Vertica V3?

The sunlight readable screens on the GliderGuider/Vertica V2 and Oudie 2 are great but I really wish they ran on an OS (like Android) that's not as antiquated and unsupported as Windows CE or Windows Mobile 6.x
With the plethora of Android smart phones, phablets and tablets available with built in GPS/GLONASS capable receivers, barometers, 3G/LTE, etc. and an app store with tens of thousands of apps why would one want to stick with an outdated OS running on seriously underpowered hardware which you can only use in the cockpit?

E.g. Take a smart phone like the LG Optimus 4X HD P880 (720x1280 HD screen with 750 cd/m2 brightness) and install XCSoar from the Google Play store and you're sorted. True HD-IPS display, quad core 1.5 GHz processor, 1GB RAM, hardware accelerated graphics, etc.
Have an outlanding? No problem just take your smart phone and make a call or send an email. Why carry another mobile phone?
When you're finished soaring for the day just pop it in your pocket and use it for the rest of the week.
Even better you get to upgrade the phone for free every two years when your mobile phone contract is up for renewal so you're never left with old hardware which you can't get rid of.

Just my opinion of course.

I think you miss the point entirely.
Most people, 99% of those I know, use a dedicated device for flight.
This is why Oudies are sold, V2 are sold, and you install aboard dedicated
computers that you dont bring home or in your car.

Using CE or Android makes no difference it the application running on it
works exactly the same on both OS.
Have you ever seen some devices like Montana, Oregon, and such by Garmin,
for example, in any shop?

So the answer to your question is: because they want a dedicated hardware,
or because they want an application that run on CE and dont care about the
xcsoar. And there has to be a reason why this happen, dont you think?


wrote in message
...

The sunlight readable screens on the GliderGuider/Vertica V2 and Oudie 2 are
great but I really wish they ran on an OS (like Android) that's not as
antiquated and unsupported as Windows CE or Windows Mobile 6.x
With the plethora of Android smart phones, phablets and tablets available
with built in GPS/GLONASS capable receivers, barometers, 3G/LTE, etc. and an
app store with tens of thousands of apps why would one want to stick with an
outdated OS running on seriously underpowered hardware which you can only
use in the cockpit?

E.g. Take a smart phone like the LG Optimus 4X HD P880 (720x1280 HD screen
with 750 cd/m2 brightness) and install XCSoar from the Google Play store and
you're sorted. True HD-IPS display, quad core 1.5 GHz processor, 1GB RAM,
hardware accelerated graphics, etc.
Have an outlanding? No problem just take your smart phone and make a call or
send an email. Why carry another mobile phone?
When you're finished soaring for the day just pop it in your pocket and use
it for the rest of the week.
Even better you get to upgrade the phone for free every two years when your
mobile phone contract is up for renewal so you're never left with old
hardware which you can't get rid of.

Just my opinion of course.

On Thursday, January 10, 2013 12:25:31 PM UTC+1, pcool wrote:
Most people, 99% of those I know, use a dedicated device for flight.

The reason for that is pretty trivial: your software runs only on hardware that is not adequate for anything else. That alone makes the hardware "dedicated for flight". That is a limitation imposed by the software, not necessarily the user's deliberate choice.

My Dell Streak is (mostly) dedicated for flight, but I enjoy using my normal phones on occasional leisure/schooling two-seater flights. I don't need to remember taking it with me, I have it in my pocket all the time anyway, and so often it turns out to be useful.

I can agree on this.
But still, many want a dedicated device. That's the same story for car
navigators, no difference.


"Max Kellermann" wrote in message
...

On Thursday, January 10, 2013 12:25:31 PM UTC+1, pcool wrote:
Most people, 99% of those I know, use a dedicated device for flight.

The reason for that is pretty trivial: your software runs only on hardware
that is not adequate for anything else. That alone makes the hardware
"dedicated for flight". That is a limitation imposed by the software, not
necessarily the user's deliberate choice.

My Dell Streak is (mostly) dedicated for flight, but I enjoy using my normal
phones on occasional leisure/schooling two-seater flights. I don't need to
remember taking it with me, I have it in my pocket all the time anyway, and
so often it turns out to be useful.

But still, many want a dedicated device. That's the same story for car navigators, no difference.

Then I cannot help but wonder what motivates those people to buy a separate device instead of something like an Altair/LX9000 or similar devices?

On Thursday, January 10, 2013 2:46:11 PM UTC+1, Roel Baardman wrote:
But still, many want a dedicated device. That's the same story for car navigators, no difference.



Then I cannot help but wonder what motivates those people to buy a separate device instead of something like an Altair/LX9000 or similar devices?

Uh, cost? LX9000 is $5500, Oudie2 $650. That's a lot of tows!

I have an Oudie2 because I do NOT want to use my phone for navigation. And I like being able to take it home and practice with it, or experiment with different configurations, or update and checkout new data in the comfort of home.

Since I use an iPhone, I really don't care about Android's "cool features". I guess I've outgrown that phase...;^)

Kirk
66

At 14:18 10 January 2013, kirk.stant wrote:
On Thursday, January 10, 2013 2:46:11 PM UTC+1,
Roel Baardman wrote:
But still, many want a dedicated device. That's the
same story for car
navigators, no difference.



Then I cannot help but wonder what motivates those
people to buy a
separate device instead of something like an
Altair/LX9000 or similar
devices?

Uh, cost? LX9000 is $5500, Oudie2 $650. That's a lot
of tows!

V2/GG/Oudie Lite + LK8000: $380. Even more tows.

At 13:46 10 January 2013, Roel Baardman wrote:
But still, many want a dedicated device. That's the
same story for car
navigators, no difference.

Then I cannot help but wonder what motivates those
people to buy a separate
device instead of something like an Altair/LX9000 or
similar devices?


Price?
They like the software?

Cost is one thing. But let's not forget one important thing: those who fly
club gliders cannot install a nice LX, altair, clearnav etc. so they must
have an independent removable solution.

Anyway, the thread was about V3 which I am afraid does not exist.


"Roel Baardman" wrote in message
...

But still, many want a dedicated device. That's the same story for car
navigators, no difference.

Then I cannot help but wonder what motivates those people to buy a separate
device instead of something like an Altair/LX9000 or similar devices?

On Thursday, January 10, 2013 5:42:47 AM UTC-5, Surge wrote:
I really wish they ran on an OS (like Android) that's not as antiquated and unsupported as Windows CE or Windows Mobile 6.x

Comparing Windows CE and Android is comparing apples and oranges. They may appear to be equivalent and interchangeable to the end user, but under the skin, they are fundamentally different beasts.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_CE
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Android...ting_system%29

The bottom line is that Windows CE is intended to be utterly stable and reliable. That's a primary design goal.

Android aspires to be all things to all Apps (and "stable"). It's totally pointless to argue (and especially in this forum) whether Windows CE is in fact more stable and reliable than Android, so let's NOT go there.

Windows CE deliberately limits functionality and utility to maximize stability and reliability. Android has constantly expanded functionality and utility and in theory that complexity, and frequent revision and extension of the kernel reduces stability and reliability. At the very least, it introduces the possibility of a code defect slipping in; a defect that could possibly lead to a critical flight computer error. The probability of that happening is unquantifiable, but non-zero.

Stability and reliability are primary goals of sensible flight related computing. That's why NASA's Space Shuttle used computers and software long frozen in decades past. The old stuff was indisputably stable and reliable. It was old, but not antiquated. Using Windows CE follows a similar proven strategy.

I'm not saying that PNA's based on Windows CE are in fact more reliable than those running on Android. Nobody knows. But that's a big part of the engineers' intention.