I was on my way to one of my favourite art house cinemas, about 15 minutes away by car. Even though I go there three to four times a year, I always forget which exit to take. Fortunately, I had not one but two GPS devices on my dashboard: a popular model made by Garmin and an Android smartphone.
To my surprise, on the way there, it looked as if the smartphone was performing as well as the Garmin GPS device. But also to my surprise, sometimes they were both about as good as leaning out the window and getting advice from a stranger.
The smartphone found the exact name of the cinema but somehow placed it 75 miles and 90 minutes away. The GPS device seemed to nail it; I recognised the exit it told me to take and I took it. Then, following its turn-by-turn directions, I found myself blocks away in the middle of a residential street, with no cinema in sight. Thanks to both, I missed the first 20 minutes of the movie.
Drivers should be asking themselves: why do I need to spend even $200 for a GPS unit that sometimes makes mistakes when a just-as-smart (or dumb) smartphone can do the same thing? Owners of smartphones that run the Android operating system are finding an even better reason: the navigation advice on an Android phone is free.
Google’s no-cost Maps app, bundled with Android smartphones, includes voice directions and turn-by-turn navigation, just like the stand-alone big boys. (This is a category in which Androids clearly trump iPhones. The iPhone’s Google Maps app does not offer these features.)
But is a free smartphone app as good as a device specifically designed for navigation? I set out to find out with a side-by-side test.
The manufacturers of navigation hardware, who have seen sales of stand-alone units drop almost 20 per cent since their 2008 peak, argue that free and low-cost smartphone navigation apps and stand-alone devices can co-exist. Each appeals to a different kind of person. Younger people are attracted to apps, while older drivers like stand-alone devices with larger screens, according to Bill Strand, Magellan’s senior product marketing manager.
To test this premise, I stuck Garmin’s Nuvi, model 2350LMT ($185), and Motorola’s latest Android phone, the Droid X2, onto the dashboard of my Audi. (There are hundreds of GPS models; I selected the Garmin as the representative because of its popularity.) Peering over this bank of devices, I took off with the children onto Los Angeles’s traffic-choked Ventura Freeway and down to Disneyland.
The Droid and Garmin both have 4.3-inch screens. The Droid’s screen was brighter and very sharp.
I typed in “Disney Grand California Hotel and Spa,” and the slight vibration let me know when a key push had been registered. Each device’s maps were easy to follow and read; the graphics style comes down to personal preference. But if you like to catch a bird’s-eye view of your travels, only Google offers a satellite view of your route, much like its satellite view on a Google map on a computer. Graphic maps work just as well, but I found something satisfying about seeing what is really there on the ground.
Google Maps was quickest in searching for a destination. A search for the nearest Peet’s coffee stores on the Garmin took 27 seconds — and it never found the one closest to my home. The Garmin did not find it even when I was parked in front of the store. Perhaps Garmin’s maps supplier is a Starbucks fan.
Alas, speed does not always translate into accuracy. Neither of the devices was ever completely accurate, either in determining the shortest route or figuring out the location of an address.
©2011 The New York
Times News Service
