Another example of why you shouldn't always trust your GPS.
http://www.kentucky.com/2013/12/17/2993198/thanks-to-map-glitch-some-would.html
FAIL. :ded:
Quote from: hbelkins on December 18, 2013, 01:20:12 PM
Another example of why you shouldn't always trust your GPS.
^^
Amen!
Quote from: hbelkins on December 18, 2013, 01:20:12 PM
Another example of why you shouldn't always trust your GPS.
http://www.kentucky.com/2013/12/17/2993198/thanks-to-map-glitch-some-would.html
FAIL. :ded:
Just blame the farmer for not putting up enough Christmas Lights.
Don't forget to charge admission!
Even if we had perfect technology, it would still be important to develop mental capacity. Even a rudimentary understanding of navigation, even just knowing how to follow road signs, would prevent this. This story about a "map glitch" to me is a story about blind faith, a result of mental laziness.
I stopped using GPS when I couldn't find the location of my credit union in East Windsor. It took me 25 minutes to find the building, since it couldn't find the road the building was located off of. I eventually found it (it was pretty hidden, but that's beside the point), and that's when I stopped trusting my GPS.
Oh, and when it told me the best way home from Trenton was via US 1. No thanks.
It didn't take long on our DC trip for my parents to figure out that I was more accurate than the GPS. It sent us down US 1 to Mount Vernon rather than the George Washington Parkway for some reason.
The big gubmint GPS worked as it should and gave their precise location. The private mapping data was to blame.
How did Barton know the couple was Japanese?
iPhone
Quote from: Blape on December 18, 2013, 04:57:07 PM
How did Barton know the couple was Japanese?
Because a lot of us probably have
some idea of what other languages sound like.
And while I'm here, welcome to AARoads!
Quote from: NE2 on December 18, 2013, 04:15:32 PM
The big gubmint GPS worked as it should and gave their precise location. The private mapping data was to blame.
Yup. It's never the GPS. The GPS always works. It's the receiver (yes, technicality), and whatever shitty data was put on it.
Quote from: hbelkins on December 18, 2013, 01:20:12 PM
Another example of why you shouldn't always trust your GPS.
http://www.kentucky.com/2013/12/17/2993198/thanks-to-map-glitch-some-would.html
FAIL. :ded:
I want to see the tunnel, myself.
ETA: Looks like I'd clinch KY 2909 in the process!
Quote from: Steve on December 18, 2013, 07:58:43 PM
I want to see the tunnel, myself.
ETA: Looks like I'd clinch KY 2909 in the process!
Tunnel = big square concrete culvert. Not dissimilar to what we went under on the under-construction US 460 just prior to the stop where the group photo was made, but wider because I-75 is six lanes there instead of four.
The GPS I occasionally use doesn't even consider MA 114 or any similar non-freeways. Even though MA 114 is the fastest by far, for the route I was taking.
I was going west on MA 114, and it kept telling me to use 128. It didn't tell me to continue straight on 114 until about the starting point of this (http://goo.gl/maps/zdrdk).
(At least, I seem to think it was that way.)
The car in the Google Streetview of the aforementioned driveway appears to himself be lost.
https://maps.google.com/?ll=38.171995,-84.534441&spn=0.000008,0.004737&t=h&z=18&layer=c&cbll=38.17192,-84.535507&panoid=fERxZ5oTw9elGxAChQfi5Q&cbp=12,122.45,,1,12.64
When I was in Oregon a few years ago, the GPS kept trying to route me onto unpaved Forest Service tracks instead of the one paved road. (this was after I maxed out the map corrections on the device)
Naturally, I ignored it.
Quote from: 1 on December 18, 2013, 09:14:14 PM
The GPS I occasionally use doesn't even consider MA 114 or any similar non-freeways. Even though MA 114 is the fastest by far, for the route I was taking.
That's might be because it doesn't have the speed limits registered for those roads. Mine used to do that.
