HomeGarmin


Garmin GLO Bluetooth GLONASS receiver
tcassidy
And while I have it up on the XP computer a comparison between the iTrek and GLO shows some of the GLONASS satellites available here.

Terry
Attached Images
no-glonass.jpg   glonass.jpg  
Boyd
I was using OziExplorer today, and the satellite screen only showed 4 or 5 satellites. But on another screen which lists GPS info it said it was receiving as many as 18 satellites at one point. Does this older software really understand how to display satellite info with a GLONASS system? None of my software has enough "bars" to show that many.
tcassidy
S&T 2013 with the GLO has listed as many as 16 so far. I think it is up to the GPS device to determine the best placed, strongest ones to use in its calculations and 12 is the magic number. More just gives diminishing returns.

Terry
tcassidy
I checked to see if GPS Gate could find the GLO using Bluetooth. I used the wizard and selected to search for Bluetooth only. GPS Gate saw the device but did not recognize it as a GPS.

I selected the 'Advanced' button and the 'Find new GPS' button. I was presented with a list of all the paired devices (and one that wasn't) and chose the GLO from the list. This gave me 2 choices, COM5 and COM7 which obviously are not COM designations in the usual sense.

Choosing COM5 as the input gave good data while COM7 showed unrecognizable data. It is possibly in a format for 'i' devices which the GLO is said to support.

Terry
Attached Images
gps-gate-search.jpg   gps-gate-advanced.jpg   glo-com5.jpg   glo-com7.jpg  
Boyd
As I mentioned earlier, sometimes GMPC will identify the GLO on the COM port, other times on bluetooth. There doesn't seem to be any rhyme or reason why.



Here's something unrelated but kind of funny. I tried to name one of those screenshots COM6 and Windows wouldn't let me, it said it was a reserved system name.
tcassidy
It depends on whether Mobile PC scans Bluetooth or Attached first. It seems to try one approach and then the other. Did you check out the registry entry listed in Post #54?

Terry
Boyd
No I didn't.... the less I know about the registry, the happier I tend to be. But actually, I *don't* want it to use the bluetooth option. As I wrote above, GMPC hangs if you go to the satellite screen using the second option above (Garmin GLO #xxxx). Everything else seems to be OK though. But when it identifies the GPS as COM6, there are no problems.

Other than that, I don't notice any difference is the operation or "feel" of Mobile PC. I have not compared CPU activity, maybe that would show a difference?
tcassidy
Good point! Maybe I should try the q550 using the COM option and see if it is easier on the cpu.

Terry
Boyd
Your earlier post sounds like the same thing I saw. The satellite bars were animated and everything appeared ok on the screen, but the buttons and window controls would not respond. I had to use the slate hardware button to return to the desktop so I could kill GMPC.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tcassidy
If I try showing the satellites, it is up over 95% and the program hangs and ignores my input!
I went out this morning to do some track comparisons and the GLO did not fare well. Notice the gaps in recorded points - I suspect that OziExplorer was having trouble keeping up with the 10hz data stream. This was about a mile hike and my only other tests at 10hz were much shorter. OTOH, the GLO itself may have hiccupped?

Anyway, I am going to do another hiking test but use Globalmapper to capture the data at 1hz since that seemed to be very stable.

tcassidy
I tried the Slate using GLO COM port instead of direct and the difference in cpu usage was considerable. I wonder what that is about. Guess I need to do some further testing.

Terry
Attached Images
com-glo.jpg  
tcassidy
If you remove or rename the DLLs related to Bluetooth from the GarminMobilePC folder, the program will scan attached only and always go to the COM listing. I see 5 DLLs listed in the folder, probably related to the BT stacks supported.

QueBlue.dll
QueBluecom.dll
QueBlueTosh.dll
QueBlueUSB.dll
QueBlueWin.dll

To confirm this, I renamed QueBlueWin.dll to QueBlueWin.dllx on my q550 and the program started to the COM port 5 times in a row.

Terry
Boyd
This is going to be my last test of the GLO... enough already! Turns out that the performance is really very similar to the 60csx and Montana when travelling on foot. The static tests still impress me though, and I may take it out and see what kind of fix I get on my property survey monuments (having done this before with a 60csx and Oregon).

But I'm completely happy with the GLO in the car with Mobile PC, which was all I really expected from it in the beginning. I hope these tests will help others with purchasing decisions in the future.







tcassidy
I had a chance today to do a quick route test with the GLO and S&T. It appeared to work ok but was totally useless as the cpu was constantly pinned on my q550. This may be the reason the cursor was always several blocks behind my actual position.

With Mobile PC the cpu was often over 80% but the cursor position seemed to track fine...at the 50 kph of my test anyways.

I did try to set up GPS gate on the q550 but although it worked with the GLO, it would not create a virual COM port output. As that works fine on other computers, I'll have to investigate further.

Regardless, I will have to test this on a more powerful computer to see if this device works successfully with S&T 2013.

Terry
Attached Images
s-t-routing-glo.jpg   gmpc-routing-glo.jpg  
Boyd
FWIW, I had no problem using nRoute with the GLO on COM1 via GPSgate.

I never checked CPU usage because I never had the sense it was an issue, although I posted some numbers above and they were much lower than what you were seeing. Could the 1024x600 screen on my Slate put less load on the system? It looks like you are running on machines with higher resolution screens.
tcassidy
A couple of things affect this. Your HP 500 has a cpu Windows index of 2.7 while the q550 is hovering around 2.0! Your graphics score is 1.5 times mine and I am running 1280 by 800 (800 x 1280 in the screenshots) at 10". The HP slate has a distinct power advantage but I didn't like the 1024x600 aspect ratio screen.

Terry
laptopgpsworld.com About