Neil Gould
August 8th 04, 12:44 PM
Recently, bangbang > posted:
> In article et>,
> Neil Gould > wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Disclaimer: I own a Garmin 295, not the AvMap. However, I have a
>> couple of suggestions for your consideration.
>
>> I don't see why swapping CF cards would be such a pain. It would be
>> a lot quicker and more reliable than Garmin's method of downloading
>> the data directly to the unit over the internet.
>
> Interesting. I've never downloaded anything from Garmin (don't own
> one - I feel like I'm the last hold-out sometimes!) so I don't know
> what makes the process slow or unreliable. I do have a very fast (and
> reliable) internet connection, so I'm used to being able to download
> things - even very large things - with no hassles. It sounds like
> Garmin has some usability issues they need to address with thier
> online update system?
>
To be clearer, I suggested that swapping CF cards would be a lot quicker
than downloading. Unplug one card, plug in the other... done. No fiddling
with settings, cables, etc. It would also be more reliable, because you
wouldn't have to rely on the status of any server in the chain between
your unit and Garmin. If you've used CF cards in a digital camera (or any
of the other removable media for that matter), this would be easier to
understand.
> Surely having to stock, manage and physically ship all that stuff
> costs a LOT more than setting up a good system that pushes the actual
> distribution tasks off to the end users. Online updates (at least in
> theory) ought to allow more frequent and cheaper updates. Perhaps
> it's just a question of improving on Garmin's existing system?
>
I don't see it that way. It would be *cheaper for the manufacturer* to
only have on-line updates, but the other issues are questionable. How
often do you expect to update your data? Once a year? Twice? A subscriber
system could easily supply the removable media in a timely manner, and
with "swap credits" (like the core charge for batteries), the cost could
be the same. Keep in mind that updates aren't free! ;-)
>> Battery life is the limiting factor. If you get 100 minutes (as Jay
>> indicated), that would define that your longest leg between battery
>> swaps. You probably don't want to be doing that while airborne.
>
> I'm not so sure about that. I occasionally change the batteries in my
> portable CD player in flight, and it's genetally not a really big
> deal. Of course I'd never do this in busy airspace, but I fly in the
> west and there are a lot of real big wide open spaces here where
> changing batteries in flight would be no problem.
>
I'm not saying that it *couldn't* be done. However, to do that with the
295 at least, you have to remove it from the mount (typically on the
yoke), then start your fiddling. You'll have your eyes inside the cockpit
and off of flight instruments for quite a while. If you're comfortable
with that...
>> I use my 295 wired to the cigar lighter, and with the external
>> antenna, even though I get more than 100 minutes out of a set. I
>> also carry a spare charged set of NiMH cells as a backup. The wiring
>> doesn't get in the way, even though the lighter is on the right side
>> of the cabin.
>
> I might eventually come to the same conclusion, but would like to have
> the option to at least try keeping things wireless.
>
In such a case, perhaps your best option is to prioritize getting a unit
with a battery life that exceeds the longest possible leg of your flight
(> 4 hrs. or so?).
Regards,
Neil
> In article et>,
> Neil Gould > wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> Disclaimer: I own a Garmin 295, not the AvMap. However, I have a
>> couple of suggestions for your consideration.
>
>> I don't see why swapping CF cards would be such a pain. It would be
>> a lot quicker and more reliable than Garmin's method of downloading
>> the data directly to the unit over the internet.
>
> Interesting. I've never downloaded anything from Garmin (don't own
> one - I feel like I'm the last hold-out sometimes!) so I don't know
> what makes the process slow or unreliable. I do have a very fast (and
> reliable) internet connection, so I'm used to being able to download
> things - even very large things - with no hassles. It sounds like
> Garmin has some usability issues they need to address with thier
> online update system?
>
To be clearer, I suggested that swapping CF cards would be a lot quicker
than downloading. Unplug one card, plug in the other... done. No fiddling
with settings, cables, etc. It would also be more reliable, because you
wouldn't have to rely on the status of any server in the chain between
your unit and Garmin. If you've used CF cards in a digital camera (or any
of the other removable media for that matter), this would be easier to
understand.
> Surely having to stock, manage and physically ship all that stuff
> costs a LOT more than setting up a good system that pushes the actual
> distribution tasks off to the end users. Online updates (at least in
> theory) ought to allow more frequent and cheaper updates. Perhaps
> it's just a question of improving on Garmin's existing system?
>
I don't see it that way. It would be *cheaper for the manufacturer* to
only have on-line updates, but the other issues are questionable. How
often do you expect to update your data? Once a year? Twice? A subscriber
system could easily supply the removable media in a timely manner, and
with "swap credits" (like the core charge for batteries), the cost could
be the same. Keep in mind that updates aren't free! ;-)
>> Battery life is the limiting factor. If you get 100 minutes (as Jay
>> indicated), that would define that your longest leg between battery
>> swaps. You probably don't want to be doing that while airborne.
>
> I'm not so sure about that. I occasionally change the batteries in my
> portable CD player in flight, and it's genetally not a really big
> deal. Of course I'd never do this in busy airspace, but I fly in the
> west and there are a lot of real big wide open spaces here where
> changing batteries in flight would be no problem.
>
I'm not saying that it *couldn't* be done. However, to do that with the
295 at least, you have to remove it from the mount (typically on the
yoke), then start your fiddling. You'll have your eyes inside the cockpit
and off of flight instruments for quite a while. If you're comfortable
with that...
>> I use my 295 wired to the cigar lighter, and with the external
>> antenna, even though I get more than 100 minutes out of a set. I
>> also carry a spare charged set of NiMH cells as a backup. The wiring
>> doesn't get in the way, even though the lighter is on the right side
>> of the cabin.
>
> I might eventually come to the same conclusion, but would like to have
> the option to at least try keeping things wireless.
>
In such a case, perhaps your best option is to prioritize getting a unit
with a battery life that exceeds the longest possible leg of your flight
(> 4 hrs. or so?).
Regards,
Neil