bull!

Anyway, the GPS is accurate enough that the only question is how precise the one second interval in its recording is and how precise the program computes the distance traveled in that one second, and therefore the speed required to cover that one second. I know we are ignoring slope, and the impact that going up or down a hill brings into the equation, unless of course we first download the elevation or unless the device records elevation and uses the difference in meters of elevation in the computation, but the difference in elevation in one second is so small that the speed is still accurate enough if treated as if it occurred on level ground.

In other words, a long way of saying that for my purposes, that extra decimal place throughout is useful, particularly at the lower speeds and around the speed limit values, as long as RouteConverter is computing based on the values that device provides and uses the correct method of doing the calculation.
(26.07.2009, 03:48)RsH Wrote: 2. It would be nice, from my viewpoint, if when I asked the program to get rid of all 0 meter movement records, it were to leave the first and the last should I so desire, so that I could see the 0 km/h speed points, when the car was actually standing still. That is only possible now if I manually go through the track after selecting all of the 0 meter traveled points and unselect one at the end or start to force the program to leave 2 so that the 0 movement is only removed leaving the first and last entries at that point behind.

Ok, I understand the use case as one which is targetted at the post-processing of tracks. The program currently aims at supporting the conversion of tracks to routes. I'm really interested in supporting more use cases without increasing the complexity of the program. Any ideas how to achieve this for the 0 movements?

The only way I can see that would work is to literally leave the first and last of the identical position records and remove all in-between, if I select a 'switch' to do so. This is indeed 'post processing' of the track, and I will not be converting the track to a route.

I am analyzing after the trip, and will never use the track as a route, but rather use the result to inject data into photos taken, etc., and seeing that 0 speed location and the time gap will permit me to artificially inject an additional point in at the time required to geocode a photo taken at that point far more easily than if I am forced to guess which of the 'two' points, the before or after, I should use. For my purposes, I always want to leave the first and last of the points that show no movement during the seconds while me as a walker, or the car, ship, aircraft or whatever was standing still at a particular point - that may well be a point where I stopped to take a photo, after all!
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)