uk speed camera .cab for tomtom

[Celtictiger]

Hi guys
Can any 1 remember the cab file needed for speed camera detection in uk with tomtom 5.2

_^.^_

[Celtictiger]

what software can i use on xda exec to alert me of cameras etc


_^.^_

[ice_coffee]

go to www.pocketgpsworld.com or .co.uk ??? and follow the instructions to get the speed cam database installed and working with TOMTOM

[sh500]

what software can i use on xda exec to alert me of cameras etc


_^.^_

A free download for TomTom; seems to work great- warns you (visual and audio) of speed limits, cameras or anything else (POIs) you wish to have warnings/alerts for.

http://checkpoint.oabsoftware.nl/index.php?MainURL=body-download.htm

[Carnivor]

i thought checkpoint was only for TT3 as in TT5 you can pretty much the same using POI, alright the warnings aint quite the same but its less overhead

[sh500]

i thought checkpoint was only for TT3 as in TT5 you can pretty much the same using POI, alright the warnings aint quite the same but its less overhead

True about the overhead with using CheckPOInt, although the latest version is designed to run with TTN v5.

Does TomTom give an audible warning? I think this is the main reason for having CheckPOInt- not an important feature for for everyone I should imagine.

[Gajet]

Tomtom 5 will give you 1 audio warning based on distance to the camera. Checkpoint will give you 2 audio warnings based on time to arrive at the camera. However you should set up Tomtom to display the visual warning and checkpoint to manage the audio warnings only or Tomtom will get slow screen refreshes. Personally I don't bother with Checkpoint as I don't see the value anymore, although I loved it for Tomtom 3.

I should also point out the the Pocketgps.co.uk will be charging for future updates to their database at £2 a time or £19 for a yearly subscription to their site. However it is an outstanding database and they do deserve to start charging, especially as they intend to plow the cash back into maintaining the database to an even higher standard.

[Carnivor]

just checked em, they're already charging, BUG**R!, i wanted one last update before it kicked in, ahh well off i go to find the wifes credit card :lol:

[griffog]

just checked em, they're already charging, BUG**R!, i wanted one last update before it kicked in, ahh well off i go to find the wifes credit card :lol:
Aw c'mon £2 is all we're askin' (unless you've contributed prior to 1st Jan 06 or donated in the past via PayPal in which case you get Free lifetime subs.

[JRH]

Aw c'mon £2 is all we're askin' (unless you've contributed prior to 1st Jan 06 or donated in the past via PayPal in which case you get Free lifetime subs.
Wish you luck with your charging scheme. Personally, it put me right off your site...

[griffog]

Fair enough, it hasn't affacted the majority and the most of those who were eligible for free subs have applied and are sorted now.

If you realised how much work goes into it and the improvements we have deployed and have in the pipeline I'm sure you'd think different.

Did you ever contribute a location?

[JRH]

If you realised how much work goes into it and the improvements we have deployed and have in the pipeline I'm sure you'd think different.

Did you ever contribute a location?
All the locations I saw were already listed.

I'm probably more aware of the work involved than you presume. I have maintained and provided public information thru websites in the past. Please tell me, when you started the database did you do it as a personal project, a public service, or with the intention to profit one day?

Now that you have made the database a commercial enterprise are you now complying with the many legalities of running such an enterprise, including insurance against possible claims regarding what you are supplying? And if it's not a commercial enterprise then surely you are fund raising and the better way is to request funds, through advertising, or a premium product vs a basic one (perhaps like DVD Profiler)?

BTW, how does your subscription policy tie in with this statement on your website "It is the joint policy of both the UK Department for Transport and the police to make the locations of these cameras as well known as possible."?

As I said before, I wish you luck but I'm not impressed and will be seeking alternatives before "subscribing" to your site...

[griffog]

We've been a limited company for some time. When we started it was a hobby, but when it started requiring 30hrs a week each of input it outgrew that philosophy.

We're DPA registered, have PL insurance and have complied with all relevant legislation.

I wish you luck in your search.

[JRH]

We've been a limited company for some time. When we started it was a hobby, but when it started requiring 30hrs a week each of input it outgrew that philosophy.

We're DPA registered, have PL insurance and have complied with all relevant legislation.

I wish you luck in your search.

I appreciate your prompt reply to my questions but you seem to have overlooked answering this point I made:

"BTW, how does your subscription policy tie in with this statement on your website "It is the joint policy of both the UK Department for Transport and the police to make the locations of these cameras as well known as possible."?"

