View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
lbendlin Pocket GPS Staff
Joined: 02/11/2002 22:41:59 Posts: 11878 Location: Massachusetts, USA
|
Posted: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:29 pm Post subject: WorldTracker GPRS Review comments |
|
|
After our review of the WorldTracker Data Logger and the WorldTracker SMS we are now looking at the next generation device - the WorldTracker GPRS. Special thanks to Gilbert Walz of Security Concepts for again providing the review unit.
As I said in the first reviews those devices are slightly outside of our "Mobile Navigation" comfort zone, and are not something you come across every day. But GPS tracking is en vogue, and you may want to know how the high end devices perform.
Read the review here:
http://www.pocketgpsworld.com/worldtrackergprs.php _________________ Lutz
Report Map Errors here:
TomTom/TeleAtlas NAVTEQ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
uffe73 Frequent Visitor
Joined: Jul 23, 2004 Posts: 521 Location: Sweden
|
Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 7:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting review! However I would be even more interested in a review of the GPS-logger GL-50-S & GL-50-BT from San Jose Navigation Inc. It appears to be the follower to the WorldTracker Data Logger (released and reviewed here last year). With that device I can create a GPS log while out jogging or cycling and upload it to my desktop computer back home.
Regards,
Ulf |
|
Back to top |
|
|
lbendlin Pocket GPS Staff
Joined: 02/11/2002 22:41:59 Posts: 11878 Location: Massachusetts, USA
|
Posted: Tue Dec 05, 2006 9:20 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Ulf, you need to differentiate between trackers and loggers. For logging there are much better alternatives to Sanav, for example the recently reviewed Wintec WBT-100 _________________ Lutz
Report Map Errors here:
TomTom/TeleAtlas NAVTEQ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
uffe73 Frequent Visitor
Joined: Jul 23, 2004 Posts: 521 Location: Sweden
|
Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 9:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
lbendlin wrote: | Ulf, you need to differentiate between trackers and loggers. For logging there are much better alternatives to Sanav, for example the recently reviewed Wintec WBT-100 |
Thanks for the advice. The WBT-100 unit does indeed look like a good alternative. The only downside would be that it's not using the Sirf III chipset, which could affect the sensitivity. But if the price of the unit is competitive and the reception is acceptable I could probably live with that. The crucial thing for me is to be able to get good reception from inside a backpack.
/Ulf |
|
Back to top |
|
|
lbendlin Pocket GPS Staff
Joined: 02/11/2002 22:41:59 Posts: 11878 Location: Massachusetts, USA
|
Posted: Wed Dec 06, 2006 3:08 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The WBT-100 is only marginally inferior to the SiRF-IIIs - It performs fine from within a backpack. _________________ Lutz
Report Map Errors here:
TomTom/TeleAtlas NAVTEQ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
SpeedCam Frequent Visitor
Joined: Mar 18, 2004 Posts: 753 Location: Biggleswade, BEDS
|
Posted: Fri Dec 08, 2006 8:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
:D Thanks for the review, if the cost could be reduced this is an ideal security deivce for caravans. Here in the UK caravan theft is a big issue, but there are challenges with powering tracking devices from a 12V battery whilst they are in storage.
If I've understood the product correctly, I could connect this to the 12V battery, and hide the unit away, no current would be used. Only if the caravan is moved, the motion detector would kick in and the device start to transmit its position. The police could then be informed of the caravans position.
Great idea, |
|
Back to top |
|
|
lbendlin Pocket GPS Staff
Joined: 02/11/2002 22:41:59 Posts: 11878 Location: Massachusetts, USA
|
Posted: Sat Dec 09, 2006 12:21 am Post subject: |
|
|
Speedcam,
there is a lot of "functionality by obscurity" involved. Thieves will have no problem to cover the receiver with a tinfoil hat, or remove it altogether. The receiver would need to be wired somewhere inside the (plastic) frame of the caravan, completely out of sight. If your caravan is transported away in a 40 foot container then that won't help either...
These tracking devices are only good if there is consent, or an unsuspecing target. _________________ Lutz
Report Map Errors here:
TomTom/TeleAtlas NAVTEQ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
davidm_uk Occasional Visitor
Joined: Mar 18, 2006 Posts: 4
|
Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 12:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
Interesting device, and good review...
One point that concerns me slightly is that the tracking website doesn't have any password protection. I don't know who has this review device now, but you can see where they are by typing the account number visible in your review into the web form at the URL visible in your review!
With 6 digit account numbers, it probably wouldn't take long to find other trackers too...
I suppose knowing where somebody else's tracker is doesn't really matter, as you don't know who they are... but it just feels wrong, somehow. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
lbendlin Pocket GPS Staff
Joined: 02/11/2002 22:41:59 Posts: 11878 Location: Massachusetts, USA
|
Posted: Tue Jan 09, 2007 3:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Fair point. The review unit gets handed down quite a bit, and the tracking is nothing we need to hide. The ID is not limited to six digits though - you can assign any random ID to the device.
Have just talked to TrackingTheWeb.com and they are preparing a number of new packages with higher security and even customer hosted versions. More details to follow when we return from CES. _________________ Lutz
Report Map Errors here:
TomTom/TeleAtlas NAVTEQ |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
Posted: Today Post subject: Pocket GPS Advertising |
|
|
We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
Have you considered making a donation towards website running costs?. Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|