What does the future hold for bike GPS?
Discussion
TKF said:
Some Gump said:
So is the summary that:
OP makes a purchasing decision to suit him, asks "why does everyone else not do that?"
Several other PHers say "it doesn't suit me, so i did different"
OP responds with "you're doing it wrong". ?
It is absurd, especially as he's also had to buy an extra Cateye to see the data. Rather than have to buy 2 things to take on the bike he's had to buy 2 things to take on the bike and everyone else is wrong.OP makes a purchasing decision to suit him, asks "why does everyone else not do that?"
Several other PHers say "it doesn't suit me, so i did different"
OP responds with "you're doing it wrong". ?
Alternatively, I could've spent £250+ on an Edge 810, Bryton Rider 60 or similar.
I'd say the price differential alone (unless you're suggesting you would've bought a GPS unit instead of a phone?) makes the discussion worth having, and that's before considering the relative pace of development of phones and GPS devices.
I reckon the next step is going to be one of the major phone manufacturers picking up on this concept and really developing it as a lifestyle device. OK, at the moment it's on an old version of Android and it's a bit stunted as a phone, but it has huge potential as a mapping device, and it's already got the bounceability needed to make people feel comfortable about bar mounting it. The likes of Samsung already seem to be starting to go that way with phones like the S5 Active and S5 Sport (which I don't think we have in the UK?), so why are so many people unwilling to contemplate the sort of improvements that will come along in the next couple of years?
Also worth considering is the need for phone manufacturers to find new ways to persuade you to update with their newest products. Moore's law seems to be tailing off somewhat for phones, and the increases in raw processing power between one generation to the next are dropping. The latest screens are also beyond the level of resolution anyone is going to need (4K on a device 5" across!), so I reckon the developments will increasingly be in lifestyle modeling.
Add then the fact that if I decide I dont' like the mapping software, or the training capabilities or any other element of my phone, I can just choose another app, whereas on a dedicated device, I'm stuck with what the manufacturer ships me, and the potential for the phone over the dedicated device just increases further.
I've never said that a phone instead of the GPS device is the right choice for everyone right now, or even for the majority, just because it is for me. I do, however, think that if phones and dedicated GPS devices both continue to develop at the current pace, then within a couple of years - maybe five at most - the GPS device will be a thing of the past. It will have been replaced by an "iPhone Outdoors" or something which will have everything a phone already does, coupled with upgraded battery and GPS performance and rugged chassis, at a premium over the standard iPhone, but much less of a premium than buying a standard iPhone and an Edge 1200 or whatever they're up to by then.
This thread was never designed to be about now. I'm only illustrating what I can do now compared to two years ago to try and start a conversation around what might be possible two years from now. Is that really such a hard concept to grasp?
I don't dispute that technology will continue to progress and that phones would be capable of even more in a couple of years. But progress will also increase the capability or reduce the cost of dedicated GPS devices. And, for some, myself included, a dedicated device would likely still be the preference.
I gave the example of a wrist watch in the other thread. It doesn't do anything a smart phone doesn't do. Both can tell the time. Yet I and most people still wear a watch because it's optimised for the job it has to do. It's small, it's light, it doesn't need to be stuffed into a pocket, looked at and stuffed back. It's not powering a 6" screen and the battery lasts longer.
And therein lies the rub with smart phones, for me. They do many, many things that dedicated devices each do one of, yet I generally prefer the dedicated devices. Whether it's web browsing, email composing, in-car navigating, listening to music or watching a video, I find it more convenient to use something else, something optimised for the job. Something with a 24" screen, a full-size physical keyboard, permanently installed in the car, or with proper speakers. Personally, I'm hoping we see a reverse in the trend towards ever larger phones with ever more power demanding screens. Sure, it's useful to be able to check emails on the train, to check my position with the GPS and find the nearest retailer of something with the web browser, but in the main I carry a phone to make and receive calls and everything else waits until I get back.
I have friends like me but also friends who've gone the other way. Friends who use their phones for everything. Including telling the time. We're not radically different personality types, but we just have our own preferred ways of doing things.
I believe, when it comes to bike GPS, there will continue to be two consumer types. Those that prefer the simplicity of dedicated devices (e.g. me) and those that prefer the simplicity of only ever having one device (e.g. you). We both think our's is the cleanest, most convenient, most straight forward way of going about it because, for us, they are. And I don't see that changing over two years.
