TomTom Online Route Planner Beta

[canderson]

I've sent them quite a bit of feedback on the beta so far.

Obviously, with no traffic data, the routing at ANY time is suspect. My GO720 + cell phone traffic set-up is a better bet. They need to incorporate that before any real qualitative judgment can be made as to how well the whole thing works as an integrated package.

Don't try to enter an address + zip for start or destination. There's no telling where it will put you. You'll need city/state information to get a reliable point located. I noted to them that I'd not seen such fussy input requirements on any mapping system for years. I entered a Denver number/street/zip combination, and it offered me a choice starting somewhere in Nebraska. I suspect they're ignoring zip codes altogether. Other mapping software makes good use of it.

Best I can tell, they will take your starting point, calculate latitude/longitude data for it, and then reverse the process to produce a textual address for the starting point? -- often not at the same address you specified. I enter my number/street/city/state/zip information, and it happily accepts this, and then starts the routing at an address at a nearby cross street. Whazzat about?

The maps have no exit numbers shown for interstates and other major highways. If you're navigating by use of any exit numbers, you'll do as well with a paper Rand-McNally. It's been a long time since I've seen any map sets that exclude these.

If they can't find your address, you're SOL. There is no option for using a map pin to manually identify a location. I entered a destination address near Exit 34 off the LIE on Long Island that is correctly found by Mapquest (NavTeq wins again). The TomTom beta site mapping couldn't cope (and as expected, neither does the Google TeleAtlas map). There's no way to indicate the location by alternate means, so there's no way to do a route. [Edit: See below]

Anyway, it was a pretty long list. They've got some work to do.

Edit: Just this evening I discovered that if you RIGHT click on some arbitrary point on a map, it will offer to use that as a start or destination point. Found it quite by accident. If I were asking for beta work, I think I'd consider more detailed instructions to go along with the app...

Note that when right clicking, there is ALSO an "Add location to TomTom" option provided.

 

[Ummagumma]

I've sent them quite a bit of feedback on the beta so far.

Obviously, with no traffic data, the routing at ANY time is suspect. My GO720 + cell phone traffic set-up is a better bet. They need to incorporate that before any real qualitative judgment can be made as to how well the whole thing works as an integrated package.

Don't try to enter an address + zip for start or destination. There's no telling where it will put you. You'll need city/state information to get a reliable point located. I noted to them that I'd not seen such fussy input requirements on any mapping system for years. I entered a Denver number/street/zip combination, and it offered me a choice starting somewhere in Nebraska. I suspect they're ignoring zip codes altogether. Other mapping software makes good use of it.

Best I can tell, they will take your starting point, calculate latitude/longitude data for it, and then reverse the process to produce a textual address for the starting point? -- often not at the same address you specified. I enter my number/street/city/state/zip information, and it happily accepts this, and then starts the routing at an address at a nearby cross street. Whazzat about?

The maps have no exit numbers shown for interstates and other major highways. If you're navigating by use of any exit numbers, you'll do as well with a paper Rand-McNally. It's been a long time since I've seen any map sets that exclude these.

If they can't find your address, you're SOL. There is no option for using a map pin to manually identify a location. I entered a destination address near Exit 34 off the LIE on Long Island that is correctly found by Mapquest (NavTeq wins again). The TomTom beta site mapping couldn't cope (and as expected, neither does the Google TeleAtlas map). There's no way to indicate the location by alternate means, so there's no way to do a route. [Edit: See below]

Anyway, it was a pretty long list. They've got some work to do.

Edit: Just this evening I discovered that if you RIGHT click on some arbitrary point on a map, it will offer to use that as a start or destination point. Found it quite by accident. If I were asking for beta work, I think I'd consider more detailed instructions to go along with the app...

Note that when right clicking, there is ALSO an "Add location to TomTom" option provided.

Wow Canderson, you're really giving the Planner a thorough going over. Nice job there, TomTom should be happy to have beta testers like you.

 

[Bama Rambler]

Edit: Just this evening I discovered that if you RIGHT click on some arbitrary point on a map, it will offer to use that as a start or destination point. Found it quite by accident. If I were asking for beta work, I think I'd consider more detailed instructions to go along with the app...

That's just like Google maps work. I like the right click option.

 

[dhn]

One of the Help screens for Route Planner shows this:

In the US, IQ Routes? technology is not available for roads in the following States: Alaska, Iowa, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, North Dakota, Nebraska, New Mexico, South Dakota, West Virginia, Wyoming.

In Canada, IQ Routes? technology is not available for roads in the following Provinces: Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland, Labrador. Yukon, Northwest Territories, and Nunavut

which I find interesting. I wonder whether users of TT units with firmware 8x and maps 8x in those States and Provinces also do not find IQ routing working, or whether it's just the online service that doesn't have the data (which makes no sense to me).

 

[Ummagumma]

One of the Help screens for Route Planner shows this:

In the US, IQ Routes? technology is not available for roads in the following States: Alaska, Iowa, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, North Dakota, Nebraska, New Mexico, South Dakota, West Virginia, Wyoming.

In Canada, IQ Routes? technology is not available for roads in the following Provinces: Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland, Labrador. Yukon, Northwest Territories, and Nunavut

which I find interesting. I wonder whether users of TT units with firmware 8x and maps 8x in those States and Provinces also do not find IQ routing working, or whether it's just the online service that doesn't have the data (which makes no sense to me).

