Route Buddy updated! Voice & Turn by Turn Navigation - Page 3

RouteBuddy · 09-06-2007, 09:35 AM

Hi,

Quote: Originally Posted by iamgnat

What would be really ideal is a Cocoa based interface so that front end developers can literally plug Route Buddy right into their own application. A custom NSView object to display the map info as well as methods to control the map (e.g. allow the default controls to be hidden so that the front end can provide it's own interface) as well as add way points and request directions.

Ideally the engine (including licensing) could be put into the API so that you don't have run the Route Buddy application at the same time, but I won't hold my breath on that

-dave

OK - hands up here - I am not an engineer!

.. and I'd rather they got on with the work, so we can all bring what you need closer to creation.

However, if I understand this clearly would you be after RouteBuddy running on a server (on a Mac mini installed in your car) and then you write your own UI and can call the map if you so wish?

Neil
CEO RouteBuddy Ltd

http://www.routebuddy.com

RouteBuddy · 09-06-2007, 09:41 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by tkn

Does the guidance feature support Growl? That would be really useful for when you are running it in the background...

Currently we do not support Growl but certainly could do so. Should Growl, or something similar we develop, add to or enhance RouteBuddy features then it will be supported. I think it's a matter of course that support for a feature like this would certainly benefit RouteBuddy and its users.

Quote:

Also, if you are looking for what your 3d driving experience should look like, you should take a close look at the announced Provia unit from Korea which definitely has the sexiest interface I have ever seen for a GPS unit.

Yes that looks interesting. There's a lot to do with the 2.5D (and sim 3D) map detail that helps, which really is not commonly available yet for markets outside Korea and Japan and maybe Taiwan. I can see some issues if the signal is lost in relation to what's shown on the screen - not driving under a freeway when the image still shows an obstruction in front of you for example! :-))

We've got our own ideas for UI, 2.5D and 3D implementation but will certainly offer scope for its evolvement as and where we can.

Neil
CEO RouteBuddy Ltd

http://www.routebuddy.com

RouteBuddy · 09-06-2007, 09:53 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by ClaZ

Mhmm... very interesting...
RouteBuddy is, at today, the only GPS route software for mac that is working and updating... Route66 is out of this market...
So, if a carputing version is shipping, i can pay for this, as i make for route66 for years...
Standby from Italy...

RouteBuddy is being localized into Italian by Massimo Rotunno http://tinyurl.com/3xkxym

However we do not expect release of the Italian version until after MWSF '08 due to the many big changes we'll be making to RouteBuddy starting with 1.5 - the bottom line is this saves us doing the work twice over. Once the localized versions are released these free updates will recognize and default to the main language used on your Mac.

Neil
CEO RouteBuddy Ltd

http://www.routebuddy.com

RouteBuddy · 09-06-2007, 10:02 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by Bugbyte

It is the only international solution. Roadnav is an open source solution that works in the USA. This is primarily because it uses the freely available Tiger/Line maps from the US Census Bureau which are quite detailed.

Roadnav does support the open map standard, which means that it can be used internationally if there is coverage.

The open map standard, OSM project, is still very much in its early days. http://tinyurl.com/3xdkdt

Whilst a lot of the busier roads in Europe are covered they are still not 100%, indeed in some instances far from it. Map data that is recovered as part of a business process by Navteq and Tele Atlas naturally has to be paid for, by us and our users, but the detail and coverage is higher.

TIGER data is detailed but IMHO is nowhere at the level that Tele Atlas and Navteq supply, especially when you take into account all the extra features they add on.

Long term, as the OSM project grows, then we'd expect some changes to take place. Of course how to deal with the licensing model is another hurdle! ;-)

Neil
CEO RouteBuddy Ltd

http://www.routebuddy.com

RouteBuddy · 09-06-2007, 10:27 AM

Hi,

Quote: Originally Posted by EnglandGreen

I should add for those that do not own Route Buddy with the complete North American maps - it is deadly slow to refresh and to navigate. As in almost unusable. Not a slam - just the truth.

And I'm running a Intel 2.33GHz Merom with 2gb of RAM. It runs just as slowly on my 1.83GHz Intel as well, by the way.

