The owner is retiring, its time to let go of this awesome community to someone else who can continue the journey. This forum is for sale ( vBulletin license and domain name), The forum generates income from marketing, adsense, and membership. please send your REASONABLE offer to ibro0079@gmail.com if you are interested in buying it.

Announcement

Collapse

For Sale


The owner is retiring, its time to let go of this awesome community to someone else who can continue the journey. This forum is for sale ( vBulletin license and domain name). Please send your REASONABLE offer to ibro0079@gmail.com if you are interested in buying it. The forum generates income from marketing,
adsense, and membership


See more
See less

Mapsource vs Mapinstall

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Mapsource vs Mapinstall

    Comparing the two programs(mapsource ,mapinstall ) making the same .img files, I cannot find out a "big" difference. I am using the GMPtool to open the said files. Any hint? How can I know if the files are made with Mapsource or Mainstall ?

    Thanks
    Slava

  • #2
    Re: Mapsource vs Mapinstall

    what does it matter?

    Comment


    • #3
      Re: Mapsource vs Mapinstall

      So, there is no difference? no significant difference? One can perform a task as another does?

      Comment


      • #4
        Re: Mapsource vs Mapinstall

        Alright, so after a few days of trying to create an unlocked map image, gmasupp.img so that it can be used on other Garmin devices, I successfully did that by using both tools. And here's a few key points
        + With nothing plugged in, MapSource allows to send map to local hard drive while BaseCamp cannot, meaning you must plug either your Garmin device and/or uSD card in the PC so that BC will recognize then allow to continue, and even though, there is no option to send maps to local hdd.
        + In BC, after click Send Maps to ... MapInstall will now take over, so it seems to me, MapSource is a 2-in-1 tool that can perform both.
        + Maybe I get used to mouse-wheel zooming and dragging that I see MapSource GUI/features is way better. I surely can deal with MapInstall but it takes time to get used to it, not a big deal, just not as good as the MS.
        + In MapInstall, I cannot name my own MapSet. Sure I can use other tool to get it done but it's extra steps
        + I compile the unlocked CNNA CT 2015.10 map folder with the intention of creating an unlocked gmapsupp.img file
        - Using BC/MI, it took 40' to send maps to my uSD + few seconds to remove gma protection (using gimgunlock.exe) + 5' to write back the .img file. The end-result gmapsupp.img file is about 2.2GB with full North America maps
        - Using MapSource, it took less than 40' to send maps to local HDD + few seconds to remove gma protection + 10' to copy this file from hdd to my uSD. However, this file I chose only United States maps so the end-result file is only 1.7GB.
        Since 2.2G vs 1.7G comparison would be an apple to orange so I can say for sure but I would add another 10 or 15 minutes to MapSource.
        Quick conclusion
        + MS is easier to deal, more GUI friendly in fact it's way better per my preference, more features however older but not obsoleted, slower and unsupported by Garmin. It's a single tool and also portable which is great.
        + BC/MI needs to revamp their interface, especially the zoom functions, newer, faster and officially supported by Garmin. Both tools need to be installed on PC.
        Last edited by snem6; 24th May 2014, 17:54.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by snem6 View Post
          .............
          + In MapInstall, I cannot name my own MapSet. Sure I can use other tool to get it done but it's extra steps
          It's a pain that the ability to rename from the default wasn't included in MI and Garmin should fix that imo rather than us have to use GMapTool or ImgTool to do it, even though it's very easy to do. The thing you've left unsaid though is that MS can only send the image with the single default supplementary map file name of gmapsupp.img overwriting another map of that name, which is quite unfortunate of course if you wanted to keep it but just forgot to re-name the original map.

          Imho, the mapset naming capability in MS is more than offset by MI's ability to auto-name the sent selection as a descriptive '<any_name>.img' file name in the Map folder if that's supported by the unit [e.g. City Navigator Europe NT 2014.4.img or City Navigator North America NT 2015.10.img]. MI will sent it as gmapsupp.img in Garmin folder though in those older units which don't support a Map folder, i.e. pre-2010 nuvi series. It would be very nice of Garmin to add the mapset naming option to MI and maybe they will, though we'll never see the descriptive file name ability added to MS of course.

          As you've said MI is much faster to send the same selection to the same device too. This is not so much to do with the different ways the two programs compile images, but it's the issue of which one might be prone to errors in the compiling of images from large modern gmap folders that we need to be wary of imo. MI is safe in that respect, whereas MS is suspect.
          Last edited by Surething; 26th May 2014, 01:14.

          Comment

          Working...
          X