iGuidance v.3 - teaser picture(s) - Page 7

b8bboi · 06-19-2006, 03:53 PM

^^ exactly why I don't think they did any serious usabillity studies and just went with what they thought would be good. I mean 9 out of 10 CarPC users would have told them they'd prefer the old qwerty OSK layout with bigger buttons.

ShawJohn · 06-19-2006, 04:01 PM

Why no news on V3 for EU/UK?????????

Marvin Hlavac · 06-19-2006, 04:27 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by b8bboi

^^ exactly why I don't think they did any serious usabillity studies and just went with what they thought would be good. I mean 9 out of 10 CarPC users would have told them they'd prefer the old qwerty OSK layout with bigger buttons.

There was feedback given by beta testers (0l33l, Justintime, me, and perhaps others). Unfortunately there was no longer enough time to consider implementing any changes. But it's nice to see the program developers trying to improve iGuidance. They are heading the right direction, I think. Let's see what will come next.

ShawJohn · 06-19-2006, 04:36 PM

TomTom for CarPC will come next... I hope

justintime · 06-19-2006, 04:46 PM

The main problem here seems to be that iNav is designing their UMPC/CarPC version around a vertical screen (Like the PPC hardware).

Let me tell you, the overall layout is perfect for a vertical screen. But not for a horizontal one! Since they are placing all the objects etc top and bottom, you are losing all the precious vertical space, much needed for navigation map (especially if you are always pointing 'up' like a lot of us do).

Wiredwrx · 06-19-2006, 04:52 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by Marvin Hlavac

There was feedback given be beta testers (0l33l, Justintime, me, and perhaps others). Unfortunately there was no longer enough time to consider implementing any changes. But it's nice to see the program developers trying to improve iGuidance. They are heading the right direction, I think. Let's see what will come next.

While I am glad some people here gave them thier ideas, I find it very disturbing that they looked for feedback when it was no longer enough time to consider the changes. It's like putting the cart before thye horse. too bad also.

I ordered the new version. I can't wait to check it out, and see how it stacks up to the 2.1.1 with JIT and other mods applied.

Michael

mbkowns · 06-19-2006, 06:27 PM

I looked around found some screenshots looks good.

tj!2k4 · 06-19-2006, 10:02 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by ShawJohn

TomTom for CarPC will come next... I hope

tj!2k4 · 06-20-2006, 11:22 PM

Just wondering if any of the testers know if iG3.0 is compatible with WM5 devices, particularly the Motorola Q?

I sent an email to iNav, but it seems that they won't be available for a while

Quote:

Dear Customers:
iNav Corporation will be closed from 6/19-6/30/06 for corp sales meeting and internal operational maintenance with limited email support and no telephone support. We sincerely apologize for the inconvenience. We will resume business on 7/3/06.

Thank you.
iNav Corporation

Marvin Hlavac · 06-21-2006, 05:48 AM

iG 3.0 is compatible with WM5. Even the preceding version 2.1.3.x was already optimized for Windows Mobile 5.0. I have had no problem using 3.0 (beta) on my PocketPC PDA phone i-mate Jasjar running WM5. Having said that, I'm unsure if the same will be true for your Motorola Q. While likely all new versions of GPS navigation software are by now compatible with the PocketPC version of WM5, I don't think the same is true with the Smartphone version of the OS. You may want to check with iNav before you buy iG 3.0 and/or Motorola Q.

ShawJohn · 06-21-2006, 07:12 AM

Come on peeps, we need everyone to cry out for v3.0 for Europe!!!!!!

IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3

Marvin Hlavac · 06-21-2006, 07:22 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by ShawJohn

Come on peeps, we need everyone to cry out for v3.0 for Europe!!!!!!

IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3
IG(EU)-V3

tj!2k4 · 06-21-2006, 07:29 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by Marvin Hlavac

iG 3.0 is compatible with WM5. Even the preceding version 2.1.3.x was already optimized for Windows Mobile 5.0. I have had no problem using 3.0 (beta) on my PocketPC PDA phone i-mate Jasjar running WM5. Having said that, I'm unsure if the same will be true for your Motorola Q. While likely all new versions of GPS navigation software are by now compatible with the PocketPC version of WM5, I don't think the same is true with the Smartphone version of the OS. You may want to check with iNav before you buy iG 3.0 and/or Motorola Q.

Thanks Marvin. I've already got the Q, and have fired off an email to iNav. Hopefully someone will find a moment to reply to my mail before July 3rd..

Marvin Hlavac · 06-21-2006, 07:55 AM

For those (including me) who are not happy about the compromised ability to automate iG 3.0, we still can try the less reliable method of sending mouse clicks (as opposed to SendKey). Or someone may think of something better. (Or the programmers at Netropa may spare some time to make us happy by releasing a patch soon. Or even better: SDK.)

rsd212 · 06-21-2006, 03:10 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by Marvin Hlavac

For those (including me) who are not happy about the compromised ability to automate iG 3.0, we still can try the less reliable method of sending mouse clicks (as opposed to SendKey). Or someone may think of something better. (Or the programmers at Netropa may spare some time to make us happy by releasing a patch soon. Or even better: SDK.)

How hard is it to send a mouse click in VB? And can you somehow temporarily disable further mouse input until the virtual click is completed? Should work, though it seems like you'd have to spend a lot of time physically mapping the screen, locating all the buttons, rather than just doing "sendkey("A"):....dammit, why'd you have to take away keyboard input?!