I really hope that RB will step up to the plate and make their user experience the same or better than iGuidance.

I would love to be 100% OSX....

We run RouteBuddy on a 1.42GHz PPC test Mac here in the office and take a 1.67GHz PPC PowerBook to expo's to demo the PPC experience compared to our MBP's at the same time.

Your MBP should be absolutely fine to run RouteBuddy on. Of course we can't see how and what you are doing to be able to compare here with other apps on Mac or PC but clearly there is an issue. For example we had a MBP at MWSF this year which rendered like a real slug in comparison to the PPC PowerBook, now we have had a new Logic board installed the change has been dramatic. Other issues besides Logic boards can cause hiccups but if you'd like to get it sorted out then feel free to contact support@routebuddy.com

Better still, if you can make it to MWSF '08 then visit us on Booth #4528 - we'll be glad to chat CarPuters, and RouteBuddy, plus have a look at your Mac to see how we can advise.

Later this year we plan to release Stage II of our RouteBuddy Compression Engine, which should make even more of a difference. In essence we get say 14GB of data for NAM from Tele Atlas and ship the same as about 7GB, this we decompress and compress on-the-fly whilst you use RouteBuddy. Rich high-definition data from us is very different when rendered compared to other developers offerings but of course puts more work on the processor. Have a look at a screenshot of DeLorme StreetAtlas and a RouteBuddy Map for example.

When deciding on our course we realized that over time we would speed up how the data is dealt with, and processing power would increase, at the same time knew that Mac users would only want the best quality rendering. Early on we knew there would be a price to pay, but for the mid - to long term goal it's well worth it.

Neil
CEO RouteBuddy Ltd

http://www.routebuddy.com

lukepools · 09-07-2007, 10:30 PM

Hello,

Newbie here, I have a few quick points.

no offense to anyone, but until route buddy has better features than my current TOMTOM, I don't see any reason to switch. My tomtom takes up less room on the dash and I don't see a better, easier to use solution. I like the 3-D look, I don't like overhead.

Maybe someone could hack tomtom's software and make it useable on the MAC? Or at least get a video out to my screen...

I am still waiting for someone to use google's maps on their GPS routing software. To this date no one has...

Luke

iamgnat · 09-07-2007, 11:17 PM

Quote: Originally Posted by RouteBuddy

OK - hands up here - I am not an engineer!

.. and I'd rather they got on with the work, so we can all bring what you need closer to creation.

If they need help, I am looking to get out of the Unix world and get into a Mac programming job

Quote:

However, if I understand this clearly would you be after RouteBuddy running on a server (on a Mac mini installed in your car) and then you write your own UI and can call the map if you so wish?

I was thinking more along the lines of distributed objects, but a TCP based server (though for car purposes the chance of there being more than one Mac would be slim I think) could work too.

Basically RouteBuddy would still do all that it normally does with the addition of allowing another application display the map as well as issue the control (zoom, pan, address entry, etc..).

Thanks for listening to us and responding btw.

-dave

EnglandGreen · 09-10-2007, 07:44 PM

Thanks for the detailed answers, Neil

RouteBuddy · 09-11-2007, 05:39 AM

Hi Luke,

Quote: Originally Posted by lukepools

Hello,

Newbie here, I have a few quick points.

no offense to anyone, but until route buddy has better features than my current TOMTOM, I don't see any reason to switch. My tomtom takes up less room on the dash and I don't see a better, easier to use solution. I like the 3-D look, I don't like overhead.

I think you have a valid point in that RouteBuddy doesn't yet have the features of TomTom's.

Currently RouteBuddy certainly has wider-use-range than a TomTom, however once all of the PND navigation features are in place similar to TomTom's, Garmin and other PND devices then we'll be moving the software forward to build in the specific features over and above PNDs. The like of which are requested on this forum.

Of course you'll still be able to use RouteBuddy to connect to your hiking devices, look at Topo maps as well as Road ones, source maps for anywhere you travel and so on. In other words RouteBuddy has added value and this we'll be advancing with each and every build.

