Newbie basecamp question

BC reminds me of Windows -extremely frustrating, constantly borked and buggy, requiring manual work arounds for everything. For the cost of Garmin (I purchased the 350LM), it should feel like using a Mac. For instance, not being able to manage files on the GPS through BC makes absolutely no sense. In the market there is very little choice for motorcycle GPS than Garmin (which does have its strengths), but the moment someone develops better software (and faster refresh, ie GPU/CPU horsepower, which lets face it given all the smartphones is relatively cheap) I'd jump ship. Really, for the amount Garmin charges for its units, this is completely unacceptable and too much feels like arrogance in pursuit of monopoly.

...and while Im at it, why does the Garmin/SDcard keep re-connecting to my comp after I eject it?

None of your rant has anything to do with Basecamp but is a limitation of the gps you've bought. If you feel the need to complain speak to Garmin customer services.

Having said that IMO the fault lies with you for not researching properly what you were buying.

Agreed.... Even with all the research, I was surprised to see how crapy the application-side user experience is with Garmin products. GPS works well; beats my Google maps on iPhone.

Wow... the more I read on the forums, the more it apparent it is BC is totally borked. The amount of posts addressing the semantics of what a "way point", "shaping point", "route", "trip", etc., etc., makes the head spin. Seriously, wtf!? The tools should be simple, the terms simple, their functions, well defined without overlap. The user community can dump all they want about not having read the endless threads that supposedly after a few weeks of dedicated reading time will make one a competent user, but simply put if a consumer product requires that much effort its broken. And I still dont know how to get BC and my 350LM to do what I want it to do, nor even know if what I want it to do, which seems pretty expected for a gps to do, is doable. Grrrrrrr......

I refer you back to my post #14 :)

FWIW I have no problem using Basecamp with my Etrex 20 and my two nuvis to achieve what I need to achieve. Yes, some folks get confused between waypoint, shaping point etc etc ... others (as presumably you want to do) just get on and use the stuff.

Most users never end up on these forums. They won't know about the discussions that go on about some of these issues, and really they don't need to know. Some of us are here to try to help anyone who is struggling. Others are here to help shape future products. Or both. Ranting doesn't help anyone, if you want to do that try contacting Garmin directly. Having hung out here a while most 'problems' are down to the user or his/her PC/Mac rather than Garmin. But we can't help anyone unless they explain clearly the problem(s) they're having.

Fair enough. I think the main point Is BC shouldnt be this complicated and fussy. Too many features = too much customization, to be sure responding to far too wide a range of feature/user-interface requests. Nor does it help one Garmin product works with "trips" (350LM) while the 660 works with... wait, I forget what its called on that. Indeed, the constantly shifting terminology indicates battling ideas at the most fundamental level of concept within the dev team.

That said, here is what I expect BC to be able to do (and perhaps it does but I cant figure it out, which is also a problem -me being a complete moron is too easy an explanation):
- plan a journey (note the attempted use of a neutral term); I want to take specific path on my journey between a determined start and end points
- ideally, this would be represented by highlighting the roads/trails taken NOT the way-point, route tool point, whatever its called; simply if i deviate from the planned leg, the unit will suggest the quickest (or shortest) way back onto the leg NOT the quickest/shortest way back to the missed route-point (whatever that dot placed on the map is called)
- to be honest, i thought laying down all those points in BC was in order to guide how the app routes the path only to be perplexed once i took the unit out on my first trip and took my first wrong turn. Ideally, I would ride with auto-recalculate but it i dont think it recalculates me to the determined path ive laid out, rather to the next "point" (shaping point, routing point, whatever we are discussing)
- the entire journey should be a) broken up by the decision maker when uploaded to the GPS, not restricted by the qty of route-points (I understand this is a bug on the 350LM and is supposed to get fixed -a significant bug IMO)

I consider this the guts of a trip-planning application, in that this (well, other than turn by turn planning) is what Google maps can do on my iPhone; basic, simple, easy to use, always works. Everything else is dressing, and can be "value-adds" to appeal to the diverse user base. But as someone said on the trip-planner beta forum, get the substance of the thing rock-solid, add the features later. Perhaps this is a philosophical difference, but frankly no application should be this frustrating to use (ok, maybe that last point was a bit of a rant).

Can someone spell out how to use BC in simple, easy point by point instructions?

Ok.... here's a suggestion: if there are going to be all these diverse but closely related functions/terminology, perhaps an appendix would be useful that a) defines the thing (ie, route point), and b) explains how the software uses the thing to do what it does.

...and it continues. So Ive now noticed that all the "route-points"? Ive laid down in BC to plot a journey are now called "stops" under the info tab. Does this mean BC now thinks I want to stop at these places (which would explain why it recalculates to the missed "stop" in the GPS if I go a distracted and verve off somewhere to check it out).

Afraid I'm not best qualified to answer these specific queries, but there are a few bikers around who should be able to, as I use BC mainly for planning walking routes. However you do need to bear in mind that for most folks stops/waypoints/viapoints etc are places that they probably do wish to pass through, so it makes sense that if you deviate off a route your GPS will continue to try to get you back to that point if you go 'off route' for whatever reason.

...and it continues. So Ive now noticed that all the "route-points"? Ive laid down in BC to plot a journey are now called "stops" under the info tab. Does this mean BC now thinks I want to stop at these places (which would explain why it recalculates to the missed "stop" in the GPS if I go a distracted and verve off somewhere to check it out).

I'm not sure that I can help you much but let me give a try. I have a Zumo 660 and a friend just got a Zumo 350. We have been experimenting to find out how best to use the 350 as compared to the 660.

As said by SUSSAMB if you use BaseCamp to draw your route with waypoints then the GPS will assume that you want to go to those points and it will keep directing you there until it eventually gives up. That is true also for the Zumo 660. You should not use waypoints in your route unless you specifically want to go there, like to a hotel, restaurant, meeting place etc. Also, it appears the via points set to "Alert on arrival" behaves like waypoints in the Z350. I think that this is the root of your problems navigating a route made in BaseCamp.

You should draw your route with via points in BaseCamp and set all the via points to "do not alert on arrival". That is important. The Z350 will quickly find out if you miss a point and reroute you. The via points show as little blue circles on the Z350 but there is no announcement. If you furthermore place the via points on intersections the blue circles will not appear on the display. Same practice for route creation as on Z660.

If your via points are "alert on arrival" they will exhibit the same behaviour as waypoints. If you miss one of those on the Z350 you will need to terminate the route and restart it with the next via point as starting point. This is a different behaviour from the Z660.

If you follow these suggestions for route creation in BaseCamp I trust that you will find a smooth and easy ride with the Z350. At least that is true when I ride with my friend using exactly the same routes on our Z350 and Z660, respectively.