Quote from: 1 on December 18, 2013, 09:14:14 PM
The GPS I occasionally use doesn't even consider MA 114 or any similar non-freeways. Even though MA 114 is the fastest by far, for the route I was taking.
I was going west on MA 114, and it kept telling me to use 128. It didn't tell me to continue straight on 114 until about the starting point of this (http://goo.gl/maps/ZTsBw).
(At least, I seem to think it was that way.)
Two things:
1. Your link is showing the Airport Circle (US 30/130/NJ 38 interchange) in Pennsauken, NJ. Nowhere near the North Shore.
2. Assuming your origin is either Salem or Marblehead, was your final destination located near/along either I-95 or US 1? If so, your GPS is likely routing you onto MA 128 South due to the numerous traffic lights that are along MA 114 between MA 128 & I-95/US 1. While going 114W/128S/95N is roughly a mile longer than going 114W/95N; it's probably quicker in travel time.
If your destination is along I-93, north of I-495; it routed you 114W/128S/95S/93N instead of 114W/495S/93N probably for the same reason; traffic lights along MA 114.
Like MapQuest, I believe most GPS' on the market has settings that can be adjusted. Your unit may be set on an
All-Expressway mode.
Fixed link: http://goo.gl/maps/zdrdk.
Quote from: 1 on December 19, 2013, 02:29:12 PM
Fixed link: http://goo.gl/maps/zdrdk.
If those are indeed was your origin & destination points (Middleton to Lawrence); then your GPS telling you to get on 128 (via 114
East) to get to your destination is definitely out to lunch.
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 19, 2013, 03:23:49 PM
Quote from: 1 on December 19, 2013, 02:29:12 PM
Fixed link: http://goo.gl/maps/zdrdk.
If those are indeed was your origin & destination points (Middleton to Lawrence); then your GPS telling you to get on 128 (via 114 East) to get to your destination is definitely out to lunch.
I was originally in Peabody, and it told me to take 128. We continued on 114 west. It kept telling us to turn (probably towards 93 at this point), and when we got to this point, that's when it finally told us to use 114.
Quote from: 1 on December 19, 2013, 03:36:24 PM
Quote from: PHLBOS on December 19, 2013, 03:23:49 PMIf those are indeed was your origin & destination points (Middleton to Lawrence); then your GPS telling you to get on 128 (via 114 East) to get to your destination is definitely out to lunch.
I was originally in Peabody, and it told me to take 128. We continued on 114 west. It kept telling us to turn (probably towards 93 at this point), and when we got to this point, that's when it finally told us to use 114.
Ah, that explains it. The
Peabody reference is key here and makes the GPS routing via 128S/95S/93N/495N more logical. The reason for such routing being that MA 114 is littered with traffic lights and also has many sections where there's only a single through lane w/few or
no passing zones. I traveled that stretch and gotten frustrated when approaching a
slow-moving vehicle.
As stated earlier, you might want to check your GPS settings to see if it's deliberately filtering out non-highways and adjust accordingly.
Problem solved.
Quote from: vdeane on December 18, 2013, 04:01:25 PM
It didn't take long on our DC trip for my parents to figure out that I was more accurate than the GPS. It sent us down US 1 to Mount Vernon rather than the George Washington Parkway for some reason.
Double fail.
Many more signalized intersections along U.S. 1 (none on the Parkway south of the corporate limits of Alexandria), and much nicer scenery on the Parkway.
Posted speed limit on the Parkway is 45 MPH - sometimes strictly enforced by the U.S. Park Police.
Any mapping software has problems when it doesn't take into consideration details we all know about a route. A good example is I-5 vs SR-99 from Wheeler Ridge to Sacramento. I-5 is only 7 miles shorter. Most software will show I-5 as the "better" route, yet SR-99 has more services and more lanes. If one route is a minute faster or a mile shorter, the software chooses it. Sometimes those routes aren't faster, at all.
