Well, if the iPhone has your location from two moments (hence calculating a direction), it IS determining your velocity, right?
My point was that the article said you need to know direction and velocity; however it's sufficient to just say "velocity". Saying "direction and velocity" is like saying "direction and direction and speed" - it's a tautology.
Yes, it's difficult to envision how, using GPS, you could end up knowing the speed but not the direction. There's probably different ways of using the chip that give you more or less accurate velocity estimation.
to give up my beloved since years tomtom on lifedrive first then on e61... would prefer to wait for some s/w from Apple itself... that would be of a bit greater interest, I bet...
Are you being purposely dense here? Or is this a joke?
I said that it might be a problem juggling a phone on your lap while you are driving.
No you didn't, you implied that using a cradle mounted GPS was inherently dangerous and suggested such devices should be built in. You then went on to use that unfounded assertion as basis for opining that GPS functionality in a small portable device was an undesirable idea.
Quote:
"Turn-by-turn devices have brackets to sit in, in their rightful place on the dashboard of the car. Add to that the fact that most accidents are caused by inattention and you have a problem waiting to happen.
....
Turn-by-turn GPS for drivers is something that really is better off being a part of the car, not a part of the music player/game machine in your pocket"
Quote:
That's hardly a controversial statement. This known problem with phones, that tends to cause inattention, that also is the number one cause of road accidents is somehow "illogical" and "spurious" how???
In the UK, Ireland and several other countries, using a phone in a car is perfectly legal if it is done so via the use of a hands-free kit. These are usually facilitated by bluetooth connectivity and often incorporate voice activation. So the devices and their use have not been proscribed, merely the physical handling and operation of them.
No such proscription applies to the use of in car dash/window mounted Sat-Navs, because from a functional point of view, such units are ergonomically indistinguishable from in-built units - ergo, you are being illogical and spurious and I will hereby add specious to the list of the faults in your 'argument'.
Quote:
And you end up with giving me some kind of lecture on "freedom" and assuming all kinds of things about me that you don't even know?
You sir, are making an Assinine statement.
I suggested that rather than the blanket proscription you were advocating, people should and would make up their own minds. I hardly think that counts as a lecture.
Quote:
For all those people jumping up and down on me over my comments, check out the very first line of my post. You know, the one where it says I'm "playing devil's advocate." If you're unfamiliar with the term let me explain it to you.
Now you are being condescending.
Quote:
It means to take an opposing but logical view in an argument or debate that you may not even believe in but has to be considered as a possible opposing stance.
So? Another interpretation is that the proponent is perfectly well aware of the weak nature of their argument but just wants to stir up trouble and to enjoy the ensuing argument. Prefacing your position with "devils advocate" does not make your specious, illogical and spurious arguments immune from rebuttal, it actually implies that you fully expect contrary argument - the metaphorical red rag to a bull - so acting all hurt and resentful when you get what you should have expected is immature and naive of you.
Quote:
It's perfectly reasonable to assume that doing *anything* on a phone while driving is somewhat of a risk and there is tons of evidence to prove it. That's why phones provide "hands-free" operation options and why Garmin provides a bracket for their device. Duh!!
But diddums, you have already declared that you consider brackets unsafe.
I gave most people the credit of assuming they have some capability for deductive reasoning, so I assumed that they would be able to deduce from my referencing of portable Sat-Navs, that I was implying the use of a bracket/cradle for the iPhone when used for in car GPS, since that is typically how portable Sat-Navs are used in cars - in a cradle.
Obviously my generous assumption of the mental faculties of my audience was misplaced in your case. I should have been able to deduce you might have problems from your name - Virgil, famed hero and pilot of Thunderbird 2 (TB2). Of course, Virgil was just a dummy, so I should have made the appropraite connection and made allowances for you, sorry.
I'm saying the rule is to pull over, I also said that lots of times that's not done or not possible or whatever. If the phone rings, you have to make a choice as to whether to answer it (you don't have to), or if the trip details are more important to you at that time. If you decide the phone call is more important, then you have to wait 30 seconds to continue your trip. These kinds of decisions occur every day. It's called "life."
