Hacker News Reader

Comment by jasode | Hacker News Reader

Another reason not mentioned by the article is map updates. Lexus charges $169+ to update the map data and requires a dealer appointment. A smartphone with google/Apple maps is always more up-to-date.

If you're buying a new car today, the reason to get navigation is for the LCD screen and not for the GPS. The LCD is used to see the rear view camera image for parking. Also, playing music shows the song titles.

View on HN

We bought a Gamin GPS for my wife as she prefers it over using a phone for navigation. It has lifetime map updates and costs less than the map update for my car's built in navigation. It's also far superior in several ways including knowing the speed limit on more roads, showing the name of the upcoming cross streets and better multi-lane information. I personally tend to use Waze on my phone but like the Garmin navigation experience more overall.

Previously I had used my phone, but after taking a few small trips and the phone's GPS either placed me on an incorrect street, or was unable to get a steady signal - I decided I needed a Garmin.

I've been happy with it thus far, and with the lifetime map updates it's pretty nice. I do with the model I got had weather overlays, but that's just me being picky.

Better multi lane information is great. I would also like better info on which lane to be in for a turn taking account of the fact that soon after I need to make another turn and don't want to have to cut across a lane to make it

This can't be said often enough! Whenever I am driving somewhere new I constantly have to look at the screen to see on the map what the turn after the upcoming one is going to be so that I can chose the right lane. For that very reason my wife and I still tend to have the passenger navigate which comes down to supplementing the Waze directions which information about what lane to likely chose depending on the turn after the next. To me this seems like a obvious short coming and I am surprised it's not a feature one can commonly expect.

I got annoyed by how poor Apple and Google Maps were here in Japan so I tried a local third-party app, and the navigation in it blows anything else I've seen out of the water. Just the lane guidance is amazingly good, and it does things like highlighting your destination on the road signs you're looking at

Screenshots: https://c2.staticflickr.com/4/3855/14390588297_f2743d8f05_b....

https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5233/14573660131_396715c2bf_b....

Is the Garmin smart enough so if two routes temporarily share a stretch of road it doesn't tell you to get off the route you were coming from? For example you are traveling east on route 2, route 202 merges into 2. Rt 2 and 202 are the same road for a few miles, then rt 202 splits off (you are going to continue going east on rt. 2). My GPS tells me to get off Rt2 and to "turn right" on to 202. My ideal GPS wouldn't say a damn thing in this situation since I am staying on the same road.

> If you're buying a new car today, the reason to get navigation is for the LCD screen and not for the GPS.

I could have sworn the US govt mandated that all new cars, after some soon to come year, must have rear facing cameras. Perhaps I heard incorrectly.

You appear to be correct and my google search shows 2018 to be the date. https://www.google.com/search?q=all+new+usa+cars+require+rea...

I suppose I could have just googled it myself. Thanks!

Some cars have the backup camera displayed in the rear view mirror so the main console LCD wouldn't be required.

Right, the way map updates are priced it seems best to me to update roughly once every five years or so. My habit is to try the car nav first (because there are some things about it that are more convenient, especially the next turn information on mine below the speedometer) and if it doesn't find an address or the route looks somewhat off switch to my phone.

Having worked for a company selling satnavs and mapping, typically an automotive company has some number of map updates that will be released for a given product per year. It generally ranges anywhere from 4 to 1/year. However, there were some instances where it was a single update at the time of release and then no more.

I agree. It's a ridiculously antiquated model that appeals to and/or traps "old people" (in the not-tech-savvy sense). It will disappear.

I use my in-dash GPS to gauge distances on big trips. If I really need to know where I'm going, I use my phone.

Agreed. Why pay Ford when I can get the update for free on my phone.

I would love a rear-view camera that could display on my phone

Give that to the kids and it will entertain them for hours. By hours I mean fifteen minutes.

Several competitors starting to pop-up here. One downside on all of them currently is, you need to connect to a wifi network generated by the camera. They have mini-routers built in because of the speed required to even come close to streaming real-time video.

Brand is pearl. Uses a cam on a license plate frame. Never seen it first hand though.

I just wish I could have my rear-view camera on while I was driving forward.

You can with the appropriate device on certain cars. I retrofit a newer headunit into my older truck and also have the added benefit of turning the backup cam on whenever I want.

http://www.coastaletech.com/index.htm

It would be nice for a lot of reasons but I think over all the net damage from the distraction would be more than the damage saved by people realizing they forgot to pin the trailer coupler and similar stuff. You don't have many reasons to see that field of view at speed since pretty much every reverse camera basically points down.

Rear view mirrors are useful while going forward. But, it's fairly easy to block that line of sight in a full car, thus making the rear view camera a useful backup.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com