I had the upgrade installed a little while ago and it seems to have
impacted my screen. After the radio has been running a while, I
notice that when I change pages, the previous page seems to have
'burned in' to the screen for a few seconds and gradually fades away.
I also found that on startup, especially if the radio has been used
in the previous hour or so, the screen was nearly impossible to read
until I set the display settings contrast manually.

I contacted Garmin tech support and they said they'd seen something
like this with the upgrade. They had me set the contrast as "auto"
and set the contrast to a number around 095. They said it's best to
leave the contrast as auto, since apparently it needs to be constantly
tweaked as the screen heats up, but that the new software sometimes
fouls up the reference point, setting it too high.

I set the contrast to 095/auto, and now it works at startup, but I
notice that after the unit's run a while, the 'burn in" is still
there, although it fades after a few seconds. I suspect that either
the new software makes the unit run hotter, or the new software has a
problem adjusting contrast as the radio heats up. Has anyone had a
similar problem?

BTW, the radio is installed in a 1976 Cardinal RG, 14V electrical
system.
--

Mark Klebanoff wrote:
> I had the upgrade installed a little while ago and it seems to have
> impacted my screen.

When you say "upgrade," do you mean from a 430 to 430W?

Or, do you mean from one 430W software version to a later version?

I ask, because the conversion of a 430 to a 430W represented a major
hardware change.

On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 19:17:52 -0800, Sam Spade >
wrote:

>Mark Klebanoff wrote:
>> I had the upgrade installed a little while ago and it seems to have
>> impacted my screen.
>
>When you say "upgrade," do you mean from a 430 to 430W?
>
>Or, do you mean from one 430W software version to a later version?
>
>I ask, because the conversion of a 430 to a 430W represented a major
>hardware change.

There's a new software version for the 430W units, came out in
December.

On Tue, 8 Jan 2008 03:17:52 UTC, Sam Spade > wrote:

> Mark Klebanoff wrote:
> > I had the upgrade installed a little while ago and it seems to have
> > impacted my screen.
>
> When you say "upgrade," do you mean from a 430 to 430W?
>
> Or, do you mean from one 430W software version to a later version?
>
> I ask, because the conversion of a 430 to a 430W represented a major
> hardware change.


Sorry, I was unclear. I have a 430W and complied with the Garmin
service bulletin by upgrading the operating software to the 3.0
version.
--

On Jan 6, 4:52 pm, "Mark Klebanoff" > wrote:
> I had the upgrade installed a little while ago and it seems to have
> impacted my screen. After the radio has been running a while, I
> notice that when I change pages, the previous page seems to have
> 'burned in' to the screen for a few seconds and gradually fades away.
> I also found that on startup, especially if the radio has been used
> in the previous hour or so, the screen was nearly impossible to read
> until I set the display settings contrast manually.
>
> I contacted Garmin tech support and they said they'd seen something
> like this with the upgrade. They had me set the contrast as "auto"
> and set the contrast to a number around 095. They said it's best to
> leave the contrast as auto, since apparently it needs to be constantly
> tweaked as the screen heats up, but that the new software sometimes
> fouls up the reference point, setting it too high.
>
> I set the contrast to 095/auto, and now it works at startup, but I
> notice that after the unit's run a while, the 'burn in" is still
> there, although it fades after a few seconds. I suspect that either
> the new software makes the unit run hotter, or the new software has a
> problem adjusting contrast as the radio heats up. Has anyone had a
> similar problem?
>
> BTW, the radio is installed in a 1976 Cardinal RG, 14V electrical
> system.
> --

And I am trying to get the upgrade and the weather here in Ohio has
delayed me. Thanks weather! The upgrade "fixes" a problem area that
I don't
use so I was fiixing something that wasn't broken. I think I will
put the upgrade on hold for a while and just listen.

Chuck

On 1/9/2008 8:50 AM, Chuck wrote the following:
> The upgrade "fixes" a problem area that
> I don't
> use so I was fixing something that wasn't broken. I think I will
> put the upgrade on hold for a while and just listen.
>
> Chuck

Garmin's software operation appears to be fairly undisciplined, at least from
what I see with upgrades to the CAP G1000 182s. Every new release it is a big
Easter egg hunt to find what they have changed and what they have broken. They
also change trivial cosmetic things, which is a no-no in professionally managed
mission software.

Waiting before loading "upgrades" is always wise, as is not rushing to get fixes
to problems you don't have. At my company, I always insisted that we age the
upgrades to our accounting system for at least six months, letting the "service
packs" accumulate. Which they always did.

Only after 6 months would we check the user groups and evaluate the risk and
payoff to installing the upgrade.

On Wed, 9 Jan 2008 16:27:19 UTC, "John Collins"
> wrote:

> Chuck,
>
> If you don't have any of the problems outline in the SB and don't have a
> GDL69, the next most important benefit of the software upgrade is that the
> GPS obtains "sole means of navigation" status. This means that you can use
> numerous airports as an alternate that are unable to be used otherwise.
> Most airports with an RNAV (GPS) Rwy xx approach that also have an ASOS for
> weather may be filed as an alternate. Approach charts with the reverse A
> symbol (white A on black triangle background) that don't have NA after the
> symbol, will list the requirements in the special alternate minimums section
> of the NOAA charts.
>


I know that being one of the first to get a software patch is a crap
shoot but I did it to enable use of the GPS as the sole means of
navigation, as noted above

--

In article <nze6zYQT7gHB-pn2-8eWUNLD0oD6k@localhost>,
"Mark Klebanoff" > wrote:

> I contacted Garmin tech support and they said they'd seen something
> like this with the upgrade.

Anything more from Garmin on this? Any sense how widespread the problem
is?

I was planning to get this done soon, but...

On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 00:04:57 UTC, Dave Anderer >
wrote:

> In article <nze6zYQT7gHB-pn2-8eWUNLD0oD6k@localhost>,
> "Mark Klebanoff" > wrote:
>
> > I contacted Garmin tech support and they said they'd seen something
> > like this with the upgrade.
>
> Anything more from Garmin on this? Any sense how widespread the problem
> is?
>
> I was planning to get this done soon, but...


I have not re-contacted them, but I think I can solve the problem by
continuing to adjust the contrast setting. I took it from 095 to 085.
The screen is still perfectly readable (in fact I can't see any
difference), but I think the burn in has gotten better. At least I
don't recall it being a problem the last time I flew, but I didn't
look closely.