Quote from: sdmichael on December 20, 2013, 12:14:36 PM
Any mapping software has problems when it doesn't take into consideration details we all know about a route. A good example is I-5 vs SR-99 from Wheeler Ridge to Sacramento. I-5 is only 7 miles shorter. Most software will show I-5 as the "better" route, yet SR-99 has more services and more lanes. If one route is a minute faster or a mile shorter, the software chooses it. Sometimes those routes aren't faster, at all.
... and more local traffic, which can really add up in a four-lane section. 5 vs 99 can be a pretty complex decision - I usually go with 99 when I am going to Sacramento, or sometimes I will even cut across on 120 to get to the Bay Area... 5 when I just want to make time.
then there's also 101.
Quote from: sdmichael on December 20, 2013, 12:14:36 PM
Any mapping software has problems when it doesn't take into consideration details we all know about a route. A good example is I-5 vs SR-99 from Wheeler Ridge to Sacramento. I-5 is only 7 miles shorter. Most software will show I-5 as the "better" route, yet SR-99 has more services and more lanes. If one route is a minute faster or a mile shorter, the software chooses it. Sometimes those routes aren't faster, at all.
I have seen more than a few GPS-aided long trips that involve passing around Washington, D.C. where the software tries to route them through the city instead of around by way of the Capital Beltway.
That is
always bad advice for people that do not intimately know the D.C. network of streets and highways.
Most GPS receivers offer "fastest/quickest" and "shortest" - which are not always the same. Then there's the "speed limit" data - I just updated my Garmin 1390LMT with maps dated 2013.40 (I think) - and it STILL has the wrong speed limit for a number of roads that were changed here over 3 years ago.
It helps to have at least a little bit of knowledge about where you are headed - perhaps scout the trip in Google Maps first so you can see "oh, yes - I-495 goes around DC - and I think I'd like to go around it rather than through it." So when the GPS starts squawking, you can ignore it, knowing that (eventually) it'll get back on track on the other side of the beltway.
Trust your GPS implicitly and it'll get you close, it'll get you lost, or it'll get you hurt.
Here's another GPS fail, this time in PA:
http://www.weather.com/video/man-drives-into-river-blames-gps-49049
There is nothing wrong with GPS. Provided you have a good signal, the GPS can provide you with an damn accurate location of where you are. The problem comes when the people purchase a new GPS, but never take the time to update the firmware or the maps data. Why, it might just mean they have to perform the update overnight! Perhaps it's a good thing that people now rely on their smartphone and get the latest data from Google Maps or MapQuest (but not Apple Maps :pan: ) where the data is pretty up to date.
Look, what frustrates me is when people gets the latest gizmos two days before a trip, then try to use them without ever checking the manual. Then, they wonder WTF is wrong with the device. (And, I won't get into how annoyed I get with people who purchase a product, use it for the vacation, then return it for a refund after the trip is over).
Here is an old thread (https://www.aaroads.com/forum/index.php?topic=10239.msg242487#msg242487) on someone who was lead astray by the GPS in Death Valley.
In the fall of 2012 the interchange at the end of I-94/I-69 in Port Huron, Michigan was reconfigured. Previously, traffic in the left lane of the two-lane freeway stayed in the U.S.; traffic in the right lane followed the Blue Water Bridge into Canada. Now, the freeway has been widened to four lanes; the two right lanes stay in the U.S. and the two left lanes go to Canada. Despite many signs with legends like "Follow signs, ignore GPS" many drivers still blindly obey their un-updated GPS units and inadvertendly end up in Canada. They then have to clear Canadian customs before returning and clearing American customs. If they have contraband they then get into big trouble.
http://www.michigan.gov/mdot/0,4616,7-151-63670_63671-305368--,00.html (http://www.michigan.gov/mdot/0,4616,7-151-63670_63671-305368--,00.html)
http://michiganmedicalmarijuana.org/topic/42056-drug-dogs-at-blue-water-bridge-port-huron/ (http://michiganmedicalmarijuana.org/topic/42056-drug-dogs-at-blue-water-bridge-port-huron/)
The problem with GPS is faith. Generally, if you're confused you can just go off course and the thing will correct automatically and guide you back. My problem with it isn't that it's unreliable; it's that people want to use it as a replacement for thinking. Maybe it's just because I'm getting old, but I think using technology to replace reasonable mental functions is an abuse of the mind. If you can't remember or print out directions and follow them, I question whether you're qualified to drive a car.
