View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
medoleg Occasional Visitor
Joined: Sep 20, 2004 Posts: 12
|
Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2004 7:17 am Post subject: iPAQ recommendations? |
|
|
What model iPAQ would you recommend to use with Bluetooth GPS in the car? I have a 12" laptop but don't want to use it in the car all the time as GPS "accessory". |
|
Back to top |
|
|
Tim Buxton Pocket GPS Moderator
Joined: 14/09/2002 20:56:18 Posts: 5231 Location: Surrey, United Kingdom
|
Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2004 8:27 am Post subject: |
|
|
As you can see from my 'Bottom Line', I use a 3970 and a 5555, both of which work admirably with my Navman BT receiver. However, do you want your iPAQ to do anything else, WiFi networking, for instance? Without ever having used one, I'd say if you don't want the latest HP iPAQs then a 22XX would be a good choice, if only due to its having both SD and CF slots. _________________ Tim |
|
Back to top |
|
|
medoleg Occasional Visitor
Joined: Sep 20, 2004 Posts: 12
|
Posted: Fri Sep 24, 2004 2:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I do not need the WiFi.
I am wandering if units with 200 MHz processors will be adequate or I will need 400 MHz. If there is no difference in performance as GPS, probably no reason to get the more expensive one. On the other hand I do not want to get a unit and save $200, but not be able to view the maps properly and be frustrated. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
AdmiralK Occasional Visitor
Joined: Aug 19, 2004 Posts: 9 Location: Ascot UK
|
Posted: Sun Sep 26, 2004 7:47 pm Post subject: iPAQs |
|
|
I have a 2210 but I'm yet to get my GPS system. I can however give some general advice based on experience. It seems that the 2210 does not have the best of implementations of Bluetooth for GPS, read around this site and you'll see. Also, there were/are bugs with Tom Tom 3 updates and 2210 BT it seems although from what I have read on here TT have now attempted to fix this issue.
Onto the iPAQs themselves,
A colleague bought a 1940 after seeing my 2210. I had been tempted to buy the 1940 for size alone but after seeing and using his I am glad I paid the extra dispite the size increase. The smaller size of the 1940 isn't worth the premium over the better screen on the 2210 (and also it is hardly noticeable). Also, my colleague has had some software compatibility issues with his handheld whereas all the software I have installed has always worked fine. This might be down to the fact that the 2210 uses a real ARM processor rather than a Samsung ARM compitable one. Some people on this site have also had better experiences running GPS maps from CF cards rather than SD and of course on the 19xx series iPAQs CF is not an option. One bottom line view I would give is that I have owned many different PDAs and I feel that the 2210 got it just right in that the size is small enough, it has a lot of expansion capability, the screen is great, and it is solidly made. Full marks must also go to the D-Pad which is the best if you like playing games. There are also tons of accessories. I have been tempted by the new wave of Pocket PCs coming in with VGA screens and built in Wi-Fi but to be honest nothing has appeared which makes me yearn to leave the 2210 which I feel has far more PROs than CONs in everyday usage than any other PDA I have experienced. The new ASUS does look nice though. I strongly believe that if you got a 200mhz Pocket PC you would regret it as the clock speeds are now going to hover around 600 and new software is bound to reflect this. As you don't seem to want WiFi you should consider a 2210 if you don't mind it now being a bit of a bin end model. There are replacements coming but I can't see what they significantly add to the mix as they don't have VGA. |
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
Posted: Today Post subject: Pocket GPS Advertising |
|
|
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!
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
|