What "rule" are you talking about? I know of no such law that says you can't answer a phone using a handsfree device (unless CA just passed another law about it but even if they did that still leaves the other 49 states that aren't nearly as restrictive).
EDIT: If inattentiveness is the biggest reason for wrecks I'd suggest you press your local gov't to work on passing a new law that bans any in car entertainment. I.E. No radio, no navigation, and certainly no talking to the other person in the car - that's just asking for it! The biggest cause of wrecks isn't inattentiveness - it's bad drivers... (unless of course the gun can fire itself that is)
I must admit that I wasn't a GPS/iPhone or else guy. when the 3g was announced. However, I must admit I do like the feature only to prove to my wife that she is always right when she sits in the right seat.
Having bought my first cell phone the day they were introduced, my only issues have been with every phone I bought since, i.e., staying on line and clarity. But, my military experience in communications, taught me that the only way to keep a conversation between two people going was to tie them down in the same room. And wireless, no matter how sophisticated it contended it to be, is fraught with hardware, mechanical and software issues from the get-go, from being able to update, but at the same time, address the legacy systems that command most of the world. Equally important, nobody has or ever will be able to predict and surmount the issues that mother nature can throw in to interfere with the performance.
Now my iPhone has done what no other has done before. Virtually no dropped calls and and for somebody past middle age, experiencing exceptional clarity. In other words, a cell phone that did what it was supposed to do in the first place and as I understand it, what was Job's primary mandate in the first place.
So back to the topic at hand. Turn-by-turn voice GPS are great. On a phone with less than ideally sized screen while driving however, there are better options, IMO. Certainly not for navigating my boat.
However, I am not entirely upset that it hasn't happened on the iPhone as I am not prepared to address my better half that our cell bill went up another $10 plus tax a month so she wouldn't have to tell me where and how to go. That and the fact that she may have read the following article, i.e., Cell Phone GPS App Smackdown. http://www.pcworld.com/article/15257...smackdown.html
2. Restrictions on Use. Unless you have received prior written authorization from Google (or, as applicable, from the provider of particular Content), you must not:
(a) access or use the Products or any Content through any technology or means other than those provided in the Products, or through other explicitly authorized means Google may designate (such as through the Google Maps/Google Earth APIs);
...
(g) use the Service or Content with any products, systems, or applications for or in connection with (i) real time navigation or route guidance, including but not limited to turn-by-turn route guidance that is synchronized to the position of a user's sensor-enabled device; or (ii) any systems or functions for automatic or autonomous control of vehicle behavior.
(My emphasis.)
i.e. you can't use the Map data that you get via Apple's SDK, that ultimately comes from Google and their licensors, to do turn-by-turn GPS. But the likes of Garmin et al obviously have seperate licensing deals in place with the people that ultimately own the map and meta data.
?seeded a beta version of iPhone Software 2.1 with a version of the CoreLocation framework that could recognize the cardinal direction of an iPhone through GPS as well as its velocity?
This software can quite likely NOT tell the cardinal direction of an iPhone - contrary to what they claim. I bet that if you stand still with your iPhone and turn it around from pointing north to instead point to the west, the software cannot tell the difference.
I believe the software can tell in what cardinal "motion" direction the iPhone is moving in, but not "directed" in. This is much more than just semanthics. This is pure and deliberate lying!
This iPhone software is NOT a compass! I dare them to prove otherwise!
This software can quite likely NOT tell the cardinal direction of an iPhone - contrary to what they claim. I bet that if you stand still with your iPhone and turn it around from pointing north to instead point to the west, the software cannot tell the difference.
I believe the software can tell in what cardinal "motion" direction the iPhone is moving in, but not "directed" in. This is much more than just semanthics. This is pure and deliberate lying!
This iPhone software is NOT a compass! I dare them to prove otherwise!
You are talking about the accelerometer in the device, but seem to be forgetting about the GPS, which easily determine your relative velocity and thus calculate your cardinal direction.
This is such a no brain feature that I can't help but think that Apple is waiting for the next version of the iPhone to deliver it. Think about it, there probably aren't going to be any major improvements, radiowise, in the next version of the iPhone.
