GO 740 LIVE traffic service?

[gatorguy]

Two of us with 740's have been testing for the past week, and have it sorted with 99% certainty. As soon as "the other half" posts his review, DHN will probably point you to it. Should explain all.

Just a note that in at least one instance that I can verify (I was there), my TT740 did not report a significant traffic issue due to an accident, while my MSN traffic did, tho too late to avoid it. So no reactive traffic reporting is foolproof or necessarily better than another in all instances. In fact I'm beginning to be of the opinion that traffic reporting from any service very seldom does anything to change the route you should be using. Probably a waste of money for the majority of users.

 

[NorFowl]

Two of us with 740's have been testing for the past week, and have it sorted with 99% certainty.

Excellent! I'm itching to see what the data say.

So no reactive traffic reporting is foolproof or necessarily better than another in all instances.

No doubt this is true. I can see the truckers' cabs sprouting alternative devices like mushrooms. All this stuff is evolving and integrating quickly.

However, If we csn get something usually reliable, it would help me a lot. Even without this info, here in Denver you can sometimes "smell" a jamb coming and hit the "Alternative" sequence to save a lot of hassle.

Biggest problem--outside of getting caught by surprise--is not enough off-ramps, so ya gotta slug it out for a while. Knowing just a minute or two ahead of time (beyond what my nose tells me) can make a big difference. Of course, how well you can take advantage of alternative routes depends heavily on the size of the vehicle you're driving.

 

[NorFowl]

US version of "TomTom Traffic Control Center" video

In this link tomtom says that they do not broadcast slowness that is predicted by IQroutes.

Very enlightening "behind the scenes" video for a Newbie. I recommend to all who are wondering about how TT's traffic reporting works (in Europe, FYI)

I wonder what it would take to have them do the same type of video for the US.

 

[mvl]

So no reactive traffic reporting is foolproof or necessarily better than another in all instances.

I agree, as I thought about my PLUS traffic example earlier, it's probably better from a routing perspective that PLUS erroneously reported that a clearing out jam was gone. This way, drivers would be routed that direction and get there after it had fully cleared up.

I'm particularly intrigued by Trafficcast's predictive traffic modeling that tells Tomtom the expected traffic for the next 48 hours. I've already found that IQroutes processes based on the traffic at the time it expects you to be at a road, not the current traffic conditions. I'm curious if you saw evidence of this in your routing.

In fact I'm beginning to be of the opinion that traffic reporting from any service very seldom does anything to change the route you should be using.

I disagree - in older, less centrally planned cities like Boston and NYC there are 10 different ways to go anywhere, I suspect many European cities are the same. There are plenty of confusing, secret "backroads" available to avoid jams and save significant time, all dependent on which ones are congested. A well informed traffic GPS could conceivably do this much better than experienced driver's "guesses" today.

 

[gatorguy]

MVL, when I say no traffic sytem really adds much to the computation of a proper route, I'm referring of course to anything currently available. I won't go into the details right now, but when you read the review, it should change the way you look at traffic reporting. As far as any predictive data from TrafficCast being used on the 740, no evidence of that at all. The only traffic info from TC used on the 740 is reactive only, things like construction or accidents, unpredicted slowdowns, from what we can see.

 

[Michael Quinlan]

On 5/3/2009, 8:45pm I observed I278 Eastbound in Staten Island NY colored yellow on Yahoo Maps. A check of routes.tomtom.com showed the western end of the yellow-colored segment on Yahoo to also be yellow, while the eastern end of the same segment on routes.tomtom.com showed as having no adverse traffic conditions. A quick look at a live traffic camera for the area showed that routes.tomtom.com had it right. Within 10 minutes Yahoo also had it right.

 

[dhn]

You guys are all amazing with the dedication you're showing in evaluating the various traffic options. I'm sure I speak for all members here in thanking you ... and more than likely, helping members to make wise decisions when the time comes.

 

[gatorguy]

Yet both Yahoo and routes.TomTom use TrafficCast

 

[mvl]

A quick look at a live traffic camera for the area showed that routes.tomtom.com had it right. Within 10 minutes Yahoo also had it right.

