Feature request: Autonomic data configuration

Do you mean an extension of this Dan? Right click the device.

Paperweight


GPS

KILLTIMER, thanks for taking the bait :)

Exactly, BUT, notice it doesn't tell you anything about the extent to which the connected device supports Waypoints, Routes, Tracks, etc.



To use the above example, consider that if you selected any of the data types supported, the window below would tell you that the zumo 660 supports:

• Waypoints: Garmin Extended Waypoint information: Address, City, State, Country, Postal Code, Phone Number....
  
• Tracks: Supports 650 Track points for Off Road Tracks or unlimited points if Importing to Route conversion.
  
• Routes: Supports Direct Routes and Auto Routing with up to 500 Via Points.
  
• Etc.
  

If this were the case today, when I plugged in my new Montana 650t ;) to BaseCamp, I would very quickly know that it does not support Extended Waypoint information and that it can only support Tracks with 500 track points, etc.

In the above scenario, if I wanted to transfer a couple of thousand waypoints with Extended info, BaseCamp would pop a flag and let me know that data wasn't going to be used by the Montana and that six of the 20 Tracks I want transfer have to many track points - Do you want to filter to 500 points?

Garmin knows these characteristics for each of the devices it manufactures - and yes those capabilities can change over the life of the product. New software releases include updated descriptor file along with those new features. :)

The About this Garmin feature could be as simple as a text file or put the information in the description of the two garmin location waypoints that come with the new GPS (just kidding). However, GPS like computers continue to advance in features but geo data is becoming standardized. Within products lines I would think garmin would be wise the make all new GPSs accept Extended data and with memory so cheep allow a high number of tracks standard across all new GPS.

I was pretty sure I knew where you were going with this Dan. :D In order for this to work properly a few things would have to happen IMO.

The software and hardware guys would have on be on the same page and be aware of the development path of the other. Legacy hardware would have to be supported.

A common feature set would have to exist across platforms and applications.

Terminology would have to be standardized. How many names does Garmin have for a "point" anyway? We've had this conversation before about the difference between Waypoints, route points, favorites, via points, shaping points.... and whatever they're calling the points used by the new units that do "Trip Planning".

Don't get me wrong, I think the idea has merit. I'm just afraid the direction that Garmin, as a company, is going, is to a simpler MBA interface. ;)

If we're going for the brass ring as it were, do you think custom avoidance synchronization could be worked in? I'd love to have the catalog of US interstate sections I've marked in MapSource to be avoided transferred to my GPS and vice versa.

PSEABOLT,

Yes, the "About this Garmin" descriptor file would be a text file (XML ;) ) and I think it's already there - although maybe only within BaseCamp.


KILLTIMER, Good points and as you might have guessed, I have given this topic some thought. :D

The software and hardware guys would have on be on the same page and be aware of the development path of the other. Legacy hardware would have to be supported.

Initially, yes, there would need to be a common "understanding of and agreement to" the initiative. This type of architectural initiative is not something that has cost to legacy devices since it can be managed as a "and-on" program. Just as you see in the examples we've shown above, there is a notion of this already in Garmin and BaseCamp.

If there is no "descriptor" file on the device BaseCamp simply shows the "generic" support info (lowest common denominator as it were).

A common feature set would have to exist across platforms and applications.

For Garmin the "common feature set" is defined by the GPX XML schema. Since Garmin is using XML export formats (GPX, TCX, etc) in their devices. Only an Extension Schema needs to be managed. This is really a very simple activity and can be done cross-brand/cross-device by use of a common repository for the Schema. This may already be the case(?). This allows differentiation and product "creativity" across brands while still adhering to a managed data architecture.

Terminology would have to be standardized. How many names does Garmin have for a "point" anyway? We've had this conversation before about the difference between Waypoints, route points, favorites, via points, shaping points.... and whatever they're calling the points used by the new units that do "Trip Planning".

Although I too would love to see common terminology between the Garmin brands, it is not a pre-requisit for this initiative to take place. As stated above, the commonality is managed in the data schema. Points can be called a "spot-on-the-earth" if they want as long as they are defined in the XML schema by either one of the standard GPX Type's or within an agreed to Extension type. In this way product's can be differentiated and targeted to a customer market (assuming someone actually wants to call a point a "spot-on-the-earth"). Garmin seems to support this already as well since even Favorites=Waypoints in Garmin's GPX schema.

If we're going for the brass ring as it were, do you think custom avoidance synchronization could be worked in? I'd love to have the catalog of US interstate sections I've marked in MapSource to be avoided transferred to my GPS and vice versa.

Ah, the brass ring - yes even Custom Avoidance's and even Auto Routing algorithm's can be standardize - and, as above, these are things that can be phased into production. There is no mandatory implementation date - customers will drive that. :D

The key to all of this is that the Chief Engineer, Chief Architect or whatever Garmin calls that person, has the mandate to make these things happen across brands.

Cheers,

The key to all of this is that the Chief Engineer, Chief Architect or whatever Garmin calls that person, has the mandate to make these things happen across brands.

Cheers,

I'm afraid that person is now an accountant, and from a dollar return per unit standpoint......... well, we're screwed, it's the soccer moms, joggers and geocachers that are driving the market. :D

I hear ya. . .:rolleyes:

One good thing in our favor is that the On-Trail and Fitness markets are growing fast. Witness the soon-to-be Montana series. That was not a cheap development effort so I would think Garmin expects big sales there. Well, they're probably going to get my money. :o

I'm afraid that person is now an accountant, and from a dollar return per unit standpoint......... well, we're screwed, it's the soccer moms, joggers and geocachers that are driving the market. :D

• BaseCamp is somewhat unique even among Garmin products in that it has to satisfy almost all the market segments simultaneously. Trying to balance the needs of soccer moms, joggers, geocachers, and motorcyclists is a daunting task, I hope you'll agree.
  
• As for BaseCamp users, motorcyclists are our number 4 largest market segment. It isn't lost on us at all that Zumo users are paying a premium to satisfy very specific needs and BaseCamp tries to satisfy these needs. I hope you'll also agree that it is getting better at doing that with each release.
  

• BaseCamp is somewhat unique even among Garmin products in that it has to satisfy almost all the market segments simultaneously. Trying to balance the needs of soccer moms, joggers, geocachers, and motorcyclists is a daunting task, I hope you'll agree.
  
• As for BaseCamp users, motorcyclists are our number 4 largest market segment. It isn't lost on us at all that Zumo users are paying a premium to satisfy very specific needs and BaseCamp tries to satisfy these needs. I hope you'll also agree that it is getting better at doing that with each release.
  

I do agree, and I applaud your efforts. I've been following this adventure from the BobCat days. ;) Much progress has been made.

You have to understand though, that even "Motorcyclists" is a broad generalization. I want BaseCamp to satisfy 2 quite different motorcycle scenarios that share very few common aspects. These two uses are quite alien to the majority of motorcyclists who are quite happy with the auto-routing automotive feature set that currently exists...... But I'm also of the mind that the last road going GPS that Garmin produced that was worth buying is the gpsMap 478 Chartplotter, so I also realize that I'm a very small blip on Garmin's radar. :D

Thanks for listening.