Anyway, regardless of what I think, how much would you guys pay for a downloadable app that has turn-by-turn GPS? I would have no problem dishing $50 bucks or so, however I would resist any attempt at a monthly subscription fee (a 'la VZ Navigator).
Verizon does charge for VZ Navigator but they also use it as a way to entice you into their data plan. Just for adding the dataplan I get VZ Navigator for free.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Virgil-TB2
Just to play devil's advocate, I can think of one really good reason why this is a bad idea.
Turn-by-turn is almost exclusively used by drivers. Turn-by-turn devices have brackets to sit in, in their rightful place on the dashboard of the car. Add to that the fact that most accidents are caused by inattention and you have a problem waiting to happen. Voice prompting alleviates some of this, but there will almost certainly be some portion of dead pedestrians directly attributed to people juggling their iPhone while driving now.
Turn-by-turn GPS for drivers is something that really is better off being a part of the car, not a part of the music player/game machine in your pocket. It's something that should have been standard and built in to those ridiculous screens that most cars have in the dashboard a long time ago. They certainly serve no other real purpose.
This shows how being so cutting edge can leave you in the dark when something is left out. The reason for turn by turn navigation isn't so I can watch a three inch screen give me direction. It is so the phone will read me the directions over my bluetooth earpiece. I don't have a mount for my phone.
Verizon has also added voice recognition to their GPS software so now it is even more driving friendly. I hit the shortcut for VZ Navigator. It goes to the entry screen. I hold down the button and say "Taco Bell" and it recognizes the words and makes the entry. Then I hit NAV and it tells me how to get their via my earpiece.
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigmc6000
Oh right, I mean, when I'm on the highway in wall to wall traffic going 60 my natural inclination is to pull over when my phone rings and cause a huge wreck - yeah, that's genius. Why would I utilize the free hands-free device that comes with my iPhone??? (smart a$$ comment begets a smart a$$ reply...)
And the problem with firing it back up? As the article said it takes 30 seconds just to initialize - they should allow the phone to just stay at the top like it it when you press the home button in the middle of the call without having to go to the phone app itself.
That would suck. It should work seamlessly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by GTL215
don't other phones with turn-by-turn GPS arleady exist? How do these other phones address these problems?
My VZ Nav isn't perfect so it doesn't go to the background. The phone takes the call and then when it is done, switches right back to the VZ Nav app. There might be a way to have it come back during the call but I haven't tried it since talking while driving and hitting buttons would be pretty dangerous.
I'm a bit worried about the iPhone. In some ways it feels very much like the first Mac OS, revolutionary in some areas but completely lacking in others. (Think multitasking, etc back when.)
You are talking about the accelerometer in the device, but seem to be forgetting about the GPS, which easily determine your relative velocity and thus calculate your cardinal direction.
No, I meen exactly what I'm saying in my reply above.
The cardinal direction means the direction in which the unit (the iPhone) is pointing. Think about it for a while? The GPS chip inside the phone knows where it is, but doesn't have a clue of how you hold it, especially not in what direction it or the phone is pointing. It is an earth coordinate - nothing more. This is why I clearly stated that the iPhone should be in rest.
Yes, I know that most of the time that you are navigating with a GPS you are actually moving. But I oftenly require otherwise, and I know lots of other use cases where the device cannot move either, and still the users need the cardinal direction. For this I use a compass. The device and software above claims to give me such functionality, but it doesn't deliver on that(!). On the contrary, it requires me to run around (a compass doesn't need that, right). Well, if I run around long enough, I will get to my destination anyway - even without this device!
Now you can play some tricks however - especially with the iPhone device. None of them can however give you reliable cardinal direction of the unit itself, and none of them are used in the software of this article - but at least you can have some fun developing a few programs. Try for ex. one f the the following ways, and maybe you'll be rich:
You can calibrate the cardinal direction of the iPhone once, and then record an integrated path of delta-movements by help of the accelerometer. You can then calculate an estimate of the direction in which the iPhone is pointing. The drawback of this method is however that the error from the accelerometer is ackumulated over time since the calibration, and this makes the total error grow to unuseful values almost immediately. Also, you need a compass to start with anyway.
