• Welcome to MacSailing.net!
  • Dedicated to sailing!
  • Be Jolly!
Hello There, Guest! Login Register


Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Title: Which system to purchase?
#26
MacENC will import anyway point that is activated on an interfaced GPS. The problem is uploading waypoints to Raymarine systems. Sometimes it works. Raymarine is inconsistent in their support of the NMEA $GPWPL message.
Scott Dillon
Sydney Australia
North Shore 38
CYCA
 
Reply
#27
The major manufacturers in my opinion are Raymarine, Furuno, and Garmin. There's much more to the decision than just a list of what works together. There are many different ways to move information in and out of the different devices and that really isn't a problem today at all.

I've never, ever had a problem moving routes to Raymarine devices. If there's an inconsistency, it's probably due to the software that is sending the data. Mine has worked flawlessly over some 20,000 nm of cruising. We almost never move our boat more than a couple of miles without a route and we always have multiple platforms running the exact same route. It just works.

I've always liked the reliability of Raymarine. Their devices are very waterproof and rugged. Autopilot support is exceptionally well done and integrated to the entire system.

If I were getting all new equipment, I'd look pretty seriously at Garmin's new products. Their radar looks really good and their chartplotters look really nice.

I'm under the impression that Furuno has the best radar systems out there. I believe it from the looks of the displays I've seen on other friend's boats. I don't know much about their chartplotters though.

Personally, I like having a waterproof system as the main system with backup laptop/phone/PDA/etc. You never know when a big splash is going to come out of nowhere and it's nice to have hardware that can take it.
 
Reply
#28
Now I'm totally confused. I liked Raymarine, but not if I have to use a flash card to transfer data. IE waypoints and routes.
I actually have just purchased MacENC along with the usb GPS. My iphone has a waterproof case, so it should work fine as a repeater in the cockpit or as a decent standby with inavx. But I still want a integrated system, so I need to find out what equipment MacNav and interface to without a problem, so Raymarine looks like it's out judging by others experiences.
Barry
 
Reply
#29
ActiveCaptain Wrote:No, you can't really transfer data to Raymarine equipment over a flash card. There might be some exotic way to do it but it's just not the easy way.

The easy way is to use a Bluetooth multiplexer. I transfer all of my routes wirelessly from my laptop or phone. A side benefit is that all of the Raymarine instruments are broadcasting over Bluetooth too so heading, wind, depth, etc. are all available to software that can understand it.
Am I right reading between the lines that you don't use MacENC with your Raymarine equipment? If that's the case what software do you use?
Barry
 
Reply
#30
A variety - Coastal Explorer, ActiveCaptain Mobile, Outdoor Navigator, plus test versions of Nobeltec, various Maptech products, other older products and a few products that haven't been released yet. I previously wrote 3 products that Maptech sold and have a lot of software to experiment with.
 
Reply
#31
Speaking of Coastal Explorer, what is the hold up with getting version 2.0 out the door? It has been promoted on the Rose Point site for over a year.
Scott Dillon
Sydney Australia
North Shore 38
CYCA
 
Reply
#32
It's very close. I'm testing it right now. They just released a new beta today. It appears like it'll be released momentarily.

It's an incredible product.
 
Reply
#33
I fear we are being a bit vague. To be a bit more specific:

Raymarine C70 installed Sept 06. The dealer fitted a serial plug to use with a keyspan adapter.

Macbook Intel 2 Ghz Core 2 Duo. (late 2006)

Keyspan USB Serial Adapter with latest driver.

System 10.5.6
MacENC V 6.0*
GpsNavX V 4.5*

*not the latest but I've had to stop using them for reasons detailed in early posts.

The only data I have been able to get from the C70 to MacENC/GPSNavX on the Mac is a GPS feed. Nothing else!

I have not been able to transfer any data at all into the C70 from my Macbook.

I was able to upload/download waypoints, tracks and routes on my last boat with an older Raymarine GPS300 display using an older Mac and the Keyspan adapter.

MacENC/GPSNavX cannot read data copied to a flash card.

If anybody has successfully implented two way data transfer between a Raymarine C70 and a Mac please post details. I would love to know how to do it.

Fairwinds
Regard,
John Proctor
VK3JP/VKV6789
S/V Chagall
Sun Odyssey 37.2
 
Reply
#34
MacENC relies on NMEA-0183 data. So if the NMEA-0183 data does not have the information then MacENC can't see it. Here is a list of the NMEA-0183 sentences MacENC can process..

http://www.gpsnavx.com/html/nmea.html

So a good place to start in diagnosing why certain data is not displayed in MacENC is to look at the GPS panel Monitor drawer and see if the NMEA data is present.
Scott Dillon
Sydney Australia
North Shore 38
CYCA
 
Reply
#35
Yeah, but...

In the real world, hiding behind a standard as nebulous as NMEA means that you won't support a whole gaggle of devices out there. The reality is that you need to spend some time with different products and determine their differences with the standard. For example, some Raymarine devices are very sensitive to the characters used for waypoint/route names. Even though this doesn't meet the NMEA specification to the fullest, it's one of those things that a software developer might have to support in order to interface with the equipment that their customers have.

