Version 2.02 or 3.2 ?

Howarduk · Posted: Fri Dec 26, 2003 3:23 am Post subject: Version 2.02 or 3.2 ?

I would like to download your excellent database onto my ipaq 2210 <PPC2003> to complement TTN ver 2.24 and would like to know which version I should be downloading? Ordinarily I would download the latest one but I have also read that ver 3.2 can cause problems. So which one would I be advised to download.

Howard

Darren · Posted: Fri Dec 26, 2003 10:08 am Post subject:

v3.02 did have some issues initially but these have since been resolved and it works well. If you don't wish to take advantage of the POI-Synch features just ignore them and it will operate much like the previous version but with an on-screen indication of camera direction as well Smile

_________________
Darren Griffin

Howarduk · Posted: Fri Dec 26, 2003 6:16 pm Post subject: version

Thanks very much for the info Darren. Much appreciated

Howard

DavidW · Posted: Fri Dec 26, 2003 7:26 pm Post subject:

Darren (or anyone!),

I'll try it myself when I get round to it - but what happens if you don't enter details for the synchronisation service and record POIs in the latest version of CheckPOInt 3? Can you still record POIs in CheckPOInt.ov2 - or does version 3 still make it essentially impossible to contribute to the PocketGPS database?

The other thing I couldn't figure out when I last tried version 3 was any way of removing the POIplace details and getting it back to the non-synchronisation mode. Has that been solved now? If not, I'll export the entire registry using Resco Registry before and after, and run a diff program over the two files - I suspect this information is in the registry somewhere.

I can experiment easily enough on my setup, as Sprite Backup allows me to get back to where I was fairly easily by hard resetting and restoring. However, before experimenting myself, I wondered if anyone had re-examined these problems that I found and posted about with earlier releases of CheckPOInt 3.

David

Darren · Posted: Fri Dec 26, 2003 7:33 pm Post subject:

David, if you choose to ignore the synch features then all remains the same, new cameras are stored in the CheckPOInt.ov2 file as before.
_________________
Darren Griffin

Howarduk · Posted: Fri Dec 26, 2003 8:40 pm Post subject:

I downloaded ver 3.2 got everything okay....I have the icon except it has a red exclamation mark on it !! I also followed the instructions as to extracting the database.
I have set general instructions to "start and stop" with TTN international settings to English and miles, however, when I go into overlay settings the folder says "Not synchronised" and when I go into "Synchronisation Settings" its looking for an email address and a validation code. and the POI database is not showing in TTN properties.

Howard

Howarduk · Posted: Fri Dec 26, 2003 9:08 pm Post subject:

Sorry guys. Panic over, remembered the golden rule whenever all else fails RTFM Smile

I hadnt synchronised or even registered on the web page. Now I have done so and everything appears to be working fine will have to go out in the next day or so to test it out.

Howard

DavidW · Posted: Fri Dec 26, 2003 9:16 pm Post subject:

DavidW · Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2003 3:21 am Post subject:

Right - having tried 3.2 I now have some answers.

Darren is right in saying that it does record POIs in CheckPOInt.ov2 if you don't enter synchronisation details. The problem is that, unlike 2.0.2, it enters nothing in the comment field, even if you enter information such as a speed limit. I have a feeling (but haven't tested) that it won't record a false POI in the CheckPOInt.ov2 file, either - I expect it to delete the POI directly instead.

These limitations make it rather harder to use for capturing information for the PocketGPS database than 2.0.2.

The synchronisation email address and authorisation code don't go in the registry - I've dumped that before and after entering the information, and run a difference checker over the two files. There were a few changes, but none related to these details. In fact, I'm rather stumped as to where they are stored. It's somewhere in RAM, as a hard reset gets rid of them.

It's not modifying the program file, as these details survive an uninstall and reinstall of CheckPOInt. I had wondered if they were put into a system database, but none of those are modified when you enter the details.