I gave the example of a wrist watch in the other thread. It doesn't do anything a smart phone doesn't do. Both can tell the time. Yet I and most people still wear a watch because it's optimised for the job it has to do. It's small, it's light, it doesn't need to be stuffed into a pocket, looked at and stuffed back. It's not powering a 6" screen and the battery lasts longer.
And therein lies the rub with smart phones, for me. They do many, many things that dedicated devices each do one of, yet I generally prefer the dedicated devices. Whether it's web browsing, email composing, in-car navigating, listening to music or watching a video, I find it more convenient to use something else, something optimised for the job. Something with a 24" screen, a full-size physical keyboard, permanently installed in the car, or with proper speakers. Personally, I'm hoping we see a reverse in the trend towards ever larger phones with ever more power demanding screens. Sure, it's useful to be able to check emails on the train, to check my position with the GPS and find the nearest retailer of something with the web browser, but in the main I carry a phone to make and receive calls and everything else waits until I get back.
I have friends like me but also friends who've gone the other way. Friends who use their phones for everything. Including telling the time. We're not radically different personality types, but we just have our own preferred ways of doing things.
I believe, when it comes to bike GPS, there will continue to be two consumer types. Those that prefer the simplicity of dedicated devices (e.g. me) and those that prefer the simplicity of only ever having one device (e.g. you). We both think our's is the cleanest, most convenient, most straight forward way of going about it because, for us, they are. And I don't see that changing over two years.
Edited by SixPotBelly on Friday 17th April 09:37
I agree with you on the watch, but then I'm 44, so I had a watch for years before I had a phone. Go and look at the teenagers of today, and very few have them.
Ultimately, I reckon wearable tech will just get better and better in conjunction with your phone, so you'll still be able to have the best of all worlds, but just one compute unit to drive it all.
For browsing and the like, if I wanted to, I could get a Google Chromecast and plug it into my TV, and a bluetooth keyboard for my phone. I could then start typing a document on my phone on the train on the way home, then pick up seamlessly with a full-sized keyboard and 50" monitor when I get home. At the moment, I don't want to, as I've got a laptop, PC and iPad, and phones aren't yet powerful enough to do things like full on photo processing, but how long is it going to be before we get there? My phone is already a lot more powerful than the first few laptops I had.
Look at early efforts with things like Google Glass. How long do you think it's going to be before your phone will be able to project speed, cadence, HR and turn by turn directions into a heads up display so that you never have to look down at the bars?
Equally, I was reading something recently (and I don't think it was an April Fool!!) which was talking about using accelerometers and GPS in your phone to identify a possible bike crash and then automatically send a text to an emergency contact with your location of you don't respond to your phone within a certain time.
Of course GPS devices will continue to develop as well, but we've already got more mobile phones than we do people in this country. How many people have dedicated GPS devices? The gulf in relative development resources is immense,even taking into account the need for phone developers to develop a much wider range of capabilities.
Ultimately, I reckon wearable tech will just get better and better in conjunction with your phone, so you'll still be able to have the best of all worlds, but just one compute unit to drive it all.
For browsing and the like, if I wanted to, I could get a Google Chromecast and plug it into my TV, and a bluetooth keyboard for my phone. I could then start typing a document on my phone on the train on the way home, then pick up seamlessly with a full-sized keyboard and 50" monitor when I get home. At the moment, I don't want to, as I've got a laptop, PC and iPad, and phones aren't yet powerful enough to do things like full on photo processing, but how long is it going to be before we get there? My phone is already a lot more powerful than the first few laptops I had.
Look at early efforts with things like Google Glass. How long do you think it's going to be before your phone will be able to project speed, cadence, HR and turn by turn directions into a heads up display so that you never have to look down at the bars?
Equally, I was reading something recently (and I don't think it was an April Fool!!) which was talking about using accelerometers and GPS in your phone to identify a possible bike crash and then automatically send a text to an emergency contact with your location of you don't respond to your phone within a certain time.
Of course GPS devices will continue to develop as well, but we've already got more mobile phones than we do people in this country. How many people have dedicated GPS devices? The gulf in relative development resources is immense,even taking into account the need for phone developers to develop a much wider range of capabilities.
I think you're probably right about the teenagers, and equally there's probably quite a strong correlation between age and disposition to dedicated devices. I'm 47, and though I feel fifteen years younger, I clearly don't behave fifteen years younger when it comes to tech.
The issue I have with such 'wearable tech' is if none of it functions without your phone. If a dedicated device is the same size and cost (as in my Bryton 20 vs Cateye remote example) then I son't see the benefit in complicating things. Strangely I consider myself an early adopter, but I don't adopt tech for tech's sake.