I'm not so sure about the dash room being an issue? After all I suspect that most CarPuter users wish to run something like a Xenarc/Lilliput screen off their Mac mini / MB(P) which is installed elsewhere in the car. Stacked up against a larger, and more useable, slim 7" screen - retractable or fixed, then IMHO I feel that the in-car installation is preferable. It's not only the larger navigation screen that gives an advantage but the power of the Mac with its own software and enormous library of media, let alone processing power and configurability.

TomTom's do not have 3D maps, nor do any other PNDs on the market. This is pure marketing hype. What PNDs do have is a best described as 2.5D, where essentially the camera is raised above the flat plain.

RouteBuddy will in time have 3D maps as well as 2.5D, because we have the processing power of the Mac to make it so. I can't comment on the processing power of the average PND but think we'd all agree it would be very minor compared to that of a real computer. ;-)

Quote:

Maybe someone could hack tomtom's software and make it useable on the MAC? Or at least get a video out to my screen...

Hacking would be a huge and costly task to undertake, anyway the software is Linux. IMHO the very limited processing power would cripple getting video out to a screen, along with many other issues. The main one being the resolution giving fuzzy images from reduced map data size. To explain: The raw data set for North America is 14GB (from Tele Atlas or Navteq) and for this we developed our own proprietary compression engine which reduces the 14GB to 7GB (installed), this data decompresses and compresses on-the-fly. Currently, amongst other things, we are working on Stage II of this compression engine and plan to make greater reductions in installed map sizes but-without-loss-of-any-fidelity.

Loss of fidelity is a critical issue in any map software because if a developer extracts data to get a smaller installation size then the accuracy (detail) is lost at the same time. The average non-compressed size we see is 1 to 2 GB in map apps and right down to 1400MB for maps on SD cards for PNDs. (Yes that's right 1400MB, not GB.)
So:
100% data = 100% fidelity = 100% accuracy
10% data = 10% fidelity = 10% accuracy
ergo RouteBuddy with 100% data is best suited to render high definition, high quality and high accuracy maps on your screen.

Quote:

I am still waiting for someone to use google's maps on their GPS routing software. To this date no one has...

For a very good reason, there is no point.
- To use Googles maps you would have to cover the whole map and render at all levels and then save the rendered images to a cache on your disk, so think of the storage problems involved.
- Then how would you build routes on rendered images? The routing information in any application like RouteBuddy is performed on another layer but with reference to many many levels of road data in other layers.

Google are in the advertising business, not the road mapping business. Google Maps and Google Earth are a very useful adjunct to bring advertisers and consumers together. Nothing more and nothing less.

Luke I hope I haven't dampened your enthusiasm for other avenues but we have a wealth of carefully researched data here from over five years over R&D on the subject and are happy to share some of it with others.

Check out our TomTom Beta support in RouteBuddy 1.4

Neil
www.routebuddy.com

Jirka Jirout · 09-11-2007, 07:29 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by RouteBuddy

TomTom's do not have 3D maps, nor do any other PNDs on the market.

But there are the new 3D landmarks and 3D city maps from TeleAtlas. It is just a question of (short?) time, before someone uses them. If they can show you the major buildings etc, they may be more useful than 3D terrain maps. Especially in Holland for which the third dimension is mostly superfluous :-)

Quote:

processing power of the average PND but think we'd all agree it would be very minor compared to that of a real computer. ;-)

True, but I would not underestimate the PNDs. The memory and cpu footprint of an embedded OS, stripped down for just one purpose, is much much lower than that of full OS X. And you can use surprisingly good hardware acceleration on the PND's if you know in advance what exactly you want to accelerate. It is when you start adding more and more functions when you beat this advantage and can fully utilize the power of regular computer.

Quote:

Hacking would be a huge and costly task to undertake, anyway the software is Linux.

Costly or cheap, hacking the software would be illegal. Reverse-engineering of data formats is already quite close to the edge...

Quote:

To explain: The raw data set for North America is 14GB (from Tele Atlas or Navteq) and for this we developed our own proprietary compression engine which reduces the 14GB to 7GB (installed), this data decompresses and compresses on-the-fly.

An alternative view could be that you are wasting CPU time while the same issue could be just as well addressed by a bigger HDD (which is what TT seems to be doing recently) ;-)

Quote:

Currently, amongst other things, we are working on Stage II of this compression engine and plan to make greater reductions in installed map sizes but-without-loss-of-any-fidelity.

