|
grover posted:You're off by about an order of magnitude; 1 mile is about 1.6km. Works out that 100kph~62mph. Hundreds of mph is really really fast for a car. That was the joke. Actually, the speed limits in France were a bit lower than what I'd be doing in the US on any particular road. This makes sense, considering the width of the roads and even the distances between towns.
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 16:38
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 00:15 |
|
|
To change the topic a little, apparently Google's logged 300,000 miles on their self driving cars with no accidents (that were their fault anyway). http://www.theatlantic.com/technolo...control/260926/ So, assuming that the cars drive 1000x as far and help to statistically prove themselves to be better than humans, what are your predictions for adoption? Will we be able to change traffic engineering in 30 years time if most of the cars are driverless?
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 17:38
|
|
|
80% higher capacity per lane, 2/3 the width per lane, so we're looking at massively higher throughput with driverless.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 17:40
|
|
|
Christ the comments on that article. Apparently some chinese dude spends all his time every day searching for every article that remotely mentions google and endlessly spams and argues about some murder conspiracy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 17:55
|
|
|
I got actual as-bid costs for the truck escape ramp. $100,000 for the unit itself isn't far off. For the arrestor unit (including the concrete walls and heating unit, as well as installation), the price was $200,000 exactly. Everything else adds up, though: cops, cones and drums, overhead sign, flashers, paint, attenuator at the blunt end of the wall... the total for all that was an astonishing $2,825,000. And that was the low bid. Chaos Motor posted:You're looking at adding 200K per lane-mile of heated pavement vs 900K for new asphalt construction, ~200K for simple resurface, and the heating unit has a 20-ish year life while that asphalt is going to be torn up after 7-ish years and redone. Cichlidae probably has tighter numbers than I do but you can see the problem already. And as for you, the heating unit is by Warmzone (https://www.warmzone.com). They are based in Utah and do a lot of installations for ski resorts. PM me for the Sales Engineer's contact info. There are some places that have done heated bridges. I'm not sure how that turned out. Some other experimental installations have included automated de-icer nozzles that spray the bridge when temperatures drop below zero. Volmarias posted:To change the topic a little, apparently Google's logged 300,000 miles on their self driving cars with no accidents (that were their fault anyway). Will we be able to change it? Hell yes. As a whole, the field is very receptive to new technologies, though our infrastructure tends to last too long to implement them as quickly as we'd like. If we go 100% automated, I'll probably lose my job, as there won't be a need for signs, signals, or pavement markings.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 21:44
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:Will we be able to change it? Hell yes. As a whole, the field is very receptive to new technologies, though our infrastructure tends to last too long to implement them as quickly as we'd like. If we go 100% automated, I'll probably lose my job, as there won't be a need for signs, signals, or pavement markings. That's not going to happen in the next 50 years. Lets say that, within 20 years, 50% of us are using computer controlled cars. How will our planning be affected, since we'll still have to deal with human operated vehicles for at least the next 10-20 years?
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 23:26
|
|
|
Volmarias posted:That's not going to happen in the next 50 years. We will keep planning for human drivers, as they're going to remain the worst drivers out there. Just like how we design for the worst drivers now. Automated cars will have to react to signs and signals meant for human drivers, at least at first. After a time, we would probably do dual guidance, with radio transmitters on each sign to relay the same information to the car as a driver sees. I say probably, because at this point, the car is getting redundant information (since it can already "read" the existing signs), and redundant information means there's a possibility someone will gently caress up and it'll get mixed messages. It would be a better strategy to wait until 100% of vehicles are automated to start putting up transmitters at all. The exception is for providing information that isn't provided to regular drivers, like design speed, road condition, personalized detour routes, congestion info, etc. You'd be better off getting that information from a central database, though, which means an Internet connection is much more useful than a local connection. And that means that I, as a traffic engineer, won't even be touching it.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2012 23:52
|
|
|
But if I play my cards right, I will. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2012 03:05
|
|
|
Chaos Motor posted:But if I play my cards right, I will. Yes indeed! Even for human drivers, that kind of information is getting simultaneously more important and easier to store and distribute. I'm sure it'll be a huge boon for anyone in Maintenance and Highway Operations, as well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2012 03:15
|
|
|