You can use the built-in camera of the iPhone to try to recognize the surroundings. With some assistance from the GPS and details from a map, you can then have software trying to guess how the camera picture should be fitted onto the map. As a last step you can then project that picture from the map location and onto the GPS location of the iPhone. Some simple math would then let you know what cardinal direction the iPhone was pointing in as the camera picture was taken. Problems with this method are of course obvious - complicated algorithms to fit camera picture into a real map - no real-time results since cardinal direction originates from the moment the picture was taken etc. etc.
Still angry at the wrongful claims of the manufacturer. Sue them ? ? probably not. Possible to sue them ?probably yes.
Still angry at the wrongful claims of the manufacturer.
Edit: I see now.
First of all, it seems that AppleInsider stated the term, not Apple, Inc. AI is not the manufacturer. More importantly, you are getting confused by the term "cardinal". The term only refers to the points. Even a magnetic compass doesn't know what direction I'm facing. It merely points to the strongest magnetic source. From that, assuming I'm in the Northen Hemisphere and not near lodestone or such materials it will point North. I can be holding it backwards or sideways and it will point to North. A GPS works the same way as it will know your cardinal direction. In other words, when you are moving at a fast enough rate it will be able to tell you what the cardinal points are.
I try not to quote Wikipedia but they explain in plain English. You can find other sources that state the same thing:
"In contrast with the gyrocompass which is most accurate when stationary, the GPS receiver must be moving, typically at more than 0.1 mph (0.2 km/h), to correctly display compass directions. Within these limitations GPSRs are considered both accurate and reliable. The GPSR has thus become the fastest and most convenient way to obtain a verifiable alignment with the cardinal directions."
PS: Did you know that the term 'orient', which now means align or position comes from the Latin meaning rising or east? Did you also know that early maps had the East at the top to signify the rising sun, which was the first position one could determine at day break? Of course, there were also the stars at night.
Ok, I think we are basically meaning the same thing. A compass can give you a certain direction (e.g the cardinal directions) without requiring you to move, while a gps cannot - it requires you to move (even with the software described above).
Thanks for the interesting background facts on the word "orient" - that was definately unknown to me.
Comments
Well, if the iPhone has your location from two moments (hence calculating a direction), it IS determining your velocity, right?
My point was that the article said you need to know direction and velocity; however it's sufficient to just say "velocity". Saying "direction and velocity" is like saying "direction and direction and speed" - it's a tautology.
Yes, it's difficult to envision how, using GPS, you could end up knowing the speed but not the direction. There's probably different ways of using the chip that give you more or less accurate velocity estimation.
Wow.
Are you being purposely dense here? Or is this a joke?
I said that it might be a problem juggling a phone on your lap while you are driving.
No you didn't, you implied that using a cradle mounted GPS was inherently dangerous and suggested such devices should be built in. You then went on to use that unfounded assertion as basis for opining that GPS functionality in a small portable device was an undesirable idea.
"Turn-by-turn devices have brackets to sit in, in their rightful place on the dashboard of the car. Add to that the fact that most accidents are caused by inattention and you have a problem waiting to happen.
....
Turn-by-turn GPS for drivers is something that really is better off being a part of the car, not a part of the music player/game machine in your pocket"
That's hardly a controversial statement. This known problem with phones, that tends to cause inattention, that also is the number one cause of road accidents is somehow "illogical" and "spurious" how???
In the UK, Ireland and several other countries, using a phone in a car is perfectly legal if it is done so via the use of a hands-free kit. These are usually facilitated by bluetooth connectivity and often incorporate voice activation. So the devices and their use have not been proscribed, merely the physical handling and operation of them.
No such proscription applies to the use of in car dash/window mounted Sat-Navs, because from a functional point of view, such units are ergonomically indistinguishable from in-built units - ergo, you are being illogical and spurious and I will hereby add specious to the list of the faults in your 'argument'.
And you end up with giving me some kind of lecture on "freedom" and assuming all kinds of things about me that you don't even know?