I do see the folly in my thoughts. I sit here with no knowledge of growing food and rely on others to do that for me, while I despair the loss of knowledge and its replacement through technology. Maybe us old people should learn to grow food and treat our own injuries before we judge those who outsource knowledge. Maybe outsourcing to technology such plebeian functions as navigation, and some day driving, can free our minds to focus on more important things and accomplish something more grand than knowing how to get from Cleveland to Atlanta.
With that PA one: Yeah it may have been night when the guy turned down the road, but even so the characteristics of the roadway (gravel, narrow and shrubbery closeby) should be some kind of clue that it doesn't seem right.
GPS is a great tool, but it cannot be followed blindly. The driver has got to take some responsibility for knowing where s/he is going...
I am reminded of my recent trip that I took along the coast. One leg had me traveling from Port Angeles, WA to Westport, WA. The recommended route had me traveling east/south on US-101, then WA-108, WA-8, and US-12 to Westport. The preferred route which I ended up taking was west/south on the US-101.
The difference was 18 minutes and 21 miles.
Electronic mapping/directions have always been a bit suspect. I've seen directions where one can enter the NJ Turnpike from any overpass and where one can enter the NJ Turnpike thru the back of a service area. When one enters Delaware via the Del. Mem. Bridge headed towards I-95 South, directions in the past used to say use Exit 5...which is actually the exit for Rt. 141 at the same location. I could tell when people were following those directions, as they would get into the exit lane then quickly swerve out of it at the last second realizing the error (and I'm sure those people blamed Delaware for the error, not the online mapping tool).
A big error I discovered recently when getting directions for someone...After one crosses the GWB into NJ headed for the NJ Turnpike, the directions say to keep left at the toll plaza to use the Express EZ Pass Lanes. That's fine...if you have EZ Pass. If you are intending on using cash and go thru that lane, the toll taker as you exit the Turnpike isn't going to care what those directions say...you're going to be paying the maximum toll.
When one is on 295 South in NJ getting near Delaware, and they switch from the right to the left lane for no reason whatsoever, guaranteed they will have a GPS on their windshield, and guaranteed that GPS just said "In 2 miles, keep left for...", even though both lanes take you directly to the bridge.
I will look up and print out directions before I leave the house, but I also use GSV to see the critical points along the route to verify what the directions are saying. The online directions can still be a bit confusing with some odd directions, and it's nice to see what is actually out there to see what the directions are actually trying to convey. And even then, I'll generally re-write the directions in the manner I like seeing them. It's good to know I need a specific exit to get from one road to another. I don't care if I need to follow a ramp for 0.6 miles...I can figure that out myself.
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on May 25, 2014, 10:14:13 PM
Here's another GPS fail, this time in PA:
http://www.weather.com/video/man-drives-into-river-blames-gps-49049
And yet, these people walk (or drive in this case) among us. :hmm:
Apparently, the US Government has a page to submit fixes (http://markholtz.info/mapfix). Of course, it can take a while. It took at least two updates between the Lincoln, CA bypass opening and the change to be reflected in Garmin's maps. :pan:
Quote from: wxfree on May 26, 2014, 01:40:03 AM
My problem with it isn't that it's unreliable; it's that people want to use it as a replacement for thinking.
"Well if I'd wanted to think, I'd-a stuck with a paper map and reading street signs!"
Quote from: rickmastfan67 on May 25, 2014, 10:14:13 PM
Here's another GPS fail, this time in PA:
http://www.weather.com/video/man-drives-into-river-blames-gps-49049
People are so stupid... This immediately reminded me of this clip from The Office: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIakZtDmMgo
Quote from: kkt on May 27, 2014, 04:32:00 PM
Quote from: wxfree on May 26, 2014, 01:40:03 AM
My problem with it isn't that it's unreliable; it's that people want to use it as a replacement for thinking.
