Originally Posted by mattcbf600

This is a really interesting thread - thanks for starting it.

For me it boils down to the right tool for the right job. The main difference between dedicated GPS units and Smartphones boil down to the underlying tech.

Smartphones will poll the satellite about once a second, dedicated units do it several times per second - this gives a significantly more accurate position amongst other things. Smartphones have batteries that are designed for phone calls etc, a dedicated GPS unit generally has a much longer battery life as it's designed to do just that.

Dedicated units can display maps from multiple sources - paid for and free - and can, via bluetooth, share and connect to a phone in order to share position and updates online via a GSM/GPRS connection. Smartphones can display maps from free and paid sources as well as online sources 'live' - such as google maps. But given the cost of data connectivity outside of your native country I'm not sure about the value of a 'live' map. Certainly an up to date map would be useful.

So for me - a dedicated unit, that is waterproof, hardy (my Garmin Zumo has bounced down the road at 70+ MPH several times and is fine - I dropped my iPhone from my desk onto a tiled floor and it smashed). So why would I want a smartphone, that requires lots of additional software (paid and free) and addition hardware (to make it waterproof)?

Incidentally Garmin are doing very very well at the moment - mainly because they understand that people want the right tool for the right job - there's units for motorbikes, cars, boats, walkers, skiers, airplanes..... all designed specifically to do the job.

I'll put my Garmin Zumo against any Smartphone any day - and it'll win on every score!

Originally Posted by Walkabout

It seems to me that it remains a case of horses for courses.

Originally Posted by PanEuropean

the result is a bit like a dog walking on its hind legs: What is remarkable is not how well the dog does it, but simply that the dog can do it.

Originally Posted by PanEuropean

..... smartwatch?

Originally Posted by Threewheelbonnie

Isn't a watch (smart or not) the key to the whole navigation thing anyway? And, if my ancient memories are also correct (and remembering I haven't navigated without some sort of electrical device this century (and before that a Sinclair calculator beat the ****y tables)), wasn't the competitor to John Harrison some animal tormenting loon who thought a dog cut open in London would cause one in the Caribbean to howl?




Andy

Originally Posted by c-m

Really we ought to be talking about software, as that is the big differentiator. The hardware is all similar, bar little differences.

Garmin software hasn't been available on mobiles since 2007. Most poeple use garmin file types when sharing data, routes, waypoints etc.. So garmin devices have a big advantage there.

Originally Posted by PanEuropean

For sure, absolutely.

I mean, if I want to make a phone call, or check my email, or surf the web, I'll choose a smartphone to do those jobs. With a lot of fooling around, extra software, and compromises, I suppose I could accomplish those tasks on my GPS navigator, but honestly, it wasn't designed primarily for those purposes, and the result is a bit like a dog walking on its hind legs: What is remarkable is not how well the dog does it, but simply that the dog can do it.

The corollary, of course, is that if I want navigational guidance on a fast moving motorcycle, obviously, I'll choose to use a GPS navigator to do that job.

Originally Posted by TheWarden

Just coming to the end of my 2014 trip and had both the iPhone and the montana running osm side by side and every time th egarmin worked better, quicker to get a signal quicker to lock position.

The phone also over heated several time (easy fix) but was virtually unusable on piste and not visible in bright sunlight. Also had a chat with a lot of other overlander and not one used a smartphone as their navigation but as a back up.