You sir, are making an Assinine statement.
I suggested that rather than the blanket proscription you were advocating, people should and would make up their own minds. I hardly think that counts as a lecture.
For all those people jumping up and down on me over my comments, check out the very first line of my post. You know, the one where it says I'm "playing devil's advocate." If you're unfamiliar with the term let me explain it to you.
Now you are being condescending.
It means to take an opposing but logical view in an argument or debate that you may not even believe in but has to be considered as a possible opposing stance.
So? Another interpretation is that the proponent is perfectly well aware of the weak nature of their argument but just wants to stir up trouble and to enjoy the ensuing argument. Prefacing your position with "devils advocate" does not make your specious, illogical and spurious arguments immune from rebuttal, it actually implies that you fully expect contrary argument - the metaphorical red rag to a bull - so acting all hurt and resentful when you get what you should have expected is immature and naive of you.
It's perfectly reasonable to assume that doing *anything* on a phone while driving is somewhat of a risk and there is tons of evidence to prove it. That's why phones provide "hands-free" operation options and why Garmin provides a bracket for their device. Duh!!
But diddums, you have already declared that you consider brackets unsafe.
I gave most people the credit of assuming they have some capability for deductive reasoning, so I assumed that they would be able to deduce from my referencing of portable Sat-Navs, that I was implying the use of a bracket/cradle for the iPhone when used for in car GPS, since that is typically how portable Sat-Navs are used in cars - in a cradle.
Obviously my generous assumption of the mental faculties of my audience was misplaced in your case. I should have been able to deduce you might have problems from your name - Virgil, famed hero and pilot of Thunderbird 2 (TB2). Of course, Virgil was just a dummy, so I should have made the appropraite connection and made allowances for you, sorry.
Well gee, there's no pleasing you I guess.
I'm saying the rule is to pull over, I also said that lots of times that's not done or not possible or whatever. If the phone rings, you have to make a choice as to whether to answer it (you don't have to), or if the trip details are more important to you at that time. If you decide the phone call is more important, then you have to wait 30 seconds to continue your trip. These kinds of decisions occur every day. It's called "life."
What "rule" are you talking about? I know of no such law that says you can't answer a phone using a handsfree device (unless CA just passed another law about it but even if they did that still leaves the other 49 states that aren't nearly as restrictive).
EDIT: If inattentiveness is the biggest reason for wrecks I'd suggest you press your local gov't to work on passing a new law that bans any in car entertainment. I.E. No radio, no navigation, and certainly no talking to the other person in the car - that's just asking for it! The biggest cause of wrecks isn't inattentiveness - it's bad drivers... (unless of course the gun can fire itself that is)
Having bought my first cell phone the day they were introduced, my only issues have been with every phone I bought since, i.e., staying on line and clarity. But, my military experience in communications, taught me that the only way to keep a conversation between two people going was to tie them down in the same room. And wireless, no matter how sophisticated it contended it to be, is fraught with hardware, mechanical and software issues from the get-go, from being able to update, but at the same time, address the legacy systems that command most of the world. Equally important, nobody has or ever will be able to predict and surmount the issues that mother nature can throw in to interfere with the performance.
Now my iPhone has done what no other has done before. Virtually no dropped calls and and for somebody past middle age, experiencing exceptional clarity. In other words, a cell phone that did what it was supposed to do in the first place and as I understand it, what was Job's primary mandate in the first place.
So back to the topic at hand. Turn-by-turn voice GPS are great. On a phone with less than ideally sized screen while driving however, there are better options, IMO. Certainly not for navigating my boat.
However, I am not entirely upset that it hasn't happened on the iPhone as I am not prepared to address my better half that our cell bill went up another $10 plus tax a month so she wouldn't have to tell me where and how to go. That and the fact that she may have read the following article, i.e., Cell Phone GPS App Smackdown. http://www.pcworld.com/article/15257...smackdown.html
http://maps.google.com/help/terms_maps.html
2. Restrictions on Use. Unless you have received prior written authorization from Google (or, as applicable, from the provider of particular Content), you must not:
(a) access or use the Products or any Content through any technology or means other than those provided in the Products, or through other explicitly authorized means Google may designate (such as through the Google Maps/Google Earth APIs);
...