"Well if I'd wanted to think, I'd-a stuck with a paper map and reading street signs!"
Amen on all counts.
Quote from: doorknob60 on May 28, 2014, 10:28:39 PM
People are so stupid... This immediately reminded me of this clip from The Office: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BIakZtDmMgo
Lol that's so funny :-D
NY should ban the use of GPS for Trucks and Busesonly due to number of trucks ripped open on Parkways. (Trucks are banned on State Owned/Maintained Parkways with some exceptions (Grand Central Pky Exit 5 to Triboro Bridge, Pky's South of Sunrise Highway In Nassau and Suffolk Counties), And Parkways owned and Maintained By NYC DOT (Ocean Parkway, Eastern Parkway Brooklyn; Pelham Parkway Bronx; Utopia Parkway, Midland Parkway Queens).
I think the worst GPS fail I've ever been presented with was Google Maps telling me to make a U-turn on the Bay Bridge.
Quote from: mapman1071 on June 24, 2014, 08:02:10 PM
NY should ban the use of GPS for Trucks and Busesonly due to number of trucks ripped open on Parkways. (Trucks are banned on State Owned/Maintained Parkways with some exceptions (Grand Central Pky Exit 5 to Triboro Bridge, Pky's South of Sunrise Highway In Nassau and Suffolk Counties), And Parkways owned and Maintained By NYC DOT (Ocean Parkway, Eastern Parkway Brooklyn; Pelham Parkway Bronx; Utopia Parkway, Midland Parkway Queens).
IMHO, a better solution would be for the government to require that ALL GPS units provide information about clearances and other restrictions, not just the super expensive "commercial driver" ones. It's not like New York City is the only major metro area with these issues - as an example, consider Storrow Drive in Boston.
Quote from: roadman on June 25, 2014, 09:05:51 AM
Quote from: mapman1071 on June 24, 2014, 08:02:10 PM
NY should ban the use of GPS for Trucks and Busesonly due to number of trucks ripped open on Parkways. (Trucks are banned on State Owned/Maintained Parkways with some exceptions (Grand Central Pky Exit 5 to Triboro Bridge, Pky's South of Sunrise Highway In Nassau and Suffolk Counties), And Parkways owned and Maintained By NYC DOT (Ocean Parkway, Eastern Parkway Brooklyn; Pelham Parkway Bronx; Utopia Parkway, Midland Parkway Queens).
IMHO, a better solution would be for the government to require that ALL GPS units provide information about clearances and other restrictions, not just the super expensive "commercial driver" ones. It's not like New York City is the only major metro area with these issues - as an example, consider Storrow Drive in Boston.
How about the government just post signs on the roads warning of low clearances and weight restrictions, and teach drivers to obey the signs as part of their training to get licenses?
Oh wait, they already do.
Government legislating to cater to the limitations of the lowest common denominator is not the way to go.
HB, as was once said, "you can't fix stupid". These drivers are morons who either forget their training, are ignorant of their surroundings (or their truck), or just don't give a shit. Then they hit a bridge.
And that doesn't even include the ones who bought and paid for their CDLs (like those who contributed to former S.O.S., later Governor George Ryan in Illinois). Only god knows how many of those are still on the road.
Quote from: ZLoth on May 27, 2014, 04:49:14 AM
I am reminded of my recent trip that I took along the coast. One leg had me traveling from Port Angeles, WA to Westport, WA. The recommended route had me traveling east/south on US-101, then WA-108, WA-8, and US-12 to Westport. The preferred route which I ended up taking was west/south on the US-101.
The difference was 18 minutes and 21 miles.
Either I'm misreading your post, or this isn't a GPS fail. Going down the east side of the peninsula is 21 miles shorter, so if that's the route the GPS recommended, it was doing its job just fine. But the west side would certainly be more scenic, so if you preferred that way, I certainly wouldn't blame you.