In my search I found another company offering a camera database. They seem to differ from yourselves in that they have a team driving around the country verifying camera locations and also email subscribers whenever the database is updated. Their link is http://www.trafcam.com/database.htm. Are these things which you intend to do also? Or will you continue to rely on user contributions and produce only monthly database updates?

It might persuade people to subscribe if you give them reasons to do so, explain the benefits, and tell us exactly what has changed that now warrents a subscription. :)

[griffog]

I don't see how our having a subscription service affects that policy? Despite the stated aim of the UK DoT you will quickly find that they make it far from easy, if they did then we would not have a service worth using. All the other systems that have succeeded are subscription based.

We are already implementing a verification process and are preparing to offer live updates rather than monthly incremental ones. Our ability to map Mobile haunts far surpasses that of any other commercial database thanks to the huge number of users and we are now using a scoring system that allows trusted users to have their reports added more quickly than those that require verification.

Trafcam does not integrate fully with nav systems unlike ours and their PocketPC offering at £79 is rather more expensive than ours at £19. We also offer lifetime membership to the first member who reports a previously unrecorded fixed camera (subject to verification).

We additionally offer a utility that integrates with TomTom on PocketPC and GO units to capture locations easily and submit them for verification.

[JRH]

I don't see how our having a subscription service affects that policy?

We are already implementing a verification process and are preparing to offer live updates rather than monthly incremental ones.

Trafcam does not integrate fully with nav systems unlike ours and their PocketPC offering at £79 is rather more expensive than ours at £19. We also offer lifetime membership to the first member who reports a previously unrecorded fixed camera (subject to verification).

We additionally offer a utility that integrates with TomTom on PocketPC and GO units to capture locations easily and submit them for verification.

All very good points. I'll address them below:

1. It removes a free source of information.
2. Surely the time to charge is AFTER you have implemented them?
3. Yes, more expensive but offering more NOW. Plus the charge is 49/yr after 1st year. £30 is for software (see below). Palm users pay less in the first year.
4. Trafcam does integrate with the mainstream satnav apps.
5. Trafcam software allows you to spot cameras even if not running navigation software such as tomtom.
6. The purpose of your utility is designed to your advantage.

[griffog]

1. It removes a free source of information.
Clearly, I am not arguing that.
2. Surely the time to charge is AFTER you have implemented them?
We are already implementing many, many more versions covering a multitude of nav systems is one.
3. Yes, more expensive but offering more NOW. Plus the charge is 49/yr after 1st year. £30 is for software (see below). Palm users pay less in the first year.
How does it offer more, we have greater coverage and our system allows the cameras to overlay on the map, Trafcam uses a background app that opos up over the navigation system when an alert is triggered, that's not the optimum solution.
4. Trafcam does integrate with the mainstream satnav apps.
Integrate no, works in conjunction with, yes.
5. Trafcam software allows you to spot cameras even if not running navigation software such as tomtom.
Because it's an entirely separate app, the vast majority want the data displayed on the map so they can see where the hazard is so run the navigation all the time.
6. The purpose of your utility is designed to your advantage.
Absolutely, but it makes the user experience better and if you spot a new canmera you can capture and report is far more easily and get the free sub as the reward.

If you prefer Trafcam then I'm glad you like it. I have no aspirations that we are the only solution available but for the majority of users ours is the better and the most popular by far.

[JRH]

At the moment i have no preference as I am still exploring alternatives. Trafcam was just one that came up on a search.

We could go on debating the pro's and con's of your offering for many posts to come, but I suspect with little to gain. I still maintain that you have brought in a charge very quickly, with no apparent improved benefits as yet, and that is not good for customers. I also think it would do wonders for your credibility with the public at large if you were to:

1. Remove the charge until such time as there are specific identifiable benefits.
2. Introduce a scheme of premium vs basic product charges.
3. Clearly promote what improvements are being made (or have, if that is the case).
4. Implement frequent database updates vs current monthly ones.

I'll leave it at that...

[SiliconS]

On the other side of the fence...
I have no problem at all paying £2 to PocketGPSWorld for their database. It's been the database of choice for many many months (years?) and if they need to start charging a nominal fee because of the overhead of providing it then that seems entirely justifiable to me.

JRH, if you want to spend at least double the price for the cheapest alternative then that's your prerogative. You can vote with your credit card and see how you get on. :)

I rarely download the DB myself -- my last update was about a year ago -- but if by contributing to the database I can earn a lifetime's free updates then I've got a financial incentive to help maintain the information. (I never have before.) If the quality of the database continues to improve because more people are contributing then we all win; the only decision we need to make is whether we contribute or pay.