Perhaps this is one of the reasons that you're finding MacENC to be "inconsistent" with Raymarine...
 
Reply
#36
You have this completely bass-awkwards, AC. The spec rules all, if the hardware doesn't comply then the hardware is at fault. You can't blame the software if hardware A does "X" and hardware B does "Y" when X is per the spec while Y is not. This is the kind of thinking that lead to IE not parsing web pages per the HTML standard, and led to web sites that worked well only with IE and other web sites that worked better with FireFox or Safari. You would hardly say M$ was "hiding" behind a "nebulous standard" like HTML, now would you?

As a former government engineer, I can tell you we lived and died by the spec. If the hardware didn't pass the test as per the mil spec, we didn't say "oh just accept it anyway" - we failed the hardware and sent it back. We didn't tweak the software so it would run, we didn't blame the programmer, we failed the unit. Period.

If RayMarine implemented a 'feature' that requires or restricts certain characters in a waypoint name, and that's not part of the NMEA spec then RayMarine is at fault here, not GPSNavX. If RayMarine doesn't accept valid NMEA sentences sent to it, then it's at fault. It's impossible to test against every single device out there that supports NMEA, and impossible to tweak software to accommodate all the various units out there. That's what a standard is for, and if it's not used correctly then it's not the standard's fault, it's the hardware. If there's a "gaggle" of devices out there that claim NMEA support but won't work with other NMEA devices, then it's past time for a new standard, one that will be recognized and enforced - not time for innuendo that the software is poorly written or needs more testing.
 
Reply
#37
AugustH Wrote:As a former government engineer...
Oh please.

Government employees don't have to earn their living by actually providing something that their customers need. Software developers do. At least the ones who are actually earning a living by developing software.

You, me, and Mr. MacENC are significantly smaller than Raymarine, Furuno, Garmin, etc. We don't get to tell them what to do. We shouldn't be telling our customers that "they" don't follow all of the specs so that's why our software doesn't work with it. That's BS and just plain poor support.

Anyone can put a "Raymarine" switch into their export function so that it can handle the differences that they have put into their devices. There are a variety of other ways that it can be handled as well. Just saying that "they don't follow the rules" is being a little too much of a cry baby. At least for us in the real world.

Frankly, it doesn't bother me in the slightest if you or Rich don't want to see MacENC work with most of the marine navigation hardware out there. Someone else will gladly step in and support the customers out there.
 
Reply
#38
How about Garmin? I like the look of the 5208 as well as their radar etc. Anyone managed to easily transfer waypoints, routes etc to one of the latest Garmin Chartplotters?
Barry
 
Reply
#39
Since you have no idea what I did as a gov't engineer, I won't take offense at your slander. My "customers" were the pilots whose planes my missiles defended, and I took my job very seriously indeed, for if I didn't, they died. Can you say any of your jobs had that kind of responsibility?

Now, back to the subject at hand. If a standard says "send this string" and then says "here is the response", and you send the string and the hardware doesn't do the response, then the hardware is failing the standard. Simple, no? So then, should the software say "for this send X, for that send Y, for that send Z, for that send..." because X, Y, and Z say they're compliant when they're not? And if the software doesn't try to handle every piece of hardware out there (since it's sending standard strings), is it to blame?

I ask, as I'm curious as to your philosophy and approach to what software should be. Does YOUR software handle every piece of hardware that claims to be NMEA compliant? If so, how?
 
Reply
#40
The argument has gotten stupid.

Suffice it to say, it's a good thing that you don't have to make a living from the software you sell to others.
 
Reply
#41
ActiveCaptain Wrote:The argument has gotten stupid.

Suffice it to say, it's a good thing that you don't have to make a living from the software you sell to others.
Hey Guys, this is getting way off track. I am new here and I didn't intend this to be a flame match.
I'm just trying to figure out what hardware best suits my needs within my budget. So far I nothing to say but good about MacEnc, now all I need is a waterproof small MacBook!
Peace Out,

Barry
 
Reply
#42
Sorry, Barry, my apologies. It won't happen again.

I've been happy with my Raytheon Pathfinder radar/chartplotter, it's old but reliable. I thought it fun one time when I tracked an airplane flying by. The GPS that came with it gets a lock amazingly fast, and the CMAP charts on the card are pretty good. It's a pain to set up a route or enter waypoints, but no more than my old Garmin 48. As a side note, you can tell I don't upgrade my hardware very often Smile

I do wish I had a better bus connection to the unit. It's SeaTalk which is proprietary and doesn't talk to much else, but it does support NMEA which is nice. I'm going to link in my fishfinder to the radar so I'll get boat speed, depth, and temperature showing up on the display.

If I had to do it over again, I think I'd still get Raytheon. It's pricy but pretty good. I wish I could afford a color display, but the prices of those are astronomically high and I want to enjoy my boat, not worry about it!
 