So like six months ago I was looking for a certain type of sensor and the cheapest I could find for what I needed was about $700, and today I found the same thing in multiple configurations in packs of 10 for $125. Either I was way off target last time or there's a serious boom going on in the embedded sensor space already.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2012 04:09
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:After a time, we would probably do dual guidance, with radio transmitters on each sign to relay the same information to the car as a driver sees. I say probably, because at this point, the car is getting redundant information (since it can already "read" the existing signs) But why would you need radio transmitters if the cars can read ordinary signs fine? Regular signs are probably more reliable and durable, and I think there will be people driving cars for a long time still, if not forever. Think oldtimers, emergency vehicles, recreational drivers, malfunctioning cars which have reverted back to manual control, etc.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2012 10:35
|
|
|
John Dough posted:But why would you need radio transmitters if the cars can read ordinary signs fine? Regular signs are probably more reliable and durable, and I think there will be people driving cars for a long time still, if not forever. Think oldtimers, emergency vehicles, recreational drivers, malfunctioning cars which have reverted back to manual control, etc. You didn't read the rest of the paragraph. Unless radio transmitters are massively cheaper than signs (which they may very well be on freeways, where a lot of the signs are made useless by GPS anyway), we'd keep signs up until it was 100% automated drivers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2012 14:05
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:You didn't read the rest of the paragraph. Unless radio transmitters are massively cheaper than signs (which they may very well be on freeways, where a lot of the signs are made useless by GPS anyway), we'd keep signs up until it was 100% automated drivers. No, what you said was that there would be little point in switching over until 100% of all vehicles are driverless. But since driverless vehicles need to be able to read regular signs anyway, I don't think there is a (technical) need to switch to radio signals at all. It could well be more cost-effective though, I don't know. In fact what I can see happening is that highways eventually become off-limits to manually controlled vehicles, but smaller roads allowing them, for those people who can't or won't drive an autocar.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2012 14:53
|
|
|
John Dough posted:No, what you said was that there would be little point in switching over until 100% of all vehicles are driverless. But since driverless vehicles need to be able to read regular signs anyway, I don't think there is a (technical) need to switch to radio signals at all. It could well be more cost-effective though, I don't know. Overhead sign supports (heck, even the side-mounted ones) are hundreds of thousands of dollars, plus a bunch of annual maintenance and inspection costs once they reach the end of their lifespans. A radio transmitter might be $10. I don't see the signs lasting any longer than human drivers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2012 14:55
|
|
|
General target costs for sensor systems are $0.01 - $1, there's no way a sign is cheaper in the long run. And it wouldn't have to be in the sign, there's no reason the road itself can't hold all the traffic control information pertinent to its specific section.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2012 15:03
|
|
|
John Dough posted:No, what you said was that there would be little point in switching over until 100% of all vehicles are driverless. But since driverless vehicles need to be able to read regular signs anyway, I don't think there is a (technical) need to switch to radio signals at all. It could well be more cost-effective though, I don't know. Well what if a necessary sign is obscured from view of the car by say a passing larger vehicle, or unusual weather? It would make sense to place transmitters in situations where this is likely to happen.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2012 15:52
|
|
|
Install Gentoo posted:Well what if a necessary sign is obscured from view of the car by say a passing larger vehicle, or unusual weather? It would make sense to place transmitters in situations where this is likely to happen. That happens for human drivers, too. Google's car doesn't seem to have had any trouble with it yet. Edit: I'm not saying that having a redundant source of information is bad. GPS already acts that way. It's more an issue of cost-effectiveness. Is it worth putting out a million dollars worth of equipment, or building the infrastructure for it, to prevent one minor injury crash and a handful of property-damage-only crashes? Heck, maybe it is. I suppose that'll be a decision left to the engineers of the future. Cichlidae fucked around with this message at 20:36 on Aug 11, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2012 16:50
|
|
|
Cichlidae posted:Unless radio transmitters are massively cheaper than signs (which they may very well be on freeways, where a lot of the signs are made useless by GPS anyway), we'd keep signs up until it was 100% automated drivers. But a lot of people don't use GPS. I am one of them. I prefer to know how the road network is laid out and use the signs a lot. I don't think more than half the people on the road are using GPS yet. Are there any figures on this?