That makes 2 of us seeing a 10 minute delay with yahoo (I did in my long example below). If Tomtom matches european HD, it is sourcing LIVE traffic on the 740s, plus the WORK devices. It's possible that Tomtom is providing LIVE traffic realtime, where trafficcast is getting it from the devices after a delay ("near real time") per the press release, causing a delay before yahoo can display it.

On a separate note, I've noticed delays on secondary (eg non-PLUS) roads in LIVE, but so far they are all major thoroughfares that are truck-driveable. I haven't yet noticed any reports on trafficcast-covered car-only locations like the Boston Jamaicaway, which would be a signal of sufficient 740-based input. I'm wondering if WORK is trafficcast's fleet vendor, and maybe it has been in an undisclosed fashion for a while.

One of the problems I think we'll have with LIVE traffic data collection is that I believe consumers tend to only use their GPS when they don't know how to get somewhere. When people are travelling in a familar area, their LIVE devices won't be on, and won't be reporting any speed data. To gain the most benefit, people will need to stop thinking of these devices as standalone or receive-only, and realize that they actually collect and transmit data that benefits others.

I have been talking to my friends who I would consider "average GPS consumrers". They all have garmins with the free (ad sponsored?) traffic. They only turn on their garmins when they're on highways where they expect accidents, and rely on Garmin to tell them when they need to reroute. I would expect anyone who purchases the LIVE subscription would do the same - they don't receive the traffic info unless it's on, so they'll turn it on when they're on the major highways, which should give sufficint on-time for LIVE input. Also, my friends actually turn off their garmins once they get off the highways because it gives inefficient directions on city streets. With IQroutes, I leave my tomtom on, since it gives accurate directions. As the average consumer realizes that Tomtom provides as-good or better directions than they know, they may begin leaving their tomtom on all the time like I do.

 

[gatorguy]

Here's the fly in the ointment: When using the 740 as a traffic monitor only, no set destination, you have no way to identify traffic issues that would not exceed the IQR-predicted travel delay over any specific road segment. Plain English? Very few traffic incidents ever appear on 740 traffic notifications. If slowdowns would be expected , then no traffic indication will be shown. No way to see that 295 coming thru New York is bumper to bumper, if IQR database shows that to be normal. You simply get a gray/no traffic available color coding on the traffic map. If traffic is moving faster than expected, no notice of that either. This is somewhat contrary to what TT indicates in the traffic tutorial.

As a result, there is very little benefit to leaving your 740 on with no destination set.

 

[NorFowl]

Seems like a user-interface dilemma here: Does the user want to see

• "normal" flow as designated by IQR - a simple, straightforward approach that would satisfy many, or
• "Just the facts, ma'am" info - A more accurate representation of what's actually taking place.

Aside from the god points raised before about delays, inconsistencies, etc. --maybe an "expert" mode, where all the available data is also presented raw would be helpful. For example, in that mode some of the data would be:

1. IQR speed (giving you normal, for roads that may be unfamiliar)
2. Posted speed
3. Current (average) speed. We saw in the demo that can be pretty granular.

...which to the descriminating eye could be more helpful than trying to figure out what the TT (or any other) traffic center has calculated to be "the most useful presentation of the situation."

This is typical dilemma in software design - How to provide a simplified interface for many,and also power features for those who want/need to dig deep. A single compromise solution can sometime provide less value for all users than a user-level operational mode.

Perhaps it would be useful for the power users here to define how they'd like to have the device work in "expert mode," on a blank slate, without trying to make those requirements relative to how the information is currently produced and presented. (How 'bout those screens used in the Traffic Center video?! Bit of a space problem, but THAT kind of data really characterizes the situation more thoroughly).

 

[gatorguy]

That's where the problem lies IMO. I'd like to see that I-4 in the Disney area is highly congested at 3:30 during weekdays, even if IQR considers it normal. I may not like driving in bumper to bumper traffic, even if it is the fastest way, preferring to take a slightly longer route. But as designed, no way to know that.

