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!
With the help of this forum I now am the proud owner of a C710 running Miomap version 3.2.
Couple of questions for all.
1. Is the licence suppose to be unique to each device?
2. What makes the device unique in regards to TMC?
3. I have noticed the "Subscribe TMC" button in the TMC Control Centre, what is this for? judging that Mitak don't know if Mio users should have a Trafficmaster or ITIS feed.
I have no "Subscribe TMC" button on my Jan 18 version of 3.2. I understand that the latest iGO version has this button. The plot thickens!
What date release is your 3.2 version?
I'm not sure what you mean when you ask what makes the device unique in regards to TMC.
My version must be V3.2 second edition as I have the follow button instead of hold. In V3.2 first edition I had a hold button.
Glad to hear you got it sorted - the subscribe TMC button. Now that is oddly organised for Mitac - and a bit scary too (it suggests more clearly than anything else I have ever come across that the TMC licence system is more flexible and less certain than some people have suggested).
Yes, the quantity of ITIS incident reports can be huge - I've had in excess of 20 pages.
It's worth pointing out though that there are TMC bugs in the Jan 18 version of 3.2 which have an impact on jam location, routing and re-routing.
Do you find that the direction of jam is not always clearly reported (main heading direction not matching the sub-heading direction)?
Retty,
All of the tests so far have been done in my house (getting a TMC signal). I'll be leaving work very sooon and will report my findings to the forum.
Thanks. I would really like to know what you make of it.
I think though it's really important to stress that there are routing and re-routing bugs with the Jan 18 version of 3.2 and TMC. If you encounter any of them please post here.
Also if you encounter any main heading/sub-heading flow direction conflicts I would be interested to know - the problem didn't occur with earlier versions of 3.2 (or 3.1) iirc.
The software is clearly improving though - the latest version of 3.2 is a big improvement in terms of non TMC functionality, routing and voice guidance. It's impossible to consider going back to 3.1 out of choice.
The thing I really do miss with the Mio is the ability to input hypothetical routes. Say you are at location C and you want to plan a route betwee location A and B. You can't simply do it without starting from position C (the sat lock), using position A as a via point, B as the destination, accessing the journey stats and doing some maths.
Anyway, I could be wrong (probably am) but the quality and detail of ITIS information seems to have improved in the past week or so. On balance and if I had the choice I would probably prefer Trafficmaster but I'm being won over (the Eddie Stobard example almost clinched the deal).
Joined: Jan 04, 2007 Posts: 2789 Location: Hampshire, UK
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2007 9:39 pm Post subject:
Yes, you can do hypothetical routes IF you've lost the satellite connection...
...put point A in first then point B and then 'route to' and the unit navigates from point A to point B whilst you're still at point C.
Other than this, I don't know of any system that allows hypothetical routes because it will always try to navigate from your current position...all systems that I've come across in the past 10 or so years behave in the same way, assuming that you want to navigate from your current position.
The problem is that when GPS first came into the public domain, we were MORE than happy just to be guided to our destination.
However, now for a fraction of the cost, we expectour systems to:
guide us to our destination
warn of speed (oooops 'safety') camera locations
route around traffic jams
...and then make the coffee when we reach our destination
Additionally, we just re-bout our computers when Windows crashes because "that's what Windows does" but then make a fuss when our GPS crashes - even though it's running on Windows CE.
Unfortunately, we have to learn to draw the line somewhere
Yes, you can do hypothetical routes IF you've lost the satellite connection...
...put point A in first then point B and then 'route to' and the unit navigates from point A to point B whilst you're still at point C.
Other than this, I don't know of any system that allows hypothetical routes because it will always try to navigate from your current position...all systems that I've come across in the past 10 or so years behave in the same way, assuming that you want to navigate from your current position.
The problem is that when GPS first came into the public domain, we were MORE than happy just to be guided to our destination.
However, now for a fraction of the cost, we expectour systems to:
guide us to our destination
warn of speed (oooops 'safety') camera locations
route around traffic jams
...and then make the coffee when we reach our destination
Additionally, we just re-bout our computers when Windows crashes because "that's what Windows does" but then make a fuss when our GPS crashes - even though it's running on Windows CE.
Unfortunately, we have to learn to draw the line somewhere
Retty & GPS fan
Hypo routes can be achieved in 2 ways.
The first is the way that GPS fan explained (basically going into map mode and pointing at point A click START then pointing to point B then click ROUTE TO.
The second way is to go into the route tools menu (Press Menu then the 3rd icon which looks like a road) click EDIT, delete what is there by pressing the "X" at the bottom, Press "+" browse as you would to find a road then "+" again to create either waypoints or destination, then click the back arrow and hey presto a route is formed.
(you may have to delete your last or current gps fix between the after the 1st entry) _________________ Regards
Dave J
Yes, you can do hypothetical routes IF you've lost the satellite connection...
...put point A in first then point B and then 'route to' and the unit navigates from point A to point B whilst you're still at point C.
Other than this, I don't know of any system that allows hypothetical routes because it will always try to navigate from your current position...all systems that I've come across in the past 10 or so years behave in the same way, assuming that you want to navigate from your current position.
The problem is that when GPS first came into the public domain, we were MORE than happy just to be guided to our destination.
However, now for a fraction of the cost, we expectour systems to:
guide us to our destination
warn of speed (oooops 'safety') camera locations
route around traffic jams
...and then make the coffee when we reach our destination
Additionally, we just re-bout our computers when Windows crashes because "that's what Windows does" but then make a fuss when our GPS crashes - even though it's running on Windows CE.
Unfortunately, we have to learn to draw the line somewhere
Retty & GPS fan
Hypo routes can be achieved in 2 ways.
The first is the way that GPS fan explained (basically going into map mode and pointing at point A click START then pointing to point B then click ROUTE TO.
The second way is to go into the route tools menu (Press Menu then the 3rd icon which looks like a road) click EDIT, delete what is there by pressing the "X" at the bottom, Press "+" browse as you would to find a road then "+" again to create either waypoints or destination, then click the back arrow and hey presto a route is formed.
(you may have to delete your last or current gps fix between the after the 1st entry)
Yes, but you can only do hypothetical routing if you have no gps fix. If you do then the Mio will automatically insert your current gps position as point A even if you've already removed your current gps position from the routing list.
Does any dedicated satnav unit have an option to turn off gps fix? The only similar thing I can think of is "flight mode" on some (but very few) mobile phones.
On Garmin models you can turn the GPS off. On the i3 and C5xx models its in the menu, on the Nuvi just fold the antenna down. _________________ Samsung Mega
Tomtom 500
Joined: Jan 04, 2007 Posts: 2789 Location: Hampshire, UK
Posted: Mon Mar 05, 2007 9:10 am Post subject:
I'm confused
The other day, I reported that my Mio tried to route me through several miles of 'stationary traffic' on the M3 instead of re-routing me along the A30.
Today, however, I WAS re-routed along the A30 around 2 miles of "Queueing traffic".
There are obviously different algorithms for different traffic conditions, but I would have thought stationary traffic should be more likely to result in a re-route than queueing traffic.
Luckily, I use radio traffic bulletins as a backup to the TMC and this usually works well
The problem of TMC information describing conflicting traffic flow in the main heading/sub-heading continues. It's bloody annoying and it renders sensible assessment of delay almost impossible. Is it London to Basingstoke or Basingstoke to London?
A recent trip to the continent allowed me to see that the same problem doesn't seem to impact TMC there.
I wonder if this is a valid suggested explanation for the problem: part of the TMC message (either the sub-heading or the main heading) is created by the Mio's own processing; is the Mio assuming continental (right road) driving and thus incorrectly calculating the direction of traffic flow (north to south rather than south to north)?
The only problem with this explanation is that despite being able to observe traffic flow conflicts in the main heading/sub-heading I have been unable to identify the actual traffic problem. Using the "show" jam function it seems that the main heading is correct and that the sub-heading is wrong (in terms of traffic flow but not perhaps location of the jam).