Reply
#43
Oh, and my next purchase is going to be a 2 meter ham radio for the boat. I'm a ham operator and 2 meters is a nice addition. You can clip it to transmit on marine frequencies in an emergency (it had better be a real emergency, though!), and the power level is twice what a marine radio can legally transmit. Plus the amount of chatter is a lot less, and by transmitting on duplex frequencies to a repeater you can cover an amazing range. From here in Seattle I can talk on a repeater trunk to the north end of Vancouver Island, or to Eastern Washington, or even to the East Coast. If you're not a ham, I urge you to take the Technician test and get on 2 meters, it's an easy test (no code for anything any longer!) and it's the first step to getting your General class HF license and talking to the entire world!
 
Reply
#44
I'm late in for this one.. (just got back from a week sailing in the BVI.) It appears that the debate over NMEA standards seems to have settled down.

<SYSADMIN HAT> I'd respectfully request that you all please avoid personal attacks or jibes in posts on this forum in future.
</SYSADMIN HAT>

Now, cometh the hour, cometh the pragmatist.. standards are there to be adhered to, and for a smaller software developer, I would imagine it's not economical to test with new kit from different manufacturers. However, from my rather limited understanding of NMEA 0183, it's been inconsistently adopted by different manufacturers for almost as long as it's been around, with Raymarine and Garmin all having their interpretations, so the standard isn't that standard after all. Which manufacturers follow it to the letter, without adding any non-standard functionality? Genuine question.

But from a commercial perspective, the old adage is that "the customer is always right", and if the customer's got Garmin or Raymarine kit, then to my mind any software developer should endeavour to provide some support for it. If minor modifications are required for each different manufacturer, and they can be implemented and tested within the user community.

In otherwords prioritise the technical standard, but adapt to the commercial reality of the marketplace when it makes sense.
Never knowingly overcanvassed!
 
Reply
#45
I have worked with many customers to insure compatibility with their systems. That being said Raymarine has been the most trouble-some. Not so much on processing the NMEA-0183 data they provide to applications (although they are inconsistent on how much of it is available), but uploading routes and waypoints. Obviously Raymarine puts a priority on their proprietary SeaTalk data and their NMEA data is more of an after thought. My wish is that more marine instrumentation manufacturers would embrace the open standards of GPX and KML making for easy waypoint and route interchange.

I would encourage developers to come into the Mac OS X space and provide new and exciting products and good support. It is a growing market.
Scott Dillon
Sydney Australia
North Shore 38
CYCA
 
Reply
#46
Just checking to make sure. The Miniplex Lite IS compatible with MacENC? I was worried that the high speed RS232 output would not work with MacENC or GPSNavX. But it does?
 
Reply
#47
Yes the Miniplex Lite works great with MacENC or GPSNavX. Just be sure to install the FTDI driver (linked in the help).
Scott Dillon
Sydney Australia
North Shore 38
CYCA
 
Reply
#48
I also have the SH CP300 chartplotter and would like to add the Sitex radar. But doesn't that require a compass input? What do you use for that? Can the Raymarine fluxgate compass used in their autopilot be used as a source of the NMEA sentences that give compass direction?

Eric

jagasail Wrote:I have Raymarine for wind/speed/depth integrated into my system via a Miniplex multiplexer and wouldn't get Raymarine again simply because of the NMEA issues. Just not worth it when many other good options are out there.

One option to look at are the newer Standard Horizon CP180 or CP300 GPS/chart plotters. I have one (CP300i)and it will display AIS, and can act as a Radar display for one of the Sitex PC radars. The two (plotter/radar) can be had for under $2000 usd, which leave a lot left for and AIS plus wind/speed/log instruments. You'd still likely have cash left over, so might even even be able to include an AIS transciever. The Standard Horizon is also compact so would fit more easily on your 30 footer.

BTW - no one actually answered your question about AIS receiver vs transceiver. I think the answer is really that the transceivers (Class B) were just approved and there's not much experience with them yet. Transceivers also cost 2-3 time that of a receiver. I have a receiver purchased not long before the transceivers were approved and really like it. However, if I could do it over again and had the extra cash I'd definitely go with a Class B transceiver. Also, spend the past two days in LaPaz and the cruisers here with AIS were all very enthusiastic about their use of it while traveling down the US/Mexican west coast(Puget Sound-SFO-San Diego-LaPaz etc).

Scot
 
Reply
#49
Eric:
For what it's worth, I get the NMEA Heading from my old AutoHelm ST4000 compass (now Raymarine) by converting its SeaTalk to NMEA using a ShipModul Miniplex-42 (input 4).
— —•••  •••— —
 Jon Longworth

 
Reply
#50
Thanks, Jade. Just what I needed to know. I have the same old Autohelm, so I can just use the Seatalk from it using the multiplexer. Thanks so much for the info. Eric

Jade Wrote:Eric:
For what it's worth, I get the NMEA Heading from my old AutoHelm ST4000 compass (now Raymarine) by converting its SeaTalk to NMEA using a ShipModul Miniplex-42 (input 4).
 
Reply
  


Possibly Related Threads…
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  what happens when I purchase GPSNAVX? carboncow 2 3,037 April 9, 2010 16:07
Last Post: carboncow

Forum Jump:


Browsing: 1 Guest(s)