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2012 19:32
|
|
|
NihilismNow posted:But a lot of people don't use GPS. I am one of them. I prefer to know how the road network is laid out and use the signs a lot. GPS is nice as a backup, but road signs are king for navigation. My GPS may say I get off in an exit in 200 miles, but in between may be little gotchas that could cause me to go down the wrong path if I'm not reading road signs.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2012 19:37
|
|
|
NihilismNow posted:But a lot of people don't use GPS. I am one of them. I prefer to know how the road network is laid out and use the signs a lot. I think the idea is that a self driving car will not need any of the signs because it will have GPS. As long as there are people driving, we will need signs. I haven't been able to think of a type of sign that the self-driving car would need (in a world where are there are only self driving cars). Stop and yield signs aren't needed, the cars would communicate, and detect cars that aren't talking. Speed limits would either be determined by GPS, or just be unlimited. Wayfinding, exit only lanes, turn only lanes, all taken care of by GPS.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2012 19:44
|
|
|
NihilismNow posted:But a lot of people don't use GPS. I am one of them. I prefer to know how the road network is laid out and use the signs a lot. Over 60% of Americans own smartphones and I don't think any significant amount of them actually lack GPS
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2012 20:32
|
|
|
It's kinda hard to look at phone GPS while you're driving, though it's invaluable with avoiding getting lost and figuring out routes. Especially when enhanced with traffic and weather data!NihilismNow posted:But a lot of people don't use GPS. I am one of them. I prefer to know how the road network is laid out and use the signs a lot.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2012 20:41
|
|
|
grover posted:It's kinda hard to look at phone GPS while you're driving, though it's invaluable with avoiding getting lost and figuring out routes. Especially when enhanced with traffic and weather data! It's actually absurdly easy, you just need like $9.99 to spare on a holder like so http://www.accessorygeeks.com/universal-windshield-mount-cell-phone-holder-ipod-pda.html
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2012 20:51
|
|
|
Install Gentoo posted:It's actually absurdly easy, you just need like $9.99 to spare on a holder like so http://www.accessorygeeks.com/universal-windshield-mount-cell-phone-holder-ipod-pda.html What I really don't like is how the places I need GPS the most are places with the worst signal- for those who haven't noticed, google maps doesn't work without a signal, and even if you have offline maps software, cell phone GPS isn't real GPS, but "assisted GPS" that requires a network connection to get a GPS lock. I even bought a an external bluetooth GPS unit only to discover it doesn't work without a network connection either. Garmins and Magellens suck in other ways, but at least they can get a fix without internet. grover fucked around with this message at 21:12 on Aug 12, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2012 21:09
|
|
|
AGPS doesn't mean that a device doesn't have a "real" GPS chip: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assisted_GPSquote:Assisted GPS, generally abbreviated as A-GPS or aGPS, is a system which can, under certain conditions, improve the startup performance, or time-to-first-fix (TTFF) of a GPS satellite-based positioning system. It is used extensively with GPS-capable cellular phones as its development was accelerated by the U.S. FCC's 911 mandate making the location of a cell phone available to emergency call dispatchers. It can speed up using GPS since it gives a rough idea of where the phone is so that it knows which satellite signals are most important to listen to. The iPhone, and most smartphones, have real GPS hardware on board and can find your location even without a data connection. Anandtech posted:The iPhone 4 previously used a BCM4750 single chip GPS receiver, and shared the 2.4 GHz WiFi antenna as shown many times in diagrams. We reported with the CDMA iPhone 4 that Qualcomm’s GPS inside MDM6600 was being used in place of some discrete solution, and showed a video demonstrating its improved GPS fix. I suspected at the time that the CDMA iPhone 4 might be using GLONASS from MDM6600 (in fact, the MDM6600 amss actually flashed onto the CDMA iPhone 4 includes many GLONASS references), but never was able to concretely confirm it was actually being used. Chemmy fucked around with this message at 21:33 on Aug 12, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2012 21:30
|
|
|
Chemmy posted:AGPS doesn't mean that a device doesn't have a "real" GPS chip: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Assisted_GPS It does work great in hotel rooms and other wifi hotspots when I don't really need GPS to tell me where I am, though. grover fucked around with this message at 21:58 on Aug 12, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2012 21:55
|
|
|
You said "cell phone GPS isn't real GPS". It has a real GPS chip. I haven't done extensive testing on getting a GPS lock in foreign countries without data, but I've gotten GPS coordinates without data in America plenty of times when I wished I could see where I was on a map.
