GPS misconceptions

This reminds me of something I've been wondering about -- I gather there no additional monthly cost to use this feature? (I guess an additional charge would apply if you were to use a specialized service that did something proprietary with the data...)

BRIAN PEARCE

On 6/11/08 4:39 PM, "Brian Pearce" <red.jacket.press.mailgmail.com> wrote:

> This reminds me of something I've been wondering about -- I gather there no
> additional monthly cost to use this feature?

No additional charges to use the GPS features of the iPhone. As you say,
there may be charges to use third party features.
--
Shawn King

On Jun 11, 2008, at 9:31 AM, Edward Reid wrote:

>> GPS receivers are illegal to use in flight.
>
> Simply not true. Whether passengers are *allowed* to use GPSrs on
> any given
> flight depends on the airline -- for example, Northwest allows them
> and
> Alaska does not. But in no case are they *illegal*.

Interesting hair splitting here: if the crew tells you not to use the
device, it becomes illegal to use it, even if it wasn't before that.

   --John

On 6/11/08 3:39 PM, "Brian Pearce" <red.jacket.press.mailgmail.com> wrote:

> This reminds me of something I've been wondering about -- I gather there no
> additional monthly cost to use this feature? (I guess an additional charge
> would apply if you were to use a specialized service that did something
> proprietary with the data...)

AT&T shouldn't be charging any additional fees for GPS usage. We already pay
for the satellite infrastructure with taxes.

The traffic congestion feature on other GPS devices usually works over a
mobile phone with a data plan, so you would normally pay for that with other
devices. Does anyone know if traffic is/will be taken into consideration
when Google plans a route? I'm going to guess "no" since it doesn't ask us
to choose "shortest time" vs. "shortest route".

--

bill

On Jun 12, 2008, at 10:17 AM, John W Baxter wrote:

> if the crew tells you not to use the
> device, it becomes illegal to use it, even if it wasn't before that.

If you refuse to shut off your device and the crew makes a beef about
your recalcitrance, you may get yourself arrested for the Federal
crime of "interfering with flight crew." See, Title 49 US Code §
46504. Word to the wise is, Don't Mess with the Feds.

 From the US Department of Justice Manual (http://www.usdoj.gov/usao/eousa/foia_reading_room/usam/title9/63mcrm.htm#9-63.110
):

  "The statute applies to any 'individual on an aircraft in the
special aircraft jurisdiction of the United States who, by assaulting
or intimidating a flight crew member or flight attendant of the
aircraft, interferes with the performance of the duties of the member
or attendant or lessens the ability of the member or attendant to
perform those duties.' The statute provides for up to 20 years
imprisonment, and further provides for imprisonment for any term of
years or life if a dangerous weapon is used. Interference with a
flight crew member or attendant is a general intent crime, and does
not require a specific intent either to intimidate the flight crew
member or attendant or to interfere with t he performance of his or
her duties. United States v. Grossman, 131 F.3d 1449 (11th Cir. 1997)."

Dave Clark
http://daveclarkimages.smugmug.com
http://www.clarklawfirm.com

At 9:31 AM -0700 6/11/08, Edward Reid wrote:
>>A GPS receiver can drain power from a mobile device quite rapidly - that's
>>why they're often used while plugged in to an automobile.
>
>I think that Adam's conception is colored by his primary use of GPS in
>automobiles.

Ironically, Glenn added that. My experience is that my handheld eTrex
Legend is always running out of battery (perhaps because I seldom use
it) and my Garmin ForeRunner watch lasts 10-14 hours on a charge (but
I turn it off when it's not in use).

Car GPSes probably use a lot of power because of the big screen.

>>GPS receivers are illegal to use in flight.
>
>Simply not true. Whether passengers are *allowed* to use GPSrs on any given
>flight depends on the airline -- for example, Northwest allows them and
>Alaska does not. But in no case are they *illegal*.

