 Which one is the best for some one who's not that great on computers, like my Dad?
|
 |
 It's hard to say. I have Anquet and have found it easy to use, but the registration processes are pretty tortuous. Upgrading to new products as they come out also involves uninstalling the product and sending back the original discs, which I find to be a real pain in the neck (to the extent that I'm not willing to do it).
I can't speak about the others as I haven't used them.
|
|
 For the benefit of those who don't frequent ukrw, here is a copy of a post I made there today about Anquet V6:-
Some of my preliminary notes on V6 for those interested, particularly the performance - a couple of other people have reported the same thing. I wonder if others are finding this too.
First though, a couple of embarassing problems:-
I ran the first installer to install the program, then the map installer took over and said it couldn't find the program it had just installed. It was looking for the install location in the wrong registry key.
Printing:- the drop-down list for orientation of the Print rectangle is the wrong way round - select Portrait and it goes Landscape, select Landscape and it goes Portrait.
But enough mirth, the important thing I found is the speed, or lack of it. Unlike V1.2, V6 is a .Net application as has been mentioned already, and it therefore installs the .Net framework. This means that V6 is compiled into an intermediate language MSIL and converted to native code dynamically,
which must impact performance for an intensive program like this.
Comparing it with Memory Map for the common operations of scrolling the map and zooming in and out, it is very slow. MM always was noticeably faster, but is now much faster. Zooming in or out one level is near instantaneous in MM, but an hourglass appears for *several seconds* in
V6. Scrolling the map in V6 is like dragging through treacle, with the map juddering and the hourglass appearing if you drag a bit too fast. This was despite using 108Mb of memory on my system (MM was using 8Mb).
I was careful to compare them at the same zoom level, since all the software packages scroll slower as you zoom outwards. I don't know about the various features yet, but this really is a pain for the
basic operation of perusing maps.
Incidentally, if anyone was wondering if I could work the same magic with V6 and old maps as I did for MM, forget it - the maps are in a different file structure.
Regards
|
|
 I use GPSUtility. Only £25 to register and I found it fairly straightforward to use.
I'm not being rude, however please try using the search facility at the top of the page; this subject comes up regularly and you'll find lots of oppinions that way.
Best wishes.
|
|
 My summary (for what it's worth)
Anquet and Memory Map appear to be the biggest (in terms of support & sales).
Anquet has been fine for me (to date) and has performed well. I like they way it works - the path handling etc.
Memory Map seems to be equally good. There were performance issues with V4 if lots of routes / waypoints were stored.
Tracklogs seems to be coming from a smaller base, but has a lot of users in the MTB arena.
Fugawi historically suffered from poor altitude data.
Then ther are the "roll your own" options - OziExplorer and GPS Utility. These need you to scan in your own maps (or do screen grabs from other areas). A bit too much like hard work for me!! The upside of these is that you're not tied into the strict conditions of use / upgrade that the Ordnance Survey impose. However, I do use GPSU for some data conversion and it works very well for this.
If I were starting now, I'd download demos of them all and try them. I'd probably go for GPSU to start with (it's very cheap) and use it in a small area. I'd probably then look at Tracklogs - just because there are lots of MTB routes on the web in that format.
|
|
Geoff - that reminds me to install the National Parks CD I bought. Thanks!
|
|
I use Tracklogs, for walking not MTB. I downloaded evaluation progs of Anquet, Mmap, and Tracklogs, and Tracklogs was the easiest to use. I've been very happy with it and download routes to a Garmin Geko 301. One thing I find strange is that Tracklogs seem to not market themselves as actively as the other two, despite the fact that the product seems so much easier to use - especially if you want to use routes rather than just waypoints. Come to think of it, the Garmin Geko 301 appears to be a 'hidden' product too. Why? Trail and TGO etc never review the Geko, despite the fact it is SOOOO light. These mags are obsessed with everything else being light, but then review GPS's the size of old clunky mobile phones.
Off my soapbox....
|
|
 Marf, I agree with you about Tracklogs marketing, but TGO included the Geko 201 in a recent GPS review - in fact I think it got Best Buy.
|
|
Yes, I think it did, Matt: I've got one and I'd not realised what a sophisticated little GPS it actually is!
|
|
Dick,
I did use the search and read some of the opinions. Just needed some opinions from people on the issue of use for somebody who is not that computer literate. Don't have time while at work to read through all the posts etc. Thought I'd narrow it down for a quick answer.
|
|
Mick
In response to your specific request - you definitely want to avoid GPSU and OziExplorer.
The rest all operate in a similar fashion - though each has it's own foibles.
I guess you need to ask what exactly it's going to be used for, e.g. I believe that there are other packages which don't have GPS support, these may be more appropriate.
|
|