|
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2012 22:13
|
|
|
Chemmy posted:You said "cell phone GPS isn't real GPS". It has a real GPS chip. You can google search and see many others complaining about the same thing; AGPS works great for most people under most conditions and I use it all the time, but it's still not a "real" GPS like you get with a TomTom or Garmin. If you plan to travel abroad: don't count on your cell phone GPS to work offline! grover fucked around with this message at 22:29 on Aug 12, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 12, 2012 22:19
|
|
|
grover posted:Why? Because google maps sucks as a real-time navigational tool due to having to constantly take your attention from the road to look at it or hit buttons. http://www.google.com/mobile/navigation/  Oh and I had a pretty good navigation experience in the US even on my European phone which doesn't receive US 3G signals (ie I was on EDGE all the time). This of course required me to hit up the first T-mobile store I could get to, coming out of ATL and buying a prepaid SIMcard, so if you're too stupid to do that kind of thing YMMV.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2012 01:19
|
|
|
Koesj posted:http://www.google.com/mobile/navigation/ Or in deep rural areas or mountains pretty much anywhere in the world for that matter. grover fucked around with this message at 01:37 on Aug 13, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2012 01:33
|
|
|
I do hope the updated Google Maps makes its way to the iPhone; Google ending their contract with Apple might be good for their apps, though I could see a rejection because it imitates Apple's new Maps app (or, well the other way around).
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2012 01:40
|
|
|
grover posted:Have you ever tried actually using AGPS outside of a network connection, though? It's useless. Works great on recent Android phones (the most popular phones in America and Europe!), especially after the recent google maps update that allows you to precache map areas. And if you're willing to pay a bit more, you can get GPS apps from the major standalone manufacturers that preload maps and routing info for entire continents and handle all routing and stuff phoneside (by default, since it's usually more useful, builtin phone navigation will use a remote server for routes and to stream the relevant map info over) grover posted:The best networks in the US are CDMA, thus most americans have CDMA phones which don't work in europe. Just like your GSM phone wouldn't work in CDMA-only nations like Japan. You don't know poo poo about phone networks. The best networks in America are GSM/UMTS (AT&T and T-Mobile). Most Americans are carrying phones that can handle roaming on GSM/UMTS networks in foreign countries, since 43% already use GSM/UMTS networks here, and a sizable fraction of Verizon and Sprint's phones are "worldphones" that use the outdated and slow CDMA2000/EV-DO technology while in America, but can access GSM/UMTS networks in other countries. Japan is the farthest you could possibly be from "CDMA only" - they were the first ones with UMTS! Furthermore, at least 55% of Japanese cell phone users are on UMTS networks for 3g, NOT CDMA2000/EV-DO.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2012 02:08
|
|
|
Install Gentoo posted:Works great on recent Android phones (the most popular phones in America and Europe!), especially after the recent google maps update that allows you to precache map areas. And if you're willing to pay a bit more, you can get GPS apps from the major standalone manufacturers that preload maps and routing info for entire continents and handle all routing and stuff phoneside (by default, since it's usually more useful, builtin phone navigation will use a remote server for routes and to stream the relevant map info over) I didn't mean to start a giant derail. I'm confident technical shortcomings that exist now be fixed in upcoming generations of smartphones, but my point was that good ole fashioned map navigation isn't entirely dead yet. Even if all the maps we use are electronic... grover fucked around with this message at 02:23 on Aug 13, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2012 02:20
|
|
|
grover posted:I have one of those (something similar), and occasionally use it on long trips. Not a whole lot of benefit over just hand-holding a phone, so I rarely use it. Why? Because google maps sucks as a real-time navigational tool due to having to constantly take your attention from the road to look at it or hit buttons. It's also far more awkward to use at stop lights and other moments of opportunity to check traffic and weather, etc., when mounted on the dash vs in your hand. Hello, I worked for ALK Technologies between 2008 and 2010. ALK makes CoPilot, turn-by-turn nav software that caches all of its maps locally rather than performing any network communication. I helped port CoPilot to Android in 2008-2009, and maintained it until I left. I later moved on to Samsung to work on the GPS software frontend for the first Galaxy S, with that software being reused in a couple of other devices. It is safe to say that I have at least a vague idea how GPS works on cellphones, along with AGPS DID YOU KNOW: Prior to the 1.5 release of Android (Cupcake) in April 2009, there was no actual AGPS support on Android phones? It's true! That G1 that we all knew and loved used GPS data from the satellites directly. It sucked to get a signal but it was definitely possible. DID YOU KNOW: The Motorola Droid, the one that was released with Eclair (2.0) actually DID NOT have AGPS? The GPS chipset shipped on the device was good enough to get a lock, very fast, all by itself. I didn't believe it, but my Verizon contacts insisted that it was in fact the case. The reason that your phone doesn't get a GPS lock doesn't have anything to do with AGPS. AGPS is just a technology where your phone can query the network and ask for advanced information on the status of the GPS constellation. If you don't have network connectivity sufficient to query for AGPS information (almost certainly MSB, not MSA, unless you're a fancypants), the GPS constellation actually broadcasts information about its own positions; it takes 5 minutes for a satellite to broadcast all of the data about all of the other satellites, but if you can see more than one satellite you can speed things up. The reason that your phone doesn't get a GPS lock without network assistance is because YOUR GPS CHIPSET SUCKS. There's only a federal requirement that GPS hardware is available on your device, which can be used to locate you in E-911 mode (where I'm assuming the GPS goes into MSA AGPS); there's no requirement that it works great without outside information. The reason that your Garmin hardware gets a lock quickly, despite having no network connectivity, is because Garmin splurged and spent $10 for the GPS chipset on the device instead of $2. Shameless commerce plug: I made a thing that helps you see what your GPS status is on Android phones. JB users be warned; I haven't fixed the notifications for JB yet because  Anyone who is interested in how well their phone's GPS hardware actually works without a network connection (and is on a GSM phone) is invited to download/install a GPS status app of some kind (preferably one that shows satellite strength/information), pull their battery and remove the SIM, reinsert the battery, turn on their phone, and start the GPS status app. Edit: \/\/\/ Yes, all of that too \/\/\/ Volmarias fucked around with this message at 03:00 on Aug 13, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2012 02:52
|
|
|
Edit: well hot drat, a dude who does this stuff for a living submitted that post while I was writing minegrover posted:The problem is AGPS not providing a position fix when operating stand-alone. That's not an "AGPS" problem. It has nothing to do with the existence of AGPS. Your phone doesn't need the assistance to GPS to get a signal, it merely serves to drastically cut the fix time. AGPS allows you to have a less-than-optimal GPS receiver setup, to reduce cost and complexity for the device, with the trade off that without the network the lock time will be slower. Do you not remember how long it could take a standalone receiver to get a good fix back in like, 2000 or so? Recent standalone GPS receivers will usually be able to handle many channels at once and deal better with interference or motion while getting the first fix, while the cheaper gps chipsets in phones and the old style gps setups in older standalones received fewer channels and have poorer handling of interference and degraded signal. By design, a GPS receiver that does not have the proper time or proper area it's in already known, and doesn't have any other sources of location and time data to help it, will take up to 15 minutes to get a fix. So if the last place you used the receiver was say Florida, and then you turned it off, went over to California, and turned it back on, it would take a much longer time to get a fix again than if you turned it back on in Florida. If the time gets out of wack too, it will take even longer.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2012 02:57
|
|
|
My point was that even though i have a cellphone with Sygic GPS navigation on it i prefer not to use it. I know things the GPS doesn't for example that friday night is not a good night to use the A4 southbound. Some navigation software tries to integrate this information but by all accounts it is still lacking. Also turn by turn navigation sucks down a entire battery charge in 2 hours flat. A lot of people have cheap android smartphones but never bothered to buy navigation software or even a 3G connection. Or they may be like me and just don't use the navigation. I just hope traffic engineers don't feel good signage on motorways is redundant. Won't someone think of me and my fellow luddites!
