Which Gps Device To Get For Pandora?

[OrR]

I just checked it on Wikipedia and you seem to be right: The artificial height limitation only kicks in at 18 km and 515 m/s. I thought those values were much lower.

 

[DAP]

The above is wrong on both counts:

1) GPS receivers are allowed on most planes as far as I know, including BT devices (because of the low power)

Not any more. At least not in the US. For the last few years, I have been explicitly forbidden to use GPS on airplanes. It usually even says so in the in flight magazine. Really pisses me off with everyone else using laptops (orders of magnitude more RFI than a GPS receiver). There is no plausible excuse for this restriction, but there it is.

Years ago, when I was allowed to use GPS on airlines, it worked fine as long as I had the antenna near the window.

 

[j.pickens]

The above is wrong on both counts:

1) GPS receivers are allowed on most planes as far as I know, including BT devices (because of the low power)

Not any more. At least not in the US. For the last few years, I have been explicitly forbidden to use GPS on airplanes. It usually even says so in the in flight magazine. Really pisses me off with everyone else using laptops (orders of magnitude more RFI than a GPS receiver). There is no plausible excuse for this restriction, but there it is.

Years ago, when I was allowed to use GPS on airlines, it worked fine as long as I had the antenna near the window.

The 9/11 hijackers used portable GPS receivers to do the deed.
GPS is banned for security reasons. They don't want you transmitting real time position info on the jet to an accomplice on the ground. The "real time" flight info stuff on the internet is delayed to prevent targeting of jets.

 

[gruso]

Oh fiddlesticks, I've just gone and purchased one of these. Slip of the mouse or something.

 

[Tor]

The 9/11 hijackers used portable GPS receivers to do the deed.
GPS is banned for security reasons. They don't want you transmitting real time position info on the jet to an accomplice on the ground. The "real time" flight info stuff on the internet is delayed to prevent targeting of jets.

Well, that makes some kind of sense. Of course they should then also ban GPS receivers on board, which they apparently don't. Mine is always tucked away inside one of the smaller pockets in whatever jacket I'm wearing, so I don't usually even think of it - I just send the jacket through the screening machine.

It's not a big deal not be be allowed to use a gps receiver - the one time I did it was just to have something to do on an extremely long and boring flight. It would be much more problematic if bringing them on board would be disallowed, what if I travel without checked-in luggage? Or all those phones with built-in GPS?. But disallowing use doesn't really make much sense without disallowing bringing them onboard, as there's no easy way to enforce the non-use.

 

[j.pickens]

The 9/11 hijackers used portable GPS receivers to do the deed.
GPS is banned for security reasons. They don't want you transmitting real time position info on the jet to an accomplice on the ground. The "real time" flight info stuff on the internet is delayed to prevent targeting of jets.

Well, that makes some kind of sense. Of course they should then also ban GPS receivers on board, which they apparently don't. Mine is always tucked away inside one of the smaller pockets in whatever jacket I'm wearing, so I don't usually even think of it - I just send the jacket through the screening machine.

It's not a big deal not be be allowed to use a gps receiver - the one time I did it was just to have something to do on an extremely long and boring flight. It would be much more problematic if bringing them on board would be disallowed, what if I travel without checked-in luggage? Or all those phones with built-in GPS?. But disallowing use doesn't really make much sense without disallowing bringing them onboard, as there's no easy way to enforce the non-use.


Oh, I agree absolutely. I'm not making the case that the security setup makes any sense. Only that the honest traveler should beware of using a GPS in flight, as that could get you in trouble. As to bluetooth, that is not a security issue, that is a flight issue, and subject to rules of individual airlines.
I know that on United, USAirways, and Spirit airlines, they announce that "any radio transmitting devices, like cell phones and WiFi, must be turned off or disabled while the cabin doors are closed, with the exception of cell phones, which may be used during taxi after landing, after the flight attendant announces they are OK to use"
That's pretty much a verbatum quote of the announcements I hear on those flights.
Bluetooth, as a radio transmitting device, would be banned under this announcement. YMMV.

