GPS Information.net Forum >

Here is a link to the Colorado review from GPS Mag

Looks very interesting. My question is how well does it handle raster data, and when will someone have a hack so I can upload my own Air Photos!

looks like no 24K topo maps though other than the existing Parks series...

would be "nice" if it could communicate wirelessly with a PC not only to exchange routes and waypoints but getting firmware and map updates.

Why?

When I'm near a PC, I'm also near a USB cable, which has the added benefit of powering the Colorado as well. So why wireless? There don't seem to be any advantage with that.

one less cable and one less data port....

if the unit will already have bluetooth connectivity.. why not?

OK. On my computer there's always a USB cable sitting in a port, ready to plug in cameras, GPS or whatever. That's why I didn't see any need, just disadvantages.

The Colorado doesn't have Bluetooth.

hmmmm....

Share Wirelessly

With Colorado 400t you can share your waypoints, tracks, routes and geocaches wirelessly with other Colorado users. Now you can send your favorite hike to your buddy to enjoy or the location of a cache to find. Sharing data is easy. Just select “send” to transfer your information to other Colorado units.

https://buy.garmin.com/shop/shop.do?cID=145&pID=11022

I just assumed... perhaps wrongly...

It does have a wireless capability, so that it can read your heart rate and/or bicycle cadence, if you pair it with such sensors. But that's ANT+, not Bluetooth.
Now when it's there, they use the same technology to share information with another Colorado, but ANT+ is typically nothing a PC would support.

what's ANT? and why not use an existing standard that would allow communication with other devices also if you are going to use wireless functionality?

is there a reason to NOT use bluetooth and to use something different?

The newer Forerunner and Edge models use ANT to upload workout data to the PC via a USB stick, so there is reason to hope.

ANT+ is an existing standard, used for these purposes, i.e. heart rate monitors and such. Bluetooth isn't energy effective enough for that.

well maybe it will work like the nüvi, uploads over FM?

I'm sure I don't understand but this seems bizarre....

they're going to do unit-specific broadcasts for unique data on a per-unit basis?

there's got to be more to this...

I can see.. generic map/firmware updates being done this way.. perhaps

what am I not understanding?

A firmware update is something you do so rarely, that there is no reason at all to add the additional risk of data transfer problems by going wireless. That can be done just as well via cable, as it also provides power to the unit while downloading.

Sending information to a specific navigator via FM must be a very smart idea, in some cases. Just imagine fleet management for transport companies, for example.
Sending maps could perhaps be a good idea for smaller updates. Shipping a whole continent is better done via cable, due to the large data size and transfer time.

Using ANT+ for heart rate monitors and cadence sensors is just because it's a technology that works better for that application.

Colorado mini website http://www8.garmin.com/buzz/colorado/

Features and issues with the Garmin Colorado models.

Garmin Colorado FAQ compiled by g-o-cashers (g.o.cashers@gmail.com)

Garmin Colorado Issues List

boy does this bring back memories.. from my previous life involved with Software Trouble Reporting.

I'm glad to see that the lists made there way over here. There doesn't seem to be much chatter about the Colorado here yet but once there is please let me know if there are additions/corrections which need to be made to either the FAQ or Issues List.

GO$Rs

I'm still trying to understand the logic behind the Colorado.. what need, not met by the other handhelds does it meet?

okay.. let's say this. Out of all the other " I wish my Gramin handheld did this" does the Colorado do?

24K US maps is not one... so I have a 76csx.. and it breaks.. should I replace it with a Colorado rather than another 76csx?

Advantages:

- Larger high res screen.
- Built in DEM which provides shading for built-in Topos as well as other maps loaded on the Colorado
- Moving 3D view
- Full geocaching descriptions (direct download of geocaching GPX files)
- Wherigo support
- 1GB (400t) or 350MB (300) of free internal memory (in addition to SD)
- Image (jpg) viewer
- Wireless sharing of waypoint data with other Colorado users
- Support for wireless heart rate and cadence sensors
- Alarm clock/stopwatch (I forget if these were in the 60/76csx's or not)
- Profile support for different modes of use (or different users)

Disadvantages:

- Lots of bugs (right now?!), check out the Issues List linked to this thread for details. It's obviously not clear if and when these issues will be resolved.
- Screen brightness, requires more use of backlight
- Doesn't float like a 76csx

GO$Rs

These are what are attractive to me as a geocacher. Once they get the bugs worked out it should be a good choice.

New FAQ and Issues list is located here:

http://garmincolorado.wikispaces.com/

thanks for the good info....

wow!

..."Note the map file on your Garmin is not protected, it is very easy to delete or overwrite if you are not carefu"

something tells me this issue is going to come up a few times in the forums.

Having spent the afternoon preparing Ikonos images for next week's trips into the forest with Thinkpad plus 60Csx I was wondering (again) if anyone knows if you can use your own images in the Colorado.

On the Colorado you can use your own images as a background and there is an image viewer built in which can view jpg images loaded on the SD card.

Hope that helps.

GO$Rs

--------------

Garmin Colorado FAQ and Issues List

Now it is back from two days of rainforest mapping, lugging around the Thinkpad. Great for following progress on a moving map etc but a bit bulky. So a question about the background image you mentioned - does that mean a user -calibrated image as a mapping background? Not just the ability to look at an image?