Time will tell whether PGW have made the right or wrong decision for themselves, but I can't really see how any reasonable person can object to their plan. £2 is nothing these days. I'm surprised you're putting griffog under such pressure to justify himself, JRH! :)

PS. There's a list of db changes on the PGW homepage that were brought in with the new charging scheme. Do they not comprise 'specific identifiable benefits'?

[DT39]

I've used the data base while it was free and will continue to use it for the very modest £2 or £19 yearly not a problem. Just think if it saves you a speeding ticket then it's well worth it, not that you should be speeding anyway!

[JRH]

JRH, if you want to spend at least double the price for the cheapest alternative then that's your prerogative. You can vote with your credit card and see how you get on. :)

I'm surprised you're putting griffog under such pressure to justify himself, JRH! :)

PS. There's a list of db changes on the PGW homepage that were brought in with the new charging scheme. Do they not comprise 'specific identifiable benefits'?

I said I would explore alternatives. You seem to think I have already made the decision to buy Trafcam?

No pressure applied. Darren responded, thus inviting further comments. Initially I just said it put me right off his site.

DB changes alone do not equate to the benefits I highlighted in other posts - such as email update notification.

I appreciate you taking the time to participate in this thread but please do not try to flame the issues discussed. I presented my POV, answered questions, and rebuked some claims made. I wished Darren success and that still stands, but as with any business there will people who like what he does, and those that don't. I just happen to be one of the latter...

[SiliconS]

please do not try to flame the issues discussed
:shock:

[tyl]

SiliconS wasnt flaming m8.


For my own part, Im wa....y dissapointed that they are charging now :( .
The last time I downloaded the DB in September 05, it was free.

But £2 aint much for an update. And the lifetime membership for submitting an update is pretty cool!

[Gajet]

Actually I'd like to throw a little fuel on the fire if Darren is still reading. I have used your database for quite a long time and have allways been impressed with it's quality. However I can't help but noticing that the last free update that was offered seems to have a number of fake mobile sites on it, some of which are blatent due to having completely the wrong speed limit.
I have to drive through Hopwood just south of Birmingham everyday and to hear "mobile 40" from my Exec everytime now on the 60 mph A441 is just a tad annoying, especially as I have never seen a mobile camera there in the last 5 years. I have spotted others too.
Now there is a financial incentive to try and provide new camera locations has it provided an incentive to provide fake locations? How strict are new locations verified? My example shows that even the speed limit was wrong which makes me assume that this location has never been verified.
I would be happy to subscribe for a continued quality service, however I am concerned that I am now being asked to pay for something of lesser quality then I used to get for free.

Or was it just a case of making the last free update rubbish to encourage subscriptions to further updates?

[griffog]

Actually I'd like to throw a little fuel on the fire if Darren is still reading. I have used your database for quite a long time and have allways been impressed with it's quality. However I can't help but noticing that the last free update that was offered seems to have a number of fake mobile sites on it, some of which are blatent due to having completely the wrong speed limit.
If you let me know the ID's I'll investigate. Mobile sites are not added until a number of reports from different users are received so this shouldn't happen.
Now there is a financial incentive to try and provide new camera locations has it provided an incentive to provide fake locations? How strict are new locations verified? My example shows that even the speed limit was wrong which makes me assume that this location has never been verified.
Mobile sites do not qualify for free subscriptions precisely because of this issue. Maliciously posted fake locations should be weeded out through our weighting and verification but of course mistakes do happen!
I would be happy to subscribe for a continued quality service, however I am concerned that I am now being asked to pay for something of lesser quality then I used to get for free.

Or was it just a case of making the last free update rubbish to encourage subscriptions to further updates?
That would of course be madness and we would never do that, it would have caused more harm than good. It is the quality of our database that we pride ourselves on and much of the income raised is being used to develop new features and further improve quality and update frequency.

[Gajet]

OK you can have Mobile:8242@40 for first instance
The limit for this stretch of road is 60mph and I pass it nearly everyday, (I do get some days off :) )
It is close to a regular site for the DVLA to do tax checks, but not really close enough for me to think someone mistook this.

[griffog]

Thanks, I'll look up the history for that location.

[MagicUK]

Few bucks saved in my opinion! But is this WM5 compatiable as the site seems to reflect PPC2000/2003

[griffog]

Few bucks saved in my opinion! But is this WM5 compatiable as the site seems to reflect PPC2000/2003
Is what WM5 Compatible? Our database is OS independent, it's compatible with a range of nav systems.

[MagicUK]

Darren,

Thanks for the response and the interest.

Okay I am now a registered user and am going to do a little more reading on your site as I have obviously misunderstood.

I will post if I have any furthur questions.