Nor do I buy into the central processing device model. Look at home computing. Twenty years ago I had one PC for everything I wanted to do. Now, as technology had progressed and processor prices have come down, I don't know off-hand how many I have. There's the desktop PC I'm writing this on, the old one in the garage for car diagnostics, there's a tiny one attached behind the TV controlling my video media library, there's another acting as a home server, there's the laptop I'd take if working abroad for a month, a netbook if they're sending me only for a weekend, an ipad if it's a day return, the one built into the car dash and the smart phone, plus probably more I've forgotten. Instead of (or as well as) a future where ancillary devices depend on a mother host, why not a future where the devices remain autonomous but gain greater computing power of their own?
As an aside, I'd like to mention that I've enjoyed this debate. You write well and you've been nothing but polite to all throughout. Not an 'insane' thread at all. And, though it might weaken my argument to admit it, I have re-downloaded the Strava app to my phone and will give it another go on a short run (battery life worries) to keep an open mind.
The issue I have with such 'wearable tech' is if none of it functions without your phone. If a dedicated device is the same size and cost (as in my Bryton 20 vs Cateye remote example) then I son't see the benefit in complicating things. Strangely I consider myself an early adopter, but I don't adopt tech for tech's sake.
Nor do I buy into the central processing device model. Look at home computing. Twenty years ago I had one PC for everything I wanted to do. Now, as technology had progressed and processor prices have come down, I don't know off-hand how many I have. There's the desktop PC I'm writing this on, the old one in the garage for car diagnostics, there's a tiny one attached behind the TV controlling my video media library, there's another acting as a home server, there's the laptop I'd take if working abroad for a month, a netbook if they're sending me only for a weekend, an ipad if it's a day return, the one built into the car dash and the smart phone, plus probably more I've forgotten. Instead of (or as well as) a future where ancillary devices depend on a mother host, why not a future where the devices remain autonomous but gain greater computing power of their own?
As an aside, I'd like to mention that I've enjoyed this debate. You write well and you've been nothing but polite to all throughout. Not an 'insane' thread at all. And, though it might weaken my argument to admit it, I have re-downloaded the Strava app to my phone and will give it another go on a short run (battery life worries) to keep an open mind.
SixPotBelly said:
I think you're probably right about the teenagers, and equally there's probably quite a strong correlation between age and disposition to dedicated devices. I'm 47, and though I feel fifteen years younger, I clearly don't behave fifteen years younger when it comes to tech.
The issue I have with such 'wearable tech' is if none of it functions without your phone. If a dedicated device is the same size and cost (as in my Bryton 20 vs Cateye remote example) then I son't see the benefit in complicating things. Strangely I consider myself an early adopter, but I don't adopt tech for tech's sake.
Nor do I buy into the central processing device model. Look at home computing. Twenty years ago I had one PC for everything I wanted to do. Now, as technology had progressed and processor prices have come down, I don't know off-hand how many I have. There's the desktop PC I'm writing this on, the old one in the garage for car diagnostics, there's a tiny one attached behind the TV controlling my video media library, there's another acting as a home server, there's the laptop I'd take if working abroad for a month, a netbook if they're sending me only for a weekend, an ipad if it's a day return, the one built into the car dash and the smart phone, plus probably more I've forgotten. Instead of (or as well as) a future where ancillary devices depend on a mother host, why not a future where the devices remain autonomous but gain greater computing power of their own?
To clarify, I don't see the phone becoming the central computing unit in the home, but I do see it becoming increasingly integrated into it, so that I can effectively take my home computing power with me. I can already use my phone to set programmes to record remotely on my Youview box, for example, and if I wanted to, I could buy a thermostat which would recognise - thanks to my phone - when I'm getting close to the house and turn the heating on accordingly.The issue I have with such 'wearable tech' is if none of it functions without your phone. If a dedicated device is the same size and cost (as in my Bryton 20 vs Cateye remote example) then I son't see the benefit in complicating things. Strangely I consider myself an early adopter, but I don't adopt tech for tech's sake.
Nor do I buy into the central processing device model. Look at home computing. Twenty years ago I had one PC for everything I wanted to do. Now, as technology had progressed and processor prices have come down, I don't know off-hand how many I have. There's the desktop PC I'm writing this on, the old one in the garage for car diagnostics, there's a tiny one attached behind the TV controlling my video media library, there's another acting as a home server, there's the laptop I'd take if working abroad for a month, a netbook if they're sending me only for a weekend, an ipad if it's a day return, the one built into the car dash and the smart phone, plus probably more I've forgotten. Instead of (or as well as) a future where ancillary devices depend on a mother host, why not a future where the devices remain autonomous but gain greater computing power of their own?