Glenn wrote that too (our event coverage articles often have a lot of
contributions from others, though I wrote the bulk of that article),
and here's what he found subsequently:

At 3:00 PM -0700 6/10/08, Glenn Fleishman wrote:
>I have apparently mistaken airline control for FAA rules! I'll
>revise the story.
>
>I just spent a while digging around.
>
>* The TSA only regulates what is legal or banned to bring on a
>plane, not what devices may operate on the plane. Some devices
>that may operate safely on a plane are banned, as well as
>devices that might interfere with navigation and control are
>allowed. That is, you could bring a super high powered signal
>generator on a plane legally, but damned if you could turn it on.
>
>* The FAA didn't set rules about GPS use, but allows each
>airline to set rules, and each pilot apparently has authority on
>this, too. One fellow has dedicated himself to maintaining a
>list of which airlines specifically allow or prohibit. I was
>confused because I routinely fly Alaska airlines (a banner),
>which on my flight yesterday didn't mention GPS units, but in
>the past has said they may not be activated:
>
><http://gpsinformation.net/airgps/airgps.htm>


cheers... -Adam

On 6/12/08 10:17 AM, "John W Baxter" <johnbaxterlistsmac.com> wrote:

>>> GPS receivers are illegal to use in flight.
>>
>> Simply not true. Whether passengers are *allowed* to use GPSrs on
>> any given
>> flight depends on the airline -- for example, Northwest allows them
>> and
>> Alaska does not. But in no case are they *illegal*.
>
> Interesting hair splitting here: if the crew tells you not to use the
> device, it becomes illegal to use it, even if it wasn't before that.

It's part of the announcement. In the US, it is a violation of Federal law
to not comply with flight crew instructions on a flight. They say turn it
off, you don't, that's an illegal act.

--
John C. Welch

John W Baxter wrote:
>
> On Jun 11, 2008, at 9:31 AM, Edward Reid wrote:
>
>>> GPS receivers are illegal to use in flight.
>>
>> Simply not true. Whether passengers are *allowed* to use GPSrs on
>> any given
>> flight depends on the airline -- for example, Northwest allows them
>> and
>> Alaska does not. But in no case are they *illegal*.
>
> Interesting hair splitting here: if the crew tells you not to use the
> device, it becomes illegal to use it, even if it wasn't before that.

The flight crew of an airplane is in many ways like the crew of a ship. Well the officers at least. What they say goes when away from terminals.

And there are good reasons why.

David

On 6/12/08 1:28 PM, "William Smith" <theoriginalmeckmac.com> wrote:

> Does anyone know if traffic is/will be taken into consideration
> when Google plans a route?

It does not now and there's no indication it will in the future.

--
Shawn King

Clark David wrote:
>
> On Jun 12, 2008, at 10:17 AM, John W Baxter wrote:
>
>> if the crew tells you not to use the
>> device, it becomes illegal to use it, even if it wasn't before that.
>
> If you refuse to shut off your device and the crew makes a beef about
> your recalcitrance, you may get yourself arrested for the Federal
> crime of "interfering with flight crew." See, Title 49 US Code §
> 46504. Word to the wise is, Don't Mess with the Feds.

About 20 years ago I was on a flight from LGA to Pittsburgh. A bit bouncy. 9 or 10 pm. Flight attendants only got 1/3 of way down the aisle due to turbulence before they had to give up serving and start getting ready to land. Lady next to me said to me "No way are they not selling me a drink tonight" (or something similar), got up and went to the front of the plane. Long arguments, raised voices, a small crash of stuff falling to the floor at one point, captain came out, more arguing, etc... In the mean time seat belt sign, flaps down, etc... Finally she was PUT into her seat and told to not get up or else. And the "or else" was said in a voice that finally got through to her. Until we got off she kept going on about how they had treated her.

When we landed there were 8 people in uniform waiting. Only 2 were from the same agency. I'm sure it wreaked her life for a while to insist on that drink. Which from my view would have in no way shape or form been her first that evening.

And this was way before the current rules. Oh, yeah. If you're flying into or out of Washington DC. Drink lightly. Getting out of your seat withing 30 minutes of take off or landing WILL cause a diversion. And an incredible amount of hassle. They warn you but folks still insist on thinking "they don't really mean it".

David

>> Does anyone know if traffic is/will be taken into consideration
>> when Google plans a route?

The only real-time traffic + routing technology I am aware of is
Inrix: <http://www.inrix.com/>

What is really cool is that it is also predictive:
<http://www.inrix.com/predictive.asp>


--chuck

> The only real-time traffic + routing technology I am aware of is
> Inrix: <http://www.inrix.com/>
>

Based on the Traffic Message Channel technology, most radio stations
in Europe provide real-time traffic information, which GPS navigation
devices can use to calculate alternative routes.

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traffic_Message_Channel>


Regards,

Jochen.


--
Jochen Wolters | jochenpolytropia.com | http://polytropia.com