Some kind of trick is being used - possibly a file is being modified somewhere which then has its timestamp reset (as I'm not finding any files changed by the process either, at least so far as timestamps tell). The only way I'm going to find out is taking a copy of all the files in RAM before and after - which is a non-trivial undertaking. I really don't understand why there's not a facility to break the link to POIplace and go back to unsynchronised mode.

It's 2am and I'm fed up - for now, I'm going to hard reset again and restore my backup, which puts me back to CheckPOInt 2.0.2. I'll stay there for now - there are still limitations when using 3.2 with the PocketGPS database. It's a shame that these can't be solved so that everyone can move to version 3 and have the new 'arrow' feature.

David

Darren · Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2003 10:19 am Post subject:

Your observations regarding the information CheckPOInt captures are interesting. I must shamefully admit Embarassed

that I hadn't looked at it in quite so much depth and had not realised that important information (at least as far as data capture for our database) was no longer being recorded.

I had noticed that the 'FalsePOI' feature was simply stripping the record rather than marking it as a deleted POI which does make our work a lot more complicated.

Thanks for the 'heads-up' on this, I'll raise this issue with the rest of the team.
_________________
Darren Griffin

DavidW · Posted: Sat Dec 27, 2003 6:03 pm Post subject:

Darren,

Don't worry - I appreciate they're subtle issues. I found them originally when 3.0 was released; I made a detailed examination of the then new version and posted a fairly lengthy comparison between the two versions in this thread (the slightly odd formatting is because it was ported from the old forums) as I realised they were rather different in nature.

I was wondering if 3.2 had changed anything, and focussed this look at version 3.2 on compatibility with the version 2 way of working. It seems that the author has, for whatever reason, needlessly stripped code that was in CheckPOInt 2. If, in "unsynchronised" mode, it had options to treat CheckPOInt.ov2 in exactly the same way as 2.0.2 does (recording rather than removing false POIs, also entering text comments in the .ov2 about the recorded POI type), and a facility was introduced to break the link to POIplace once it was set up (I understand that POIplace integrity relies on these details being well hidden away, but it annoys me that there's no way deliberately to opt out of it once configured, even if you uninstall the software), it would be the best choice for every user.

However, I suspect that the author has decided POIplace is the way ahead, and is unlikely to make these changes. It's his right - either version is a fine product for free.

Having tried the 'arrow' feature in demo mode when I did have 3.2 installed, it's nice, but I can live without it. I'll stay with 2.0.2 for now.

David

MR_WHITE · Occasional Visitor Joined: Feb 19, 2004 Posts: 34

I think v3.2 is pretty cool I've just put it on my pocket PC and synchronised it, it's downloaded all the new camera databases including bus lane cameras and more, also I noticed that the database seems to be more up-to-date as it includes the four-speed cameras in my location which are not currently on the pocket GPS speed camera database! Also when you dock the pocket PC and synchronised it sends the new recorded overlays information up, aswell as downloading updates.
Happy

Darren · Posted: Sun Feb 22, 2004 3:26 pm Post subject:

I'm firmly back with v2.02 now. The problem with POI_Place and the like is that because there is no human input to monitor additions and deletions the accuracy of the data quickly becomes watered down. Multiple entries for the same site occur etc.

It is for this reason that we still have a human element in compiling our database and we hope this will mean that for the UK at least it is still the most accurate.
_________________
Darren Griffin

Privateer · Posted: Sun Feb 22, 2004 6:17 pm Post subject:

Hi MR White,

I agree with Darren, I tried 3.2 for a while, but I think 2.02 is the better option for me.

MR_WHITE · Occasional Visitor Joined: Feb 19, 2004 Posts: 34

Thanks guys for the reply, but I thought that the pocket GPS speed camera database worked in the same way (people reporting the sites) So would you say I would be better off going back to v2.02 with the pocket GPS database? Because like I said before I am new to all this, and any help and advice is much appreciated, would you be able to use the ov2 file from version 3.2? As I did report two new cameras when I was using v2.02 the other day, but with the file I currently got with version 3.2 it's got the four new cameras in my location.

	PocketGPS
	Web