SixPotBelly said:
As an aside, I'd like to mention that I've enjoyed this debate. You write well and you've been nothing but polite to all throughout. Not an 'insane' thread at all. And, though it might weaken my argument to admit it, I have re-downloaded the Strava app to my phone and will give it another go on a short run (battery life worries) to keep an open mind.
Why thank you! 
Kermit power said:
TKF said:
Some Gump said:
So is the summary that:
OP makes a purchasing decision to suit him, asks "why does everyone else not do that?"
Several other PHers say "it doesn't suit me, so i did different"
OP responds with "you're doing it wrong". ?
It is absurd, especially as he's also had to buy an extra Cateye to see the data. Rather than have to buy 2 things to take on the bike he's had to buy 2 things to take on the bike and everyone else is wrong.OP makes a purchasing decision to suit him, asks "why does everyone else not do that?"
Several other PHers say "it doesn't suit me, so i did different"
OP responds with "you're doing it wrong". ?
Alternatively, I could've spent £250+ on an Edge 810, Bryton Rider 60 or similar.
I'd say the price differential alone (unless you're suggesting you would've bought a GPS unit instead of a phone?) makes the discussion worth having, and that's before considering the relative pace of development of phones and GPS devices.
I reckon the next step is going to be one of the major phone manufacturers picking up on this concept and really developing it as a lifestyle device. OK, at the moment it's on an old version of Android and it's a bit stunted as a phone, but it has huge potential as a mapping device, and it's already got the bounceability needed to make people feel comfortable about bar mounting it. The likes of Samsung already seem to be starting to go that way with phones like the S5 Active and S5 Sport (which I don't think we have in the UK?), so why are so many people unwilling to contemplate the sort of improvements that will come along in the next couple of years?
Also worth considering is the need for phone manufacturers to find new ways to persuade you to update with their newest products. Moore's law seems to be tailing off somewhat for phones, and the increases in raw processing power between one generation to the next are dropping. The latest screens are also beyond the level of resolution anyone is going to need (4K on a device 5" across!), so I reckon the developments will increasingly be in lifestyle modeling.
Add then the fact that if I decide I dont' like the mapping software, or the training capabilities or any other element of my phone, I can just choose another app, whereas on a dedicated device, I'm stuck with what the manufacturer ships me, and the potential for the phone over the dedicated device just increases further.
I've never said that a phone instead of the GPS device is the right choice for everyone right now, or even for the majority, just because it is for me. I do, however, think that if phones and dedicated GPS devices both continue to develop at the current pace, then within a couple of years - maybe five at most - the GPS device will be a thing of the past. It will have been replaced by an "iPhone Outdoors" or something which will have everything a phone already does, coupled with upgraded battery and GPS performance and rugged chassis, at a premium over the standard iPhone, but much less of a premium than buying a standard iPhone and an Edge 1200 or whatever they're up to by then.
This thread was never designed to be about now. I'm only illustrating what I can do now compared to two years ago to try and start a conversation around what might be possible two years from now. Is that really such a hard concept to grasp?
Kermit power said:
Look at early efforts with things like Google Glass. How long do you think it's going to be before your phone will be able to project speed, cadence, HR and turn by turn directions into a heads up display so that you never have to look down at the bars?
http://www.dcrainmaker.com/2015/04/recon-jet-start...neilbauer said:
But on a long ride 4-5 hours using Bluetooth to link your devices does the battery last???
I don't know about Bluetooth yet, but 6 hours last Sunday logging my ride and my hear rate through ANT+ used up about 25% of my battery life. I'll let you know after I've tried the Bluetooth head unit, which is currently sat at home awaiting my return.
TKF said:
Kermit power said:
I've spent £45, and I can do anything I did previously with my Edge 800.
You've got one of these on your bars
Which button do you press to get to the map page?
If you had bothered to read the rest of the thread, you'd have seen the bit where I said I didn't use the Garmin for navigation off road because I didn't like having to look at the s
tty little screen and couldn't get it to do voice instructions. From personal preference, I'm far more likely to use turn by turn nav on a bike if it's in my ear rather than bouncing around on the bars on a crappy little screen.On the road, on the other hand, I've already said I'm perfectly happy bar mounting the phone.
