XCSoar / LK8000

On Monday, March 11, 2013 12:33:43 PM UTC+1, Paul Remde wrote:
Hi Marco,



I find it hard to believe that the Vertica V2 is brighter than the Oudie 2

Lite. Did you compare them in bright sunlight? If so, please provide

photos for comparison.



It is my understanding that the Oudie 2 Lite is considerably faster and has

faster screen updates than the V2.



It is easy to have both SeeYou Mobile and XCSoar installed on the Oudie 2

Lite. You can select in the settings screens which program is run

automatically at startup.



Best Regards,



Paul Remde

Cumulus Soaring, Inc.

_________________________________________



"Marco" wrote in message




On Sunday, March 10, 2013 3:11:53 AM UTC+1, MNLou wrote:

I am about to make my first foray into the world of soaring software.







I will, most likely, be using a Naviter Oudie Lite hooked up to a

Cambridge 302. My focus will be cross country flight (versus contest

flying) for the foreseeable future.







I have read reviews and comments about both XCSoar and LK8000. They both

appear to be fine products with excellent functionality.







I would be interested in your comments on ease of use (both on the ground

and in the air), learning curve / ease of set up, and if one is better

suited for cross country flying.







Thanks in advance for your help!



Why not take the Vertika into account as well. In fact: I bought the Oudie

light and a friend the Vertika. Both devices are very similar but if I had

to make a new purchase the Vertika a a slight edge over the Oudie for the

following reasons:

1. Vertika platform is just a Windows platform, making it possible to

install several programs. In the Oudie case once you have choosen to install

XCSoar it is not possible to return to CU. I now have a way to run CU as

default and to run XCSoar from my SDcard but shutting down the device after

I have run XCSoar is not straightforward. I now need to reset the device,

restart in CU mode and then choose the shutdown option after pressing the

power-off button. Currently the software is not designed to accomodate

several pilots sharing one device with different types of software.

2. The Vertika is slightly brighter than the Oudie. Both are excellent

compared to the old PDAs but the Vertika has a slight edge. It might consume

more power as a consequence though. That detail I do not have.



The first reason would for me trigger the choice to Vertika; the second is

nice to have but not very important.
No pictures taken. You have to take my word for it. But both my friend (the happy Vertica owner) and myself (the quite happy Oudie owner) agreed. The sun was out but the sky was a bit hazy. The sun was still 2 hours from setting and I had both devices on a table inbetween us and the sun. But please read what I wrote: the softwareshell used in the Oudie is not very flexible when you want to alternate between both programs. The Vertica is easier to use. Yes you can make the choice as you decribe but reversing to CU mobile is less simple. This would for me be the decisive factor to buy the Vertica if there would be a need to replace my Oudie. Both screens are perfect for use in the sun, certainly when compared to the PDA I was using before.

Hi Paul,

No pictures taken. You have to take my word for it. But both my friend (the happy Vertica owner) and myself (the quite happy Oudie owner) agreed. The sun was out but the sky was a bit hazy. The sun was still 2 hours from setting and I had both devices on a table in between us and the sun. But please read what I wrote: the software shell used in the Oudie is not very flexible when you want to alternate between both programs. The Vertica is easier to use. Yes you can make the choice as you describe but reversing to CU mobile is less simple. This would for me be the decisive factor to buy the Vertica if there would be a need to replace my Oudie. Both screens are perfect for use in the sun, certainly when compared to the PDA I was using before..

Marco

No pictures taken. You may take my word for it. But both my friend (the happy Vertica owner) and myself (the quite happy Oudie owner) agreed. The sun was out but the sky was a bit hazy. Sunset was a good 2 hours away and I had both devices on a table in between us and the sun and looked at the screen from a 30 degree angle. But please read what I wrote: the software shell used in the Oudie is not very flexible when you want to alternate between both programs eg when you share your glider. The Vertica is easier to use. Yes you can make the choice as you describe but reversing to CU mobile is less simple. This would for me be the decisive factor to buy the Vertica if there would be a need to replace my Oudie. Both screens are perfect for use in the sun, certainly when compared to the PDA I was using before.The Vertica does have the edge though. For the Oudie I would rate 9.5 out of 10 which is not bad.

Marco

Op dinsdag 12 maart 2013 15:29:07 UTC+1 schreef Marco het volgende:
Hi Paul,

No pictures taken. You may take my word for it. But both my friend (the happy Vertica owner) and myself (the quite happy Oudie owner) agreed. The sun was out but the sky was a bit hazy. Sunset was a good 2 hours away and I had both devices on a table in between us and the sun and looked at the screen from a 30 degree angle. But please read what I wrote: the software shell used in the Oudie is not very flexible when you want to alternate between both programs eg when you share your glider. The Vertica is easier to use.. Yes you can make the choice as you describe but reversing to CU mobile is less simple. This would for me be the decisive factor to buy the Vertica if there would be a need to replace my Oudie. Both screens are perfect for use in the sun, certainly when compared to the PDA I was using before.The Vertica does have the edge though. For the Oudie I would rate 9.5 out of 10 which is not bad.



