Originally Posted by
CargoDane
As for the watch: A barometer is easier, cheaper, and packs into a smaller size than using chips and antennas for Beidou, Glonass, Galileo and so on. THe fact that there is a barometer doesn't mean it is then better at finding your altitude. A barometer is very useful for actually checking the atmospheric pressure and sudden drops in it.
More stuff you have no idea about. The Garmin watches and cycling units have supported GLONASS and Galileo for a while.
Garmin rates barometric data as better.
Originally Posted by
CargoDane
I mentioned that because it was in your two decades old article writing about equipment from BEFORE GPS was UNSCRAMBLED!
Do you read your own damn "proof"? Sheesh.
Thanks for the head-up, though: You're merely a copy/paster who doesn't read your own damn "evidence" - to the extent that you don't even check the date of it.
Still ridiculous.
You didn't provide
any links (until late). If you don't like the links,
provide better ones rather than blathering incoherently.
Originally Posted by
CargoDane
First you argue that you can't have glonass, galileo etc. in a small cycle computer,
I never said this, Talk about moving goal posts!
Originally Posted by
CargoDane
You said that GPS was bad for altitude.
Garmin rates barometric data as better.
Originally Posted by
CargoDane
You said that GPS was bad for altitude. THen moved on to claim that small cycle computers couldn't be as good as pro gear and hence altitude was still bad.
???? This is just clueless.
Small devices
aren't as good as "survey grade" devices that use D-GPS and WAAS.
https://mapasyst.extension.org/what-...vey-grade-gps/