Some Gump said:
Well i'm guessing his setup works perfectly for him - just like my setup works for me, and the chap with the mio is happy with his.
The thread started like this.Kermit said:
Personally, I reckon the standalone GPS for bikes will be dead within a couple of years
Yes, his unusual setup works perfectly for him. But I wouldn't use that anecdote as evidence that I should be instructing my broker to sell my Garmin shares.Kermit power said:
To clarify, I don't see the phone becoming the central computing unit in the home, but I do see it becoming increasingly integrated into it, so that I can effectively take my home computing power with me. I can already use my phone to set programmes to record remotely on my Youview box, for example, and if I wanted to, I could buy a thermostat which would recognise - thanks to my phone - when I'm getting close to the house and turn the heating on accordingly.
I wasn't clear. I was trying to use what's happened to home devices over the past years to illustrate what I believe will happen to portable devices over the next. Yes, your phone can already be used to set recordings, announce your intended arrival to your boiler or alert the emergency services should you suddenly stop moving but in the near future so could your watch, or your bike computer. Component and manufacturing costs will continue to fall so there's no reason to suspect not.
I see a future with more powerful and capable dedicated devices, not just ever more powerful smart phones. Maybe the new generation of smart bike computers will be able to link with your phone for data transmission over mobile networks, but I believe they will remain capable of autonomous function as stand alone displays and ride trackers. And that's what I would want.
SixPotBelly said:
I wasn't clear. I was trying to use what's happened to home devices over the past years to illustrate what I believe will happen to portable devices over the next.
Yes, your phone can already be used to set recordings, announce your intended arrival to your boiler or alert the emergency services should you suddenly stop moving but in the near future so could your watch, or your bike computer. Component and manufacturing costs will continue to fall so there's no reason to suspect not.
I see a future with more powerful and capable dedicated devices, not just ever more powerful smart phones. Maybe the new generation of smart bike computers will be able to link with your phone for data transmission over mobile networks, but I believe they will remain capable of autonomous function as stand alone displays and ride trackers. And that's what I would want.
The challenge you face with that view is one of sheer size of customer base, I think. In 2013, there were over a Billion mobile phone handsets sold across the planet.Yes, your phone can already be used to set recordings, announce your intended arrival to your boiler or alert the emergency services should you suddenly stop moving but in the near future so could your watch, or your bike computer. Component and manufacturing costs will continue to fall so there's no reason to suspect not.
I see a future with more powerful and capable dedicated devices, not just ever more powerful smart phones. Maybe the new generation of smart bike computers will be able to link with your phone for data transmission over mobile networks, but I believe they will remain capable of autonomous function as stand alone displays and ride trackers. And that's what I would want.
Of those handsets, 55% were smartphones, and of those, the vast majority of customers would effectively perceive them to be "free", both because the cost is buried in a contract, and because they would've bought a phone anyway.
Given the relative market size, I wouldn't be particularly surprised to see one of the mobile phone giants buying one of the GPS device manufacturers - maybe not Garmin but one of the smaller ones - with the specific intent of creating a combined device that does absolutely everything today's dedicated GPS devices do but do it better.
At that point, would you still want a separate device if you were having to pay £300+ for something like an Edge 1000 just to replicate functionality you've already got in your phone?
Let's come back to the thread in a couple of years and see what's happened!
To make some toast today I microwaved some bread and ran an iron over it. Personally I reckon the standalone toaster will be dead within a couple of years. It certainly is for me as there's nothing I could do with the Dualit which I couldn't do with this set up. What do other people think?
Kermit power said:
snowdude2910 said:
It sounds like your phone is well cut out for it but I like android and my phones gps is better than an iphone but not as good as my garmin with speeds varying wildly on the phone and the battery is st with the gps on. Sounds like you have a good solution if you want a windows phone but I don't particularly I stick to what I know and it's nice that I never have to worry about my garmin being charged or it running out of charge as it lasts forever I just get on the bike turn it on and go. With my phone I couldn't do that, I'll be upgrading to a 910xt soon though to save me keep counting and loosing count of lengths when swimming that alone is worth the £300 for me.
t with the gps on. Sounds like you have a good solution if you want a windows phone but I don't particularly I stick to what I know and it's nice that I never have to worry about my garmin being charged or it running out of charge as it lasts forever I just get on the bike turn it on and go. With my phone I couldn't do that, I'll be upgrading to a 910xt soon though to save me keep counting and loosing count of lengths when swimming that alone is worth the £300 for me. My phone is Android???Gassing Station | Pedal Powered | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff