HomeMicrosoft


Many Routing Bugs And No One At Microsoft Cares
SD Pilot Car
Forgive me if this subject has been previously addressed, but I’ve spent a lot of time reviewing many threads, and none seem to be close to this one. I need to preface this by saying, my job requires me to create routes on specific roadways, and deviation from those roadways is not allowed without special permission for the State DOT. I have many scenarios like the example I have attached, and all end up the same. I do have work arounds, but you would think a multi-billion dollar company like Microsoft would be embarrassed to see there product is flawed, rather than trying to blame someone else that doesn’t seem to have control of the specific issue.

Attached is a portion of a route I created last year. For example purposes, we’ll use just the section containing the flaw. I needed to create a route from Wilson MN to Austin MN, both towns being on I-90. It may seem simple, but when I entered it into Streets & Trips, it routed me up to Rochester which is no where near I-90. I tried to add a stop on the section of road the software avoided and it went nuts on me, sending me in a loop through Rochester a 2nd time. I wasn’t allowed to go to Rochester the 1st time, why would it think I could do it a 2nd time? I have several scenarios very close to this one in many different states.

When I called Microsoft about this, they said it was a Navteq issue, and that I needed to send it through “Map Feedback. I don’t know how many S&T users have noticed, but they changed the Feedback process in 2011 from a fairly simple email created by the software, to a process where you have to log into the Navteq site and try to describe the issue using POIs. I tried to find a contact number for Navteq to no avail (seems they don't want to hear it either). Anyways, this is a routing issue, not a POI issue and therefore you have no way to describe this kind of problem on their website. Am I crazy, or does this seem to be a software issue instead of a POI issue?
Attached Files
File Type: est 20110829.est (2.69 MB)
tcassidy
I cannot place a stop on the westbound side of I90 in that section. It always defaults to the eastbound lane. If you reverse the route, it works perfectly. My bet is an error in the Microsoft database for that highway section. It may or may not be repaired in S&T 2013.

Terry
tcassidy
Just to prove this is not a Navteq issue, I set the route up in CNNANT 2008, a Garmin product using Navteq mapping information quite a bit older than S&T 2011. I did not see the error you experienced.

Basically S&T left the westbound section of I90 between those intersections out of its routing database. You can see it on the map but you can't route over it. Sorry!

Terry
Attached Images
wilson-austin-2008.jpg  
Larry
Wow. That little segment along 90 near Rochester, MN doesn't want to route in S&T 2011. I opened the very same map in S&T 2013 and it worked fine and the route stayed on 90 as expected.
Attached Images
rochesterrouteerror-st2013.jpg  
omnifold
I believe the construction update is not correct. The west bound lane was closed for resurfacing and you were rerouted. The east bound land was fine. So the Streets and Trips thought the lane is closed, that is why it works east to west and not west to east.
Marvin Hlavac
Omnifold, that's an interesting suggestion. But, as far as I know, the current version of the product doesn't automatically route around construction road closures. The road segments under planned construction are color coded on the map when a route is plotted, but it is up to the user to decide whether or not to modify the route based on the information.
malaki86
SD - I'm assuming that you're a pilot car for oversize loads. Have you looked at CoPilot Truck? You can put exact truck specs in (length, width, height and axle weights). Even if it doesn't route correctly, you can easily put waypoints in along the route to ensure it runs you the correct way.
SD Pilot Car
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry
Wow. That little segment along 90 near Rochester, MN doesn't want to route in S&T 2011. I opened the very same map in S&T 2013 and it worked fine and the route stayed on 90 as expected.
Thanks Larry (and Terry). I was pretty sure it was a MS issue, but I can't get anyone at MS to talk about it. They continuously tell me to log it into Navteq's website, which can't be done. I have a bunch of these (on all kinds of highways), and I even have a POI that will map you 100 miles away from where you clicked the POI. All in 2011. Anyone know how I can become a "trusted ally of MS" to gain access to someone who will care to hear these issues?
SD Pilot Car
Quote:
Originally Posted by malaki86
SD - I'm assuming that you're a pilot car for oversize loads. Have you looked at CoPilot Truck? You can put exact truck specs in (length, width, height and axle weights). Even if it doesn't route correctly, you can easily put waypoints in along the route to ensure it runs you the correct way.
Thanks Malaki86, but I chose Streets and Trips with the assumption that a corporation as large and experienced as MS could deliver a product far superior to smaller and more risky companies. Though it seems I've made a bad decision, I'm invested in many copies of S&T in multiple vehicles. I can't just write off the investment without a substantial hit to my profits and even worse, our productivity. If there is no other way to get resolution to this, I just may have to follow your suggestion. Thanks again!
SteveJonesMO
Quote:
Originally Posted by SD Pilot Car
Am I crazy, or does this seem to be a software issue instead of a POI issue?
It is fine for MS to steer users to Navteq to report issues such as missing roads, roads that are in the wrong place, etc. Data errors that one can explain on a map.

But the error you describe is either a) a S&T bug or b) a problem in the underlying Navteq metadata for that section of road, not something end users should need to be communicating with Navteq about. We have no access to the metadata and thus cannot describe the problem with the necessary detail. Microsoft should pursue it with Navteq, not the user.

Though in this instance it sounds as if the problem has been resolved in Streets and Trips 2013.

But here are some more, not fixed in v2013, which I read about on another forum:

Build a Route with just a start point and end point, from from Prudhoe Bay AK to Tok AK. Try to calculate directions. It will fail. If you place an intermediate stop in someplace like Fairbanks or Delta Junction then it works. You can route from Prudhoe Bay to Fairbanks, and from Fairbanks to Tok, but you cannot route from Prudhoe Bay to Tok with no intermediate stops.

Another is Toronto Ontario to Killarney Ontario. Can't do it, unless you lay down an intermediate stop.

I don't know when those problems first appeared, but I can reproduce them in '07 and '10 (the only copies I have) and they have been confirmed in another forum to still be a problem in '13. They and other similar errors were reported to Microsoft long ago yet remain problems today.

There is another long standing routing bug that has persisted I think from the very beginning of S&T. If you put a pushpin on a freeway and then add that pushpin as a stop on the route, often the route goes crazy, heading off overland (over no roads) and makes a weird loop before regaining it's senses and continuing a normal route.

When it wants to happen, you can have a devil of a time working around it. If you just add the stop via dragging and dropping the route line, no problem. If you place the pushpin directly on an exit dot for that freeway, no problem. But other than that if it wants to happen you just can't make it stop. I've attached an example in v2010. I know it was not fixed in 2011.

Once it became possible to rename a stop it ceased being such an important bug. It used to be the only way to manipulate the stop name was with a pushpin added as the stop. But it's still clearly an error, apparently one they do not intend to fix.
Attached Files
File Type: est st2010_error.est (191.0 KB)
t923347
Also did you notice that in your Toronto to Killarney example that the intermediate stop has to be north of MacTier. Any stop from there south will again produce the "unable to get directions" error message. I'm using S&T 2013.
SteveJonesMO
Yeah, and there is a similar spot on the north edge, about 6 or 7 miles shy of Killarney, if memory serves.

And a similar pair of points for the AK example, one about halfway from Delta Junction and Tok, and another about 170 miles south of Prudhoe Bay, again if memory serves.

Should be a 5 minute job to troubleshoot for someone with access to the metadata and the routing code, but here we are with the bug celebrating at least it's 7th birthday.
joshuals
Quote:
Originally Posted by Larry
Wow. That little segment along 90 near Rochester, MN doesn't want to route in S&T 2011. I opened the very same map in S&T 2013 and it worked fine and the route stayed on 90 as expected.
This has been a known issue in my experience since at least the release of 2011.

Unfortunately the problem persists in S&T 2013 in an instance where it did not exist in the 2011 version.

The attached files are screen shots of a simple routing between Phoenix and Flagstaff in Arizona. The only logical route (shortest or fastest) is to use I-17 all the way. I started a virgin 2013 file and have only two points in the route.....Phoenix and Flagstaff. The S&T 2013 routing leaves I-17 at Cordes Junction and directs me over back roads, through small towns, then back to I-17 again. There is no way that I can force the route back onto northbound I-17 in that "gap area". It will snap to the southbound side of I-17, but not the northbound.

This is an abomination! For Mircosoft to say that this is a Navteq problem, and refer me to them to report the problem, is tantamount to buying a new car from Honda, and when the steering wheel falls off, Honda tells me to call the manufacturer of the steering wheel to fix my problem. Microsoft is selling the product and it should work as advertised or Microsoft fixes the problem.....now.....not in the next release.

I'm supposed to demonstrate S&T to my local Phoenix computer club in January. I would like to be able to tout the product, but if the product cannot even plan a simple route between Phoenix and Flagstaff, I'll be laughed off the stage and no one will want to purchase the product.

Micrsoft has just lost a sale of their "new and improved" version of S&T.....I suppose they don't really care, though.

With reference to the attachments, the one on the left is the route in S&T 2011; on the right is S&T2013.
Attached Images
2011.png   2013.png  
SD Pilot Car
Quote:
Originally Posted by SD Pilot Car
Thanks Malaki86, but I chose Streets and Trips with the assumption that a corporation as large and experienced as MS could deliver a product far superior to smaller and more risky companies. Though it seems I've made a bad decision, I'm invested in many copies of S&T in multiple vehicles. I can't just write off the investment without a substantial hit to my profits and even worse, our productivity. If there is no other way to get resolution to this, I just may have to follow your suggestion. Thanks again!
Hey Malaki, after so much frustration, I took your advice and looked into Co-Pilot. I could not find a 14 day trial until after I had purchased the software and that's where my world fell apart. Here's the email I just sent their Tech Suppport:

Your company is the perfect example of rip-off companies. I will be telling everyone including the web blogs about the following experience:

Your site does not offer a 14 day trial download. You only offer a "PAY US NOW" option. After you pay and load the software, it then shows a 14 day trial. But you've already paid for it so why would you choose this option? You wouldn't unless you're an idiot. Then, you find the Microsoft GPS receiver is incompatible with the software (how do I know? the software told me so when I plugged it in), so you contact the company who tries to tell you it's your fault and that they "DON'T REFUND ON ACTIVATED SOFTWARE". What a crock of deception.

After actually finding an ancient GPS receiver that works with the software in my garage, I see the software looks like a 4th grader drew the maps, there are no reference points associated to anything a Trucker would need (I did buy the Trucker package), and the software sends you places you would never want to take the truck (for example, thru a downtown area where the entire city has a bypass).

I've deleted the garbage software off my system and chaulked the $150 off to a stupid lesson. I immediately downloaded the Microsoft Streets and Trips 2013 (I was trying to replace all the cars with 2011 because of the program flaws in it) and loaded it. Low and behold, all the issues were corrected in 2013. I won't have to change a darned thing and I keep all the same GPS receivers.

All readers, be advised, ALK Software (specifically CO-Pilot for Trucks) is a total and complete waste of your time and money unless you are looking for something your 3 year old can play with.
SD Pilot Car
Quote:
Originally Posted by SD Pilot Car
Forgive me if this subject has been previously addressed, but I’ve spent a lot of time reviewing many threads, and none seem to be close to this one. I need to preface this by saying, my job requires me to create routes on specific roadways, and deviation from those roadways is not allowed without special permission for the State DOT. I have many scenarios like the example I have attached, and all end up the same. I do have work arounds, but you would think a multi-billion dollar company like Microsoft would be embarrassed to see there product is flawed, rather than trying to blame someone else that doesn’t seem to have control of the specific issue.

Attached is a portion of a route I created last year. For example purposes, we’ll use just the section containing the flaw. I needed to create a route from Wilson MN to Austin MN, both towns being on I-90. It may seem simple, but when I entered it into Streets & Trips, it routed me up to Rochester which is no where near I-90. I tried to add a stop on the section of road the software avoided and it went nuts on me, sending me in a loop through Rochester a 2nd time. I wasn’t allowed to go to Rochester the 1st time, why would it think I could do it a 2nd time? I have several scenarios very close to this one in many different states.

When I called Microsoft about this, they said it was a Navteq issue, and that I needed to send it through “Map Feedback. I don’t know how many S&T users have noticed, but they changed the Feedback process in 2011 from a fairly simple email created by the software, to a process where you have to log into the Navteq site and try to describe the issue using POIs. I tried to find a contact number for Navteq to no avail (seems they don't want to hear it either). Anyways, this is a routing issue, not a POI issue and therefore you have no way to describe this kind of problem on their website. Am I crazy, or does this seem to be a software issue instead of a POI issue?
All, as a follow up, I did purchase the Streets and Trips 2013. I reviewed ALL of the mapping issues I found and all were corrected.... Except one. This is truly a tough one to explain, but I'll try. I mapped a route from Columbus NE to Vermillion SD via hwy 15 north. The software (all versions) will tell me I have a number of miles to the end of my trip. The numbers are consistent until I get to a specific point just north of Laurel NE, where all of a sudden, I have 16 miles farther to travel to get to my destination. Did I go through a time/space continuum? The only way I can think of to show this to anyone is to video tape it the next time I go through? Anyone interested in seeing this? Let me know and we can work from there.

Otherwise, thanks to everyone for your help and attention to this situation.
laptopgpsworld.com About