 

[DAP]

The 9/11 hijackers used portable GPS receivers to do the deed.
GPS is banned for security reasons. They don't want you transmitting real time position info on the jet to an accomplice on the ground. The "real time" flight info stuff on the internet is delayed to prevent targeting of jets.

Well, that makes some kind of sense. Of course they should then also ban GPS receivers on board, which they apparently don't. Mine is always tucked away inside one of the smaller pockets in whatever jacket I'm wearing, so I don't usually even think of it - I just send the jacket through the screening machine.

It's not a big deal not be be allowed to use a gps receiver - the one time I did it was just to have something to do on an extremely long and boring flight. It would be much more problematic if bringing them on board would be disallowed, what if I travel without checked-in luggage? Or all those phones with built-in GPS?. But disallowing use doesn't really make much sense without disallowing bringing them onboard, as there's no easy way to enforce the non-use.


Oh, I agree absolutely. I'm not making the case that the security setup makes any sense. Only that the honest traveler should beware of using a GPS in flight, as that could get you in trouble. As to bluetooth, that is not a security issue, that is a flight issue, and subject to rules of individual airlines.
I know that on United, USAirways, and Spirit airlines, they announce that "any radio transmitting devices, like cell phones and WiFi, must be turned off or disabled while the cabin doors are closed, with the exception of cell phones, which may be used during taxi after landing, after the flight attendant announces they are OK to use"
That's pretty much a verbatum quote of the announcements I hear on those flights.
Bluetooth, as a radio transmitting device, would be banned under this announcement. YMMV.


The fact that there have been a few incidents where airliners have suddenly changed altitude (injuring passengers) that have been blamed on the use of wireless devices should be an embarrassment to the manufacturer of the airliner involved.

I would hope that system critical devices on airplanes would not be susceptible to RFI, that they would test for such susceptibility, and even if it were susceptible, that it would fail gracefully!

At the very least there should be some indicator light inside the cabin that alerts the crew that someone left their cell phone on, or forgot to turn off their wifi.

Sorry I seem to have gotten off topic, but the ban on GPS on airplanes pisses me off.

 

[Solontus]

I have a question, would using a high speed usb SD card reader (like this) and a SDIO GPS receiver work?

 

[DesktopMan]

Why on earth would the most compatible USB port get the weird connector and the lowest power? Surely, mouse, keyboard, GPS or 3G modem will be the most common hardware to connect to the Pandora, all of them low speed or full speed. GPS or 3g modem will also require more than the power available on the OTG port... This is unsettling.

 

[paolo]

I've yet to see a battery powered USB hub.

They do exist, though. Unfortunately, the only ones I ever found took AAA batteries but I don't want to get rechargables of yet another battery type. If anybody sees an AA powered hub around, send me a PM! Of course, every AAA hub could be modded to take AAs.



why don't ya buy a pack of usbcells? :lol: they came in various formats.. 9v as well

www.usbcell.com

AA

AAA

ps. ain't no spam! lotsa people here like geeky gadgets eh?

 

[DAP]

Why on earth would the most compatible USB port get the weird connector and the lowest power? Surely, mouse, keyboard, GPS or 3G modem will be the most common hardware to connect to the Pandora, all of them low speed or full speed. GPS or 3g modem will also require more than the power available on the OTG port... This is unsettling.

Because it is also a USB OTG port and that is required to use a mini-AB connector. This port is used both as a master & a slave (when you plug it into your PC, it is a slave, when you plug a GPS into it, it is a master).

I have no problems with the way this port is implemented. It appears fully standards compliant.

It is the other port that has issues. The current work around for the other port is to use only high speed devices, or a self powered high speed USB hub between it and the device you wish to use. The future fix (when they next change the motherboard) is to add a USB hub chip, even if they only bring out one port.