 

[mvl]

There an ugly workaround to see IQ2 speeds if you wish:

1) set your tomtom clock to the desired travel time (can't choose a day)
2) do a route demo of the intended route (choose 500% speed to save time), then you can see how fast IQ2 thinks each road is. This doesn't work with roads that have speed limits stored in them as the demo always drives at speed limit - tomtom probably wanted to avoid the liability of showing a route demo driving faster than the posted speed (which is what IQ2 sometimes does).

I agree, a way to see the inbuilt IQ2 (and even better a way to edit it with mapshare) would be a very valuable power user feature. Currently builtin or mapshare speed limits are ignored for IQ2 routing.

 

[gatorguy]

But that's not something you can do on the road (well, if your insurance is really good, guess you could). So it doesn't address the problem. Should be a simple enough change to the filtering, if TT would entertain it.

 

[canderson]

.
6:45 - LIVE and Yahoo showing a fully clear road, matches the webcam. PLUS showing a backup 5 miles before the accident site. It's as if PLUS flow data is 15 minutes late. Final score LIVE: 5, PLUS: 1, Yahoo: 3

I have found PLUS to be consistently late here in the Denver area, and your 15 minute figure is about the average. As long as the mess was made sufficiently ahead of my arrival, it serves me well enough -- but anything recent always seems to come as a surprise. Ditto on the clean-up stage.

 

[Michael Quinlan]

...I have been talking to my friends who I would consider "average GPS consumrers". They all have garmins with the free (ad sponsored?) traffic. They only turn on their garmins when they're on highways where they expect accidents, and rely on Garmin to tell them when they need to reroute. I would expect anyone who purchases the LIVE subscription would do the same - they don't receive the traffic info unless it's on, so they'll turn it on when they're on the major highways, which should give sufficint on-time for LIVE input. Also, my friends actually turn off their garmins once they get off the highways because it gives inefficient directions on city streets. With IQroutes, I leave my tomtom on, since it gives accurate directions. As the average consumer realizes that Tomtom provides as-good or better directions than they know, they may begin leaving their tomtom on all the time like I do.

My Garmin c550 is the only GPS I've ever used that actually alerted me to traffic conditions even when I had no destination. If continuing on the current road, even taking into account merging roadways, would bring me to the traffic, I would get an alert.

 

[Michael Quinlan]

...Aside from the god points raised before about delays, inconsistencies, etc. --maybe an "expert" mode, where all the available data is also presented raw would be helpful...

It's virtually impossible to compare traffic services given the filtering we think is being done due to IQR. An expert mode would be extremely helpful when trying to evaluate the traffic data. Even during regular driving, when I encounter traffic that's not displayed as such, it would be nice to now that IQR considers it "normal", so I don't start cursing out my TomTom, its developers, and their families.

 

[mvl]

It's virtually impossible to compare traffic services given the filtering we think is being done due to IQR. An expert mode would be extremely helpful when trying to evaluate the traffic data. Even during regular driving, when I encounter traffic that's not displayed as such, it would be nice to now that IQR considers it "normal", so I don't start cursing out my TomTom, its developers, and their families.

Turn on "view arrival time" in preferences. That calculation is based on IQroutes. If the arrival time moves sooner/later, then your going through less/more traffic than IQroutes expected.

What you'll notice unfortunately, is the impact of the <10 mph bug. The arrival time jumps up significantly if you're going down a road at less than 10mph. I think IQroutes has a minimum speed (due to input data filtering) of 10mph on it's estimated speeds.

 

[NorFowl]

TomTom rep to discuss LIVE traffic online

All, Check this out. Could be very informative.
Note that it's this Tues.

Early tomorrow afternoon (Tuesday, May 5th) an opportunity for a TomTom rep to answer specific questions concerning traffic services on the 740 will take place at gpsreview.net . "Live" traffic as integrated with IQ2 on the new TomTom requires a change in thinking, and can easily be misunderstood. Here's a chance to get your questions answered....

The link to the thread at gpsreview.net is here.

You can post your questions here and I'll get them over to that forum.

 

[dhn]

Uh, ok, I'll delete my link.

A good opportunity to paticipate, I hope, in this experimental venture between two different sites.