Quote from: roadman on June 25, 2014, 09:05:51 AM
Quote from: mapman1071 on June 24, 2014, 08:02:10 PM
NY should ban the use of GPS for Trucks and Busesonly due to number of trucks ripped open on Parkways. (Trucks are banned on State Owned/Maintained Parkways with some exceptions (Grand Central Pky Exit 5 to Triboro Bridge, Pky's South of Sunrise Highway In Nassau and Suffolk Counties), And Parkways owned and Maintained By NYC DOT (Ocean Parkway, Eastern Parkway Brooklyn; Pelham Parkway Bronx; Utopia Parkway, Midland Parkway Queens).
IMHO, a better solution would be for the government to require that ALL GPS units provide information about clearances and other restrictions, not just the super expensive "commercial driver" ones. It's not like New York City is the only major metro area with these issues - as an example, consider Storrow Drive in Boston.
The state legislature would also have to require the use of commercial driver GPS in rental moving trucks, since issues most commonly occur concurrent with the fall move-in for Boston's many colleges and universities.
Quote from: hbelkins on June 25, 2014, 10:29:09 AMHow about the government just post signs on the roads warning of low clearances and weight restrictions, and teach drivers to obey the signs as part of their training to get licenses?
Oh wait, they already do.
Government legislating to cater to the limitations of the lowest common denominator is not the way to go.
Agreed. The aforementioned Storrow Drive has the chain-mounted clearance signs at most (if not all) entrances, that still doesn't stop the stupid.
Devil's Advocate Mode ON
How many of these overheight-vehicle restricted roads/routes have a signed/marked truck routes in the immediate vicinities?
One has to wonder if alternative truck routes were indeed signed; would the bridge/overpass incursions still take occur?
Devil's Advocate Mode OFF
Quote from: PHLBOS on June 26, 2014, 01:03:50 PM
Devil's Advocate Mode ON
How many of these overheight-vehicle restricted roads/routes have a signed/marked truck routes in the immediate vicinities?
One has to wonder if alternative truck routes were indeed signed; would the bridge/overpass incursions still take occur?
Devil's Advocate Mode OFF
I tend to agree. While there may still be some accidents by those not paying attention, the number of the incidents would be significantly lower.
And it isn't enough to simply sign truck routes the way that I typically see with those small white signs with arrows that guide trucks simply to turn on some street without necessarily leading them to their destination.
One example: CA-110 Arroyo Parkway does not allow trucks over 3 tons. When you're heading north on the 110 Harbor Freeway you can clearly see signs saying NO TRUCKS on the BGSs leading to the Arroyo Seco and TRUCK ROUTE on the signs leading to the Hollywood or Santa Ana Freeways. The problem is, there is no guidance for trucks to tell them how to specifically get to Pasadena. Now, it's debatable what the best way between Downtown LA and Pasadena would be if the Arroyo Seco were unavailable, and I'm sure that the NIMBYs would be very upset if their street were signed as a specific truck route that all of the trucks would follow.
Some truck drivers can't be bothered with reading signs and are determined to find out the hard way if their truck & trailer can fit under something. I've seen plenty of commercial signs (pole & building mounted) and awnings either damaged or destroyed by trucks simply because some driver insisted on driving his truck under it or side swiping it.
Back on the GPS Fail topic, the fault with every GPS failure is ultimately rooted in human error. GPS technology works very well and is continually becoming more accurate.
The biggest problem with GPS is human laziness. Too many people don't want to bother studying the route of a road trip they're about to take before taking it. They just want to tap the destination into their smart phones and hit the road, blindly following their phone's instructions. If those drivers had at least some idea of their general route they would know if their navigation software ran into a bug and was trying to take them on a wild goose chase.
I don't need GPS controlled navigation software to give me directions. However, some features can be very useful -like route adjustments based on traffic flow. Unfortunately the navigation software is often not clear on why a detour is being suggested.
Sunday evening my girlfriend and I were driving North out of Houston on I-45. She had Google Maps navigation app running. Near The Woodlands the app suggested we leave I-45 and get on some other road. I muttered, "we're not getting off I-45 until the US-287 split in Ennis." We ignored the re-route suggestion. A pretty bad multiple vehicle accident was a couple miles ahead. Thankfully the traffic on I-45 Northbound wasn't too heavy and left 2 or 3 lanes were still open. It was only when we passed the accident scene that I understood why the navigation was doing what it did. The re-route suggestion would have made more sense if some description of the problem ahead was provided. I'm not going to just blindly follow a re-route direction without any reason why.
So, I'm watching this scenario play out, knowing exactly what all these people are doing. Use the link below for a general map of the area:
https://goo.gl/maps/ojJm4RritW42
There's an accident on 76 East at the 295 North Ramp. The ramp's temporarily shut down, and traffic on 76 East, especially the right two lanes, are at a standstill. This prohibits traffic on 130 South to access 76 East, as well as traffic coming off of Market Street onto that ramp, due to the traffic jam.
On 130 South, some people think they can outsmart everyone else. They continue on 130 South about a 1/4 mile and either:
A) Turn Left onto Market Street
B) Continue past Market Street just a little bit to a rarely used U-turn lane to 130 North to make a right onto Market Street. Several cars are in line doing this.
C) Continue down to the next light, using a jughandle that never backs up on a Saturday afternoon to return to 130 North to make a right onto Market Street. The jughandle is backed up due to all the motorists doing this.
In all 3 cases, their GPS is probably telling them: "Hey, you lost SOB...recalculating! Here you go". And what are those GPSs doing? Simply leading them back into the traffic jam that they are trying to avoid!
Is it a GPS fail? Technically, not really. But without additional information available to the user or the GPS, it just leads them back to the point that's causing the issue in the first place!
The problem was that years ago, people had to follow signs to know where to go. So, you go to see all those signs warning you of low bridges, weight limits, detours, etc.
Now, that drivers just follow what the GPS tells them, there's no need to follow the signs when the GPS will tell you when to turn. So, they just zone out and stop following the signs. It's a symptom of helping drivers spend less time on signs and them not spending as much time looking at signs.
Quote from: Bobby5280 on July 08, 2014, 02:39:07 PM
Some truck drivers can't be bothered with reading signs and are determined to find out the hard way if their truck & trailer can fit under something. I've seen plenty of commercial signs (pole & building mounted) and awnings either damaged or destroyed by trucks simply because some driver insisted on driving his truck under it or side swiping it.
Back on the GPS Fail topic, the fault with every GPS failure is ultimately rooted in human error. GPS technology works very well and is continually becoming more accurate.
The biggest problem with GPS is human laziness. Too many people don't want to bother studying the route of a road trip they're about to take before taking it. They just want to tap the destination into their smart phones and hit the road, blindly following their phone's instructions. If those drivers had at least some idea of their general route they would know if their navigation software ran into a bug and was trying to take them on a wild goose chase.
I don't need GPS controlled navigation software to give me directions. However, some features can be very useful -like route adjustments based on traffic flow. Unfortunately the navigation software is often not clear on why a detour is being suggested.
Sunday evening my girlfriend and I were driving North out of Houston on I-45. She had Google Maps navigation app running. Near The Woodlands the app suggested we leave I-45 and get on some other road. I muttered, "we're not getting off I-45 until the US-287 split in Ennis." We ignored the re-route suggestion. A pretty bad multiple vehicle accident was a couple miles ahead. Thankfully the traffic on I-45 Northbound wasn't too heavy and left 2 or 3 lanes were still open. It was only when we passed the accident scene that I understood why the navigation was doing what it did. The re-route suggestion would have made more sense if some description of the problem ahead was provided. I'm not going to just blindly follow a re-route direction without any reason why.
The software only knows the slowdown is there.. Not the reason.. Waze gets updates from drivers.. I notice Google mapping will say "as reported by Waze app"
I use Waze and Google apps on trips.. Because I don't like the maps in Waze. I like the info from other drivers in Waze. Although if I am using Pandora for music the 3 apps running kills battery and charger can't keep up