This object is in archive!
Finding a specific point on the track
Answered
Hi all
when I look at the track profile - speed, height, km or time based - I can easily select a point. But this selection does not go back to the map whem I close the profile.
Use case: I know I stopped on the my way for some minutes to take a photo. Selecting the time axis, this is easy to spot. But then the trouble starts to translate this finding into the track on the map easily. Any hints
The same question
Hi Michael,
when you select some point (hightlight) on chart, bottom middle map button should become active. Did you tried to tap on it? It should move you directly on place you selected on chart
Hi Michael,
when you select some point (hightlight) on chart, bottom middle map button should become active. Did you tried to tap on it? It should move you directly on place you selected on chart
You are so right.
And its so logical. ..
TXs very much for the advise.
Cheers
Michael
You are so right.
And its so logical. ..
TXs very much for the advise.
Cheers
Michael
it`s logical? I`m very glad to hear it!
You`re welcome
it`s logical? I`m very glad to hear it!
You`re welcome
Good morning.
I have one question that is not related to the original topic:
on my Galaxy I have Locus and Maverick installed and some more. In the past I used Maverick a lot, but in this vacation I started to use Locus. I find it more powerful, e.g. managing and displaying tracks. But it seems to take quite some SD space in comparison. I use Online maps , various OSM flavors. One obvious difference between the two apps is file based storage of tiles versus SQL DB usage in Locus.
Is the SQL overhead so heavy ?
TXs and best regards
Michael
Good morning.
I have one question that is not related to the original topic:
on my Galaxy I have Locus and Maverick installed and some more. In the past I used Maverick a lot, but in this vacation I started to use Locus. I find it more powerful, e.g. managing and displaying tracks. But it seems to take quite some SD space in comparison. I use Online maps , various OSM flavors. One obvious difference between the two apps is file based storage of tiles versus SQL DB usage in Locus.
Is the SQL overhead so heavy ?
TXs and best regards
Michael
Hi Michael,
if I remember Maverick system correctly, they store it`s data as a single images on card. If this is still valid, then I`m more then 100% sure, that Locus take less space then Maverick!! But it depend what you do, how often you use apps etc. I think you can simply find which files in Locus take a lot of space by you and I can tell (if this will not be clear) why this happen, no problem ...
Hi Michael,
if I remember Maverick system correctly, they store it`s data as a single images on card. If this is still valid, then I`m more then 100% sure, that Locus take less space then Maverick!! But it depend what you do, how often you use apps etc. I think you can simply find which files in Locus take a lot of space by you and I can tell (if this will not be clear) why this happen, no problem ...
Yes Maverick does single images. I have more than 2 million of them on my SD card. 11 GB. Of course I would prefer the DB approach - if the total size would be less or equal. I will do a comparison test when back home.
Cheers
Michael
Yes Maverick does single images. I have more than 2 million of them on my SD card. 11 GB. Of course I would prefer the DB approach - if the total size would be less or equal. I will do a comparison test when back home.
Cheers
Michael
2 millions and 11GB?? That`s crazy. I think you`ll delete them from card few hours :). Also I`m sure that one database file will have less size, for sure!
2 millions and 11GB?? That`s crazy. I think you`ll delete them from card few hours :). Also I`m sure that one database file will have less size, for sure!
Hello Menion,
back from vacation and have done a number of actions. My PC is hot from MOBAC still ;-) All SQLITE now.
And I have some comparison data now:
Maverick SQLITEDB
example 1 195000 kb 197000 kB
example 2 39800 kb 41600 kB
So the DB does not impose big overhead and in turn it`s one one file rather than scores of them.
But here are additional observations: nicely enough Maverick can directly see and use the SQLITEDBs in the Locus map directory. Once I chose such a DB as base, and I then hit the limit of resolution (say 13), but I zoom beyond, it will simply load the additional pages on the fly.
On the other hand, there is such a strict separation between Online and "Own" DBs in Locus. Why is that ? And why would you not allow Locus to just add additional tiles into the "own" DBs ?
Locus can fill SQLITEDBs on the fly - proven by the Online maps if you store the downloads permanently. So why don`t you use this feature to give more power and convenience to the user ?
TXs and best regards
Michael
Hello Menion,
back from vacation and have done a number of actions. My PC is hot from MOBAC still ;-) All SQLITE now.
And I have some comparison data now:
Maverick SQLITEDB
example 1 195000 kb 197000 kB
example 2 39800 kb 41600 kB
So the DB does not impose big overhead and in turn it`s one one file rather than scores of them.
But here are additional observations: nicely enough Maverick can directly see and use the SQLITEDBs in the Locus map directory. Once I chose such a DB as base, and I then hit the limit of resolution (say 13), but I zoom beyond, it will simply load the additional pages on the fly.
On the other hand, there is such a strict separation between Online and "Own" DBs in Locus. Why is that ? And why would you not allow Locus to just add additional tiles into the "own" DBs ?
Locus can fill SQLITEDBs on the fly - proven by the Online maps if you store the downloads permanently. So why don`t you use this feature to give more power and convenience to the user ?
TXs and best regards
Michael
Anybody out there ??
Anybody out there ??
Replies have been locked on this page!