You will probably disagree, but is it really wort the effort when you can buy 250GB HDD for the mini?

Quote:

Loss of fidelity is a critical issue in any map software because if a developer extracts data to get a smaller installation size then the accuracy (detail) is lost at the same time.

While I agree in principle, it all depends on what you need. If you can extract the important data (for navigation this means mainly the junctions), most users will probably not care about the lost information. Lossy image compression formats such as JPEG have been around for quite a while and most people do not seem to mind (I do and I use RAW myself).

Quote:

100% data = 100% fidelity = 100% accuracy
10% data = 10% fidelity = 10% accuracy

Is this a fact or just an example? From what I know TT is also using a pretty smart compression algorithm.

Quote:

ergo RouteBuddy with 100% data is best suited to render high definition, high quality and high accuracy maps on your screen.

Such as the aquaduct on A4 between Amsterdam and Den Haag? :-D

Quote:

Google are in the advertising business, not the road mapping business.

Have you seen their Professional version of the Google Maps API? I would say they are very much into the location-aware application business, including stuff such as fleet management etc.

BTW: Have you changed something int he compression engine in 1.4? The maps now draw significantly faster on my MBP.

RouteBuddy · 10-01-2007, 08:31 AM

Hi Jirka,

apologies on the delay in reply. The release of RouteBuddy 1.4, Apple expo Paris and work on RouteBuddy 1.5 has kept us a little busy.

Quote: Originally Posted by Jirka Jirout

But there are the new 3D landmarks and 3D city maps from TeleAtlas. It is just a question of (short?) time, before someone uses them. If they can show you the major buildings etc, they may be more useful than 3D terrain maps. Especially in Holland for which the third dimension is mostly superfluous :-)

Sure, they have some data but I don't think it's as large a set as some imagine - '3D landmarks' describes it well, it's not '3D everything'.. Of course major cities will start to become available but that still leaves a lot out if you don't live in a prime city.

Quote:

True, but I would not underestimate the PNDs. The memory and cpu footprint of an embedded OS, stripped down for just one purpose, is much much lower than that of full OS X. And you can use surprisingly good hardware acceleration on the PND's if you know in advance what exactly you want to accelerate. It is when you start adding more and more functions when you beat this advantage and can fully utilize the power of regular computer.

Which really proves the point, you can't have it all without a proper computer.

Quote:

An alternative view could be that you are wasting CPU time while the same issue could be just as well addressed by a bigger HDD (which is what TT seems to be doing recently) ;-)

You will probably disagree, but is it really wort the effort when you can buy 250GB HDD for the mini?

I don't disagree that a larger HDD is always beneficial. But with a larger HDD married to our compression engine technology then it makes sense that the user would get the best of both worlds..

Quote:

While I agree in principle, it all depends on what you need. If you can extract the important data (for navigation this means mainly the junctions), most users will probably not care about the lost information. Lossy image compression formats such as JPEG have been around for quite a while and most people do not seem to mind (I do and I use RAW myself).

I suspect people haven't made their minds up on this to date because the technology is all so new.

Quote:

Is this a fact or just an example? From what I know TT is also using a pretty smart compression algorithm.

It's a good illustration that doesn't bore people with specifics that would be necessary on a case by case basis.
It would be pedantic to detail them out, for the sake of illumination this was the best approach.

Quote:

Such as the aquaduct on A4 between Amsterdam and Den Haag? :-D

You have me there on this particular aqueduct, too much work has gone by since we last spoke.

Quote:

Have you seen their Professional version of the Google Maps API? I would say they are very much into the location-aware application business, including stuff such as fleet management etc.

Taking Google as a whole this element is not really at their core, so is it something that affects QCar? - I doubt it. It's the direction they take and manner of implementation that differentiates what QCar, or RouteBuddy, offer from what they do.

Quote:

BTW: Have you changed something int he compression engine in 1.4? The maps now draw significantly faster on my MBP.

RouteBuddy is continually being tweaked though we feel some items don't really need to go in press releases, that said it may also have something to do with your Mac? :-)

Neil

RouteBuddy · 10-01-2007, 08:38 AM

Hi Dave - once again apologies on delay!

