Fletch,
Any word on what carriers it will be availble for? I don't feel like giving up my iPhone just yet.

If Garmin wants to dominate this sector they will have to once and for all fix their flawed routing choices. Regardless of the quality of the product overall, they still consistently lose out on routing to Magellan, simply because they have failed to add a "most use of freeways" option to their list of choices. I continue to find it astounding that EVERY other brand has managed to miss the importance of adding this very obvious routing choice.

In addition to that, Garmin continues to include arrival time estimates that are consistently incorrect (always predicting arrivals that would require breaking the speed limit or running red lights to actually achieve) versus the more realistic (and correct) arrival estimates used by a variety of other makers.

I am currently evaluating the newest firmware and map upgrades to the Navigon 7100 on a trip to NC from Chicago. While the new software DRAMATICALLY improves some of the shortcomings Fletch noted in his review of the unit (including more accurate routing), it still fails to measure up to Magellan's routing engine. In every case where the Magellan's "most use of freeways" provided a critical edge in providing the best route it's been obvious that if the Navigon had this choice it too would have provided a flawless route to each destination.

I have contacted Navigon regarding this and am cautiously optimistic that they will be more proactive than some of the other brands. The fact that their newest firmware upgrade proved to be a very good one speaks to Navigon's commitment to provide the best PND available. Garmin better look out, as this company appears serious about making a play for the "crown."

I'd be interested in what insiders like Fletch and GPS4ME have to say about why they think other companies would fail to incorporate such an obvious routing advantage as "most use of freeways." It certainly doesn't seem like the kind of feature Magellan could legally lock up for themselves, so why not emulate what works so very well?

Regards,
Steve

As for the NuviFone, I don't think Garmin will be selling them through the normal channels, maybe through an exclusive service provider like AT&T but not sure yet.

As far as most use of freeway goes, I would guess there is probably a patent on it by RockWell previously and Magellan could have inherited this patent, not sure why but one would think it is not so difficult to replicate by a class act company such as Garmin.

NuviFone will probably work well enough, sad part is I doubt any authorized Garmin reseller will be selling them any time soon without Garmin selling the products unlocked to any service providers.

Have to wait and see but we have the Nuvi 880 in and that was a nice surprise anyhow.

GPS4ME,
Do you run a GPS business/store? How much are you guys selling the 880 for? Is there a website?

I confess that I cannot understand Steve's remarks.

When my Nuvi 310 computes a route the ETA is never more than 2 minutes away from the real time of arrival, and I always drive at or below the speed limit.

This obviously does not include traffic or re-routes caused by works or other things the navigator cannot know beforehand.

BTW, I am waiting eagerly for the Nuviphone, as it will lower the weight of my pocket. Especially if they give us a good compatibility with the DBs from the PalmOS main applications.

There has been speculation that GPS on cell phones will kill the stand-alone GPS receiver. But based on very little information (I watched a guy try to do a route), if it relies on external routing and mapping, it will not. Sometimes it works fine, sometimes there is an unacceptable delay - as in, it loads to around 80 percent and then hangs. So if Garmin makes their phone with internal mapping and routing, it will have a distinct advantage over the current cell phone/mappers.

I don't think that the nuvifone will be successful. They won't sell many. Plus, there are many phones out on the market that do the same things as the nuvifone and better.

As far as Garmins' ETA's, Steve, It generates a time from the get-go and then sees your average sppeed and adjusts accordingly. I make a 50-75 mile trip to the eastern end of long island daily (southampton, east hampton etc...), and my nuvi 660 is never more than 10 minutes off the eta from the point that I leave. Once I get on the highway, the eta is usuall pretty accurate even with 40-50 miles to go.

I'd love one. I don't want an iphone but at the same time I'm not foolishly going to pay an absurd amount for a garmin phone. Given that some of their nuvi line is still priced way up there, I just can't see how they'll offer this competetively.

At a minimum, it better include FREE online traffic updates, etc.

And unless they can price it at or less than $199, it'll flop and I won't get one.

Steve may be misunderstanding the Garmin routing engine. I'll post more details later as soon as testing is complete, but the Garmin nuvis, specifically the 7x0's, have the apparently unique ability to adjust to the individual user, something Magellan's are lacking.

Having used a Nuvi660 extensively for both short and long trips side by side with an older Magellan Roadmate 800, I can definitively state that the 660 did NOT predict arrival times as accurately compared to the RM800, nor did it properly handle instances where there were two possible interstates to choose from with only a very minimal difference in total distance. The RM800 (and RM700/760 before it) properly adapted to the "better" freeway within two miles of recalculating - the Nuvi660 tried for forty miles to direct me back to the other interstate, which would have added at least another hour or more to my trip.

If the newer 700 series adapts to the individual user, I think that's fantastic! I may have to give one a try to see if the routing engine has been improved to avoid the above mentioned problem.

Regarding GPS4me's suggestion that there might be a patent (or trademark) on "most use of freeways," it's an interesting explanation, but I can't help but wonder why other companies couldn't simply refer to the choice in a different way and still accomplish the same result without stepping on any specific patent issues. I do find it hard to believe that any company could actually patent a particular route strategy. Technology, yes, but a way of computing the best route? Seems a little too far-fetched. Anyway, I appreciate you throwing the thought out there nevertheless.

As I stated previously, I believe the Nuvis are the best overall product out there. having just returned from a two week driving trip with a Navigon 7100, I can tell you that the Navigon did a lot of very impressive things that nobody else does, BUT that was marred by occasional lockups which required shutting off and restarting the unit, sometimes when it was very inconvenient to do so. It also seemed to have less "pinpoint" accuracy than some other major brands, although this was rarely a major problem. Still, I would have expected a Sirfstar III device to be as accurate as any other similar product.

Bottom line: I'll miss some of the unique features only the Navigon has, but will probably go back to a Magellan or Nuvi.

Regards,

By the way, Warren, dynamically adapting to the user's speed is a plus (which I believe my old RM700/760 used to do) but in my opinion a good PND ought to accurately predict the time of arrival or time of travel before one even starts driving. My old Roadmates always did this quite well, whereas the Nuvi660 I had NEVER accurately predicted arrival times. It almost seemed as though Garmin was trying to sell their products by disingenuously suggesting through routing estimates that their product would "get you there" sooner than competitors (which of course is rarely true). Sitting side by side with my dad's RM800 it was clear that the Nuvi fell short on routing compared with the older product, especially during dynamic re-routes occuring as we drove. I sincerely hope the newest units (and firmware updates) have solved this problem, as the 660 was a joy to use in every other way except the most important one ... accurate navigation.

Regards,

In a nutshell, the nuvi's are using the same algorythm that was used in the RM2720, and subsequent models. The longer you use them (without resetting), the more accurate they become. My 760 will consistently give me a more accurate travel time on primarily interstate routes than my TT930 with IQRoutes. On local drives, the TT is usually a bit more accurate. Out of the box, the nuvi will assume you drive 9mph over on major highways. Once it has some personal drive history, subsequent trips on those same routes, as well as similar ones, will now show updated times based on your personal driving style.

I'm going to guess that the nuviphone will be running Linux, in addition to using GeoClue. Doing so will allow for location aware services, along the same line as the iPhone, as well as 3rd party application development. Garmin may be a little more sophisticated than we may be giving it credit for.

Unfortunately, it is now delayed until the first half of next year, Garmin blaming it on phone carriers requesting certain specific features for their systems.

I have had a C390 Garvin for about 9 months. Recently the estimated time of arrival has been off by 1-2 hours. Suggestion?