Metroguide 4 and 5 differences?

Does the map data between Mapsource Metroguide 4 and 5 differ, or is the
program interface just different?

--
Phil, Squid-in-Training

Peter wrote:

>> Does the map data between Mapsource Metroguide 4 and 5 differ, or is
>> the program interface just different?
>
> I'll assume you're referring to MG-USA. In that case the maps and
> POIs (points-of-interest) are different and come from different
> sources (4.01 comes from TeleAtlas, 5 comes for NavTech). In general
> 5 is more up-to-date and accurate, but there are some exceptions.
> 4.01 has quite good support for marine features (buoys, lights,
> markers, tide predictions) and these are completely missing from 5. I
> generally found better support for shoreline details and small lakes
> in 4.01.

It's not just marine stuff -- most rural POIs are *much* better in
earlier versions of MG-USA, at least in the areas I'm familiar with.

One "sore thumb" example: compare the area near the Blue Ridge Parkway
south of Sperryville, Virgina at, say, a 2-mile zoom scale.
CityNavigator 4.01 (NavTech) doesn't even hold a candle to MG-USA 3.0
(TeleAtlas).

The only thing that's better for CityNav/NavTech in rural areas was
if -- and that's a big if -- you were routing on main roads.

NavTech's rural coverage is terrible! Why did MG switch to them?


--
da
~~
"OE Quotefix" http://flash.to/oe-quotefix
to fix Outlook Express' broken quoting.

Yeah, I meant CN 4.01. I followed your suggestion below and agree that
tertiary-highway coverage in CN isn't as complete as MGUSA. Also, MGUSA
shows more landmarks and marine points that may be useful to the
"small-road" enthusiast. I wouldn't argue that there differences in
coverage; but on the other hand, when I've followed a bunch of those
Virginia roads on my Gold Wing motrocycle, I've ended up on dirt roads,
which isn't my thing on a big bike :-) But put me in my 4x4 and it's a whole
different thing... CN works pretty well for me, but if I head for those
trails in the George Washington National Forest, guess I'll load up MGUSA
:-)

--
Jim Beachy


"Donkey Agony" <root@[127.0.0.1]> wrote in message
news:etednX_QoapF34WiXTWJgA@comcast.com...
> Jim Beachy wrote:
>
> > Well, maybe... The detail is actually there in MG 4.01,
>
> You mean CityNav, right?
>
> > it's just
> > that you have to zoom in farther or slide the "Map Detail" bar
> > farther toward "more" to see it. If you drill down, all the same
> > roads are there. I think it's because City Nav probably uses a
> > different algorithm and assigns a lesser priority to some of the
> > secondary roads and therefore doesn't display some of the lesser
> > roads until you zoom in pretty far.
>
> Try this -- using MG, select the area south of Sperryville, with Corbin
> Mountain at the top, Old Rag Mountain at the bottom, and the town of
> Nethers on the right (so that it fills the screen at a zoom level of .3
> miles). Switch to CityNav. See what I mean?
>
> Even better, now that you're there, in MG select the area around Nethers
> at a zoom of 800 feet. Switch to CityNav. !!
>
> I know these may seem nitpicky, but I've run into a number of situations
> like this in rural Virginia and West Virginia (Check out Charlestown, or
> Fayetteville). In those cases, my MG 3 shows lots more than CityNav
> 4.01!
>
> Stay away from the backroads, and CityNav is great. But if you're
> looking for a mountain or a "little road", you'll want an old
> MetroGuide.
>
> > I used to load both MG USA and CN 4.01 into my SP3 for quite a while,
> > but finally decided CN 4.01 will do the trick. Incidentally, I live
> > in Virginia not too far from Washington DC, an hour's ride from
> > Sperryville as you mention.
>
> I'm in Alexandria -- folks have a place in Sperryville, and get almost
> daily visits in their back yard from bears.
>
>
> --
> da
> ~~
> "OE Quotefix" http://flash.to/oe-quotefix
> to fix Outlook Express' broken quoting.
>
>