Quote: Originally Posted by iamgnat

If they need help, I am looking to get out of the Unix world and get into a Mac programming job

I was thinking more along the lines of distributed objects, but a TCP based server (though for car purposes the chance of there being more than one Mac would be slim I think) could work too.

Basically RouteBuddy would still do all that it normally does with the addition of allowing another application display the map as well as issue the control (zoom, pan, address entry, etc..).

There are several approaches we could take to allow RouteBuddy to be embedded into other applications, and this is something we will be exploring in the future.

Which implementation we select is not something we can really commit to at this stage, since obviously once we release a public API we would need to support it going forward.

Apros pos the job - Well you never know.. ;-)

Neil

RouteBuddy · 10-26-2007, 03:35 AM

Hi,

seeing as how we'd touched on 3D navigation earlier, I thought it worth posting this news item on the forum.

Neil
www.routebuddy.com

Quote:

According to ABI Research, 3D and photorealistic graphic displays will feature in 100% of personal navigation products in Asia by 2011, and in 90-95% of such products in Western Europe by 2012. (10/25/2007)
Uptake in North America, however, will be the slowest and lowest, and will not approach 100% penetration in the foreseeable future.
According to ABI research director Mike Ippoliti, the reasons behind these regional differences are not hard to find.

“3D and photorealistic imagery is most useful in urban environments,” says Ippoliti, “and North America’s wide open spaces and grid-plan cities mean less need for such displays.”

Not every device will feature full street-level realism of the kind delivered by Immersive Media’s car-mounted, dodecahedron-shaped, eleven-camera video capture unit. For the moment at least, that kind of detail is found mainly in desktop-oriented applications such as those created by Google and Microsoft.

The vast amount of data needed to render a wide geographic area in photorealistic 3D means DVD or hard disk storage, or at least a fast broadband connection. This functionality will eventually find its way into handheld navigation devices with the advent of “connected navigation,” which is the subject of another upcoming ABI Research report.

As entertaining and informative as these photorealistic 3D images may be, Ippoloti says automotive manufacturers offering built-in navigation are steering away from them because all that glorious detail could distract drivers.

For the most part, he says, while driving, less is more. “What you want is a simplified interface, except perhaps at a difficult downtown intersection where a view of prominent landmarks could help negotiate a path through.”

RouteBuddy · 10-31-2007, 09:45 AM

Use your voice to control RouteBuddy

Since release we have been talking to other software developers to see how we can work together. The first of these projects to bear fruit is the work that's been done by RouteBuddy's specialist voice recognition partner MacSpeech.

MacSpeech have released their first ScriptPak for RouteBuddy which enables voice control of the application and its maps.

MacSpeech have got speech control on the Mac down to a fine art and we are looking forward to a long relationship with them as we bring out further iterations of the application. There's a lot to come in future versions of RouteBuddy, and having a very advanced speech control system like MacSpeech being able to run GIS software and digital maps on a Mac will offer new uses, as well as advantages over simple voice control extant in other map apps.

There are over 60 Commands in the first MacSpeech RouteBuddy ScriptPak
release which are listed here:

http://tinyurl.com/273rjf

MacSpeech iListen products with Headset and Microphone are available from
here:

http://tinyurl.com/2fu5lx

The MacSpeech ScriptPak for RouteBuddy costs US$15.00, and requires MacSpeech
iListen with Headset and Microphone. Variously priced configurations of iListen
and supporting hardware are available.

Neil
http://www.routebuddy.com

ClaZ · 12-05-2007, 06:32 AM

Quote: Originally Posted by RouteBuddy

Hi,
We intend to give the Mac community a good product when it comes to navigation software so will certainly do our best.

snip...

Neil
CEO RouteBuddy Ltd

http://www.routebuddy.com

Hi, Neil

i have see the news: 1.5 RouteBuddy is out.

As you tell we in some post here, have this version the mac carputing support ??
Or, better, can i destroy (with fire and happy dances) my Route66 2004 Pro version for buy your 1.5 RouteBuddy and an Italy map ??
I use GPS-Usb receiver Rayming TN200...

Tnx.
ClaZ