I am not at all a cognoscenti of mobile phones - I used a Blackberry for years because that was what my company gave me. I asked them to give me an iPhone a few years ago because it could run an aviation weather app that would save me a lot of time when working. When I retired, they let me keep the phone, and I have no plans to replace it until it dies. It works, it makes phone calls, it runs a small selection of specialty apps that I find useful. That's enough for me. I'm not a heavy user of the phone, I often ignore it for days at a time.

I only chose that application (which cost about $100, with all the maps and a few select add-ons) because Seoul Joe spoke so highly about it in his many posts earlier in this same thread.

But, what a software developer might term a 'feature' is not necessarily a 'benefit' to the user. I remember that 10 years ago, a user could heavily customize the screen appearance and level of data presented on the Garmin GPS units, for example, the StreetPilot III. I spend hours fooling around trying to fine-tune the device so it displayed only what I wanted, in a layout that I thought best.

Beginning about 7 years ago, with the introduction of the Nuvi series, Garmin thinned out about 90% of the user-configurable controls from the display. I remember complaining about that (I was a beta-tester for Garmin at the time) and being told by the software team to just settle down and try the new strategy out for a couple of months. Sure enough, a couple of months later, I realized that it was actually a lot simpler and faster to use the newer design... too much user customization ability can actually be a burden, rather than a benefit. Sort of like DOS 3.1 vs. Windows 7, if you know what I mean.

Since then, advances in processing power and continued software development have greatly simplified operation of the Garmin devices. When I fitted the Zumo 590, the biggest choice I had to make (and about the only choice I truly needed to make) was whether to run it in landscape or portrait mode. As for everything else, the device was designed thoughtfully enough to ensure that it gave me the information I needed when I needed it, and didn't bother me with unnecessary information when I didn't need it.

Very careful attention that the software development team paid to what was displayed when on the screen meant that I rarely needed to adjust the zoom level, or the brightness, or go 'digging' into menus to find more detailed information.

Oh God no. The worst that can happen when fooling around with consumer electronics for vehicle navigation is that you get lost. The stakes are higher in flight. For any aviation-related matters, the device needs to comply with the TSO (Technical Standards Orders) set out for aviation use, otherwise I think it is safest to simply leave it off the aircraft. The only possible exception I can see to that would be using an automotive navigator (phone or dedicated) to assist with visual navigation in extremely small recreational aircraft (ultralights or microlights). But, my background is commercial transport aircraft, I have no experience with recreational aircraft.

What I tried to do was compare the best available phone-based navigator (that evaluation having been provided by Seoul Joe) with the best available dedicated GPS navigator.

A very good question.

I was disappointed with the quality of the aural prompts provided by the Sygic smartphone application. It provided 'correct' prompts, in the sense that the directions given were appropriate, but the quality of the synthetic voice was wretched - it sounded like a cartoon character, and the speed of the voice was too fast. There was no implementation of phrasing. It was not, by any means, 'natural speech'.

On the other hand, the Zumo 590 voice prompt quality was a great (and pleasant) surprise to me. Garmin has made major improvements - full order of magnitude improvements - to the quality of the audio prompts.

Not only were the voices entirely natural and extremely easy to understand, the speech was 'natural' - phrases, pauses, and inflection almost perfectly matched natural speech. Even dialect could be selected (British English used the term 'slip roads', American English spoke of 'on and off ramps'). The aural prompts also took full advantage of the road attributes contained in the database. Hence, a series of aural prompts for a single right turn might go like this:

(2 km prior): In 2 km, turn right on Highway 10.

(1 km prior): Be in either of the two right lanes. (or) Be in the right lane. (At the same moment, a photo-realistic view of the available lanes would be presented, with the desired lanes clearly highlighted, as illustrated in the image below).

(400 m prior): Turn right at the Esso station.

(100 m prior): Turn right on Highway 10 now.

I like voice prompts, but for me, they serve a different and non-overlapping purpose to the map displayed on the screen. The voice prompts provide tactical guidance, meaning, they tell you what you have to do right now. The map, on the other hand, provides strategic guidance - it shows you what your overall navigational plan is, and how you are progressing towards your goal.

Lane Guidance provided with voice prompt for appropriate lane
The picture doesn't match the example I provided above, but I think you will get the general idea.


Thank you for that compliment, but I don't think I will be doing any more trials of navigational equipment. Now that I have figured out how the Zumo 590 works, I intend to use it to assist me in achieving my primary objective, which is pleasant, relaxed sight-seeing and touring on my motorcycle.

As for the phone application, I'll keep it on my phone. I can see it being useful in the future when I visit other countries (without the motorcycle). For example, I will be going to Sudan and Vietnam in the new year... I have no desire to bring a dedicated navigator along, and the phone app should be perfect for whatever navigation needs (pedestrian or in a taxi, for example) I might have in those countries.

Michael