Garmin 496!!!

In article . com,
"Mike Granby" wrote:

better terrain resolution

How can there be better terrain resolution when the screen resolution is
the same?

Mike Granby wrote:
Thomas Borchert wrote:


so what exactly is different from the 396?


Faster update; integrated street maps; better terrain resolution;
taxiway information; AOPA directory. All in all, not that much, but the
faster update might tip it for me.

Yes, except for the faster update, EVERYTHING ELSE could be provided to
owners of a 396 via software and be put on the data card. Wanna bet they
don't offer it?

Mike

In article . com,
"Mike Granby" wrote:

john smith wrote:

How can there be better terrain resolution
when the screen resolution is the same?

The terrain database resolution is independant of the screen
resolution.

To me, resolution means greater detail. What is your interpretation?

" wrote in message
oups.com...
Fast 5Hz GPS!!! Is it the same rate as GNS480? Does that mean VNAV is
possible?

You will never see a legal use for a portable unit, IMHO.
--
Jim in NC

john smith wrote:

How can there be better terrain resolution
when the screen resolution is the same?

The terrain database resolution is
independant of the screen resolution.

To me, resolution means greater
detail. What is your interpretation?

The terrain data is stored at some specific resolution ie. there is a
height recorded for each square of land N by N feet in size. These N x
N squares will correspond to a variable number of pixels on the
display, depending on the zoom level. At lower zooms, multiple squares
will contribute to a single pixel; at higher zooms, a single square
will show as multiple pixels. Go to the terrain page and you'll see a
"blocky" appearance on a 396 at the normal close-in zoom levels used on
that page. Increasing the terrain resolution allows you to get closer
before you get the blocking. It also allow better decisions about
possible terrain conflicts.

Mike Spera wrote:

Yes, except for the faster update, EVERYTHING ELSE
could be provided to owners of a 396 via software and be
put on the data card. Wanna bet they don't offer it?

I'm sure they won't, but I'm also not sure that you get all that on a
data card and access it at a reasonable rate. The 496 must have quite a
lot more memory than the 396, and processing that data will take
horsepower, too.

In article .com,
"Mike Granby" wrote:

john smith wrote:

How can there be better terrain resolution
when the screen resolution is the same?

The terrain database resolution is
independant of the screen resolution.

To me, resolution means greater
detail. What is your interpretation?

The terrain data is stored at some specific resolution ie. there is a
height recorded for each square of land N by N feet in size. These N x
N squares will correspond to a variable number of pixels on the
display, depending on the zoom level. At lower zooms, multiple squares
will contribute to a single pixel; at higher zooms, a single square
will show as multiple pixels. Go to the terrain page and you'll see a
"blocky" appearance on a 396 at the normal close-in zoom levels used on
that page. Increasing the terrain resolution allows you to get closer
before you get the blocking. It also allow better decisions about
possible terrain conflicts.

If I understand you correctly, the increase in terrain resolution comes
from packing more data into memory (more information per pixel) and
redefining the zoom access?

The terrain data is stored at some specific resolution ie. there is a
height recorded for each square of land N by N feet in size.

good stuff snipped

If I understand you correctly, the increase in terrain resolution comes
from packing more data into memory (more information per pixel) and
redefining the zoom access?

"pixels" and "zooming" are concepts orthogonal to the database resolution, which
is what is claimed to be improved. It has nothing to do with the resolution of
the display screen.

"ktbr" wrote in message
...
Mike Granby wrote:
I might even buy a 496 when they start showing up used on Ebay for
$950. In the meantime I'll just have to stick it out with my 196
(that I bought used on Ebay).

That will be a while, that's about what a used 296 (in good cond with
accesories) brings.

Michael Ware wrote:

That will be a while, that's about what a used 296 (in good cond with
accesories) brings.


So be it. The 296 is too slow.. we have 'em in the 182's we use for fire
patrol and my 196 is way faster.