Wireless Traffic as opposed to RDS-TMC Traffic

[Captain_Eric]

On another thread (an excellent 920 review by Darren), Wireless Traffic as opposed to RDS-TMC Traffic was talked about due to a tangential question I asked. I should have started another thread then, so will put my follow-up questions here. Sorry about that earlier transgression. Anyway . . .

Based on that discussion, I am still not "absolutely" clear if Wireless Traffic is identical to RDS-TMC Traffic or not.

It seems that the source data might be (or is?) identical, but that the frequency of updates (better with Wireless Traffic?) is different or that the coverage area is different (better with Wireless Traffic?).

Can anyone offer a further clarification?

(Maybe Dennis and Darren put their heads together on this and pronounce your combined brain power and experience?)

As an another (closely) related topic, does anyone have any experience with HD Traffic?

Thanks,

Yankee Capn

[Captain_Eric]

I believe I found my own answer (minutes after I posted), based on this video from TomTom headquarters in Amsterdam.

http://www.vimeo.com/649472

You can come to your own conclusions, but it seems to me that Wireless Traffic is different from and better than (at least more frequent and maybe more detailed) TMS Traffic.

It's a very interesting video on High Definition Traffic by the way.

We see you’re using an ad-blocker. We’re fine with that and won’t stop you visiting the site.
Have you considered making a donation towards website running costs?.
Or you could disable your ad-blocker for this site. We think you’ll find our adverts are not overbearing!