I think this is the most likely explanation given that the problem does not seem to be inherent to the TMC broadcast itself - it wasn't present in the earlier version(s) of 3.2. Having said that the Mio wasn't using ITIS then so it's difficult to be sure.
But a bug of some sort it certainly is - and a pretty big one at that.
Joined: Jan 04, 2007 Posts: 2789 Location: Hampshire, UK
Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2007 9:08 am Post subject:
The Mio has now successfully re-routed me around traffic on the M3 several times.
In TMC, the sub-heading was J4 Frinley-J2 M25 Interchange
2 miles of slow traffic
The Mio took me off the M3 at J5 (Hook) and re-routed me along the A30 to the M25.
Subsequent radio traffic bulletins said slow traffic from Fleet Services (between J5 & J4A) to the M25 (J2), so on the face of it, the Mio successfully re-routed above and beyond the information displayed and I avoided any hint of traffic on the M3.
Yes, as the thread says reception is a big problem. I've given up trying to get reception in my home town despite the fact I can easily receive Classic FM via radio antenna.
But as I've said previously no amount of emphasis on reception is going to wish away the fact that Mio TMC direction reporting is bugged following the November 3.2 update ;-)
Joined: Jan 04, 2007 Posts: 2789 Location: Hampshire, UK
Posted: Tue Mar 27, 2007 9:02 am Post subject:
Yes, the data could be reported better.
Yes, the speed limits could be corrected.
Yes, the maps could be improved.
It could also be argued that we should be driving with the map displayed, rather than straining to read the small print of the traffic info.
I'm convinced that part of the problem lies with the TMC data from its source and the Mio/TT/ANOther simpy displays the data received. For example, if somebody asked you where Fleet Services is you would probably say "M3 between junctions 4A and 5" because it could be argued this is the logical way, yet you're expecting your GPS to be more specific.
...but we have to live with what we have and, for the money, Mio products take some beating.
As demonstrated in the TMC forum, Mio are by no means alone with TMC reception problems.
Not too long ago, we would have been happy for GPS just to guide us to our destination but now we're almost expecting it to drive the car and make the coffee
I would be very, very interested to know if upgrading to the latest version of 3.2 (Jan 2007) does alter *your* data feed to ITIS (it does for mine with an older rom version). For what it's worth I have a strong suspicion that your firmware version will also determine the data feed provider and that you will stick with Trafficmaster but I can't cite any evidence for this gut feeling (other than some chatter on a French site regarding French premium TMC support and rom versions).
Just for the record I upgraded C710 ROM ver R31F.3.123.1004 and this latest ROM did not make any difference - TMC transferred to Classic FM
However, I received 19 pages of Info compared to Trafficmanager 12 pages. Perhaps more importantly 50 of the ITIS incidents were within 50 mile radious, compared to 5 from TM.
I am happy with that.
Do you know where ROM R35F.3.111.928 fits in the Mio numbering system. This is from a C510 which I am thinking of changing to. Advantage is the 2.5mm jack plug from my car aerial splitter fits straight into the separate aerial cable for the C510. Just one lead provides power and TMC - lead comes up behind the steering wheel and a couple of bits of velcro hold the GPS inside the dashboard. Five seconds puts it in place and removes it.
I think at last I have a system that does not look like a Christmas tree and actually works (well some of the time).
I've invited both TrafficMaster and iTIS to take part in the PGPSW forum.
I'm not holding my breath, but we'll see if anything happens.
As we know the downloadable software determins which service is used, we should ask for software which can use whichever service is available in the area (or selected by user). Someone reported he had this on his Garmin 360 before he applied the latest upgrade (if it isnt broke dont fix it).
It should fill a lot of the gaps if both systems could be used. Pie in the sky to expect them to cooperate - but if the alternative might be for the government to give the job to someone else (BBC?) - Green issue saving petrol etc. - they might get their act together.
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
