| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
classy56
Frequent Visitor
Joined: Sep 08, 2006
Posts: 441
Location: Dorset
|
 Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 9:37 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| emjaiuk wrote: | | If there had been less pointless and inane posts not to mention the chidish bickering perhaps more members would have felt able to contribute, whichever point of view they may support |
But the fact remains after 16 pages not one person who is for the inaccurate database has given a reason as to how they would benifit from it, or why they should have it at all, " i'm a paying customer and i'm entitled to it" just doesn't work for me.
So maybe this is your chance to convince me and those that feel the same way as me why you should have it!
1) Why should you have it, even though the site owners said they were not going to provide it, because it does not meet their agenda?
2) What benifit would YOU get from an unverified inaccurate database of possible mobile camera units?
_________________
Tomtom Go730T
App 8.300
Map v815.2003
To old to die young. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
MaFt
Pocket GPS Staff
Joined: Aug 31, 2005
Posts: 15134
Location: Bradford, West Yorkshire
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 9:46 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hopefully this will put an end to the bickering.
The team have discussed the issues raised and have made the following decision:
PocketGPSWorld.com WILL release a 'pending mobiles' file. The relevant people are working on it's implementation which is not as straight forward as 'making an extra ov2 file'. The software we use is being edited as I type which will create the relevant 'pocketgps_uk_pmobile.xxx' files which will display the camera type as pMobile to distinguish it from the active Mobiles. They will also have a different icon associated with them.
It is far easier to release a file this way than to do it as a stand-alone download so those who do not wish to use it will need to delete the relevant file(s).
MaFt |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Border_Collie
Pocket GPS Verifier
Joined: Feb 01, 2006
Posts: 2543
Location: Rainham, Kent. England.
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 9:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | If there had been less pointless and inane posts not to mention the chidish bickering perhaps more members would have felt able to contribute, |
Oh dear, I haven't noticed any of the posts quite go down to that level but we all read them differently.
Getting away from the alleged pointless and inane posts and childish bickering, can someone actually explain the benefits of having the unverified mobile cameras as a download other than 'I want it, I want it'.
Please, please tell me how I personally would benefit if it were made available. Maybe a grown-up could explain it in detail.
_________________
Formerly known as Lost_Property
And NO that's NOT me in the Avatar. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
lola
Lifetime Member
Joined: Aug 31, 2006
Posts: 146
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 10:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
@MaFt
PM sent. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
emjaiuk
Frequent Visitor
![]()
Joined: Dec 06, 2003
Posts: 335
Location: North Surrey (TW17) UK
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 10:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
Hopefully this will put an end to the bickering.
|
I do hope so, but I wouldn't place money on it. 
| Quote: |
It is far easier to release a file this way than to do it as a stand-alone download so those who do not wish to use it will need to delete the relevant file(s).
|
You'll probably be doing this anyway, but if not could I suggest that the download page text is edited to clearly identify this file in order that people dont inadvertantly make use of this file thnking it to be to the same standard as the rest of the database.
And thanks again for the extra work involved.
_________________
Go740L App 9.510 Europe 985.8155
RDS_TMC mount
Home 2.8.3.2499 Win10 Home |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
classy56
Frequent Visitor
Joined: Sep 08, 2006
Posts: 441
Location: Dorset
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 10:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| emjaiuk wrote: |
people dont inadvertantly make use of this file thnking it to be to the same standard as the rest of the database.
|
That about sums up the stupidity of it really 8O
_________________
Tomtom Go730T
App 8.300
Map v815.2003
To old to die young. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MaFt
Pocket GPS Staff
Joined: Aug 31, 2005
Posts: 15134
Location: Bradford, West Yorkshire
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 07, 2007 10:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| emjaiuk wrote: |
You'll probably be doing this anyway, but if not could I suggest that the download page text is edited to clearly identify this file in order that people dont inadvertantly make use of this file thnking it to be to the same standard as the rest of the database.
And thanks again for the extra work involved. |
it will be mentioned in the release notes / version info that gets downloaded with the files as well as added to the release announcement.