Marco

On Mar 11, 9:22*am, wrote:

If not, is anyone working on a "US contest" package for either program?

Please no flame wars on how stupid our rules are for using cylinders, 2 minute rules, in air task changes, etc. The rules are what they are. The question is, can this software help a pilot to deal with the rules as they are?

John Cochrane

John -

I used LK8000 as my only flight computer during the 2012 Montague
Nationals. It works fine for US contests.

There are a few fiddly bits to EVERY flight computer (LK, XCSoar, LX,
Cambridge, SYM - it doesn't matter which one you choose). But LK8000
works fine with US rules and US tasks.

If anyone has questions about how to set up LK8000 for a US contest,
feel free to contact me and I'll be glad to help! (although there
aren't any hard or "secret" settings)

Enjoy,

--Noel

I'm using LK8000 and I'm quite happy with it. At the time I compared LK8000 with XCSoar the LK8000 had huge advantages in usability (for me most important at that time the multi target feature). So I don't know whether XCS has catched up and I don't mind.

For tests with real igc files you can use also IGC Replay

Max wrote:
http://bugs.xcsoar.org/query?status=...%40g mail.com

This is exactly one ticket, one that can't be any less serious.

I feel Evans pain! I raised a ticket 4 months ago( # 2421) which appears to be a duplicate of Evans ticket #2054.

How can you consider a bug that prevents us from uploading Cambridge format turnpoint files to a Cambridge 302 not to be serious? It is VERY serious to 302 owners!

I've also been waiting 16 months for any thing to happen re ticket #1603 that requests functionality that See You has had for years, that is, the ability to set different scales on each different map page.

I really love XCSoar, and the developers have been very responsive with many tickets I have raised, but they seem to not be familiar with the needs of pilots using XCSoar for competition. But as others have said, try it!

On Wednesday, March 13, 2013 5:46:48 AM UTC+1, Bernie wrote:
How can you consider a bug that prevents us from uploading Cambridge format turnpoint files to a Cambridge 302 not to be serious? It is VERY serious to 302 owners!

Would you please explain why this is serious, or even a bug?

Yes, it may be uncomfortable that only CUP files can be selected at this one specific dialog, and we will extend it to allow all the other file formats that XCSoar understands. It's just that nobody got around to do it, because we had other requests that seemed more urgent.

My point is:

- you CAN upload waypoints to the CAI302 with XCSoar

- most other programs CAN'T (since this thread is about LK8000 vs XCSoar: no, LK8000 can't do that; XCSoar's device drivers are so much more advanced)


I've also been waiting 16 months for any thing to happen re ticket #1603 that requests functionality that See You has had for years, that is, the ability to set different scales on each different map page.

Sorry this (and other feature requests) has been sitting unattended for so long. This was difficult to do with our old code base (pre 6.5). But I have good news: I rewrote the "pages" code in XCSoar 6.5, and implementing your feature is now very easy.

Given the hundreds of feature requests, it's difficult for us to pick the right one to implement next. I thought about adding a "voting" plugin to the bug trackers to let users vote for the most important requests.

(Bug reports are always first priority, of course - since saturday, I spent the better part of every night on important bug reports, and had no time left for new features)

"Max Kellermann" wrote in message
...

- most other programs CAN'T (since this thread is about LK8000 vs XCSoar:
no, LK8000 can't do that; XCSoar's device drivers are so much more advanced)

:-)
haha

On Wednesday, March 13, 2013 4:47:04 AM UTC-4, Max Kellermann wrote:
On Wednesday, March 13, 2013 5:46:48 AM UTC+1, Bernie wrote:

How can you consider a bug that prevents us from uploading Cambridge format turnpoint files to a Cambridge 302 not to be serious? It is VERY serious to 302 owners!



Would you please explain why this is serious, or even a bug?



Yes, it may be uncomfortable that only CUP files can be selected at this one specific dialog, and we will extend it to allow all the other file formats that XCSoar understands. It's just that nobody got around to do it, because we had other requests that seemed more urgent.



My point is:



- you CAN upload waypoints to the CAI302 with XCSoar

So you fixed the transfer of waypoints to 302 using .cup files? If so, I agree that's an acceptable solution. As stated on that original ticket I tried this and it simply erased all the waypoints in the 302.

T8