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2012 08:01
|
|
|
NihilismNow posted:I know things the GPS doesn't for example that friday night is not a good night to use the A4 southbound. Some navigation software tries to integrate this information but by all accounts it is still lacking. I'm continuing this derail. Sorry, but navigation is a fun subject! Fun fact: You phone operator always knows where your phone is. They have to know, otherwise they couldn't route calls to you. This info can be collected for one or all subscribers via what's called a Mobile Positioning System. Some telecom operators (at least in Sweden, I don't know how prevalent this is elsewhere) will collect this location info from their network (and presumably anonymize the data). This location info for every subscriber is then correlated with geographical info on location of roads. This way they can find out where traffic is slow without even anyone on the road using a GPS! The operator can then sell this real-time information to GPS software vendors, who may send out traffic alerts to GPS owners. This is one of the services you won't get on freeware nav software. Although for instance Waze does a decent job of the same thing by checking on speed of their own users, they have too few users in my city to make any useful predictions for my travel time. Phone networks are fun! NihilismNow posted:Also turn by turn navigation sucks down a entire battery charge in 2 hours flat. Well, there is such a thing as 12V phone chargers... NihilismNow posted:I just hope traffic engineers don't feel good signage on motorways is redundant. Won't someone think of me and my fellow luddites! I'm inclined to agree with you, but I really don't think you have to worry. Signs will still be used for as long as you or I are driving.
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2012 10:38
|
|
|
Volmarias posted:The reason that your phone doesn't get a GPS lock without network assistance is because YOUR GPS CHIPSET SUCKS. There's only a federal requirement that GPS hardware is available on your device, which can be used to locate you in E-911 mode (where I'm assuming the GPS goes into MSA AGPS); there's no requirement that it works great without outside information. The reason that your Garmin hardware gets a lock quickly, despite having no network connectivity, is because Garmin splurged and spent $10 for the GPS chipset on the device instead of $2. Is there any software I can get that will make up for GPS shortcomings to give full onboard GPS functionality? Are there any new phones out there with actual good GPS chips?
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2012 10:56
|
|
|
Hippie Hedgehog posted:I'm inclined to agree with you, but I really don't think you have to worry. Signs will still be used for as long as you or I are driving. Like I said, as long as there are human drivers, there will be signs. Sign mandates are decided at the federal level, by a bunch of old white guys. If anyone is distrustful of GPS, it's them. Not to mention that this country treats driving as a basic human right. Think of it as analogous to the analog-digital TV switch. The only way I can see us doing a no-sign transition while there are still drivers on the road is with an in-car computer that shows the non-existent signs on an HUD - provided for free to owners of older cars. That sounds like a pretty great idea, now that I think of it. You could update signs without having to wait for them to fall down! You wouldn't have to worry about minimum letter heights! You could put them in any language!
|
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2012 12:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 13, 2024 00:15 |
|
|
grover posted:Why do I have no problem getting an accurate GPS fix within seconds when I'm in-network or on wifi, but no amount of waiting will get any GPS signal at all when there's no network connection? I've heard oft mentioned that my Droid2 should be able to pull down satellite info, but it apparently doesn't, and the internet is full of other people with other model android phones bitching about the same thing. Volmarias posted:The reason that your phone doesn't get a GPS lock without network assistance is because YOUR GPS CHIPSET SUCKS. It's a hardware problem, not a software problem. A software workaround exists; it's called AGPS and it's integrated into your phone, but it requires a valid network connection to work. It has two parts - Using the network to get a vague idea where you are already to help with the time to first fix - Using the network to pull down (relatively) current information about the location and status of the GPS satellite constellation. Using this information, your first fix can come much, much faster. I don't know why you never get a lock without it; it's probably an issue of the GPS chipset sucking and requiring perfect conditions when there's no network assistance. I can assure you that if you can get a lock with AGPS, your device CAN pull information from satellites; it has to! It has to know which satellite sent that signal along with what time it sent it to compute its position. Here's an experiment you can try; while in network, use your phone to get a GPS lock. Then, turn off the gps, disable your data, turn on the GPS and try again. I bet that you get a lock awful fast, since your hardware's already been primed with your location and gps constellation information. There are other things, such as a Barometer which can be used to get your altitude that can also be used to assist with accuracy and time to first fix, but most devices don't have a barometer and you'd need a network connection to get the surface level air pressure nearby anyway. Volmarias fucked around with this message at 13:11 on Aug 13, 2012 |
|
#
?
Aug 13, 2012 13:03
|
|