CoPilot 5 database deficiencies

PONDEROUS · Posted: Mon May 30, 2005 11:41 pm Post subject: CoPilot 5 database deficiencies

There are serious problems with the Copilot 5 database search facility. The following example illustrates the point.

I want to go to Coniston Grove, Middlesbrough, England, so I follow the usual procedure, as follows:

Smile

In 1st screen confirm Country as UK: CP 5 accepts;
Smile

In 2nd screen enter Middlesbrough as City: CP 5 accepts;
Smile

In 3rd screen enter Coniston Grove as street: CP 5 accepts;
Crying or Very sad

In 4th screen, CP 5 shows “None” for street in Middlesbrough itself and for Nearby Cities.

Coniston Grove is in LINTHORPE, which has for 70 or 80 years been part of the Middlesbrough conurbation. If one enters Linthorpe as the city, then CP 5 finds it. However most people giving the address give it as Middlesbrough. If the user does not know the former village name, then it will be impossible to find the street.

Clearly, as CP 5 does not have this address listed under Middlesbrough, it should locate it under “Nearby cities”.

This has happened to me with dozens of addresses in Middlesbrough, Leicester and Loughborough. I have not tested it with other towns, although of course ALK will be able to do so since their product has a “Planning” mode.

It is a major fault that has caused me significant inconvenience and time-wasting. I have not reported it before largely because I have been waiting to check whether a faulty SD card might be the culprit. I am now satisfied that it is not an SD card problem.

Could ALK please post the solution or proposed course of action on this thread.

lbendlin · Posted: Mon May 30, 2005 11:59 pm Post subject:

ALK use NavTEQ maps. While it makes sense to report this to ALK you will also want to report this to NavTEQ directly. The link is in my signature.
_________________
Lutz

Report Map Errors here:
TomTom/TeleAtlas NAVTEQ

Tim Buxton · Posted: Tue May 31, 2005 6:26 am Post subject:

Just to give the other side of the coin, Garmin Mapsource CitySelect V7 (NAVTEQ data), using Garmin Que, finds the road under Middlesbrough but not under Linthorpe.

Of course, the vastly superior ( :D ) Navman SmartST finds this road whether you put Middlesbrough or Linthorpe in.
_________________
Tim

PONDEROUS · Posted: Tue May 31, 2005 6:47 am Post subject:

Thanks, Tim Buxton. I am sure you appreciate that finding it under Middlesbrough would be fine, and that Linthorpe is not a satisactory alternative when it does not show up in Nearby cities and it is part oif Middlesbrough these days.

PONDEROUS · Posted: Tue May 31, 2005 7:24 am Post subject:

Further to my reply to Tim Buxton, I should say that the application must find the Middleborough address rather the former village address as users will otherwise be stuck with having to flag down local people or buying paper maps to find out where they are. I presently get over it by searching for the address in Pocket Streets.

Sorry, Lutz, I didn't notice that you had also replied. I won't contact Navteq, however, as the product is the responsibility of ALK and the fault may or may not be relevant to Navteq - and perhaps it is not given Tim Buxton's observations about Navman.

Tim Buxton · Posted: Tue May 31, 2005 10:40 am Post subject:

PONDEROUS · Posted: Tue May 31, 2005 11:12 am Post subject:

Thanks again, Tim Buxton.

Just to clarify it, then: what I was trying to get across was that "Linthorpe" does not usually appear in the address at all; i.e. the address is Coniston Grove, Middlesborough except to those with local knowledge. Therefore, that is how it needs to be treated by a GPS navigator. To be able to find it under Linthorpe would be a nice bonus, but not a satisfactory alternative.

It is worth stating again that this is only one example. In fact where similar has occurred in other parts of the country, I have not necessarily been able to discover what the equivalent of Linthorpe is - if there is one at all. As I say, without Pocket Streets running alongside, I would simply have to go out and get a paper map.

Tim Buxton · Posted: Tue May 31, 2005 11:25 am Post subject:

PONDEROUS · Posted: Tue May 31, 2005 2:02 pm Post subject:

Sorry, Tim. I completely overlooked that line:

clivers · Posted: Tue May 31, 2005 5:24 pm Post subject:

I tell you what PONDEROUS.
why dont you take a leaf out of my book. save yourself the stress and a heartattack and just uninstall it like i did. and just use tomtom instead. i know the maps are a bit dodgy. but it works.

I know it cost me a small fortune. but like they say, i only get ripped off once.
_________________
Ipaq 3970, Ipaq 2210 X2, Smart ST V1, Tomtom V3+V5, CoPilot V5, AA Navigator, Tomtom Bluetooth GPS, Navman 3450i Jacket, Navman Bluetooth GPS, Holux GM270, Fortuna GPS-PocketXtrack
, Tomtom GO V5 Classic, Road Angel Classic.

GrimBeard · Posted: Tue May 31, 2005 9:04 pm Post subject:

What's the difference between dodgy maps in TomTom and the dodgy bits in CP5. I may be:

1. Too young
2. Too naieve (no speller sorry!!)
3. Too easily pleaesd

I use CP5 (.48v) and i think it's rather good

GB

Skippy · Posted: Tue May 31, 2005 9:52 pm Post subject:

PONDEROUS · Posted: Thu Jun 02, 2005 9:52 pm Post subject:

Just to update the situation on the database search inadequacies. I tried addresses in Birmingham, Nottingham, Wolverhampton then decided that was enough: the only reasonable conclusion is that this is a general problem in conurbations.

You may think it's rather good, Grimbeard, and that's up to you. However, it does not seem to be relevant to the fault that I have described - unless you are suggesting that the failt does not exist.

PONDEROUS · Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2005 8:27 am Post subject:

So far, I have received no response from Dave or ALK concerning this fault. I appreciate that it is early days as far as this particular fault report is concerned.

However, in case it has anything to do with the email address I used, I should say that the email address that Dave specified in his thread, Announcement: CoPilot Live Bug Reporting, appears unusual and unusable. It is:

daveburrows_~@at~@_gmail.com

Because it would not work, I used Daveburrows[remove]@[remove]gmail.com.

xda · Posted: Fri Jun 03, 2005 1:45 pm Post subject:

Just take out the _ ~ at and one of the @
_________________
Graham.
TT Go720, App:9.510(1234792.1) OS:842337
GPS: V1.20, Boot: 5.5279, Home: V2.9.5.3093
Map: Europe V910.4892
Map: Europe_Truck V870.3421, Kingston 8GB SD
Nokia 925 Windows 8

	PocketGPS
	Web