(g) use the Service or Content with any products, systems, or applications for or in connection with (i) real time navigation or route guidance, including but not limited to turn-by-turn route guidance that is synchronized to the position of a user's sensor-enabled device; or (ii) any systems or functions for automatic or autonomous control of vehicle behavior.
(My emphasis.)
i.e. you can't use the Map data that you get via Apple's SDK, that ultimately comes from Google and their licensors, to do turn-by-turn GPS. But the likes of Garmin et al obviously have seperate licensing deals in place with the people that ultimately own the map and meta data.
No you didn't, you implied that using a cradle mounted GPS was inherently dangerous and suggested such devices should be built in. ... etc. ...
Best. Post. Ever.
?seeded a beta version of iPhone Software 2.1 with a version of the CoreLocation framework that could recognize the cardinal direction of an iPhone through GPS as well as its velocity?
This software can quite likely NOT tell the cardinal direction of an iPhone - contrary to what they claim. I bet that if you stand still with your iPhone and turn it around from pointing north to instead point to the west, the software cannot tell the difference.
I believe the software can tell in what cardinal "motion" direction the iPhone is moving in, but not "directed" in. This is much more than just semanthics. This is pure and deliberate lying!
This iPhone software is NOT a compass! I dare them to prove otherwise!
This software can quite likely NOT tell the cardinal direction of an iPhone - contrary to what they claim. I bet that if you stand still with your iPhone and turn it around from pointing north to instead point to the west, the software cannot tell the difference.
I believe the software can tell in what cardinal "motion" direction the iPhone is moving in, but not "directed" in. This is much more than just semanthics. This is pure and deliberate lying!
This iPhone software is NOT a compass! I dare them to prove otherwise!
You are talking about the accelerometer in the device, but seem to be forgetting about the GPS, which easily determine your relative velocity and thus calculate your cardinal direction.
This is such a no brain feature that I can't help but think that Apple is waiting for the next version of the iPhone to deliver it. Think about it, there probably aren't going to be any major improvements, radiowise, in the next version of the iPhone.
Anyway, regardless of what I think, how much would you guys pay for a downloadable app that has turn-by-turn GPS? I would have no problem dishing $50 bucks or so, however I would resist any attempt at a monthly subscription fee (a 'la VZ Navigator).
Verizon does charge for VZ Navigator but they also use it as a way to entice you into their data plan. Just for adding the dataplan I get VZ Navigator for free.
Just to play devil's advocate, I can think of one really good reason why this is a bad idea.
Turn-by-turn is almost exclusively used by drivers. Turn-by-turn devices have brackets to sit in, in their rightful place on the dashboard of the car. Add to that the fact that most accidents are caused by inattention and you have a problem waiting to happen. Voice prompting alleviates some of this, but there will almost certainly be some portion of dead pedestrians directly attributed to people juggling their iPhone while driving now.
Turn-by-turn GPS for drivers is something that really is better off being a part of the car, not a part of the music player/game machine in your pocket. It's something that should have been standard and built in to those ridiculous screens that most cars have in the dashboard a long time ago. They certainly serve no other real purpose.
This shows how being so cutting edge can leave you in the dark when something is left out. The reason for turn by turn navigation isn't so I can watch a three inch screen give me direction. It is so the phone will read me the directions over my bluetooth earpiece. I don't have a mount for my phone.
Verizon has also added voice recognition to their GPS software so now it is even more driving friendly. I hit the shortcut for VZ Navigator. It goes to the entry screen. I hold down the button and say "Taco Bell" and it recognizes the words and makes the entry. Then I hit NAV and it tells me how to get their via my earpiece.
Oh right, I mean, when I'm on the highway in wall to wall traffic going 60 my natural inclination is to pull over when my phone rings and cause a huge wreck - yeah, that's genius. Why would I utilize the free hands-free device that comes with my iPhone??? (smart a$$ comment begets a smart a$$ reply...)
And the problem with firing it back up? As the article said it takes 30 seconds just to initialize - they should allow the phone to just stay at the top like it it when you press the home button in the middle of the call without having to go to the phone app itself.
That would suck. It should work seamlessly.
don't other phones with turn-by-turn GPS arleady exist? How do these other phones address these problems?
My VZ Nav isn't perfect so it doesn't go to the background. The phone takes the call and then when it is done, switches right back to the VZ Nav app. There might be a way to have it come back during the call but I haven't tried it since talking while driving and hitting buttons would be pretty dangerous.
I'm a bit worried about the iPhone. In some ways it feels very much like the first Mac OS, revolutionary in some areas but completely lacking in others. (Think multitasking, etc back when.)
You are talking about the accelerometer in the device, but seem to be forgetting about the GPS, which easily determine your relative velocity and thus calculate your cardinal direction.
No, I meen exactly what I'm saying in my reply above.
The cardinal direction means the direction in which the unit (the iPhone) is pointing. Think about it for a while? The GPS chip inside the phone knows where it is, but doesn't have a clue of how you hold it, especially not in what direction it or the phone is pointing. It is an earth coordinate - nothing more. This is why I clearly stated that the iPhone should be in rest.
Yes, I know that most of the time that you are navigating with a GPS you are actually moving. But I oftenly require otherwise, and I know lots of other use cases where the device cannot move either, and still the users need the cardinal direction. For this I use a compass. The device and software above claims to give me such functionality, but it doesn't deliver on that(!). On the contrary, it requires me to run around (a compass doesn't need that, right). Well, if I run around long enough, I will get to my destination anyway - even without this device!
Now you can play some tricks however - especially with the iPhone device. None of them can however give you reliable cardinal direction of the unit itself, and none of them are used in the software of this article - but at least you can have some fun developing a few programs. Try for ex. one f the the following ways, and maybe you'll be rich:
- You can calibrate the cardinal direction of the iPhone once, and then record an integrated path of delta-movements by help of the accelerometer. You can then calculate an estimate of the direction in which the iPhone is pointing. The drawback of this method is however that the error from the accelerometer is ackumulated over time since the calibration, and this makes the total error grow to unuseful values almost immediately. Also, you need a compass to start with anyway.
- You can use the built-in camera of the iPhone to try to recognize the surroundings. With some assistance from the GPS and details from a map, you can then have software trying to guess how the camera picture should be fitted onto the map. As a last step you can then project that picture from the map location and onto the GPS location of the iPhone. Some simple math would then let you know what cardinal direction the iPhone was pointing in as the camera picture was taken. Problems with this method are of course obvious - complicated algorithms to fit camera picture into a real map - no real-time results since cardinal direction originates from the moment the picture was taken etc. etc.
Still angry at the wrongful claims of the manufacturer. Sue them ? ? probably not. Possible to sue them ?probably yes.Still angry at the wrongful claims of the manufacturer.
Edit: I see now.
First of all, it seems that AppleInsider stated the term, not Apple, Inc. AI is not the manufacturer. More importantly, you are getting confused by the term "cardinal". The term only refers to the points. Even a magnetic compass doesn't know what direction I'm facing. It merely points to the strongest magnetic source. From that, assuming I'm in the Northen Hemisphere and not near lodestone or such materials it will point North. I can be holding it backwards or sideways and it will point to North. A GPS works the same way as it will know your cardinal direction. In other words, when you are moving at a fast enough rate it will be able to tell you what the cardinal points are.
I try not to quote Wikipedia but they explain in plain English. You can find other sources that state the same thing: PS: Did you know that the term 'orient', which now means align or position comes from the Latin meaning rising or east? Did you also know that early maps had the East at the top to signify the rising sun, which was the first position one could determine at day break? Of course, there were also the stars at night.
Edit: I see now.
Ok, I think we are basically meaning the same thing. A compass can give you a certain direction (e.g the cardinal directions) without requiring you to move, while a gps cannot - it requires you to move (even with the software described above).
Thanks for the interesting background facts on the word "orient" - that was definately unknown to me.