Hi! We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
But as we’re losing ad-revenue from this then why not make 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!
Mmm a few problems with what you say here mate mind...
kichu1979 wrote:
step 4 means login using TomTom HOME
There is no problem with having the same device assigned to two different account. Neither TomTom nor any software has any problems with that. It unly uses and remembers the last account that was used to login via tomtom home.
Not my experience of it at all - when adding all our local delivery drop POI's to my mate's ONE a few months back, I could not use his device on my PC, becasue it told me the device ID was already registered to an existing TomTom User account, and would not let me add it again to another.
So my experience is totally the opposite of what you say, nor would I understand why the same device could be allowed to work on two accounts. But certainly, this is not what I EXPERIENCED mate.
kichu1979 wrote:
Generally speaking, the whole different account workaround will allow you to upgrade your maps to 8.05 via LMG and after logging back to the original account using your subscribed plus servies.
What you need to sort out with tomtom manually would be the old maps you have on your old account.
Again, not my experience - because in the day I had my first 720 exchanged for a replacement, and wanted to use LMG, but had to wait for a Device ID Assignment, I asked them, "Could I not just add the Device ID to a NEW TomTom Account, download the map, and then at a later date, and in due time, have TomTom assign the Device ID back over to my existing account...?"
And the unequivocal reply was that I "Must never do this in ANY circumstances, as the second I register a device ID with a NEW TomTom Account, I remove any ability for them to then later have it assigned to an existing account. So please do not do that, or even TT won't be able to help you".
Now, how true or not this is, I have no idea, and I am only too aware that TT Support can be hit and miss in terms of what one person says, to the other.
But the noteworthy thing here was that they could not stress enough, that of all the options, this is the one I must NEVER take, if ever I want to see a new device assigned to my existing account at any point.
And again, this would sound like the sensible procedure too here.
kichu1979 wrote:
By doing as described above you will at least have the 8.05 maps up and running without the need to contact TomTom.
shadamehr wrote:
Alternatively, if you mean log in to TomTom Home on the PC, with the OLD account credentials, all well and good. Except it will then NOT allow or recognise the new device, which is not assigned to that account.
kichu1979 wrote:
Yes, I exactly mean that.
The whole procedure was done by a guy on yournav.com forum and he had almost the same situation as yours (TomTom manually changed device code, maps not activated, plus services running on the account), he did what I tell you to do and he both upgraded the maps and was able to use the plus services registered with old account.
Again, I worry about this one too, as ANOTHER thing introduced here causes me doubt - that I thought all this was matterless anyway, and just for future reference only, if it IS even possible, as it's too late for me, as TomTom have now already manually assigned my Device ID to my existing account.
But what is being stated here, is that even after a Manual Device ID assignment HAD been COMPLETED for this guy, he was then somehow still able to then go and add a Device ID already in use, to ANOTHER TomTom Account (as your first point above indicates too).
I find that bit strange, and supposedly impossible.
kichu1979 wrote:
What was suggested to do for him were switching to the new account after the plus service expires.
Finally, can I close by saying, that I worry this reads like I am attacking you. But if so, on the contrary, you have been most helpful, and have repeatedly came back to this thread to answer my points, and gave up lots of your time doing so.
So I am in fact extremely grateful to you, if it does not come across clear enough.
I just find everything that has been said, to be very doubtful, totally contrary to how it should work, and in particular, totally the opposite of what TomTom have told me, and moreover, in one case of what you allude to, completely contrary to my own experience.
Which all makes me even more adamant that TomTom manage their Piracy Issues in a really terrible way for the legitimate customer.
First I think, a thank you, to kichu, as he's the one who's been giving me advice all along here, and in another forum.
OK, my results...
Firstly I emptied the current contents of my device map folder just in case.
I then created a new TomTom user Account at the TT website...
I logged in to this new account in TomTom HOME.
I then connected my device.
Sure enough, as Kichu said, and I would have sworn NOT POSSIBLE based on past experiences, yet as he stated, it asked me if I wanted to add the Currently Connected Device, to my new TomTom HOME user account, and allowed me to do so fine.
Erm, wow, no idea how or why it does this, but it DID!
So having let me add it, I then ran Latest Map Guarantee, and it found and downloaded v805 Map for me.
And this time it WORKED, with the correct, new Activation Code, based on correct serial number, thanks to the new TomTom User Account.
RESULT so far.
Better yet however, it then let me Log In to TomTom HOME using my ORIGINAL user account, and happily connect the device under THAT login anyway.
Wow again - weird, but wow!
I was then able to copy over my POI and speed cam files, and my mapsettings.cfg file, from my prior PC backup (no other data however, so as not to clash with new map code or files).
I then ran "Update my device" in TT HOME
And got a PROBLEM...
An error message about it not being able to find some map .tco file or similar, on my PC itself, for the correct map.
Oh dear.
But clicking the BACK button in Home, actually IGNORED this error so to speak, and brought up the screen offering me a batch of MapShare corrections anyway, which it duly let me install.
So just to be on the safe side, I then Disconnected my device using the correct procedure in the TT Home menu, and then shut down TT Home.
I removed device from dock, switched it on, then did a reset once running, just to be on the safe side, as I say.
I then connected it to my dock, and ran TomTom Home, logged in as my ORIGINAL User Account, just like I want to, and this time it reported no MapShare Updates, but I did NOT see the error message this time.
So as it stands, it seems that despite my wildest possible expectations, flying in the face of common wisdom and TomTom say so, and owing a large does of thanks and apology to kichu, I have managed to achieve the unexpected and have exactly what I want.
A new 730, with latest map working, on my original account now, and up to date.
Crazy, but true, fingers crossed.
Thanks again mate!
It's also worth saying that such a set of possibilities, makes an utter mockery of the TomTom Anti-piracy measure that causes so much hassle, utterly a waste of time it now seems, having to get a Manual Device ID Assignment - as if it's not bad enough having to go through all the hassle they insist, to do so when it can be so readily circumvented (for legitimate customers), is a diabolical disgrace and then some!
Oh, and by some weird quirk, though I'm certainly not complaining, somehow, despite this being a newer map, about 95% of my previous personal map corrections are already registered and working on it.
I thought this wasn't possible or supposed to happen.
But I genuinely see them being MINE, not "other user" ones, as they are unique to me, and weren't on my device at v800 until "I" updated them two days ago, so strange to think they are all done on v805 by other people were that to be the suggested answer - especially as some are not strictly correct, but ARE the way I see things as being, so unlikely other users would have submitted them, and why I never said yes to them being a permanent change.
So somehow, because the folder NAMES are identical, MapShare corrections seem to have survived a map update now, whereas before we were given to believe they were map version and type, dependant.
All very interesting!
(but too tired to take in all the ramifications now!)
What the...?
Someone up later than I?
Not a wonder your confused by it all at such an hour Andy.
Suffice to say, if anyone is likely to be interested by this, I thought it would be you.
The workaraound alone, is interesting food for thought, what you CAN actually get away with, Device ID and Accounts wise with TT.
But in terms of my MapShares, Andy, I am utterly confused.
Because the more and more and more I look, nearly ALL the corrections I usually make, are already ON my new map.
Corrections that have never ever before, been seen when using "share other peoples" as they are local, minor correction, on a pedantic level, that I tend to make to suit me.
Yet in hindsight to my post just above, I don't even understand HOW they are there at all, because all I have copied over to the Map Folder, are my POI files, ogg files, ov2 files of my own, and the mapsettings.cfg file.
I thought MapShares were stored in a different file, which I have not copied over.
So if true, it's as if it's getting the MapShare corrections, for my v805 map, from the SERVER side.
Nothing wrong with that, in a normal sense, but these are MY own corrections, that I would SWEAR have NOT been made by other people, and submitted/created by me, on a v800 map, never having had a v805 map 'til now.
Now that, that is weird.
If not, I have no idea how all my work is already done for me, on this new map though.
So whatever it is, something weird, but GOOD has happened.
Shademehr, can we please try and be briefer in our posts please
I'll endeavour to mate, sorry.
But being fair, the subject at hand was a Process of steps.
So not really too much I could strip out of the Explanation post, or else it would have made no sense.
