Satnav (GPS) recommendations wanted.
May. 7th, 2012 11:57 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
randomnessAnyone have any good recommendations for a satnav that doesn't send you through Harvard Square at the least provocation?
bedfull_o_books is looking for a new satnav. She has finally reached her wits end with her old Magellan unit, which seems incapable of coping effectively with Boston's street layout. It signals turns with insufficient granularity, loses track of where it is and then gets confused as to how to put one back on track, and almost invariably suffers from the Harvard Square problem*. On one memorable occasion it even insisted we were on the wrong side of the Hudson for an hour and a half of high-speed driving, solved only after we crossed to the side of the river it thought we were on.
I have problems with its parochiality. To it, roads outside the continental US are terra incognita. For me personally, this is crippling. Even my Cheetah GPS red light/speed camera warning device knows about cameras in Europe and Australasia, as well as the US and Canada. (I recommend this device, and its perpetual database update add-on, to anyone who drives in places with speed and red-light camera revenue enhancement devices.)
As it turns out, other people have asked this question. Unfortunately those threads are years old, and dead. Apparently there wasn't an easy answer to this question.
I would guess that any satnav capable of dealing with London's street layout would be able to deal with Boston. If the satnav can get me from Hanger Lane to Islington without doing something insane like sending me south of Regents Park (just to take a random example) it should be able to avoid Harvard Square.
Unfortunately, stories of antics perpetrated by drivers too slavishly following satnavs in Britain are legion. So I don't hold out great hope.
But your suggestions are welcome.
*As applied to satnavs, the Harvard Square problem is when the navigation device insists the best route to your destination is through Harvard Square. This is almost never the case, but the routing algorithms in most satnavs persist in attempting to send you through the Square rather than accept a route around it as faster.
I theorize that this is because of two factors which applied together cause the satnav to believe the best route is through the Square. First, it believes major arteries like Massachusetts Avenue, are faster than side streets like Oxford Street, based on the speed rating of the road on paper. Experienced Boston drivers know that side streets are often faster than major arteries, partly because there are fewer traffic lights, partly because major arteries are more congested more of the time, and partly because the speed limits have little relation to actual traffic speed. Thus the Boston driver penchant for rat running through side streets.
Second, satnavs underestimate the congestion in major intersections themselves. Negotiating one's way through them can be very slow because the traffic light patterns are long. These cause tailbacks, which the satnav does not account for. One extremely useful rule in Boston driving is to avoid the major intersections whenever possible. There are obvious routes avoiding major intersections (Porter, Harvard) from Arlington Center to Central Square Cambridge, for example, but your satnav will never send you that way.
bedfull_o_books is looking for a new satnav. She has finally reached her wits end with her old Magellan unit, which seems incapable of coping effectively with Boston's street layout. It signals turns with insufficient granularity, loses track of where it is and then gets confused as to how to put one back on track, and almost invariably suffers from the Harvard Square problem*. On one memorable occasion it even insisted we were on the wrong side of the Hudson for an hour and a half of high-speed driving, solved only after we crossed to the side of the river it thought we were on.
I have problems with its parochiality. To it, roads outside the continental US are terra incognita. For me personally, this is crippling. Even my Cheetah GPS red light/speed camera warning device knows about cameras in Europe and Australasia, as well as the US and Canada. (I recommend this device, and its perpetual database update add-on, to anyone who drives in places with speed and red-light camera revenue enhancement devices.)
As it turns out, other people have asked this question. Unfortunately those threads are years old, and dead. Apparently there wasn't an easy answer to this question.
I would guess that any satnav capable of dealing with London's street layout would be able to deal with Boston. If the satnav can get me from Hanger Lane to Islington without doing something insane like sending me south of Regents Park (just to take a random example) it should be able to avoid Harvard Square.
Unfortunately, stories of antics perpetrated by drivers too slavishly following satnavs in Britain are legion. So I don't hold out great hope.
But your suggestions are welcome.
*As applied to satnavs, the Harvard Square problem is when the navigation device insists the best route to your destination is through Harvard Square. This is almost never the case, but the routing algorithms in most satnavs persist in attempting to send you through the Square rather than accept a route around it as faster.