BTW, it is more likely that the most common device plugged into this port will be a flash memory drive, and most of those are high speed.

 

[TaG]

The future fix (when they next change the motherboard) is to add a USB hub chip, even if they only bring out one port.
You word that as if you know they will be changing the motherboard. Do you?

 

[DAP]

The future fix (when they next change the motherboard) is to add a USB hub chip, even if they only bring out one port.
You word that as if you know they will be changing the motherboard. Do you?

No, but that fix is so cheap and simple, they would be crazy not to do it. Especially once they start having to deal with the tech support issues with people who don't understand the limitations of the current USB port.

 

[Chip]

No, but that fix is so cheap and simple, they would be crazy not to do it.
We've been aware of the USB limitation since May. If there really was a "cheap and simple" fix, we would already have it.

 

[DAP]

No, but that fix is so cheap and simple, they would be crazy not to do it.
We've been aware of the USB limitation since May. If there really was a "cheap and simple" fix, we would already have it.

Please explain your definition of "cheap".
If a powered USB hub can be had for less than $10 retail, the IC inside must be available for less than $1 in quantity. Do you consider this expensive?

 

[Capn_Fish]

I have a generic Holux SirfStar III that works perfectly with the pl2303 driver (built in to the kernel). It seems to draw little power (and doesn't need a powered hub; it ran off of the Zaurus' USB port).

EDIT: SirfStar III is the chipset; it's a USB GPS

 

[DesktopMan]

No, but that fix is so cheap and simple, they would be crazy not to do it.
We've been aware of the USB limitation since May. If there really was a "cheap and simple" fix, we would already have it.

"Cheap and simple" doesn't seem that hard, as a bunch load of hardware has a USB hub chip in it.

How many Pandora *buyers* do you think know of this limitation? It's a killer for 3G modems and power hungry GPSes, as well as mouse / keyboard without either a hub or an adapter for the OTG port. Also, does the OTG port have to have the small connector? I'd rather have a special cable to connect it to a PC (it being a regular connector), than to have a special cable for everything connecting to the Pandora. Also, how much work would it be to give it full 500 mah?

 

[DAP]

No, but that fix is so cheap and simple, they would be crazy not to do it.
We've been aware of the USB limitation since May. If there really was a "cheap and simple" fix, we would already have it.

"Cheap and simple" doesn't seem that hard, as a bunch load of hardware has a USB hub chip in it.

How many Pandora *buyers* do you think know of this limitation? It's a killer for 3G modems and power hungry GPSes, as well as mouse / keyboard without either a hub or an adapter for the OTG port. Also, does the OTG port have to have the small connector? I'd rather have a special cable to connect it to a PC (it being a regular connector), than to have a special cable for everything connecting to the Pandora. Also, how much work would it be to give it full 500 mah?


Yes, the OTG port has to have the small connector. If you look at the small connector you will see that it has 5 wires instead of the 4 that the large connector has. That 5th wire is necessary for the negotiation between OTG devices that determines who is master. If you changed to a large connector, you would not be able to connect it to other OTG devices.

There may be a way to hack the OTG stuff to supply more than 100 mA, but to do so, you would have to bypass the 100 mA power supply contained in the chipset. This may turn out to be messier than adding a hub to the other port.
Also, there is some negotiation going on between the master & the device as to how much power it is allowed to draw. If the port thinks it only has 100 mA available, and the device requires 200 mA, the software may not allow it to work even if the port has been hacked to provide 500 mA. I don't know how much of this negotiation is done in software, so I don't know if the 100 mA limit can be circumvented.

 

[OrR]

why don't ya buy a pack of usbcells? :lol: they came in various formats.. 9v as well

Because I've got about 20 AA rechargeables already and capacity is more important to me than being able to charge via USB. When I charge them it'll mostly be from mains. They are then used to power mobile devices, mobile USB etc. so it would make more sense to get them with USB sockets, not plugs. Guess they aren't available with sockets, though, are they? h34r: