2nd attempt: Does *any* iOS app do off-trail hiking tracks with "decent" topo maps?

[Adair Bordon]

Does any iOS app (free or otherwise) do this one task well?
- GPS tracking overlaid realtime on a decent USGS quadrangle map.
MotionX GPS HD, by MotionX, Version 22.0
https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/motionx-gps-hd/id370488535?mt=8

I hike off trail in mountainous country every day, and I really
would like to find a usable app for iOS that does at least this
ONE critical off-trail task, which is to show the current track
on a decent USGS topographical map.

I tried MotionX GPS HD, but the underlying default topographical
maps are not even close to USGS quality; but, otherwise, that app
has many hiking bells & whistles (but none of the substance) you'd
need for off-trail hiking in mountainous country.

The type of hiking I do can be shown by the ten pictures appended,
snapped today, while on a daily hike from arbitrary point A to
arbitrary point B. The slopes are often 45 degrees and tightly
spaced, such that the topography is critical; plus it's hard to
map where I've been (I use old-fashioned surveyor's tape, but
I'd prefer watching, saving, and following a KML track).

The best (so far) *USGS topo map* has been from the freeware iOS app:
Topo Reader, by Dennis Lindsey
- https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/topo-reader/id940309979?mt=8
So, that's the standard we will compare the apps by.

The best (so far) KML *real-time tracking* has been from the app:
Map Plus (Offline Map + GPS Track + KML Editing), by Zax
- https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/map-plus-offline-map-+-gps/id438868200?mt=8

Examples of a substandard underlying maps *abound* for those items
which track KML, for example, these all fail miserably on maps:
- Logger Tool, by Skiroute16 (no terrain maps)
- Tracks Logger, by Siu Yuen Ho (no terrain maps)
- Map Measure Free, by zhao guo (no terrain maps)
- GPS++, by Ewoud Wijma (crashes on iOS every time)
- SlopeTacker Ski tracking, by Bach it Solutions (no terrain maps)
- Walkwith Map My Walk, by MapMyFitness (no terrain maps)
etc.

What I'm asking about is simple:
1. Decent USGS-quality terrain maps, plus,
2. Real-time KML tracking.

Is that too much to ask?

To give you an idea of the terrain, here is just a set of pictures
from the ad-hoc hike today, although every hike is different, the
terrain is always steep and mountainous and there are no trails:
- Typical hike today 1 http://i59.tinypic.com/2dl4vhi.jpg
- Typical hike today 2 http://i57.tinypic.com/23gydlh.jpg
- Typical hike today 3 http://i61.tinypic.com/vn2dfa.jpg
- Typical hike today 4 http://i57.tinypic.com/9rhrhc.jpg
- Typical hike today 5 http://i62.tinypic.com/2qamebp.jpg
- Typical hike today 6 http://i60.tinypic.com/2n6x43k.jpg
- Typical hike today 7 http://i59.tinypic.com/2ih4jyf.jpg
- Typical hike today 8 http://i57.tinypic.com/dnj71w.jpg
- Typical hike today 9 http://i60.tinypic.com/213nple.jpg
- Typical hike today 10 http://i57.tinypic.com/29d9s3m.jpg

The question for those of you who hike off trail, is what iOS app
(free or otherwise) do you use that simply displays the current
KML track in real time on a decent USGS terrain map?

[Savageduck]

On 2015-03-05 06:13:23 +0000, Adair Bordon said:

> Does any iOS app (free or otherwise) do this one task well?

I for one, am not playing this tedious game again, and I doubt that you
are going to get any sane regulars here to bite again.

However, there might be one or two folks with masochistic tendencies
who will take this wreck around the block one more time.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

[Rod Speed]

Adair Bordon <Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote

> Does any iOS app (free or otherwise) do this one task well?

Does it have to be all in the one app ?

> - GPS tracking overlaid realtime on a decent USGS quadrangle map.
> MotionX GPS HD, by MotionX, Version 22.0
> https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/motionx-gps-hd/id370488535?mt=8

> I hike off trail in mountainous country every day,

Is that accurate or a bit of an exaggeration ?

I used to do it daily, but now do it every second day instead.

> and I really would like to find a usable app for iOS that
> does at least this ONE critical off-trail task, which is to show
> the current track on a decent USGS topographical map.

> I tried MotionX GPS HD, but the underlying default topographical
> maps are not even close to USGS quality; but, otherwise, that app
> has many hiking bells & whistles (but none of the substance) you'd
> need for off-trail hiking in mountainous country.

> The type of hiking I do can be shown by the ten pictures appended,
> snapped today, while on a daily hike from arbitrary point A to
> arbitrary point B. The slopes are often 45 degrees and tightly
> spaced, such that the topography is critical; plus it's hard to
> map where I've been (I use old-fashioned surveyor's tape, but
> I'd prefer watching, saving, and following a KML track).

Yeah, it makes no sense to not use GPS now.

> The best (so far) *USGS topo map* has been from the freeware iOS app:
> Topo Reader, by Dennis Lindsey
> - https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/topo-reader/id940309979?mt=8
> So, that's the standard we will compare the apps by.

> The best (so far) KML *real-time tracking* has been from the app:
> Map Plus (Offline Map + GPS Track + KML Editing), by Zax
> -
> https://itunes.apple.com/us/app/map-plus-offline-map-+-gps/id438868200?mt=8

> Examples of a substandard underlying maps *abound* for those items
> which track KML, for example, these all fail miserably on maps:
> - Logger Tool, by Skiroute16 (no terrain maps)
> - Tracks Logger, by Siu Yuen Ho (no terrain maps)
> - Map Measure Free, by zhao guo (no terrain maps)
> - GPS++, by Ewoud Wijma (crashes on iOS every time)
> - SlopeTacker Ski tracking, by Bach it Solutions (no terrain maps)
> - Walkwith Map My Walk, by MapMyFitness (no terrain maps)
> etc.

> What I'm asking about is simple:
> 1. Decent USGS-quality terrain maps, plus,
> 2. Real-time KML tracking.

> Is that too much to ask?

Nope, but its no big deal if you need to use two instead of one.

> To give you an idea of the terrain, here is just a set of pictures
> from the ad-hoc hike today, although every hike is different, the
> terrain is always steep and mountainous and there are no trails:
> - Typical hike today 1 http://i59.tinypic.com/2dl4vhi.jpg
> - Typical hike today 2 http://i57.tinypic.com/23gydlh.jpg
> - Typical hike today 3 http://i61.tinypic.com/vn2dfa.jpg
> - Typical hike today 4 http://i57.tinypic.com/9rhrhc.jpg
> - Typical hike today 5 http://i62.tinypic.com/2qamebp.jpg
> - Typical hike today 6 http://i60.tinypic.com/2n6x43k.jpg
> - Typical hike today 7 http://i59.tinypic.com/2ih4jyf.jpg
> - Typical hike today 8 http://i57.tinypic.com/dnj71w.jpg
> - Typical hike today 9 http://i60.tinypic.com/213nple.jpg
> - Typical hike today 10 http://i57.tinypic.com/29d9s3m.jpg

It would be more convenient if you used an album system
so we could just click on the link to the album and then
move thru the individual pictures once there.

> The question for those of you who hike off trail, is what iOS
> app (free or otherwise) do you use that simply displays the
> current KML track in real time on a decent USGS terrain map?

I don’t do it all in one app and don’t normally use topo maps either.

[Adair Bordon]

Rod Speed wrote, on Thu, 05 Mar 2015 20:30:55 +1100:

>> Does any iOS app (free or otherwise) do this one task well?
> Does it have to be all in the one app ?

Having the map in one app and the track in another is like having
to use one app for email text and another for sending attachments.

>> I hike off trail in mountainous country every day,
> Is that accurate or a bit of an exaggeration ?

This week it has been every day; sometimes it's every two days;
other times it's once every three or four days. The opportunity
presents itself every day; whether I do it or not depends.

>> 1. Decent USGS-quality terrain maps, plus,
>> 2. Real-time KML tracking.
>> Is that too much to ask?
> Nope, but its no big deal if you need to use two instead of one.

I currently use 2 apps, instead of one:
1. MotionX GPS HD (to save waypoints & to generate KML tracks)
2. Topo Reader (USGS topo maps)

Since it's a *basic* need to have KML tracking on a map, I'm
shocked and dismayed that it's so hard to find on iOS.

I'll keep looking, but, there must be at least one other person
who hikes off trail on this newsgroup who has found a reasonable
answer to this most basic of basic questions:

Q: What iOS app does KML tracking on a decent USGS topo map?

[Adair Bordon]

Savageduck wrote, on Wed, 04 Mar 2015 22:30:33 -0800:

> I for one, am not playing this tedious game again, and I doubt that you
> are going to get any sane regulars here to bite again.

I understand. Hiking is not your need - that makes total sense.

I'm not asking anyone to run my search (I already ran the same
search you'd run anyway - and I doubt you'd find anything I can't
find).

At the moment, I'm shocked if there are no decent iOS off-trail
hiking apps, so, I'm trying to find an *existing* hiker, i.e.,
one who has *already* solved this need.

It may very well be that there are no off trail iOS hikers;
but I don't know that at this point.

I will also put the best solution there is, into this thread, so,
that, at the very least, the NEXT hiker will start standing on
our shoulders.

[Jolly Roger]

On 2015-03-05, Adair Bordon <Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote:
> Savageduck wrote, on Wed, 04 Mar 2015 22:30:33 -0800:
>
>> I for one, am not playing this tedious game again, and I doubt that you
>> are going to get any sane regulars here to bite again.
>
> I understand. Hiking is not your need - that makes total sense.
>
> I'm not asking anyone to run my search (I already ran the same
> search you'd run anyway - and I doubt you'd find anything I can't
> find).

Doubt that, considering plenty of people here have already found many
things you were apparently unable to find fairly recently.

--
E-mail sent to this address may be devoured by my ravenous SPAM filter.
I often ignore posts from Google. Use a real news client instead.

JR

[Patty Winter]

In article <md8s63$2ck$1...@news.albasani.net>,

Adair Bordon <Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote:
>Does any iOS app (free or otherwise) do this one task well?
>- GPS tracking overlaid realtime on a decent USGS quadrangle map.

Yes, and you have been given information about how to do it in your
previous threads.

Also, this question is off-topic for the Garmin newsgroup, so I've
removed it from this reply.

[Rod Speed]

Adair Bordon <Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote
>> Adair Bordon <Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote

>>> Does any iOS app (free or otherwise) do this one task well?

>> Does it have to be all in the one app ?

> Having the map in one app and the track in another is like having
> to use one app for email text and another for sending attachments.

Nothing like. Much more like having an email app handle
new income emails when you are looking at your photos
etc with whatever keeps track of where you have been
and produces a KML of that in the background.

>>> I hike off trail in mountainous country every day,

>> Is that accurate or a bit of an exaggeration ?

> This week it has been every day; sometimes it's every two days;
> other times it's once every three or four days. The opportunity
> presents itself every day; whether I do it or not depends.

Yeah, I certainly don’t go walking in the rain, but that’s easy
for me because we don’t have all that may days like that.

>>> 1. Decent USGS-quality terrain maps, plus,
>>> 2. Real-time KML tracking.
>>> Is that too much to ask?

>> Nope, but its no big deal if you need to use two instead of one.

> I currently use 2 apps, instead of one:
> 1. MotionX GPS HD (to save waypoints & to generate KML tracks)
> 2. Topo Reader (USGS topo maps)

> Since it's a *basic* need to have KML tracking on a map,
> I'm shocked and dismayed that it's so hard to find on iOS.

I'm not and can see why some choose to do it like that.

In fact I do it like that myself, I use a separate app to keep track
of where I have been and a separate app to play me the podcasts
from out local national govt radio broadcaster that I listen to while
walking. I don’t always log my movements when doing that, some
of the time I am just sitting in my car waiting for a garage/yard sale
to open when I am the only one waiting. When I'm not the only one
waiting, I normally talk to the other people who are waiting.

> I'll keep looking, but, there must be at least one other person
> who hikes off trail on this newsgroup who has found a
> reasonable answer to this most basic of basic questions:

> Q: What iOS app does KML tracking on a decent USGS topo map?

You've already been told about one, it just doesn’t have very good maps.

[Cecil Propes]

on 3/5/2015, Adair Bordon supposed :

http://www.ihikegps.com

[Savageduck]

On 2015-03-05 17:58:25 +0000, Cecil Propes said:

> on 3/5/2015, Adair Bordon supposed :

<<Le Snip>>

> Q: What iOS app does KML tracking on a decent USGS topo map?
>
> http://www.ihikegps.com

Oh boy! $7.99!
Now he is going to have to buy another gift card, and we will hear all
about that part of this continuing, and tedious saga.

--
Regards,

Savageduck

[bj]

Followed by reams of complaints about how deficient it is, what it can't
do, what it gets wrong, etc. etc. etc.

Anyway, someone who does that much hiking in wilderness areas should
probably be in more focussed forums where the people know the tools of
their activity.
Geez!
bj

[Adair Bordon]

Rod Speed wrote, on Fri, 06 Mar 2015 04:57:40 +1100:

>> Q: What iOS app does KML tracking on a decent USGS topo map?
>
> You've already been told about one, it just doesn’t have very good maps.

I try to use the iPad not as a mere toy, but as something useful!

I think the problem I'm facing is that the hikers who use the
iPad aren't really serious hikers, so, the app that was suggested
works for them, simply because they're using it as a toy app.

By way of related analogy, I often buy gloves for when I hike,
but for me, gloves aren't a toy; they need to actually be strong.
http://i58.tinypic.com/2niof2v.jpg

Here, for example, are long leather gloves I just bought yesterday,
already ruined, in their very first hour on the trail this morning!
http://i60.tinypic.com/35am0av.jpg

They are toy gloves. They look like they can do the job, and, for
people with toy jobs to accomplish, I'm sure they work; but if
you're trying to get something real done, the leather isn't up
to the task.

I think I'm finding the same thing inherently in all the known
iOS-based KML-tracking apps. They're like all these gloves I
have tried, and found lacking when put to a serious test:
http://i59.tinypic.com/ifdbic.jpg

So, I'm always in search of serious leather work gloves.
I think we have a similar situation with the topo-tracking apps.

When I first asked, people derided me saying they're all over
the place; but when you put each one to a serious test, they
fail almost instantly being used as anything other than as a toy.

I'm in search of a serious (not toy) topo map tracking app
on iOS.

[Rod Speed]

Adair Bordon <Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote

>>> Q: What iOS app does KML tracking on a decent USGS topo map?

>> You've already been told about one, it just doesn’t have very good maps.

And you have now been told about one that has the maps you want too.

> I try to use the iPad not as a mere toy, but as something useful!

Sure.

> I think the problem I'm facing is that the hikers who use the
> iPad aren't really serious hikers, so, the app that was suggested
> works for them, simply because they're using it as a toy app.

I don’t buy that, its just not as well done as the latest one.

> By way of related analogy,

I've never been into analogys.

> I often buy gloves for when I hike,

Never wear them myself.

> but for me, gloves aren't a toy; they need to actually be strong.
> http://i58.tinypic.com/2niof2v.jpg

> Here, for example, are long leather gloves I just bought yesterday,
> already ruined, in their very first hour on the trail this morning!
> http://i60.tinypic.com/35am0av.jpg

> They are toy gloves.

Nope, just not intended for what you want to do with them.

> They look like they can do the job, and, for people with
> toy jobs to accomplish, I'm sure they work; but if you're
> trying to get something real done, the leather isn't up
> to the task.

There will always be different articles for any purpose.

> I think I'm finding the same thing inherently in
> all the known iOS-based KML-tracking apps.

No you aren't.

> They're like all these gloves I have tried,

It doesn’t look like the latest one is.

> and found lacking when put to a serious test:
> http://i59.tinypic.com/ifdbic.jpg

The ones the pros use must be available, you
just aren't looking in the right place for them.

> So, I'm always in search of serious leather work gloves.

You need to look at what the pros use.

> I think we have a similar situation with the topo-tracking apps.

I doubt it. Not that common, sure, but I just don’t believe that
they aren't available at all, particularly if you have enough of a
clue to realise that it doesn’t have to be all in the one app.

> When I first asked, people derided me saying they're all over
> the place; but when you put each one to a serious test, they
> fail almost instantly being used as anything other than as a toy.

That isn't true of the apps that do what you want in more than one app.

> I'm in search of a serious (not toy) topo map tracking app on iOS.

But stupidly demand that it must all be in the one app.

That drastically limits what is available, just like your
demand that no card be involved radically limits what
you can do trivially on an iDevice.

[Adair Bordon]

Patty Winter wrote, on Thu, 05 Mar 2015 17:47:15 +0000:

> Yes, and you have been given information about how to do it in your
> previous threads.

Hi Patty,

I appreciate all suggestions, but, if you're only using the iPad as
a toy, that suggested app works just fine; but if you're actually
using the iPad for off-trail hiking, that toy app fails instantly.

By way of analogy, take this simple trail I started building today
from this starting point high up in the hills after reconoitering
the lay of the land on foot and via the USGS topographic maps:
http://i61.tinypic.com/2vwbka0.jpg

I donned new elbow-length leather gloves, then chainsawed my way down
through the brush, which included 100-foot long poison oak thickets:
http://i58.tinypic.com/2niof2v.jpg

I then laid a rope and widened the path so that it's now a "trail":
http://i57.tinypic.com/2z5oojn.jpg

This is not a toy job, so, it requires toy clothing. For example,
I accidentally chainsawed my leg a couple of days ago, and, because
I didn't have chaps on, I was (slightly) injured in the thigh.
http://i59.tinypic.com/f4p5om.jpg

Point is, that a chainsaw is not a toy, and therefore it requires
serious clothing, where jeans are akin to the toy apps suggested
for off-trail hiking with the iPad:
http://i60.tinypic.com/21ccl1l.jpg

Carrying the toy analogy further, if you don't see these black
marks on your clothing, then you've never been in serious poison
oak (you've just been toying around with the poison oak or ivy):
http://i57.tinypic.com/2e0tdzo.jpg

All this analogy is to explain that, yes, an app was suggested, and
it was a toy app. Likewise, people suggested I search for tracking
apps, which, so far, all turned out to be iOS toy apps too.

Hence I'm still searching for a real iOS-based hiking app that simply
tracks where I am in real time on a decent topographical map.

The iOS people apparently think it's odd to want that.
Do the Garmin people think the same way?

[Adair Bordon]

Cecil Propes wrote, on Thu, 05 Mar 2015 11:58:25 -0600:

>> Q: What iOS app does KML tracking on a decent USGS topo map?
>
> http://www.ihikegps.com

Perfect!

The description seems to describe *exactly* what I am looking for!
A non-toy app on the iPad for an average off-trail hiker.

Two things that actually matter seem to be covered, namely:
1. Real time tracks, and,
2. Decent maps! (http://www.ihikegps.com/usgsmaps.html)

I will pick up a new $15 iTunes gift card to test out that $8
app, & report the results back to the team.

Thank you very much for the suggestion!

[Jolly Roger]

On 2015-03-05, Adair Bordon <Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote:
>

> the hikers who use the iPad aren't really serious hikers, so, the app
> that was suggested works for them, simply because they're using it as
> a toy app.

The ignorant insults just keep on coming, don't they?

[Rod Speed]

"Adair Bordon" <Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote in message
news:mdag5n$hfh$2...@news.albasani.net...

Nope, not if you use two apps instead of one.

> Hence I'm still searching for a real iOS-based hiking app that simply
> tracks where I am in real time on a decent topographical map.

> The iOS people apparently think it's odd to want that.

Nope, they just do it using more than a single app.

> Do the Garmin people think the same way?

Nope, Garmin has always done stuff like that.

[Adair Bordon]

Rod Speed wrote, on Fri, 06 Mar 2015 07:58:22 +1100:

>>>> Q: What iOS app does KML tracking on a decent USGS topo map?
>
>>> You've already been told about one, it just doesn’t have very good maps.
>
> And you have now been told about one that has the maps you want too.

Unfortunately, the maps on that suggested app are substandard, at
least upon initial inspection:
http://i57.tinypic.com/358yypk.jpg

However, I will test that app out, perhaps this weekend, as
tomorrow I have meetings most of the day, where I can let the team
know if the apparent lack of map detail is a problem in practice.

Until then, here is a comparison of the same location near where
I hiked today, with the freeware Topo Reader map on the left,
and the iHikeGPS map on the right, where both are zoomed in to
their max granularity:
http://i62.tinypic.com/2zfr0nl.jpg

It will be a couple of days before I can test this iHikeGPS
out on a real off-trail hike; but, at this point, we still
need an iOS-based app that can do real-time tracking on maps
at least as good as the USGS maps found in the freeware
Topo Reader, by Dennis Lindsey.

[Sunshine]

On Thu, 5 Mar 2015 21:00:39 +0000 (UTC), Adair Bordon
<Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote:

>By way of analogy, take this simple trail I started building today
>from this starting point high up in the hills after reconoitering
>the lay of the land on foot and via the USGS topographic maps:
> http://i61.tinypic.com/2vwbka0.jpg
>
>I donned new elbow-length leather gloves, then chainsawed my way down
>through the brush, which included 100-foot long poison oak thickets:
> http://i58.tinypic.com/2niof2v.jpg
>
>I then laid a rope and widened the path so that it's now a "trail":
> http://i57.tinypic.com/2z5oojn.jpg
>
>This is not a toy job, so, it requires toy clothing. For example,
>I accidentally chainsawed my leg a couple of days ago, and, because
>I didn't have chaps on, I was (slightly) injured in the thigh.
> http://i59.tinypic.com/f4p5om.jpg

I didn't click any of your other links, but I clicked that one. There was
less leg damage than I expected.

My question is, whose property are you chainsawing your way through?

[Adair Bordon]

Sunshine wrote, on Thu, 05 Mar 2015 16:10:37 -0600:

> I didn't click any of your other links, but I clicked that one. There was
> less leg damage than I expected.
>
> My question is, whose property are you chainsawing your way through?

This isn't relevant, but the chain sawed parts of the hike go through
private property (some of which is my own), where the neighbors and I
are all in agreement that we need better trails to connect us together.

A chain saw is pretty loud, so, they *know* when I'm cutting trails
on their property!

[Adair Bordon]

Sunshine wrote, on Thu, 05 Mar 2015 16:10:37 -0600:

> There was less leg damage than I expected.

I did say it was only a minor cut; I get much worse any time I fall
down a ravine (which is frequent, lately as these hills are extremely
steep and loose and slippery and I'm not at all cautious when I hike).

Here's a picture of the (minor) wound, which happened on my Tuesday hike:
http://i61.tinypic.com/5fevdc.jpg

The point was that jeans and "gardening gloves" are "toy" equipment for
chainsawing a trail through heavy oak, madrone, manzanita, toyon,
ceanothus, poison oak, etc., just as the $2 app MotionX GPS HD is a
toy app, not suitable for real-time navigation through that same area:
http://i58.tinypic.com/24npsh4.jpg

Even though the first view of the $8 iHikeGPS maps was disappointing,
what really matters is whether the real-time tracking on them is
usable in the field.

I probably won't get a chance to test that out for a couple of days,
but I'll report back to the team when I do.

In the meantime, if anyone knows of any decent iOS apps that can
track real time location on a decent USGS quality topo map, please
post the suggestion so that everyone benefits from your efforts.

[Adair Bordon]

Rod Speed wrote, on Thu, 05 Mar 2015 20:30:55 +1100:

> It would be more convenient if you used an album system
> so we could just click on the link to the album and then
> move thru the individual pictures once there.

In effect, this is a one-click "album" system I set up long
ago simply by making the URL below:
http://tinyurl.com/comp-mobile-ipad
http://tinyurl.com/alt-satellite-gps-garmin
http://tinyurl.com/misc.phone.mobile.iphone
etc.

Michelle isn't the only one who volunteers community service
for the better good of everyone.

[Rod Speed]

Adair Bordon <Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote

>> It would be more convenient if you used an album system
>> so we could just click on the link to the album and then
>> move thru the individual pictures once there.

> In effect, this is a one-click "album" system I set up long
> ago simply by making the URL below:
> http://tinyurl.com/comp-mobile-ipad
> http://tinyurl.com/alt-satellite-gps-garmin
> http://tinyurl.com/misc.phone.mobile.iphone
> etc.

Sure, I just meant that that one would be
more convenient to use as an album too.

> Michelle isn't the only one who volunteers community
> service for the better good of everyone.

She appears to have slashed her wrists at the
previous snide comment you made about her.

[Adair Bordon]

Rod Speed wrote, on Fri, 06 Mar 2015 11:33:37 +1100:

> She appears to have slashed her wrists at the
> previous snide comment you made about her.

I apologize for those comments.
I hope she didn't see them.

[Adair Bordon]

Savageduck wrote, on Thu, 05 Mar 2015 10:34:51 -0800:

> Oh boy! $7.99!
> Now he is going to have to buy another gift card, and we will hear all
> about that part of this continuing, and tedious saga.

The deed is done!
http://i61.tinypic.com/xeo8wx.jpg

[Adair Bordon]

bj wrote, on Thu, 05 Mar 2015 14:02:59 -0600:

> Followed by reams of complaints about how deficient it is, what it can't
> do, what it gets wrong, etc. etc. etc.

Here's a comparison of the free USGS map from "Topo Reader"
http://i59.tinypic.com/34dfnuh.jpg

With the suggested $8 map app "iHikeGPS"
http://i57.tinypic.com/fvgpoz.jpg

Both those screenshots are of an area I hike and both are zoomed
in to their best granularity.

Any comments?

[Adair Bordon]

Adair Bordon wrote, on Thu, 05 Mar 2015 22:14:22 +0000:

> A chain saw is pretty loud, so, they *know* when I'm cutting trails
> on their property!

Plus, I leave static line ropes on the steep parts, which they'd
notice if they weren't expecting them.

[Rod Speed]

"Adair Bordon" <Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote in message

news:mdato5$uq$7...@news.albasani.net...

You've got those backwards |-(

[Adair Bordon]

Rod Speed wrote, on Fri, 06 Mar 2015 13:49:05 +1100:

>> Here's a comparison of the free USGS map from "Topo Reader"
>> http://i59.tinypic.com/34dfnuh.jpg
>>
>> With the suggested $8 map app "iHikeGPS"
>> http://i57.tinypic.com/fvgpoz.jpg
>>
>> Both those screenshots are of an area I hike and both are zoomed
>> in to their best granularity.
>>
>> Any comments?
>
> You've got those backwards |-(

Heh heh ... nope.

I just double checked.

FREE: http://i59.tinypic.com/34dfnuh.jpg
PAID: http://i57.tinypic.com/fvgpoz.jpg

So, you're seeing what I'm seeing, which is that the free app has
the *better* map!

[Rod Speed]

"Adair Bordon" <Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote in message

news:mdb8v2$clk$6...@news.albasani.net...

Nope, the second jpg has the better map.

[Michael Eyd]

I fail to see in which regard the first (free) map is better than the
second (paid) one. To me the second one looks better (looks actually
like based on vectors), while the first one pretty clearly is a scanned
map, zoomed up to a point where I feel it is becoming senseless. Apart
from that, I actually like the display of the paid app better, i.e. does
it give you a 'confidence interval' of where you are.

GPS is (out in the wild, with no (or only few) mobile network masts
around and no WiFi networks visible) reliable only up to about 10m (or
slightly better under otherwise good conditions), so that your position
is only known to be inside a circle with an area of about 314m² (about
3400sq ft.).

Apart from that both maps look rather identical to me, so what *exactly*
is your complaint?

And one more thing: Do you know in which formats the USGS publishes its
maps? Only as bitmaps/prints or as well as vectorized maps? And if
vector maps are available, what is the highest resolution (on the
ground) that they offer? Why do I ask? You always refer to the USGS
maps, but if the USGS doesn't offer maps any better than what you see in
the apps, then how could any app developer give you a better map? You
don't expect them to create such maps on their own, do you? ;-)

Best regards,

Michael

[Adair Bordon]

Rod Speed wrote, on Fri, 06 Mar 2015 21:24:27 +1100:

> Nope, the second jpg has the better map.

It's slower to load, and grainer than the first.
It might not be much worse, but can you give me an idea as to how
it's better?

[Adair Bordon]

Michael Eyd wrote, on Fri, 06 Mar 2015 14:20:58 +0100:

> the second one looks better (looks actually like based on vectors)

The second (i.e., paid) map description says it's a "raster" of the
USGS maps, while the first (i.e., free) is almost certainly a static
scanned image.

> while the first one pretty clearly is a scanned map, zoomed up to a
> point where I feel it is becoming senseless.

The zooming is only meaningful when you consider that's as close
as you can get for either map. In practice, both maps will be zoomed
out from where they are displayed side-by-side for test purposes.

> GPS is (out in the wild, with no (or only few) mobile network masts
> around and no WiFi networks visible) reliable only up to about 10m

There will never be WiFi networks available! :)
I'd be lucky at times to have any cellular signal.

> Apart from that both maps look rather identical to me, so what *exactly*
> is your complaint?

I don't think anyone complained. We don't yet know how the app works
in practice, and we were just comparing static map views until then.

When you do side-by-side comparisons, you do side-by-side comparisons.

> Do you know in which formats the USGS publishes its maps?

I have no idea.

> if the USGS doesn't offer maps any better than what you see in
> the apps, then how could any app developer give you a better map?

This is an extremely valid point!
I have no idea what the answer is.

[reilloc]

I wave my hat to all I meet and they wave back to me and Patty Winter
snarls:

> Yes, and you have been given information about how to do it in your
> previous threads.

...from every green wood tree.

[Rod Speed]

Adair Bordon <Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote

>> Nope, the second jpg has the better map.

> It's slower to load, and grainer than the first.

> It might not be much worse, but can you
> give me an idea as to how it's better?

Most obviously with the closer spacing of the contours.

[Savageduck]

On 2015-03-06 17:49:04 +0000, Adair Bordon said:


What I don't get is, if all of this outdoor hiking and brush clearing
takes place on property you own, and neighbor owned property you are
familiar with, and which you visit regularly, why you need a map at all?

I hike the hills above my home, they are quite remote, but since I am
very familiar with the area, having lived here some 22 years, I
certainly don't need a map to know where I am, or where I am going in
that area. I can say the same thing for some of the wilderness areas I
am familiar with around Big Sur, Kings Canyon/Sequoia NP, and even some
of the remote areas of Yosemite NP, and the Whitney Portal area above
Lone Pine.



--
Regards,

Savageduck

[Patty Winter]

In article <mdag5n$hfh$2...@news.albasani.net>,

Adair Bordon <Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote:
>Patty Winter wrote, on Thu, 05 Mar 2015 17:47:15 +0000:
>
>> Yes, and you have been given information about how to do it in your
>> previous threads.
>
>Hi Patty,
>
>I appreciate all suggestions, but, if you're only using the iPad as
>a toy, that suggested app works just fine; but if you're actually
>using the iPad for off-trail hiking, that toy app fails instantly.

No one has given you suggestions for "toy" apps. Quit being snide.
And stop adding irrelevant newsgroups back into the Newsgroups line.

[Rod Speed]

Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote
> Adair Bordon wrote

> What I don't get is, if all of this outdoor hiking and brush clearing
> takes place on property you own, and neighbor owned property you are
> familiar with, and which you visit regularly, why you need a map at all?

Yeah, I had the same reaction.

> I hike the hills above my home, they are quite remote,
> but since I am very familiar with the area, having lived
> here some 22 years, I certainly don't need a map to
> know where I am, or where I am going in that area.

Me too.

> I can say the same thing for some of the wilderness areas
> I am familiar with around Big Sur, Kings Canyon/Sequoia
> NP, and even some of the remote areas of Yosemite NP,
> and the Whitney Portal area above Lone Pine.

The point about a topo map is that it allows you to
see what is where you haven't been before and allow
you to see which is likely to be the most useful way
to get between two points when there are no trails etc.

You can see where the cliffs are and where the undergrowth
is too thick to be convenient to traverse etc and where there
are rivers that aren't going to be convenient to cross etc.

[Adair Bordon]

Rod Speed wrote, on Sat, 07 Mar 2015 05:58:12 +1100:

> Most obviously with the closer spacing of the contours.

Hmmmm.... I really do not understand what you're trying to say. Sorry.

If I drew two lines, say, 100 feet apart, on the ground, and if I then
flew in an airplane and snapped two pictures from two different cameras,
one picture might show the 100-foot-apart lines as being "closer"
together than the other.

All else being equal, the "better" camera would show the two lines
*further* apart (i.e., greater resolution).

[Adair Bordon]

Savageduck wrote, on Fri, 06 Mar 2015 11:16:55 -0800:

> What I don't get is, if all of this outdoor hiking and brush clearing
> takes place on property you own, and neighbor owned property you are
> familiar with, and which you visit regularly, why you need a map at all?

First off, I've been hiking all my life, and almost always without
a map. So, I agree with you. You NEVER need a map. It's just a nice
thing to have, and, it's really nice when you're blazing trails.

If all you do is follow a trail, you never need a map.

I often pick a mountain peak, from another mountain peak, and then
I try to get there on foot. That is NEVER a straight line (for the
obvious reasons that there are obstacles in the way).

For *that* kind of hiking (which is basically what I love to do),
a map is a NICE thing to have.

That's all. It's not required. I don't think I've ever been truly lost
in my entire life. If you can see the shadows and you know the time of
day, you know where you are, give or take a few miles.

Out here, every ravine leads to a stream which leads to a lake, and
almost every lake has a trail at one end or the other, which almost
always (if not always) leads to a road. Once you are on a road, you
can hike back by the road (yuck) but I like to make the shortcuts.

By necessity, the shortcuts are never easy (otherwise they would have
had trails or logging roads long ago). So, I basically hike where nobody
else hikes.

I do follow game trails all the time though, so, it's not totally
trackless.

[Rod Speed]

Adair Bordon <Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote

>> Most obviously with the closer spacing of the contours.

> Hmmmm.... I really do not understand what you're trying to say. Sorry.

Surely you can see the different spacing of the contour lines in your
two examples ? Maybe I assumed you had shown the same place on
both maps and you didn’t do that and showed two different places.

You should have shown the same place so we
can see if one map is better than the other.

> If I drew two lines, say, 100 feet apart, on the ground,
> and if I then flew in an airplane and snapped two pictures
> from two different cameras, one picture might show the
> 100-foot-apart lines as being "closer" together than the other.

That isn't what contours are about. They are entirely
artificial, as is the entire map, its not a photo, it’s a map.

> All else being equal, the "better" camera would show
> the two lines *further* apart (i.e., greater resolution).

That utterly mangles it all over again. If the two photos
are taken with the same area of ground covering the
entire photo, the two photos will have the same spacing
of the lines. The one with the greater resolution will just
show it more sharply than the one with the lower resolution.

[Adair Bordon]

Rod Speed wrote, on Sat, 07 Mar 2015 10:28:34 +1100:

> You can see where the cliffs are and where the undergrowth
> is too thick to be convenient to traverse etc and where there
> are rivers that aren't going to be convenient to cross etc.

Yup.

Let's agree. We don't "need" a map; but it sure is handy.

Without a map, it's like trying to screw a wood screw into a plank
using a pair of pliers instead of a Philips screwdriver.

Out here, the topography is decidedly not flat. Ravines
can be hundreds of feet deep, and once you're in them, there is
often no easy way out (I carry only 100 feet of static line
in my daypack, which I use for 50-foot drops, at most and then
I take it with me as I continue onward).

Where I hike, nobody else hikes (otherwise, there would have been
trails hundreds of years ago). That means the terrain is steep.
Or completely overgrown such that you can't possibly walk (the
best you can do is crawl but even then, it's very difficult).

On any particular hike, one wrong move can send you hours into
a poison-oak choked ravine, and many miles hiking out (the streams
will always get you out but they are also the longest way possible).

I generally start at the top, so, I have to get *back* to the top,
which, if I pick a cliff, is the hard way to do it. On a map, you
can easily see what areas are steep and what areas are less so.

So, I agree, I can get from any point to any other point without
a trail or a map; but, while I shun the trails, the map is a nice
thing to have (since I'm effectively making trails where nobody
else did - and these lands have been inhabited for thousands of
years so that tells you the terrain).

[Adair Bordon]

Rod Speed wrote, on Sat, 07 Mar 2015 12:52:17 +1100:

> Surely you can see the different spacing of the contour lines in your
> two examples ? Maybe I assumed you had shown the same place on
> both maps and you didn’t do that and showed two different places.
>
> You should have shown the same place so we
> can see if one map is better than the other.

Hi Rod Speed,
To clarify, yes, I showed *exactly* the same spot on both maps.
Both maps were zoomed in to as close as they would go on that spot.

[Rod Speed]

Adair Bordon <Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote
> Savageduck wrote

>> What I don't get is, if all of this outdoor hiking and brush clearing
>> takes
>> place on property you own, and neighbor owned property you are
>> familiar with, and which you visit regularly, why you need a map at all?

> First off, I've been hiking all my life, and almost always without a map.

Yeah, me too.

> So, I agree with you. You NEVER need a map. It's just a nice thing to
> have,

Mainly so you don’t have to try routes that don’t go anywhere
or which see it much harder going than an alternative route.

> and, it's really nice when you're blazing trails.

I don’t agree with that at all.

> If all you do is follow a trail, you never need a map.

That's not right either. You may need a map so you can
see which particular trail is the one you intend to use when
there is more than one available at a particular point.

> I often pick a mountain peak, from another mountain peak, and
> then I try to get there on foot. That is NEVER a straight line (for
> the obvious reasons that there are obstacles in the way).

> For *that* kind of hiking (which is basically what
> I love to do), a map is a NICE thing to have.

It can certainly save you some time.

> That's all. It's not required. I don't think
> I've ever been truly lost in my entire life.

I know I haven't, but I also know that I have
a much better sense of direction than most.

> If you can see the shadows and you know the time of
> day, you know where you are, give or take a few miles.

I don’t do it that way, I always know where I am give
or take quite a bit less than a mile, all the time. I just
know where I am.

[Adair Bordon]

Adair Bordon wrote, on Sat, 07 Mar 2015 01:58:48 +0000:

> To clarify, yes, I showed *exactly* the same spot on both maps.
> Both maps were zoomed in to as close as they would go on that spot.

To further explain the difference in those screenshots, let's
assume that I am hiking out from a centerpoint where two streams
merge into a Y, and I have an A-sized paper map with me, that
totally encompasses the area I wish to hike in order to get out
of the ravine.

Now, let's assume I have a second paper map, with the exact same
centerpoint; but, which encompasses double the area (or triple,
or whatever).

That is, the lines on that second map are spaced far closer
together (it's the same map; it just has lower resolution).

Which map would you prefer?
Map 1, which has the lines, say, a quarter inch apart, or,
Map 2, which has the lines, say, 1/8th, or 1/16th of an inch apart.

[Adair Bordon]

Michael Eyd wrote, on Fri, 06 Mar 2015 14:20:58 +0100:

>> FREE: http://i59.tinypic.com/34dfnuh.jpg
>> PAID: http://i57.tinypic.com/fvgpoz.jpg

> I fail to see in which regard the first (free) map is better than the

> second (paid) one. To me the second one looks better...

I must be explaining something incorrectly, since both you and
Rod Speed said the same thing (or, possibly, I'm wrong).

Let's say I want to go from point X to point Y at that same
location where I showed the two maps.

Here is, I think, what you expected me to do, with respect to
"zoom" level at that very same location (where the free map is
on the left, and the paid map is on the right):
http://i62.tinypic.com/4zszsm.jpg

Bearing in mind that it's *exactly* the same map, there's not
much (if any) difference between the two maps at this zoom level,
right?

But, bear in mind that the paid map is zoomed in as tightly as
it will go, while I can still zoom further in (by a lot!) on
the free map.

BTW, I never said the difference was "major"; only that it was
instantly noticeable. BTW, this is a *major* difference, which
is the best you can get for that same area in MotionX GPS HD:
http://i62.tinypic.com/2d8kshk.png

NOTE: It's so hard to correlate anything on the MotionX GPS HD
maps that they're essentially unusable.

[Rod Speed]

Adair Bordon <Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote

>> You can see where the cliffs are and where the undergrowth
>> is too thick to be convenient to traverse etc and where there
>> are rivers that aren't going to be convenient to cross etc.

> Yup.

> Let's agree. We don't "need" a map; but it sure is handy.

Can be, anyway. I don’t actually use one at all myself in the last 40 years.

I do have a full set of our topos in paper format and
I did use them quite a bit at one time, but mostly
for deciding where would be interesting to go to.

> Without a map, it's like trying to screw a wood screw into a
> plank using a pair of pliers instead of a Philips screwdriver.

I've never been into your analogys.

Its nothing like that one.

> Out here, the topography is decidedly not flat. Ravines
> can be hundreds of feet deep, and once you're in them,
> there is often no easy way out (I carry only 100 feet of
> static line in my daypack, which I use for 50-foot drops,
> at most and then I take it with me as I continue onward).

I don’t carry any rope at all.

> Where I hike, nobody else hikes (otherwise, there
> would have been trails hundreds of years ago).

We have a MUCH lower population density than you do.

There are a few trails but people like me don’t use them at all.

> That means the terrain is steep. Or completely
> overgrown such that you can't possibly walk (the best
> you can do is crawl but even then, it's very difficult).

Few of ours where I walk are that bad, just significantly slower and
less enjoyable to walk thru than where I choose to walk instead.

> On any particular hike, one wrong move can send you hours into
> a poison-oak choked ravine, and many miles hiking out (the streams
> will always get you out but they are also the longest way possible).

> I generally start at the top, so, I have to get *back* to the top,
> which, if I pick a cliff, is the hard way to do it. On a map, you
> can easily see what areas are steep and what areas are less so.

And where to get around cliffs.

> So, I agree, I can get from any point to any other point
> without a trail or a map; but, while I shun the trails, the
> map is a nice thing to have (since I'm effectively making
> trails where nobody else did - and these lands have been
> inhabited for thousands of years so that tells you the terrain).

Ours have been inhabited for much longer than yours but
with a much lower population density there is very little
evidence of any occupation earlier than 250 years ago.
What evidence there is is mostly cave paintings and a few
areas where the rocks have been deliberately worked on.

[Rod Speed]

Adair Bordon <Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote

>> Surely you can see the different spacing of the contour lines in your
>> two examples ? Maybe I assumed you had shown the same place on
>> both maps and you didn’t do that and showed two different places.

>> You should have shown the same place so we
>> can see if one map is better than the other.

> To clarify, yes, I showed *exactly* the same spot on both maps.
> Both maps were zoomed in to as close as they would go on that spot.

So the one with many more contours is clearly the better map.

[Rod Speed]

Adair Bordon <Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote
> Adair Bordon wrote

>> To clarify, yes, I showed *exactly* the same spot on both maps.
>> Both maps were zoomed in to as close as they would go on that spot.

You didn’t make that last clear in the initial presentation.

What you are now saying is that you can zoom in more with
the original free map than you can with the later paid for app.

> To further explain the difference in those screenshots, let's assume
> that I am hiking out from a centerpoint where two streams merge
> into a Y, and I have an A-sized paper map with me, that totally
> encompasses the area I wish to hike in order to get out of the ravine.

> Now, let's assume I have a second paper map, with
> the exact same centerpoint; but, which encompasses
> double the area (or triple, or whatever).

> That is, the lines on that second map are spaced far closer
> together (it's the same map; it just has lower resolution).

> Which map would you prefer?
> Map 1, which has the lines, say, a quarter inch apart, or,
> Map 2, which has the lines, say, 1/8th, or 1/16th of an inch apart.

Clearly the map which has bigger scale is the
most useful map in the walking situation.

You should have just said that the original free map has maps
which are larger scale than you get with the second paid app.

But now you have a problem with the fact that the second paid
app claims to be the USGS 24K series which is the most detailed
maps they produce over the entire country. Are you saying that
it doesn’t actually have those for the area you are interested in ?

[Rod Speed]

"Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:clvctn...@mid.individual.net...

Maybe you are saying that they haven't scanned the 24K series properly
or something, but that's hard to believe with the contour lines.

[Rod Speed]

Adair Bordon <Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote
> Michael Eyd wrote

>>> FREE: http://i59.tinypic.com/34dfnuh.jpg
>>> PAID: http://i57.tinypic.com/fvgpoz.jpg

>> I fail to see in which regard the first (free) map is better than
>> the second (paid) one. To me the second one looks better...

> I must be explaining something incorrectly, since
> both you and Rod Speed said the same thing

Yes, that appears to be the problem.

> (or, possibly, I'm wrong).

> Let's say I want to go from point X to point Y at
> that same location where I showed the two maps.

> Here is, I think, what you expected me to do, with respect
> to "zoom" level at that very same location (where the free
> map is on the left, and the paid map is on the right):
> http://i62.tinypic.com/4zszsm.jpg

> Bearing in mind that it's *exactly* the same map, there's not much
> (if any) difference between the two maps at this zoom level, right?

Yes, except that the one on the left is more usable
because the contour lines are bolder/darker.

> But, bear in mind that the paid map is zoomed
> in as tightly as it will go, while I can still zoom
> further in (by a lot!) on the free map.

OK, you should have originally said it like that,
that you can zoom in more with the free app.

Whether that is actually useful is a separate matter
when you don’t actually get any more detail when
you zoom in more.

> BTW, I never said the difference was "major";
> only that it was instantly noticeable.

You in fact claimed that the one you couldn’t zoom in
as much was only a toy. That is radically overstating it.

> BTW, this is a *major* difference, which is the best
> you can get for that same area in MotionX GPS HD:
> http://i62.tinypic.com/2d8kshk.png

> NOTE: It's so hard to correlate anything on the MotionX
> GPS HD maps that they're essentially unusable.

I don’t buy that last.

[Adair Bordon]

Rod Speed wrote, on Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:38:03 +1100:

> OK, you should have originally said it like that,
> that you can zoom in more with the free app.
>
> Whether that is actually useful is a separate matter
> when you don’t actually get any more detail when
> you zoom in more.

Thanks for understanding. I apologize for not stating the problem
set clearly at first.

I only belatedly realized, while I was trying to reproduce the issue
for you, that the maps are identical in every way (other than the
paid map being a bit more grainy - but it's clearly the same map
as the free map as all the words line up in the same spots).

Knowing now, that the maps are exactly the same, the *only* difference
is that you can see the lines more clearly in the free map, and,
when zoomed, you can zoom far more closely in the free map.

Other than that, they're the same, and, as you noted, it remains
to be seen whether that additional level of zoom matters, because
there isn't more information (it's just easier to see because it
will be bigger when zoomed, which is OK with my tired old eyes).

This weekend, we might rope down the area we cleared an opening
into, which goes down about 600 feet in elevation, and then we'll
take one of the trails I marked with surveyors tape to get back
up to the top without having to ascend the static line (which,
for old men like we are, is always the part we hate most).

There is a difficult section in the returning tape-marked trail
where I realized from my KML tracks that I could have skirted
an obstacle, so, we will use the map app to see if it guides us
around that obstacle and back onto the trail I had marked.
http://i62.tinypic.com/30idd11.jpg

[Adair Bordon]

Rod Speed wrote, on Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:38:03 +1100:

> You in fact claimed that the one you couldn’t zoom in
> as much was only a toy. That is radically overstating it.

Hi Rod Speed,
Sorry for that misunderstanding.

I *never* said, nor implied, that the $8 app was a toy.

All I said was I will test out the suggested $8 app, and that, upon
initial inspection, I liked the maps better on the free app.

The *toy* app was the $2 MotionX GPS HD.

Here is a screenshot of the MotionX map at the same location as all the
other screenshots. http://i62.tinypic.com/2d8kshk.png

It doesn't show *any* creeks in the area, which are clear landmarks a
hiker would *never* miss (if for no other reason than the topography
won't let you miss them): http://i57.tinypic.com/678nkl.jpg

It doesn't even show the two creeks meeting at a classic Y shape, which
is another clear landmark a hiker would never miss (even if they're dry).
http://i59.tinypic.com/23mro1x.jpg

It's almost impossible for me to even see if I have the screenshot
correct, the maps are *that* bad. It's rare that a map is wholly
and unequivocally unusable, but, sad to say, the MotionX GPS HD
topo maps are the epitome of useless.

Clearly, MotionX GPS HD is a "toy" app, as even a casual hiker
would find their topo maps useless. The app "talks" to you, and it
does seemingly useful things, but, without a decent map, it's just
a toy.

[Adair Bordon]

Rod Speed wrote, on Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:25:22 +1100:

> You didn’t make that last clear in the initial presentation.

Yes. I agree. I didn't realize it wasn't clear until you responded,
and I tried to figure out why you responded in the way that you did.

Mea culpa.

> What you are now saying is that you can zoom in more with
> the original free map than you can with the later paid for app.

Yes. All I see upon initial inspection is that the free app has
an easier to read (less grainy) map and you can zoom in much further
onto that map. The actual map data is *exactly* the same between
the two maps, even down to the words written on the map.

> You should have just said that the original free map has maps
> which are larger scale than you get with the second paid app.

I agree. My fault.

> But now you have a problem with the fact that the second paid
> app claims to be the USGS 24K series which is the most detailed
> maps they produce over the entire country. Are you saying that
> it doesn’t actually have those for the area you are interested in ?

I don't understand even what 24K means. All I know at this point is
that the map quadrangle I downloaded using Topo Reader freeware is
apparently the same as the one that was downloaded in iHikeGPS payware
even down to the miss-spelled name of one of the local roads.

That miss-spelled road name tells me something else though, which
is that both maps are OLDER than the current ones, as I have a recent
2012 USGS PDF for the same quadrangle that has the road name correctly
spelled.

[Adair Bordon]

Rod Speed wrote, on Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:28:00 +1100:

> Maybe you are saying that they haven't scanned the 24K series properly
> or something, but that's hard to believe with the contour lines.

Let's wait until I get a chance to test the app in a real-life
situation in the hills. I may get down there this weekend, so,
I hope to be able to tell you how it works.

We just bought 600 feet spools of static line, so, our plan, now
that we've cut an opening, is to walk the line down the hill as
far as we need to.

Then, instead of going back up the static line, which we will
leave there forever, so that others can make use of it, we will
instead use a combination of either dead reckoning or the map
app to guide us to a known point that is on the other side of
a hill.

Once at that other side, I have already marked a trail which
gets us back to the top. Without marked trails, we would end
up going a different way each time, as, even from the top,
the understory is dense enough to limit the view:
http://i59.tinypic.com/358sb3o.jpg

[Rod Speed]

Adair Bordon <Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote

>> You in fact claimed that the one you couldn’t zoom in
>> as much was only a toy. That is radically overstating it.

> Sorry for that misunderstanding.

> I *never* said, nor implied, that the $8 app was a toy.

Yes you did. You said that very explicitly indeed.

> All I said was I will test out the suggested $8 app, and that,
> upon initial inspection, I liked the maps better on the free app.

You said a lot more than that.

> The *toy* app was the $2 MotionX GPS HD.

Nope, you claimed that there was nothing but toys available for iOS.

> Here is a screenshot of the MotionX map at the same location
> as all the other screenshots. http://i62.tinypic.com/2d8kshk.png

> It doesn't show *any* creeks in the area, which are clear landmarks a
> hiker would *never* miss (if for no other reason than the topography
> won't let you miss them): http://i57.tinypic.com/678nkl.jpg

> It doesn't even show the two creeks meeting at a classic Y shape, which
> is another clear landmark a hiker would never miss (even if they're dry).
> http://i59.tinypic.com/23mro1x.jpg

You didn’t just claim that that was a toy.

> It's almost impossible for me to even see if I have the screenshot
> correct, the maps are *that* bad. It's rare that a map is wholly
> and unequivocally unusable, but, sad to say, the MotionX GPS HD
> topo maps are the epitome of useless.

> Clearly, MotionX GPS HD is a "toy" app, as even a casual hiker
> would find their topo maps useless. The app "talks" to you, and it
> does seemingly useful things, but, without a decent map, it's just
> a toy.

Wrong.

[Rod Speed]

"Adair Bordon" <Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote in message
news:mde7uq$qke$6...@news.albasani.net...

> Rod Speed wrote, on Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:25:22 +1100:
>
>> You didn’t make that last clear in the initial presentation.
>
> Yes. I agree. I didn't realize it wasn't clear until you responded,
> and I tried to figure out why you responded in the way that you did.
>
> Mea culpa.
>
>> What you are now saying is that you can zoom in more with
>> the original free map than you can with the later paid for app.
>
> Yes. All I see upon initial inspection is that the free app has
> an easier to read (less grainy) map and you can zoom in much further
> onto that map. The actual map data is *exactly* the same between
> the two maps, even down to the words written on the map.
>
>> You should have just said that the original free map has maps
>> which are larger scale than you get with the second paid app.
>
> I agree. My fault.
>
>> But now you have a problem with the fact that the second paid
>> app claims to be the USGS 24K series which is the most detailed
>> maps they produce over the entire country. Are you saying that
>> it doesn’t actually have those for the area you are interested in ?

> I don't understand even what 24K means.

The USGS 1:24,000 series.

> All I know at this point is that the map quadrangle I downloaded
> using Topo Reader freeware is apparently the same as the one
> that was downloaded in iHikeGPS payware even down to the
> miss-spelled name of one of the local roads.

> That miss-spelled road name tells me something else though, which
> is that both maps are OLDER than the current ones, as I have a recent
> 2012 USGS PDF for the same quadrangle that has the road name
> correctly spelled.

Sure.

[Adair Bordon]

Rod Speed wrote, on Sat, 07 Mar 2015 19:25:36 +1100:

>> I *never* said, nor implied, that the $8 app was a toy.
> Yes you did. You said that very explicitly indeed.

I'm NOT going to get into a hesaidshesaid yesnoyesno avalanche, so,
I will just say two things about that statement.

1. If I said that, I was wrong in doing so, as I don't "feel" that way
(I have no opinion on the $8 app other than the comment about the
initial response about zoom level & raster effect on contour lines).
2. If I said that, I apologize, and you're welcome to call me out on
it by showing the post where I said that.

>> The *toy* app was the $2 MotionX GPS HD.
>
> Nope, you claimed that there was nothing but toys available for iOS.

Oh! OK. Wow. You'd be dangerous as an adversarial lawyer!

OK. Mea culpa. I did say something to that effect. I agree with you.
But I'm sure I had said that *before* I read the post where someone
suggested the $8 iHikeGPS app - or - at the very least - before I had
downloaded the $8 iHikeGPS app.

I'll know soon enough how well the iHikeGPS app works in the mountains,
when I rope that 600 foot drop into the ravine, and then hike out of
that ravine along an isocline line to a lower level on the mountain
where the isocline intersects a ridge, where I can then follow that
ridge back up to the top where I had started (total distance only about
five miles or so).

If the $8 iHikeGPS app helps me on that quest, it's a keeper.

>> Clearly, MotionX GPS HD is a "toy" app

> Wrong.

:)

[Adair Bordon]

Rod Speed wrote, on Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:09:17 +1100:

> I don’t carry any rope at all.

I carry only 100 feet and very light climbing equipment, but,
I generally only use it when going down rock waterfall faces,
where I'm hemmed into a ravine, and have no other way of getting
down without falling.
http://i60.tinypic.com/raru6h.jpg

Here's a picture of a typical small rock face I was climbing up
a few days ago (because I was hemmed in by the ravine and I
was trying to get back to the top of the hill):
http://i59.tinypic.com/k9yr8k.jpg

Here's a shot, just a few feet downstream from that rock face,
showing the soft slopes to either side.
http://i58.tinypic.com/21dk85h.jpg

I often go back up a rocky ravine in lieu of those soft slopes,
but, if/when I leave a static line on the slopes, I can then
ascend using my ascenders as hand grips (or just by hand).
http://i57.tinypic.com/30l18i1.jpg

I could probably do it all without rope, just as I could do
it without maps and hiking shoes, but it's easier with rope:

[Adair Bordon]

Rod Speed wrote, on Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:09:17 +1100:

> Few of ours where I walk are that bad, just significantly slower and
> less enjoyable to walk thru than where I choose to walk instead.

It's impossible to walk through thick chaparral.
The best you can do, if you're young, is climb over it on your
stomach, or, if you're older, like I am, climb on the ground
on your stomach.

If you want, I can snap a picture of the chaparral, but, I
generally avoid any chaparral if I don't have a chainsaw.

You can easily get through the thickest poison oak without
a chain saw, but, your pants will be stained black from the
urushiol (which I currently have a bad case of right now).

Again, if you've never seen those black swaths on your clothes,
you've never been in "real" poison oak. The word urushiol
comes from the black lacquer that the Japanese used a similar
plant for.

If you want, I can snap a picture of my almost new pants,
with a chain-saw slice in the thigh and black swaths of
poison oak. When it's that thick, it's impossible to protect
yourself fully. You WILL get it. Hopefully, not too bad.
(And, yes, I know (almost) EVERYTHING there is to know about
poison oak and specifically about getting rid of it once it's
on your skin.) I have to. (Most of the stuff on the Internet
is wrong.)

[Adair Bordon]

Rod Speed wrote, on Sat, 07 Mar 2015 15:09:17 +1100:

> Ours have been inhabited for much longer than yours but
> with a much lower population density there is very little
> evidence of any occupation earlier than 250 years ago.
> What evidence there is is mostly cave paintings and a few
> areas where the rocks have been deliberately worked on.

Out here, in California, you can imagine, it has been populated
for twenty thousand years (or so), and recently, the "white man"
has logged the redwoods, and blazed trails.

So, since I'm in a populated area, and I'm in an area that has
no trails, then you can just imagine that it's never going to
be a cake walk. If it was, there would have been a trail long
ago.

[Rod Speed]

Adair Bordon <Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote

>>> I *never* said, nor implied, that the $8 app was a toy.

>> Yes you did. You said that very explicitly indeed.

> I'm NOT going to get into a hesaidshesaid yesnoyesno
> avalanche, so, I will just say two things about that statement.

You actually said rather more just below.

> 1. If I said that, I was wrong in doing so, as I don't "feel" that way
> (I have no opinion on the $8 app other than the comment about the
> initial response about zoom level & raster effect on contour lines).
> 2. If I said that, I apologize, and you're welcome to call me out on
> it by showing the post where I said that.

>>> The *toy* app was the $2 MotionX GPS HD.

>> Nope, you claimed that there was nothing but toys available for iOS.

> Oh! OK. Wow. You'd be dangerous as an adversarial lawyer!

> OK. Mea culpa. I did say something to that effect. I agree with you.
> But I'm sure I had said that *before* I read the post where someone
> suggested the $8 iHikeGPS app - or - at the very least - before I had
> downloaded the $8 iHikeGPS app.

You said that just after you compared the two maps and preferred
the one that you could zoom in more with, which doesn’t do the track.

[Adair Bordon]

Rod Speed wrote, on Sun, 08 Mar 2015 05:57:09 +1100:

> You said that just after you compared the two maps and preferred
> the one that you could zoom in more with, which doesn’t do the track.

Again, I'd hate to have you as the opposing lawyer in a room of law.

I didn't hike today, but I have been looking at the thing and am
nicely surprised by the settings to turn off tracking at 23mph for 8 minutes,
which will prevent all those errant tracks that I have with my backpack
thrown into the trunk, with me too tired to remember to turn the thing
off at the end of a hike.

They have wonderful help, even down to giving you a phone number and
email address to contact (lwjames at ihikegps dot com).

I'm surprised that the tracks are not in KML format; they're only in
GPX format, which didn't automatically bring up anything on Linux for
me. I'll probably get good at converting GPX to KML.

One nice surprise was that you can add a waypoint from an EXIF geotagged
photo in your camera roll, which is REALLY convenient, especially since
with MotionX GPS HD I was doing the additional steps of adding a photo
to each waypoint.

I like the iHikeGPS method better, which is to just snap the photo;
and then, back home, I can choose which to add as waypoints.

Also, that you can turn on and off waypoints individually on the map
is nice, but I can't seem to turn off track display just yet.

You can tap "goto" a waypoint which will put a green line on the map
to that waypt with your bearing and heading and distance in numerics
on the map. My problem with that was that the bearing was about +90
degrees off from where I knew the waypoint to be; so either I
misunderstand a bearing & heading or something is wrong with my
iPad or the iHikeGPS app.

[Rod Speed]

Adair Bordon <Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote
> Rod Speed wrote

>> You said that just after you compared the two maps and preferred
>> the one that you could zoom in more with, which doesn’t do the track.

> Again, I'd hate to have you as the opposing lawyer in a room of law.

> I didn't hike today, but I have been looking at the thing and am
> nicely surprised by the settings to turn off tracking at 23mph for
> 8 minutes, which will prevent all those errant tracks that I have
> with my backpack thrown into the trunk, with me too tired to
> remember to turn the thing off at the end of a hike.

Yeah, and it would also be handy if it started logging auto
too when you forget to start it manually. I do that quite a
bit and forget to stop it manually quite a bit too.

> They have wonderful help, even down to giving you a phone number
> and email address to contact (lwjames at ihikegps dot com).

Yeah, that's very useful.

> I'm surprised that the tracks are not in KML format; they're only
> in GPX format, which didn't automatically bring up anything on
> Linux for me. I'll probably get good at converting GPX to KML.

Be worth suggesting it to him, he might not have thought of that.

> One nice surprise was that you can add a waypoint from an EXIF
> geotagged photo in your camera roll, which is REALLY convenient,
> especially since with MotionX GPS HD I was doing the additional
> steps of adding a photo to each waypoint.

> I like the iHikeGPS method better, which is to just snap the photo;
> and then, back home, I can choose which to add as waypoints.

Yeah, I prefer to do that back home than when out on the walk/hike.

> Also, that you can turn on and off waypoints individually on
> the map is nice, but I can't seem to turn off track display just yet.

> You can tap "goto" a waypoint which will put a green line on the map
> to that waypt with your bearing and heading and distance in numerics
> on the map. My problem with that was that the bearing was about +90
> degrees off from where I knew the waypoint to be; so either I
> misunderstand a bearing & heading or something is wrong with my
> iPad or the iHikeGPS app.

I'd try it myself if it had my topo maps.

[Adair Bordon]

Rod Speed wrote, on Sun, 08 Mar 2015 11:48:18 +1100:

> Yeah, and it would also be handy if it started logging auto
> too when you forget to start it manually. I do that quite a
> bit and forget to stop it manually quite a bit too.

Unfortunately, iHikeGPS won't start tracking automatically:
The tracking options are:
1. Off (duh)
2. Only when the map is displayed
3. On but stop when you start driving (stops at 23mph for 8 seconds)
4. Always on (depends on iPad Settings > General > Background App Refresh)

>> My problem with that was that the bearing was about +90
>> degrees off from where I knew the waypoint to be
>

> I'd try it myself if it had my topo maps.

I may have messed with the iPad compass calibration settings in
Commander Compass Lite, By Pavel Ahafonau, which I had used to
give me a heading and bearing to a given waypoint.

I am surprised not to see how to calibrate the internal compass
of the iPad in the iPad settings. How does the iPad do the compass
anyway?

To answer that question, I'm reading the following but finding
them useless...

http://demo.tizra.com/iPad_User_Guide/76
(It tells you how to calibrate if the calibrate request is on,
but not how to force the calibration request to go on).

How You Calibrate Your iPad Compass
http://www.tcgeeks.com/tip-how-to-calibrate-your-ipad-compass/
(same problem here)

Problems calibrating compass on iOS 7
https://discussions.apple.com/thread/5332012?start=15&tstart=0
Says to go to
Privacy>Location Services: Compass ON
Privacy>Location Services>System Services: Compass Calibration OFF

Problem is, I'm using iOS 7 but there is no "Compass" in that
location (it has Commander Compass Lite" but no "Compass").

Looking about, I found "compass calibration = on/off" in
Settings > Privacy > Location Services > System Services > Compass Calibration
But, it didn't do anything.

So, at the moment, I have to suspect that Commander Compass screwed
up with my compass calibration - but I don't know that, for a fact
since I can't figure out yet how to calibrate the compass.

[Erilar]

Patty Winter <pat...@wintertime.com> wrote:
> In article <mdag5n$hfh$2...@news.albasani.net>,
> Adair Bordon <Adair@not_my_real_email.com> wrote:
>> Patty Winter wrote, on Thu, 05 Mar 2015 17:47:15 +0000:
>>
>>> Yes, and you have been given information about how to do it in your
>>> previous threads.
>>
>> Hi Patty,
>>
>> I appreciate all suggestions, but, if you're only using the iPad as
>> a toy, that suggested app works just fine; but if you're actually
>> using the iPad for off-trail hiking, that toy app fails instantly.
>
> No one has given you suggestions for "toy" apps. Quit being snide.
> And stop adding irrelevant newsgroups back into the Newsgroups line.

Hi, Patty
I open the thread, but skip over the trolls now. This "not Adair" person
has joined "rod speed" in my skip-over list 8-) There was some excellent
advice offered earlier by several people.

--
Erilar, biblioholic medievalist with iPad

[Adair Bordon]

Erilar wrote, on Sun, 08 Mar 2015 20:10:11 +0000:

> I open the thread, but skip over the trolls now. This "not Adair" person
> has joined "rod speed" in my skip-over list 8-) There was some excellent
> advice offered earlier by several people.

SUMMARY:
So that others benefit from the effort, here are a dozen test results
with a screenshot at the exact same spot in every map application
(it's a spot in a ravine where streams meet that I hike all the time).
http://i60.tinypic.com/wsagyq.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Topo Reader, by Dennis Lindsey
PASS: Best USGS 24K maps, limit 5 free maps
http://i57.tinypic.com/a1sbrd.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
iHikeGPS USA + SE & SW Canada Topo Maps, by James Associates
KEEPER: Second best maps plus does tracking on the map itself.
http://i62.tinypic.com/sqmtci.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Topo Maps+, by Glacier Peak Studios LLC (older version for iOS 7.1.1 is ok)
FAIL. VERY Blurry USGS 24K topo maps without lousy zoom level.
http://i58.tinypic.com/1ok2hh.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Trail Tracker GPS Outdoor Maps, by TapTools LLC
FAIL: no topo maps whatsoever
KEEPER: For tracking on roads by automobile
http://i58.tinypic.com/25red81.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
TwoNav GPS: Tracks & Maps, by CompeGPS
FAIL: Open Street/Cycle Maps which are useless for off-trail navigation.
http://i59.tinypic.com/mkep2s.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Backpacker Map Maker Lite, by Trimble Navigation Limited
FAIL: Open Street/Cycle Maps which are useless for off-trail navigation.
http://i58.tinypic.com/1ptg9i.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
ViewRanger GPS Topo Maps, by Augmentra
FAIL: Open Street Maps
http://i62.tinypic.com/velwzd.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
MotionX GPS HD, by MotionX
FAIL: Open Street/Cycle Maps which are useless for off-trail navigation.
KEEPER: This $2 app might work just fine on roads & has bells/whistles.
http://i61.tinypic.com/15hli8.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
RouteBuddy Atlas Outdoors GPS for US, by RouteBuddy LTD
FAIL: Open Street/Cycle Maps which are useless for off-trail navigation.
http://i58.tinypic.com/wl63c.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
mAPP offline mapping app, by Looking4Cache, UG
FAIL: no topo maps
http://i58.tinypic.com/2ic5qh1.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
DrawArea, by myice92
Fail: no topo maps
Keeper: For measuring acres by drawing an area on the map
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Green Trails Maps - Mapps and Viewer, by Green Trails Maps
FAIL: Maps are only for Washington & Oregon
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Adair Bordon]

I forgot to list the prices, so I've added that to this test summary.

About a dozen free (and two payware) off-trail hiking apps were tested.
http://i60.tinypic.com/wsagyq.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
FREE: Topo Reader, by Dennis Lindsey
PASS: Best USGS 24K maps, limit 5 free maps (too bad it doesn't do tracking)
http://i57.tinypic.com/a1sbrd.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
PAY $8: iHikeGPS USA + SE & SW Canada Topo Maps, by James Associates

KEEPER: Second best maps plus does tracking on the map itself.
http://i62.tinypic.com/sqmtci.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

FREE: Topo Maps+, by Glacier Peak Studios LLC
FAIL. VERY Blurry USGS 24K topo maps with lousy zoom level.
http://i58.tinypic.com/1ok2hh.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
FREE: Trail Tracker GPS Outdoor Maps, by TapTools LLC

FAIL: no topo maps whatsoever
KEEPER: For tracking on roads by automobile
http://i58.tinypic.com/25red81.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

FREE: TwoNav GPS: Tracks & Maps, by CompeGPS

FAIL: Open Street/Cycle Maps which are useless for off-trail navigation.
http://i59.tinypic.com/mkep2s.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

FREE: Backpacker Map Maker Lite, by Trimble Navigation Limited

FAIL: Open Street/Cycle Maps which are useless for off-trail navigation.
http://i58.tinypic.com/1ptg9i.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

FREE: ViewRanger GPS Topo Maps, by Augmentra

FAIL: Open Street/Cycle Maps which are useless for off-trail navigation.

http://i62.tinypic.com/velwzd.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
PAY $2: MotionX GPS HD, by MotionX

FAIL: Open Street/Cycle Maps which are useless for off-trail navigation.
KEEPER: This $2 app might work just fine on roads & has bells/whistles.
http://i61.tinypic.com/15hli8.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

FREE: RouteBuddy Atlas Outdoors GPS for US, by RouteBuddy LTD

FAIL: Open Street/Cycle Maps which are useless for off-trail navigation.
http://i58.tinypic.com/wl63c.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

FREE: mAPP offline mapping app, by Looking4Cache, UG

FAIL: no topo maps
http://i58.tinypic.com/2ic5qh1.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

FREE: DrawArea, by myice92

Fail: no topo maps
Keeper: For measuring acres by drawing an area on the map
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

FREE: Green Trails Maps - Mapps and Viewer, by Green Trails Maps

[Adair Bordon]

As always, to give back to the team, here's a quick summary of keepers:
http://i62.tinypic.com/2ptar0x.jpg

[Adair Bordon]

Adair Bordon wrote, on Sun, 08 Mar 2015 23:10:36 +0000:

> As always, to give back to the team, here's a quick summary of keepers:
> http://i62.tinypic.com/2ptar0x.jpg

I just (very belatedly) found the answer to the initial question!

Nobody noticed, but, this is perhaps the best free app for the initial
stated task (which was to find freeware that did at last the two things
that the freeware Google MyTracks does on Android):

Freeware iOS Trail Tracker GPS Outdoor Maps:
1. Uses the same maps as the Android freeware Google MyTracks, and,
2. Breadcrumbs your track as a KML file (just like MyTracks does).

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
FREE: Trail Tracker GPS Outdoor Maps, by TapTools LLC

KEEPER: Uses Google Terrain maps (which are not as good as USGS but ok)
KEEPER: Breadcrumbs on the terrain map.
http://i61.tinypic.com/so501d.jpg <== zoomed into the same spot as before
----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Pretty much, the free TapTools Trailtracker is at least a 1:1 replacement
for the free Google MyTracks.

It even TALKS to you (heh heh, take that you $2 MotionX GPS HD!).

[Adair Bordon]

Adair Bordon wrote, on Mon, 09 Mar 2015 00:25:24 +0000:

> Nobody noticed, but, this is perhaps the best free app for the initial
> stated task (which was to find freeware that did at last the two things
> that the freeware Google MyTracks does on Android):

By way of contrast, the best comparison Android app appears to be:
1. Unlimited USGS 24K topo maps (zoom level is infinite)
2. KML tracking
3. Bearing/distance/elevation to a given waypoint

FREE: BackCountry Nav Topo Maps GPS, by CritterMap Software LLC
https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.crittermap.backcountrynavigator&hl=en

So, these seem to be the best for free on the two platforms.
I wish I knew this when I had started, but, now anyone can start where
I am now after a week of research.

[Adair Bordon]

Adair Bordon wrote, on Mon, 09 Mar 2015 12:49:16 +0000:

> So, these seem to be the best for free on the two platforms.

I'm still testing, but, so far, these seem to be the best on iOS:
http://i62.tinypic.com/2ptar0x.jpg

And, these seem to be the best free off-trail map apps on Android:
http://i59.tinypic.com/2cnzggz.jpg

If you know of better off-trail hiking apps that do the 3 things,
let us know as now is the time to test 'em out together:

1. USGS 24K maps (with decent zoom) [Google terrain is ok, OSM stink]
2. Tracking (preferably with KML output)

[Adair Bordon]

Adair Bordon wrote, on Mon, 09 Mar 2015 14:12:39 +0000:

> I'm still testing, but, so far, these seem to be the best on iOS:
> http://i62.tinypic.com/2ptar0x.jpg
>
> And, these seem to be the best free off-trail map apps on Android:
> http://i59.tinypic.com/2cnzggz.jpg

Ran a test of both the Android and iOS trackers today.
Here's a quick summary of just the iOS trackers.

iOS:
x. Trail Tracker was a bust. A huge failure. But, I'm not sure why.

Trail Tracker had so much promise because it does everything,
in theory, that you want, for free.
a. Decent maps (Google Terrain) & shows current location
b. KML tracking
c. Route to destination

However, it is an app with an idiotic quirk, which makes it so that
it can *never* be relied upon to work when you need it.

Apparently it *requires* a network, momentarily, to start tracking;
but, once it checks something on the network, it no longer needs
the network to start, stop, save, and start tracking anew.

However, one you kill the Trail Tracker program, then it will
only view maps and your current location; but it will *never*
start tracking again, until/unless you connect to the network
at least so that it can check something.

The error you get is relatively clear:
"Couldn't check upgrade status. Please check your Internet
connection and try again".

So, while Trail Tracker was the best freeware that could be
found on iOS (because it had the best free maps, being Google
Terrain maps and it tracked and it saved a waypoint and routed
to that waypoint), it's *almost* useless because you can *never*
depend on it working.

x. MapPlus started and saved tracks easily and intuitively emailed
the KML files out.

x. MotionX GPS HD started & saved tracks easily & intuitively, &
emailed results automatically (as a table, GPX, and KMZ file).

x. iHikeGPS (forgot to start it so it wasn't tested in this pass.)

[Adair Bordon]

Adair Bordon wrote, on Thu, 05 Mar 2015 06:13:23 +0000:

> The question for those of you who hike off trail, is what iOS app
> (free or otherwise) do you use that simply displays the current
> KML track in real time on a decent USGS terrain map?

I tested the $8 iHikeGPS and the trialware Trail Tracker over the past
couple of days. Here is what I found out...

iHikeGPS: $8
- This was the most expensive app tested, at $8, and it had the most
promise. The USGS 24K maps are ok (not the best definition but certainly
good enough). The bearing to a given point is good. The ability to
set waypoints from photos very nice.

The one oddity of the program is the way it handles track. Yes, track.
Singular. The app doesn't have the concept of tracks. It's just one
track, with multiple segments, which can span days.

It's an odd GUI and I haven't gotten the hang of it yet. I really wish
it handled tracks (plural). But, it can't. The best you can do is save
track segments to a "route", which, I guess is the same thing only
different. I'm still getting used to this use model.

Trail Tracker: trialware
- The map is Google Terrain, which is usable (but not as good as USGS 24K).
The zoom level is far less than iHikeGPS and further less than Map Plus.
Trail Tracker *requires* an Internet connection to start, so that's a bust.
At least it saves multiple tracks, but it actually saves them as separate
maps with tracks on them. Weird concept but it works OK.
It talks to you (distance, speed, time, etc.) and has lots of settings.
But it doesn't do much (e.g., it can't tell you bearing & distance to
a waypoint, and it can't even save waypoints).

[Adair Bordon]

Adair Bordon wrote, on Wed, 11 Mar 2015 04:33:29 +0000:

> Trail Tracker: trialware

UPDATE on Trail Tracker...

When the trial period ended today, Trail Tracker just died.
Zero functionality.

No sense in paying for it since it had *less* functionality when it
was in the trial period than the freeware Map Plus app does.

And, it had a lot less functionality than the MotionX GPS HD payware
did (before I deleted it after buying it).

So, this post is just to say forget about Trail Tracker; it's a waste
of time and effort and energy.

[Tony Cito]

Adair Bordon wrote, on Fri, 13 Mar 2015 07:48:04 +0000:

> So, this post is just to say forget about Trail Tracker; it's a waste of
> time and effort and energy.

I create the KML tracks on Android or iOS and then view on Google Earth
with a USGS topographic map overlay on the PC.
=========================================================================
How to view KML tracks on a topographic map on Google Earth on the PC:

0. Download the entire USA USGS topographic map for Google Earth:
Go to http://www.earthpoint.us/TopoMap.aspx
Press the "View on Google Earth" button
This will Download "EarthPointTopoMap_024802.kml"
Save as: /tmp/EarthPointTopoMap_024802.kml

1. Load the USA USGS topographic map into Google Earth on the PC:
$ googleearth /tmp/EarthPointTopoMap_024802.kml & (this didn't work)
$ googleearth &
GoogleEarth: File > Open > /tmp/EarthPointTopoMap_024802.kml
GoogleEarth: View > Sidebar

2. Select the Earth Point Topo Map USGS Quandrangles:
GoogleEarth: Places > Earth Point Topo Map > USGS Quadrangles

3. Load your KML track which will now topographically show on GE:
GoogleEarth: File > MyTrack.kml
=========================================================================