The Amazing iOS 6 Maps

[kyteflyer]

Originally Posted by jswinden

Cellular phones don't have true GPS like the above mentioned devices.

I'm sorry but you are flat out wrong about this one. my iPhone GPS works perfectly well without even a SIM card in it. Its slower to get the initial fix but after that, its just fine (I did it as a test because long ago someone else made the same claim as you just have). I also have a Tomtom... but prefer the iPhone for a lot of reasons (convergence being one... I detest carrying multiple devices for various purposes when I can have it all in one)

[kyteflyer]

Anyone who wants to have a true turn by turn and doesn't yet have it in Apple Maps (which are WOEFUL for Australia and dont yet provide tbt for here) just get Navfree. Doesnt cost a bean, and also has a map correction tool. Its pretty darned good, IMO. Uses OpenStreetMap for its map data.

[frahse]

Originally Posted by tubemonkey

If Steve were still here, he'd say you're holding it wrong

Doggone it. I was going to say that.

[frahse]

Originally Posted by ilovejedd

I've got a standalone Magellan GPS and the smartphones (both Android and iPhone) get a location fix/lock before the Magellan does. Smartphones nowadays have assisted GPS which consists of an actual GPS which gets location information from satellites and additional help via triangulation using cell towers, etc.

Ease of use, though, naturally the Magellan wins since it has a dedicated interface designed primarily for GPS usage.

I am sorry to have to tell you that the Magellan line which has been around a long time is not so good these days. Garmin or Tom Tom are better for the US for car or truck navigation. There are others also for more specialized activities. DeLorme for one. SPOT. etc.

[frahse]

Originally Posted by jswinden

Google also used Tele Atlas but I'm not sure if they still do. However, Google also supplements their map data via many sources including their own map vehicles which drive around verifying map locations and taking photos. My guess is that Google does a much more thorough job than TomTom, especially in the USA.

Google hasn't used Tele Atlas for at least several years. I would say 3.

[frahse]

Originally Posted by tompe

The gps in the phone is a real gps. So I do not understand what you mean. A car gps usually have a better antenna then the one in the phone but that is another thing. And with a phone you can use data from the net to get the initial fix. And I compared Google navigation to a Garmin and did not see any quality differences in the routing.

I don't doubt that some phones have a complete GPS chip and system, but many have "aGPS" which is "assisted GPS" which works off the location of cell towers. There can be errors tied to where you are in relation to the towers and how far away the towers are.
There are also various levels of GPS chips with variations on sensitivity and number of satellites used.

[hrosvit]

Originally Posted by frahse

I don't doubt that some phones have a complete GPS chip and system, but many have "aGPS" which is "assisted GPS" which works off the location of cell towers. There can be errors tied to where you are in relation to the towers and how far away the towers are.
There are also various levels of GPS chips with variations on sensitivity and number of satellites used.

You are correct that AGPS is assisted GPS, but it is actually an enhancement. It possesses full GPS capabilities, and supplements that using cellular towers, as well as the cellular data plan. This allows it to get locations in places traditional GPS will not, such as indoors or under tree cover. AGPS is GPS that has been enhanced, not a substandard substitute.

[lorenzoens]

I gave my contribution to #iLost

https://plus.google.com/u/0/11599175...ts/XMtEKoEx6ip (Google+ link)

[tubemonkey]

Originally Posted by frahse

Doggone it. I was going to say that.

The early monkey gets the banana

[manou]

Here in Hong Kong everybody is amazed. Apple singlehandedly undid all the reclamation done at the harbour for the last 10 years - thus relocated the Star Ferry piers and demolished the Government Building nearby.
They did have their priorities right though - the location of the Apple Store is clearly marked, but according to Apple it's right at the waterfront....

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by jswinden

They are designed with good GPS chips that have everything they need to navigate. Cellular phones don't have true GPS like the above mentioned devices. They instead rely heavily on supplemental location information derived from cellular tower locations.

You've said this before, and been corrected before.
The iPhone does have a 'true' GPS chip, taking position from GPS satellites. It also has cell-tower based location services for when it does not have a GPS lock. (As does my BlackBerry)

[sadievan]

Originally Posted by kyteflyer

Anyone who wants to have a true turn by turn and doesn't yet have it in Apple Maps (which are WOEFUL for Australia and dont yet provide tbt for here) just get Navfree. Doesnt cost a bean, and also has a map correction tool. Its pretty darned good, IMO. Uses OpenStreetMap for its map data.

Thanks for that. Karma to you.

Carol

Originally Posted by hrosvit

You are correct that AGPS is assisted GPS, but it is actually an enhancement. It possesses full GPS capabilities, and supplements that using cellular towers, as well as the cellular data plan. This allows it to get locations in places traditional GPS will not, such as indoors or under tree cover. AGPS is GPS that has been enhanced, not a substandard substitute.

Not really, A-GPS typically has a lower grade GPS chip, which makes a difference, and uses cell towers to look at cached data which is a bit older than what the GPS satellites can provide. It is predictive tracking. It is true that A-GPS can, but doesn't always, provide more accuracy within skyscraper canyons or similar geographic locations, but it can also show you on the top floor of a skyscraper rather than on the street below. In flatter terrain of suburbs and open country the accuracy of A-GPS is considered at least a bit less accurate than data received directly and solely from satellites. Outside the coverage area of cell towers, or when cell towers are few and far between, the inferior GPS chips often used in phones to provide A-GPS will show even more inaccuracy.

You can believe whatever marketing BS the phone makers and service providers feed you, but that doesn't make it true. In theory if A-GPS in a phone used a high quality chip set and an antenna with as high a gain as the antennas used in dedicated GPS only devices from Garmin or TomTom then A-GPS could be the better of the two. In reality, it highly depends on your usage, but GPS only devices have the over all edge.

As far as antennas go, I can tell you as a radio person that you can have the best rated, most expensive radio available, but if you attach an inferior antenna you will have terrible reception. On the other hand, even with a so so radio if you attach a well designed high gain antenna you will have as good of reception as can be expected for your location. It is all about the antenna. We always say if you have X amount to spend on a radio and antenna, then spend most of it on the antenna. So using an inferior GPS antenna within a phone is going to mean inferior reception of GPS signals which means it takes longer to get the data, if it can be received at all. If you are in Manhattan that probably isn't going to be a problem with A-GPS. If you are driving through rural America then you might need to have a backup mapping system.

[murraypaul]

Originally Posted by jswinden

Not really, A-GPS typically has a lower grade GPS chip, which makes a difference, and uses cell towers to look at cached data which is a bit older than what the GPS satellites can provide. It is predictive tracking.

You are wrong.
An aGPS system has two separate functions.
The first is a traditional GPS satellite system, that works that same as other GPS systems.
The second is a cell-tower based system, which is used when GPS lock has not been achieved.
It is true that cellphones generally have smaller, poorer, antenna than dedicated GPS units, but that has nothing to do with the aGPS function, it is a hardware difference.
These devices can be used as GPS units with no SIM cards installed, so no cell connection.

[afv011]

On the topic of phone GPS, I find that my S3 gets a lock faster and is more accurate than my Magellan dedicated GPS. Part of it may be that phones now support both GPS and GLONASS satellites, thus giving you increased accuracy and more satellites to lock on.