Auto navigation systems have improved a great deal since they were invented by the US military in the Sixties and Seventies. In fact, their development is a continuous process, as you can easily imagine. I remember in the Eighties when you received a fix on your location every twelve minutes or so.
This meant that 'sat nav' was great for shipping and yachts, but not much good for cars or other fast-moving vehicles. They were also rather expensive and quite large, not like the devices that cyclists can get in a wrist watch these days.
Despite the fact that sat nav has advanced far enough for companies to be able to produce reasonably priced auto navigation systems, there are still problems with them. But there is nothing new about that, it has become standard practice to begin selling a product while it is still at some phase of improvement.
Look at MS Widows for an example; it is nearly thirty years old and still does not work perfectly - it is still 'under development'. The same holds true of auto navigation systems.
And part of the problem is with the software running the device. Software is a very tricky thing, as Windows proves to its users every day. I am not of necessity criticizing Windows software, it is probably the best of its class, but then there is no real competition for it and that is a shame for all the usual reasons such as apathy, high-handedness and over-pricing, just look at Windows 'Vista'. What an expensive pile of junk that was.
Needless to say, if Microsoft cannot get their software right, then auto navigation companies cannot either. Therefore, it is imperative to use an auto navigation device that either regularly updates itself automatically or permits the user to do it manually.
You have to have the latest bug-fixes to the software and the latest updates to the maps. Ideally, the unit will update itself every day automatically, but you should do it manually at least before each extensive journey.
The signal is clearly very significant as well. In order to get a fix on your position at least three satellites have to be able to 'see' your auto navigation system. If a fourth can corroborate the data, then so much the better.
This means that you may vanish 'off the radar', so to speak, if you are travelling under ground or in mostly built-up locations. Being tracked by one or two satellites is not good enough, there is no triangulation.
It is rational to assume that if you have a clear view of the sky, then the three or four satellites should have a clear view of you, but it is not an infallible test. The best thing to have with you is still common sense. Do not just depend on your auto navigation system blindly. If you think it is giving you a false reading, perhaps it is.
In this situation, the best thing to do is think about whether you or it is right and check it with a map if you have one. If all else fails, employ a bit of advice often given by Windows support, turn the device off, count to ten and turn it back on again - in other words, reboot it.
This meant that 'sat nav' was great for shipping and yachts, but not much good for cars or other fast-moving vehicles. They were also rather expensive and quite large, not like the devices that cyclists can get in a wrist watch these days.
Despite the fact that sat nav has advanced far enough for companies to be able to produce reasonably priced auto navigation systems, there are still problems with them. But there is nothing new about that, it has become standard practice to begin selling a product while it is still at some phase of improvement.
Look at MS Widows for an example; it is nearly thirty years old and still does not work perfectly - it is still 'under development'. The same holds true of auto navigation systems.
And part of the problem is with the software running the device. Software is a very tricky thing, as Windows proves to its users every day. I am not of necessity criticizing Windows software, it is probably the best of its class, but then there is no real competition for it and that is a shame for all the usual reasons such as apathy, high-handedness and over-pricing, just look at Windows 'Vista'. What an expensive pile of junk that was.
Needless to say, if Microsoft cannot get their software right, then auto navigation companies cannot either. Therefore, it is imperative to use an auto navigation device that either regularly updates itself automatically or permits the user to do it manually.
You have to have the latest bug-fixes to the software and the latest updates to the maps. Ideally, the unit will update itself every day automatically, but you should do it manually at least before each extensive journey.
The signal is clearly very significant as well. In order to get a fix on your position at least three satellites have to be able to 'see' your auto navigation system. If a fourth can corroborate the data, then so much the better.
This means that you may vanish 'off the radar', so to speak, if you are travelling under ground or in mostly built-up locations. Being tracked by one or two satellites is not good enough, there is no triangulation.
It is rational to assume that if you have a clear view of the sky, then the three or four satellites should have a clear view of you, but it is not an infallible test. The best thing to have with you is still common sense. Do not just depend on your auto navigation system blindly. If you think it is giving you a false reading, perhaps it is.
In this situation, the best thing to do is think about whether you or it is right and check it with a map if you have one. If all else fails, employ a bit of advice often given by Windows support, turn the device off, count to ten and turn it back on again - in other words, reboot it.
About the Author:
Owen Jones, the writer of this article writes on different topics, but is currently involved with the Snooper sat nav system. If you would like to know more, please go to our website at Escort 8500.
0 comments:
Post a Comment