MaFt |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bmuskett
Lifetime Member
Joined: May 12, 2006
Posts: 710
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 12:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| classy56 wrote: |
I won't even comment on the fact you need a database of ANY kind to "remind you to check your speed"  |
So why do you use the database then? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bmuskett
Lifetime Member
Joined: May 12, 2006
Posts: 710
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 12:25 am Post subject: |
|
|
| MaFt wrote: | | PocketGPSWorld.com WILL release a 'pending mobiles' file. The relevant people are working on it's implementation which is not as straight forward as 'making an extra ov2 file'. The software we use is being edited as I type which will create the relevant 'pocketgps_uk_pmobile.xxx' files which will display the camera type as pMobile to distinguish it from the active Mobiles. They will also have a different icon associated with them. |
Why restrict the content to pending mobiles? Why not all pending cameras? One of the benefits that I see of this file is that if I come across a pending site I can report what I find at that site, thus hopefully speeding up improving the accuracy of the database. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bmuskett
Lifetime Member
Joined: May 12, 2006
Posts: 710
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 12:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| DennisN wrote: | And you finished up as high poster with 25 One of my deliberate inaccuracies?  I only counted 24. |
Probably because I included the post with your figures in, hence 25.
| DennisN wrote: | | I counted all Moderators and Team members as against on the basis that they would have been part of the corporate decision to exclude unverified cameras. Plus I read all the posts again and found enough sentiment I suppose to class as against. |
Hmmm. Are you a spin doctor in real life?
| DennisN wrote: | | Maybe I had more time on my hands than you. You didn't do too badly with posts yourself. Also there was quite a lot of irrelevant comment (definitely including me) to make up the numbers. |
I made my score 14 with one off-topic, not including my figures post.
| DennisN wrote: | | With the best will in the world, it doesn't make a huge difference though, does it? There were still less than a score of people who wanted pgpsw to change their policy. |
But they have listened and changed their policy, for which I thank them. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alan_dr
Lifetime Member
Joined: Oct 14, 2006
Posts: 316
Location: Portsmouth, UK
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 8:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Lost_Property wrote: | Surely the camera warning signs are a bit of a giveaway, whether there is an unverified camera warning or not.
|
I think you are mixing up mobile and static sites. You don't often if ever get warning signs for mobile sites. We are only discussing here unverified *mobile* sites.
_________________
Alan - iPhone 5 64GB, with CamerAlert, TomTom Europe & CoPilot |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
DennisN
Tired Old Man
Joined: Feb 27, 2006
Posts: 14889
Location: Keynsham
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 9:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bmuskett wrote: | | DennisN wrote: | | And you finished up as high poster with 25 One of my deliberate inaccuracies? I only counted 24. |
Probably because I included the post with your figures in, hence 25.
Ahah - massaging the figures!
But they have listened and changed their policy, for which I thank them. |
Yes indeed. A good day's work.
| MaFt wrote: | | PocketGPSWorld.com WILL release a 'pending mobiles' file. |
HOORAY, a victory for "democracy" and the "overwhelming majority" of 16 !
Now we can all hop on our horses and ride off into the lovely sunset, hand in hand, with a glow in our hearts. And if anyone detects a note of insincerity in this post, they are far too sensitive.
_________________
Dennis
If it tastes good - it's fattening.
Two of them are obesiting!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
alan_dr
Lifetime Member
Joined: Oct 14, 2006
Posts: 316
Location: Portsmouth, UK
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:37 am Post subject: |
|
|
| MaFt wrote: | | PocketGPSWorld.com WILL release a 'pending mobiles' file |
Thanks guys - I really appreciate that.
_________________
Alan - iPhone 5 64GB, with CamerAlert, TomTom Europe & CoPilot |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Darren
Frequent Visitor
Joined: 11/07/2002 14:36:40
Posts: 23848
Location: Hampshire, UK
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bmuskett wrote: | | classy56 wrote: |
I won't even comment on the fact you need a database of ANY kind to "remind you to check your speed" |
So why do you use the database then? |
_________________
Darren Griffin
Last edited by Darren on Thu Feb 08, 2007 3:06 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
MaFt
Pocket GPS Staff
Joined: Aug 31, 2005
Posts: 15134
Location: Bradford, West Yorkshire
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 08, 2007 10:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bmuskett wrote: |
Why restrict the content to pending mobiles? Why not all pending cameras? One of the benefits that I see of this file is that if I come across a pending site I can report what I find at that site, thus hopefully speeding up improving the accuracy of the database. |
ha ha. erm, sorry but no. this discussion has been about returning the database download to how it was (i.e. including the pending mobiles) which has now been agreed but with a slightly different format, i.e. we will distinguish the pending mobile sites.
MaFt |
|
| 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 |
|
|
|
Forum FAQ
Search
Usergroups
Profile
Log in for private messages
Log in