The follow up post about MapShares might have been shorter though - got me there for sure .
But honestly mate, as long as it was, the Workaround post, if shortened, would have made no sense to people, who might also consider the same solution.
Sometimes, certain posts are like that. The choice then is either post a long one, or don't post at all, and risk certain people not seeing a useful workaround.
Me hears though, and ends there before THIS is a long one too.
Joined: 11/07/2002 14:36:40 Posts: 23848 Location: Hampshire, UK
Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 12:34 pm Post subject:
Even your reply above is long! I'm not asking to be bloody minded, your posts often have useful info but its lost in the extraneous stuff and briefer posts will help all of us including you. Shorter, more to the point posts ensure we all read the important content and can contribute!
The above could have been:
Quote:
I'll endeavour to, sorry. The subject at hand was a Process of steps so not much I could strip out of the Explanation post or it would have made no sense.
The follow up post about MapShares might have been shorter though.
Nothing lost and the same answer conveyed. You have a particular conversational writing style, very natural but its out of place in a forum. Here it should be short punchy and too the point, nowt wrong with humour in the mix but flowery and extraneous stuff isn't needed. Now I'm off for lunch before I risk committing the same crime _________________ Darren Griffin
Even your reply above is long! I'm not asking to be bloody minded, your posts often have useful info but its lost in the extraneous stuff and briefer posts will help all of us including you. Shorter, more to the point posts ensure we all read the important content and can contribute!
The above could have been:
Quote:
I'll endeavour to, sorry. The subject at hand was a Process of steps so not much I could strip out of the Explanation post or it would have made no sense.
The follow up post about MapShares might have been shorter though.
Nothing lost and the same answer conveyed. You have a particular conversational writing style, very natural but its out of place in a forum. Here it should be short punchy and too the point, nowt wrong with humour in the mix but flowery and extraneous stuff isn't needed. Now I'm off for lunch before I risk committing the same crime
My post was a mere nine lines, and then only for spacing, it could easily have been just five joined together lines. And a mere 125 words. If 125 words in a post is excessive, my point about taking things too far is valid. My earlier posts were MASSIVE and rightly do you point them out.
But 125 words is over much? Of course we can strip them down to base level - but that's the POLICEMAN in you mate - they become a statement, not a Forum Post then ** Especially as, your own reply now, counting JUST YOUR WORDS IN IT, not mine, is:
117 words. Erm, the same size as my too long post. When yours could easily have read:
"I’m not saying this to be awkward, but even your reply was long. Your posts are welcomed, but relevant stuff oft gets lost in their length.
You could have said: (snipped my quote out)
The same message gets across, but the post is much shorter. Your own style is natural, but not suited for forum posts. Punchy is better, and humour is fine, but try and avoid unneeded wording. Right off to lunch before mine’s just as bad."
A mere 74 words, HALF the size, but conveying it all, and losing nothing.
The point here is that we can ALL pick apart posts and say they can be shortened D mate. Doing it on my long waffle ones was fine- really it was, I agree with you. Trying to do it for a 125 word post, when your own reply was 117 and could have been a mere 74, just strikes as pedantiscism gone mad.
I had already said "sorry, yes, and I will try". In truth, zero reply was thus needed. But certainly not a 117 word one, complaining about my 125 word one being long, when your own could easily be picked apart down to just 74 words. And with that, this HAS been a long reply, so I'll leave it there, apologise for past indiscretions, and endeavour to give short, punchy replies, like you say. CLEARLY however, short and punchy is not easy, where quoting and pasting is involved too mind.
Joined: 11/07/2002 14:36:40 Posts: 23848 Location: Hampshire, UK
Posted: Wed Jun 04, 2008 1:41 pm Post subject:
Ok, I'm going to suggest we leave it there for now. If you can be seen to try then that's a good enough start for me. But I will still keep nagging until you get the message if I don't detect change _________________ Darren Griffin
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!
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!
Hi! We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
But as we’re losing ad-revenue from this then why not make 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!
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in for private messages
Log in
.
* Especially as, your own reply now, counting JUST YOUR WORDS IN IT, not mine, is:
