GPSr vs Droid Incredible pt-1

[+LukeTrocity]

There is a lot of smartphone bashing on this forum. I see a lot of "c/o must have placed with a smartphone" or "GPSr's are infinitely better and phones pale in comparison". Now I started a smart phone, this hobby was recommended to me by a work colleague, and quite frankly while I hike quite a bit the whole process didn't interest me. When I upgraded from my blackberry to the Droid Incredible, I was opened up to a world of limitless apps on it. What exactly made me search "geocaching" in the app world and download the app is beyond me. I went walking my dog, looking for local caches. Soon I was finding them all over, and was dumbfounded by the amount that were out their. All the best overlooks seem to have them, all the great secret spots seem to have one nearby (and all the lamp posts near Walmart seem to have one under their skirts. )

 

Soon I found myself owning an actual handheld unit, for planned days of caching. I didn't want to risk my smartphone, so I picked up an Oregon 450. It had great reviews for paperless caching. So now I use both.

 

Anyway, I am however sick of people bashing smartphone users for whatever reason. I think part of the issue is that they feel like their unit HAS to be better cause that's all it does. Who knows. So does my smartphone hold up against my dedicated GPRSr? I decided to find out.

 

Today I went out and did the first of many tests. I will be comparing the Droid Incredible to the Oregon 450. The following are the results of my FIRST test. During these tests I will attempt to be as accurate as possible without driving myself totally mad. Since personal units can only be SO accurate I will try to extrapolate data as best as possible. The entire point of these tests is to see if the smartphone can hold up against a GPSr at its own game.

 

Test 1- Accuracy in an open area on a clear day. Testing site is this benchmark

 

Weather:

 

Units: Droid Incredible; Oregon 450 with most recent firmware

 

I rebooted both units and waited for both to show a good satellite fix. I then punched in the co ordinates to the benchmark:

 

N40 51.973

W 74 44.599

 

I allowed the units take me to the GZ 10 times, and recorded the distance from each to the benchmark. I walked away at least 40 feet each time to get a good read.

First the Oregon:

1.6'

2.3'

3.9'

4.3'

5.4'

6.4'

7.2'

8.7'

9.1'

10.4'

 

Average feet away from benchmark is 4.3 feet.

 

Now for the Droid Incredible:

1.2'

2.6'

3.3'

4.2'

5.8'

6.5'

7.7'

8.2'

9.3'

10.5'

 

Average feet away from benchmark is 4.3 feet.

 

Next I set the units on top of the benchmark and did some waypoint averaging. The Droid Incredible has a weird averaging app, you can't actually set it down you need to move it slightly (its weird). First the Oregon:

 

After 100% confidence it came up with

 

N40 51.973

W074 44.598

 

Next the Droid:

 

N40 40 51.975

W 74 44.600

 

Remember the benchmarks position is at N40 51.973 W 74 44.599. The Oregon was almost dead on which is very impressive but the Incredible wasn't that far off at ALL.

 

Results: I suspect the results look staged, in fact as I did the math I thought "no one will believe this" but quite frankly I have no reason to fake it. I suspect that if I had done at least 100 tests on each, the average distance would be closer to +-7 feet on both. The Droid Incredible is more than accurate enough to place a geocache in these conditions. Both had the same distance on average to the benchmark, and both had similar co ordinates during waypoint averaging. I will be posting more tests as I think of them, not only on accuracy on conditions but durability battery life ruggedness etc etc.

[+dfx]

nothing overly surprising really. it would be more interesting to repeat the whole test in bad reception conditions.

 

interesting though that the phone has be moved for averaging to work. sounds like it's got the annoying static navigation feature enabled.

[GOF and Bacall]

As I understand it some of the newer phones actually use the GPS satellite system for their GPS feature. Is this true? If so then I expect they will be mutch better than the earlier ones that worked off the cell system to determine your location. Personally I don't care how you get the coordinates as long as they are reasonably accurate.

[+wimseyguy]

Why I bash smartphones.

Sent from my mobile device.

 

Yup, that's the entire log.

 

Out of 400+ finds in 3.5 years (so yes, it is a fairly easy find, but in a nice location) there are only 6 TFTC only logs. Including over 200 from GW5. At least they managed to type something else besides initials.

 

I have also heard that the 3G ifones have a serious problem with giving bad coords, but have no personal experience. I'm glad your droid is working out for you.

[+LukeTrocity]

As I understand it some of the newer phones actually use the GPS satellite system for their GPS feature. Is this true? If so then I expect they will be mutch better than the earlier ones that worked off the cell system to determine your location. Personally I don't care how you get the coordinates as long as they are reasonably accurate.

Correct. It uses a combination a "assisted GPS" and "GPS". To get your initial position it triangulates the cell towers, then it uses GPS to narrow down position. The process is much faster than traditional GPS. Heres what it looks like on the phone.

 

 

Uploaded with ImageShack.us

[+LukeTrocity]

Why I bash smartphones.

Sent from my mobile device.

 

Yup, that's the entire log.

 

Out of 400+ finds in 3.5 years (so yes, it is a fairly easy find, but in a nice location) there are only 6 TFTC only logs. Including over 200 from GW5. At least they managed to type something else besides initials.

 

I have also heard that the 3G ifones have a serious problem with giving bad coords, but have no personal experience. I'm glad your droid is working out for you.

That's the USER not the phone. My first log was only a date that I found it. I had no idea what I should write. With experience I learned, but I had no clue at the time. And my phone never says "sent from my mobile device" , and if it did I would edit and delete because thats dumb.

 

[GOF and Bacall]

Word has it that some of the phones have some form of crappy log as the default. It promotes the posting of such logs, mostly because so many people these days are too lazy to change it. So yes, a big user issue.

 

When I got my last phone I seriously considered getting a so called smart phone. But then I started thinking about it. Buy a phone and add $30 bucks a month for service and all I'd do with it would be geocache. Just didn't make sense to me.

[+mtn-man]

The general opening premise of the topic makes it sound as if all phones could be OK, but they are not. You only tested one phone. When I looked about a month ago, there were over 65 Android phones. Until you test each one, your data only applies to one phone.

 

It is a known fact that the iPhone 4G is fairly accurate, but all previous models were inaccurate. That's a well known fact.

 

GPSr's are designed specifically to be accurate. It is their function to be accurate.

Phones in general have not been specifically designed to be accurate. It is their function to do many things.

 

My Droid X seems fairly good, but I have seen it get wacky. I think over time the accuracy will improve as new models are released. I think over time certain mobile devices will come along that will be seen as very accurate and will work for hiding caches. Maybe the Incredible or the Droid X are some of those devices. Maybe not. I would prefer to be sure and so I will use a GPS. I am sure that seekers of my caches will appreciate the due diligence I take in making sure my coordinates are accurate.

[Keystone]

I am moving this thread from the Geocaching Topics forum to the GPS and Technology forum.

[GeoRothes]

I appreciate the OP. I too have a Droid Incredible and went geocaching for the first time this past weekend. It's good to know that it's GPS capabilities are inline with standalone devices. Thanks!

[+dfx]

I appreciate the OP. I too have a Droid Incredible and went geocaching for the first time this past weekend. It's good to know that it's GPS capabilities are inline with standalone devices. Thanks!

that's a bit of an overly quick conclusion.

[GeoRothes]

I appreciate the OP. I too have a Droid Incredible and went geocaching for the first time this past weekend. It's good to know that it's GPS capabilities are inline with standalone devices. Thanks!

that's a bit of an overly quick conclusion.

 

The conclusion was derived along with us finding 7 of 7 caches our first time out this past weekend and the DInc putting us within a few feet of each. The turn by turn spoken navigation while driving to the cache that accompanies it was a nice touch while out also. I have another thread in this forum section that I created before reading this thread asking for input on other GPS solutions also. Please check it out. Thanks! - Noob.

[+zapfrog]

While I love the smartpones for what they do they do have short comings. I too started with the iPhone 3gs and loved it...until I started doing some real hiking in the woods and got crazy reads and the battery only lasted for 3-4 hours. Now I know even the dedicated units can get wonky with positioning but from what I've been reading they are MUCH more accurate than a smart phone. So we went to an eTrex Legend and most recently sold it to get a 60CSx. So now I wait patiently until it arrives and then I can have a really good comparison and some really good times hiking in the woods.

[+LukeTrocity]

@mtn man, can you describe said "wackiness" a bit more specifically?

[+splashy]

My droid Samsung Galaxy is AT LEAST as good as my Oregon 550, even the battery time with Gps on.

Gps possibilities are endless, also very accurate.

[+movemaine]

My blackberry with geocache navigator has been pretty good. It's accuracy once I get near a cache isn't great. It scrambles all over the place, especially in tree cover and often drops out. I have a PN-60 on order, which I think will solve that issue for me. However, I love searching for caches without ever having to load a PQ - smartphones are brilliant to use that way

[+cerberus1]

The general opening premise of the topic makes it sound as if all phones could be OK, but they are not. You only tested one phone. When I looked about a month ago, there were over 65 Android phones. Until you test each one, your data only applies to one phone.

 

It is a known fact that the iPhone 4G is fairly accurate, but all previous models were inaccurate. That's a well known fact.

 

GPSr's are designed specifically to be accurate. It is their function to be accurate.

Phones in general have not been specifically designed to be accurate. It is their function to do many things.

 

My Droid X seems fairly good, but I have seen it get wacky. I think over time the accuracy will improve as new models are released. I think over time certain mobile devices will come along that will be seen as very accurate and will work for hiding caches. Maybe the Incredible or the Droid X are some of those devices. Maybe not. I would prefer to be sure and so I will use a GPS. I am sure that seekers of my caches will appreciate the due diligence I take in making sure my coordinates are accurate.

 

Rare , but I gotta agree...

I don't understand how an unscientific "test" on one "smart" phone shows anything other than (maybe) that one phone is sorta good for caching in open areas on clear days.

Guess we have to assume you have cell coverage in the entire state (NJ). We frequently cache in N Jersey and can't recall (other than a brief spot in Wawayanda) any cut offs.

In the PA NE, we have no cell coverage throughout most mountain regions and since most phone models still rely on tower triangulation to get a fix - are worthless in these areas.

My other half went from a blackberry to a Iphone3g and noticed it's a "bit" better, but still usually 30+' off - in open area and with more than a bar for coverage.

We've noticed a number of times that if we can't find a newer person's hide, we switch from GPSr (60cxs) to the Iphone and we're right on the money - 35-50' away.

Until Consumer Reports does a test and finds a phone that truly works (in all areas/all terrains/all weather conditions), we'll be sticking with our 60cxs'.

[+Safari Jack]

I have noticed that my HTC Hero can constistantly put me into the exact parking spot that I am sitting in, among other locations. A friend of mine and myself actually have plans to do some lunchtime chaching tomorrow both under tree cover, and open are to compare how acurate my Hero, and his HTC Evo are.

[+Pax42]

While I'll say my Droid Incredible is very convenient for a quick grab, I would never put it above my PN-40 or PN-60 for accuracy or overall performance. I don't know that people are bashing the phones, I think they're just reporting the facts as they see them. Of the smart phones I've seen in action while caching, none have performed as consistently well as dedicated handhelds.

[+Safari Jack]

Hit two today, one with moderate cover, and one under heavy tree cover. Both phones got us to within 10 feet of the caches. It seems to be just as accurate as my Magellan eXplorist 400, but then again, it's a couple of years old.

[+hikingirl3]

In my opinion, the biggest drawback to using smartphones for geocaching is the battery situation. If you're out in the woods and it dies, you can't just pop in a new one. Accuracy-wise, I think my iPhone 4 works great. My geocaching partner has a Garmin, and we always end up heading towards the same spot. However, I did just get a DeLorme so I no longer have to worry about being stranded with a dead phone. The Geocaching ap really drains the battery fast.

[+northernpenguin]

 

Guess we have to assume you have cell coverage in the entire state (NJ). We frequently cache in N Jersey and can't recall (other than a brief spot in Wawayanda) any cut offs.

In the PA NE, we have no cell coverage throughout most mountain regions and since most phone models still rely on tower triangulation to get a fix - are worthless in these areas.

 

Right. That was a valid argument two years ago.

Companies like HTC and Apple have listened to their customer base, and prolly more importantly geo-location based advertisers and 911 emergency departments that want accurate coordinates, not to send the ambulance to a location five blocks over.

 

My Touch Pro2 released last July has a discreet GPS Chip, a Qualcomm one. It will happily give me a position fix even though I have no active cellular contract on it. Now, it will certainly USE cellular data when advantageous to obtaining a quicker fix - HTC will grab the ephemerical data from a website rather than download the almanac and use cell tower triangulation to get an initial fix before grabbing a GPS lock. HTC customers know this program as "QuickGPS". It is not required for a location fix, but it is helpful. If you preload your maps there is no reason that you can't use it as a GPS even if Verizon is unreachable where you are.

 

The newer smartphones are even better. I have an iPhone 4 and frankly it has become my primary geocaching GPS. My secondary GPS is a Garmin Colorado that, thanks to some cheapskate in purchasing at Garmin and combined with boneheaded programming practices is actually a lot less reliable in the field. Sure it gives me an accurate position when I average a waypoint but I can be assured the unit will crash to a white screen or simply lock up and require a battery pull at least twice for every geocache outing. I haven't yet had to reset my iPhone while caching.

 

If you're going to slam a smartphone as a GPS, start slamming particular models. I would wager that the poor ones fall into either: old or cheap. Carrier matters too with boneheads at companies like Verizon and Bell fiddling with the Qualcomm GPSOne settings to disable GPS for non pay-per-month carrier apps muddying up the waters too.

 

My HTC Touch (Vogue) would make a better hockey puck than a GPS. My Blackberry Bold 9700, HTC Touch Pro2 and iPhone 4 are quite usable for locating tupperware. My Bold 9700 in it's Otterbox case is almost as rugged as my Colorado is too. I would be confident hiding a cache with my iPhone 4 (to be honest I mark the location using 4 GPS units - the Colorado, iPhone, my eXplorist 600 and the eXplorist XL but I'm just being picky).

[+northernpenguin]

In my opinion, the biggest drawback to using smartphones for geocaching is the battery situation. If you're out in the woods and it dies, you can't just pop in a new one. Accuracy-wise, I think my iPhone 4 works great. My geocaching partner has a Garmin, and we always end up heading towards the same spot. However, I did just get a DeLorme so I no longer have to worry about being stranded with a dead phone. The Geocaching ap really drains the battery fast.

 

I use a battery pack with my iPhone 4. I have the Mili Power Crystal and top up the battery when it gets low. User replaceable battery is not really a must have anymore with devices like that. Make sure whatever you get has a 1 amp charge circuit so you can fill up quickly. I can recharge my iPhone 4 from 20% battery to full in about a half hour, while using data and GPS periodically.

 

Case example: I used Google Latitude to update a hike tracker over a 14 hour hike. Phone automatically took a location fix - GPS forced in Latitudie app - every 15 minutes and sent that information to Google. Phone lasted 9 hours, and then I had 50% charge left at the end of the hike after topping back up with the Crystal. Outside temperature was 8C and phone was in outside jacket pocket.

[+LukeTrocity]

The general opening premise of the topic makes it sound as if all phones could be OK, but they are not. You only tested one phone. When I looked about a month ago, there were over 65 Android phones. Until you test each one, your data only applies to one phone.

 

It is a known fact that the iPhone 4G is fairly accurate, but all previous models were inaccurate. That's a well known fact.

 

GPSr's are designed specifically to be accurate. It is their function to be accurate.

Phones in general have not been specifically designed to be accurate. It is their function to do many things.

 

My Droid X seems fairly good, but I have seen it get wacky. I think over time the accuracy will improve as new models are released. I think over time certain mobile devices will come along that will be seen as very accurate and will work for hiding caches. Maybe the Incredible or the Droid X are some of those devices. Maybe not. I would prefer to be sure and so I will use a GPS. I am sure that seekers of my caches will appreciate the due diligence I take in making sure my coordinates are accurate.

 

Rare , but I gotta agree...

I don't understand how an unscientific "test" on one "smart" phone shows anything other than (maybe) that one phone is sorta good for caching in open areas on clear days.

Guess we have to assume you have cell coverage in the entire state (NJ). We frequently cache in N Jersey and can't recall (other than a brief spot in Wawayanda) any cut offs.

In the PA NE, we have no cell coverage throughout most mountain regions and since most phone models still rely on tower triangulation to get a fix - are worthless in these areas.

My other half went from a blackberry to a Iphone3g and noticed it's a "bit" better, but still usually 30+' off - in open area and with more than a bar for coverage.

We've noticed a number of times that if we can't find a newer person's hide, we switch from GPSr (60cxs) to the Iphone and we're right on the money - 35-50' away.

Until Consumer Reports does a test and finds a phone that truly works (in all areas/all terrains/all weather conditions), we'll be sticking with our 60cxs'.

 

I guess first I would ask what made my test unscientific? I thought I did a fairly decent job of testing things properly, without spending days on it. Also, your right I won't be testing every phone known to man. I lack the ability to do so, but unlike many others I have actually done a test instead of just saying smart phones are inaccurate. (If someone wants to start sending me cell phones I'll start testing all of them!)! Making general statements like "its a well known fact" don't bode well with me...well because..says who? Where's the data and testing done?

 

Also as Penguin pointed out I don't need any cell reception at all. I have OSM that caches maps onto my phone and I can do everything offline. No service needed!

 

I will continue testing, I promise. I know its slow going but I'm lazy and work a lot.

[+Safari Jack]

I think your test was pretty good Luke. I just wanted to add information to your thread on a couple of different phones in differnt conditions. I also agree with Penguin that poor performance is probably limited to old, or cheap smartphones. My Hero was the top player on Sprint this time last year, and now the Evo is the top player. I have noticed on this forum that people can be quite snobby about somethings, and how some people play the game, and I think that is the type of person that looks down their nose at smartphone chachers. If there is something out there that brings more players to the game, or makes it easier for people to play. I'm all for it!

[+splashy]

A Samsung Galaxy is at least as good as a Oregon 550, the navigation app's are much better, actually the whole package is light-years ahead.

It's also more flexible, if you don't like an app, just delete it and try another, not to mention prices of maps.

Battery life is shorter, but you could take a spare with you. Screen view in bright sun can be bad.

Rain, if you are in a really rainy area you might have a problem, but on most places it doesn't rain as much as it looks like

and did you ever see people not using the cell in bad weather the last years?

If you have very bad rain put the phone in a zip bag.

[+JOK*]

i use my droid (the first one, motorola). i bought 3 different gpsr because everyone told me they are better. they are wrong. maybe to hide a cache you can get a few feet better accuracy for the coordinates. big deal, put a better description or hint if you're worried those couple feet will hurt.

what i haven't seen mentioned here is the fact that from anywhere i can get internet service i can get a notification, get to the cache page, download the gpx file, read past logs, hint and full description, see the satellite image, get driving directions to the cache with real time traffic and weather updates...ALL WITHIN MINUTES!

i use geobeagle most of the time. i download all the gpx files i need for the day, load them onto my phone and use the map to get from cache to cache. when i get there i have an arrow pointing the direction to go, the sat. image with an arrow pointing where to look and the description and hint. i do not log from my phone, but can if i choose to. i do log it, but use the option to log to a notepad file just a simple 'found it' or 'dnf'. with that info i take it home and log our caches for the day.

[Andronicus]

Each phone is different. Then there is the issue of using it outside of cell phone coverage. Personally, I am a big advocate of the smart phone. Why wouldn't you want to have access to the Internet at all times. I use a external bluetooth GPSr so my smart phone always has excellent GPS reception. My bluetooth GPSr is more sensitive than the best garmin receivers, and just as accurate.

 

See the thread link in my signature for lots of great smartphone geocaching tips.

[+bobdammit]

In my opinion, the biggest drawback to using smartphones for geocaching is the battery situation. If you're out in the woods and it dies, you can't just pop in a new one. Accuracy-wise, I think my iPhone 4 works great. My geocaching partner has a Garmin, and we always end up heading towards the same spot. However, I did just get a DeLorme so I no longer have to worry about being stranded with a dead phone. The Geocaching ap really drains the battery fast.

I carry a spare battery for my Droid with me at all times. 172 finds and counting, all on my smart phone.

[+LukeTrocity]

Just as an update I wanted to say that the weather tests I was planning would be a waste of time. After doing some reading I found that clouds play no part in gps accuracy. Its a myth. Best tests I can do is under tree cover, and right now my trees have no leaves.

[+dfx]

I carry a spare battery for my Droid with me at all times. 172 finds and counting, all on my smart phone.

 

Not a whole lot. I don't mean to downplay anything, I've come the same way and have actually found well over 1500 caches with a lowly PDA that didn't even give me any maps. Eventually I was fed up with its limiations and took the plunge and got a proper GPS. I never regretted it one bit.

[+4bejeepin]

I started caching with a friend and their iPhone 4. That same day, I downloaded Geocache Navigator for my Blackberry, signed up for a Geocaching.com account, and was looking for my own caches, all from the field, without ever using a computer for the process and certainly without using a dedicated GPSr. I like the convenience of being able to search for caches no matter where I am (within data plan range). I do have a DeLorme PN-40 on the way because the battery life is terrible on the BB and, while durable, it is not as durable as a handheld GPSr. The other issues are caching outside of cell service and that it has the occasional problem with accuracy. All In all, I just started in January and have 80 finds using just the Blackberry. I think we may see a more complete solution in the future (dedicated GPSr units with data plans?), but for spontaneous, around town caching, I can't imagine how you could beat a smartphone. I think they both have their purposes, but information is king and a smartphone can get it to you faster than a GPSr can. The GPSr is a better tool for the job, if it has the data you need.

 

Just my two cents.

 

4bejeepin

[+Team BowMint]

I think the huge ammount of folks that smart phones have introduced to the world of geocaching alone is worth gratitutde. No way was I going to spend money on a new GPS and cut into my flying lesson's budget to go find tupperware. But then my brother showed me the Andriod Geocache app for $10.00 and 2 months later and an extended battery for my HTC Incredible and my team is over 70 caches! I have had nothing but good times using my Driod for caching. It has gotten us close enough to all caches and the one's that seem questionable as far as ground zero,w ell a quick read of the previous logs reveal that others have found that GZ is a bit off too! I love the convienience of being able to spontaniously use the Driod in the field without having to worry about PQs and such.

Until I go to hike and cache in canyons or rainforests, the Driod will do for me. Besides the next GPS I buy will be for the plane....

[+Walts Hunting]

I have tested my DroidX with GS app against my Oregon 450 and found little if any difference. The phone doesn't work that well for me since most of my caching is done by hiking or biking and it isn't rugged enough. The other issue is battery life when I am out all day.

[+Doctroid]

In my opinion, the biggest drawback to using smartphones for geocaching is the battery situation. If you're out in the woods and it dies, you can't just pop in a new one. Accuracy-wise, I think my iPhone 4 works great. My geocaching partner has a Garmin, and we always end up heading towards the same spot. However, I did just get a DeLorme so I no longer have to worry about being stranded with a dead phone. The Geocaching ap really drains the battery fast.

 

http://www.ladyada.net/make/mintyboost/

 

(I have this kit but haven't put it together yet. I assume that, like a corded charger, it'll let you use your phone while it charges. YMMV.)

[+Skarekrough]

The bottom line is this will always be the basic fact that GPS' are designed for a specific use and functionality set as their primaru task whereas phones are designed to be phones first and have had features heaped on top of them.

 

There's nothing a phone can be made to do that a GPS can't.

 

However, with that said, out of the box a GPSR is and will always be superior without any "bolt on's" that are necessary for smartphones. It's by design and the result of that which makes it a superior pick.

 

You may be able to dig holes with a sturdy rake but a shovel is intended for the task.

[+gsmX2]

I have the original Motorola Droid and a Colorado 400T. I use each to it's individual advantage. If I receive a notification on my way home, the Droid will give me turn-by-turn directions and take me right to GZ where I can read all I need about the cache without ever touching another device. Similarly, if I see an interesting place for a cache, I can use my Droid to verify that there are no caches within .10 miles (multies and puzzles excepted). If I chose to log a cache in the field, I can do that with the Droid. The Colorado can do none of those.

 

But when I am going on a planned caching run, I want the quickest and most reliable device I can have....and that hand's down is the Colorado (or any dedicated handheld gpsr). It flips from screen to screen instantly, doesn't rely on a signal, and battery life is not an issue because I carry a spare battery.

 

I love having both capabilities (and a Nuvi for turn-by-turn directions--filtered through human common sense---when the Nuvi is saying get on the freeway---apply common sense.