| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
matthewj
Frequent Visitor
Joined: Apr 03, 2006
Posts: 751
|
 Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 10:38 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Andy_P wrote: | But if it is JUST cellular bandwidth at stake, that doesn't explain the often-reported complete download and then throwing way half the info.
I suspect a lack of processing power and/or available RAM on the unit itself is also a factor here. |
If the devices can't handle it, how come they can handle it? (IYSWIM)
The range used to be very large, and has been reduced. It wasn't because people were complaining that their devices were slow, it was because of the volume of data that the system had to send out. Data comms cap is the only explanation that stands up, and the only one out of TomTom's direct control. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Andy_P
Pocket GPS Moderator
Joined: Jun 04, 2005
Posts: 19991
Location: West and Southwest London
|
| Posted: Fri Jan 25, 2013 12:21 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| matthewj wrote: | | Data comms cap is the only explanation that stands up... |
To steal your phrase, if the data limits can't handle it, how come they can handle it? (IYSWIM)
We've already established that the entire set of traffic data DOES get downloaded initially.
| matthewj wrote: | | ...and the only one out of TomTom's direct control. |
It's perfectly within TomTom's control... they just don't want to pay for it.
_________________
"Settling in nicely" ;-) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
matthewj
Frequent Visitor
Joined: Apr 03, 2006
Posts: 751
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 2:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
When the system gets busy, they reduce the range each device requests updates for. If they could handle it, then why would they reduce it?
And yes, I quite agree that they could renegotiate the comms contract, but for whatever reason they don't. I suspect that it is that we the users don't want to pay. Me, I'd like a two tier system. Pay a little, get local area. Pay a lot, get the country. Hard to do of course, as it would probably need a different SIM or something. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andy_P
Pocket GPS Moderator
Joined: Jun 04, 2005
Posts: 19991
Location: West and Southwest London
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 4:50 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| matthewj wrote: | | When the system gets busy, they reduce the range each device requests updates for. If they could handle it, then why would they reduce it? |
That's the big mystery...
The one thing we seem to know is that data is ALWAYS downloaded for a wider area, but then some of it is ALWAYS thrown away.
So it seems it isn't necessarily requesting a different amount when the system gets busy
_________________
"Settling in nicely" ;-) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
matthewj
Frequent Visitor
Joined: Apr 03, 2006
Posts: 751
|
| Posted: Mon Jan 28, 2013 5:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree it is a mystery, but there can be no doubt that it has to be reducing the updates after the initial, otherwise they wouldn't be doing it.
Threads here and on the TomTom forum have digged much deeper into the technical options (as you probably know). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andy_P
Pocket GPS Moderator
Joined: Jun 04, 2005
Posts: 19991
Location: West and Southwest London
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 2:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| matthewj wrote: | | I agree it is a mystery, but there can be no doubt that it has to be reducing the updates after the initial, otherwise they wouldn't be doing it. |
Ah, I get your point now!
So you're suggesting that the FIRST download may be of the full data, then it gets "massaged" on the machine by distance, and after that SUBSEQUENT downloads/updates can made be smaller.
That makes a lot of sense. 
_________________
"Settling in nicely" ;-) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
matthewj
Frequent Visitor
Joined: Apr 03, 2006
Posts: 751
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:05 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Indeed - how they can do those update requests efficiently in such a manner is not clear, but then maybe that's part of the problem! It wouldn't be the first time someone implements a process in a particular manner, then it turns out to be a poor choice, but by then it is too late and you are onto something else. I'm sure we've never felt TomTom have focused on the shiny rather than fixing things that are broken. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Andy_P
Pocket GPS Moderator
Joined: Jun 04, 2005
Posts: 19991
Location: West and Southwest London
|
| Posted: Tue Jan 29, 2013 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| matthewj wrote: | | I'm sure we've never felt TomTom have focused on the shiny rather than fixing things that are broken. |
{cough, splutter} Coffee all over monitor now! 
_________________
"Settling in nicely" ;-) |
|
| 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 |
|
|
|
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in for private messages
Log in