I theorize that this is because of two factors which applied together cause the satnav to believe the best route is through the Square. First, it believes major arteries like Massachusetts Avenue, are faster than side streets like Oxford Street, based on the speed rating of the road on paper. Experienced Boston drivers know that side streets are often faster than major arteries, partly because there are fewer traffic lights, partly because major arteries are more congested more of the time, and partly because the speed limits have little relation to actual traffic speed. Thus the Boston driver penchant for rat running through side streets.
Second, satnavs underestimate the congestion in major intersections themselves. Negotiating one's way through them can be very slow because the traffic light patterns are long. These cause tailbacks, which the satnav does not account for. One extremely useful rule in Boston driving is to avoid the major intersections whenever possible. There are obvious routes avoiding major intersections (Porter, Harvard) from Arlington Center to Central Square Cambridge, for example, but your satnav will never send you that way.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-07 10:55 am (UTC)Once we bought a different brand, it never happened again. It never seemed to know which of our streets were one-way, either. (Quite a lot, but not on the scale of Boston!)
I can easily imagine you gnashing teeth at being sent anywhere near Harvard Square.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-07 11:40 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-07 11:57 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-07 04:08 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-07 12:04 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-09 07:05 am (UTC)They really do. I got a ticket for going 40 on one of those 30 speed limit streets.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-07 12:06 pm (UTC)Still, generally it's pretty good, though it does get confused -- mostly our fault because we never update it. It also takes a frustratingly long time to find a signal, but once it does we're usually pretty happy with it. We're borrowing my parents' TomTom for our upcoming Ireland trip -- they have a Europe pack on their more up-to-date version, and I assume expansions for other parts of the world are available as well...
(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-07 01:20 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-07 07:31 pm (UTC)1. I too have it set to "fastest" as opposed to "shortest" route. It takes me on shortcuts that are so crazy they work.
2. It has that "IQ Routes" or something, which uses data from people who agree to be tracked to record how long it REALLY took to get from A to B on a certain day and time via a certain route, and hence, it may take you a completely different way depending on if it is Saturday at 9am or Monday at 5pm.
3. The traffic feature is great if you are on highway. Unfortunately, it doesn't appear to get data for Storrow. But if you're on a major artery that it gets data about, it may helpfully ask you in the middle of your trip "The traffic delay on your route is now 13 minutes. There is a faster way. Do you want to re-route?" Hells yes!
4. You can change your map. If you never, ever ever, want to go through Harvard Square, tell your map that Mass Ave is permanently blocked in all directions at Out of Town News, and you'll never see it again.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-07 01:59 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-07 02:04 pm (UTC)But, again, my maps are probably eight or more years old.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-07 02:09 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-07 02:26 pm (UTC)My TomTom also recently developed a weird thing while driving south through Boston on the Central Artery. You're going on your merry way through the tunnel, and then it wants you to exit onto Purchase St. around exit 23, drive along that street for several blocks, then rejoin the Central Artery around South Station, I think it was. Um...no. I can't even fathom what made it recommend that. Is it shorter by 30 meters or something? :-b
It also recommended a way back to I-93 from
(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-07 05:40 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-08 12:06 am (UTC)An interesting exercise would be to sell thousands of sat navs that log transit times and use that to update the master database.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-08 01:23 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-09 07:07 am (UTC)For now I have a very dumb phone, however.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-08 02:48 am (UTC)I use it all the time. It's hard to see the projected route (you basically have to zoom out) but...it's free, so what's there to lose by trying it out?
(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-08 02:49 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-09 07:10 am (UTC)I'll have to check it out when I get around to getting a smartphone. Can't justify one as yet, as I have both a very dumb phone and a netbook with cellular net access. Between the two I have most of the functionality a smartphone generally has, plus a bigger screen and a full keyboard.
But I'll look at it when I have one, or ask digitalemur to look at it on her phone.
(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-08 05:03 am (UTC)I bought the Garmin because my colleague who drove us around a lot swore by his. Turns out it's a POS for any real city driving, especially if it's an unfamiliar city. I got stuck with a TomTom while driving around rural France, and was... nervous. Turns out the interface is fine, and - this is where it might really rock in a city - the recalc speed is damn fast, especially compared to a Garmin. So if you're driving around inner Boston and take miss your turn (how likely is that, really?), you'd instantly get a new route, whereas recalc time on the Garmin has screwed me even harder, on virtually every occasion. See the route takes you through Harvard Square? No problem. Turn off and see where it takes you instantly!
(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-09 07:11 am (UTC)Thanks for the pointer!
(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-08 05:12 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2012-05-09 07:12 am (UTC)