TomTom really needs to get the finger out and expand its NA coverage for all of its services. It could be the Google of the GPS market, hitting the market first with all these ground-breaking features that really do make the experience of navigating and map planning more efficient and enjoyable, if it would just focus on market penetration.

 

[uocooper]

Keep in mind that IQ routes are only as good as the amount of data points they have for any given road. It does make you wonder just how many people with TomTom's actually connect to HOME so it can send its data back for incorporation with IQ routes. I think that the number of places that don't have IQ routes in North America shows that it's not that many.

I've also planned routes that I can guarantee will have stop and go traffic at certain times of the day show that it will take only one minute more than the same route at 11:30 at night. The idea behind this is fantastic but I just don't think they're getting enough devices phoning back home to be useful.

Interestingly my 930 with IQ routes and the 8.15 maps gives me better routes than this site does. It is in beta so perhaps they're still tweaking the methods that it uses to select routes. Compared to maps.google.com though I'd take the routes from this site any day.

 

[Gilbert]

Keep in mind that IQ routes are only as good as the amount of data points they have for any given road. It does make you wonder just how many people with TomTom's actually connect to HOME so it can send its data back for incorporation with IQ routes. I think that the number of places that don't have IQ routes in North America shows that it's not that many.

I've also planned routes that I can guarantee will have stop and go traffic at certain times of the day show that it will take only one minute more than the same route at 11:30 at night. The idea behind this is fantastic but I just don't think they're getting enough devices phoning back home to be useful.

Interestingly my 930 with IQ routes and the 8.15 maps gives me better routes than this site does. It is in beta so perhaps they're still tweaking the methods that it uses to select routes. Compared to maps.google.com though I'd take the routes from this site any day.

OTOH, TT said they had x billions of route data. They very well may have that data but seriously doubt they are on the TT's NA map!

Last Tuesday, I got a call from the electronics store that they had received my new Sony alpha 200 camera kit. I was with a friend who has the latest 930 with the latest NavCore and NA map. He came along with me with the 930 and we asked for the route. It was 16:45 and it recommended taking the congested highway Metropolitan Boulevard in Montreal (store is about a 5km distance from my home). I'm not impressed! I'll just say what's on my mind: Marketing hype as always! ALG? Same thing! Sure they may have some data for both features but if the coverage is minimalist then I consider that as simple marketing hype to try to sell new units and maps. TT does not dare say what coverage they have for ALG or how much traffic data for which roads because if they did, they would be lauged at. I know it is a very competitive business and probably other manufacturers are not much better.

The point is how does one find the truth? Are people just concerned about glitter and just wish the lies are the truth? Do people just want to consume for consuming's sake and to the benefit of CR cards owners? I know I'm off on a rant but getting annoyed at unmet expectancies from marketing...

 

[Arno]

Live Maps, which incorporates live traffic information for Toronto directions.
http://tinyurl.com/57lzza

Also for Montreal and Vancouver and quite a few US cities.
Click on the link, click Modify search, click Traffic and enlarge map to see.

 

[Arno]

Obviously, with no traffic data, the routing at ANY time is suspect. My GO720 + cell phone traffic set-up is a better bet. They need to incorporate that before any real qualitative judgment can be made as to how well the whole thing works as an integrated package.

Only the option Leave: Right now returns the fastest route by passing trouble spots.

Don't try to enter an address + zip for start or destination. There's no telling where it will put you. You'll need city/state information to get a reliable point located.

The Help file point out that the Zip is to be entered as 10001, us or 606025, il.
Canadian Postal Codes are pretty useless as the pointer ends up in the middle of the Forward Sorting part of the code H9B 2J5, ca gets you in the middle of H9B, etc.

Just this evening I discovered that if you RIGHT click on some arbitrary point on a map, it will offer to use that as a start or destination point. Found it quite by accident. If I were asking for beta work, I think I'd consider more detailed instructions to go along with the app...

That's why they are asking for public Beta testers to get that feed back.
When I played with it on the first day they got more than 20 feed backs.

Note that when right clicking, there is ALSO an "Add location to TomTom" option provided.

That works well, after initial problems with it wanting to install a new instance of HOME, and they are placed in the Favorites folder.

 

[Arno]

One of the Help screens for Route Planner shows this:

In the US, IQ Routes? technology is not available for roads in the following States: Alaska, Iowa, Idaho, Kansas, Montana, North Dakota, Nebraska, New Mexico, South Dakota, West Virginia, Wyoming.

In Canada, IQ Routes? technology is not available for roads in the following Provinces: Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba, New Brunswick, Newfoundland, Labrador. Yukon, Northwest Territories, and Nunavut

which I find interesting. I wonder whether users of TT units with firmware 8x and maps 8x in those States and Provinces also do not find IQ routing working, or whether it's just the online service that doesn't have the data (which makes no sense to me).

My guess would be that they don't get it either as there is just not enough traffic density to submit data.

 

[Arno]

TomTom really needs to get the finger out and expand its NA coverage for all of its services. It could be the Google of the GPS market, hitting the market first with all these ground-breaking features that really do make the experience of navigating and map planning more efficient and enjoyable, if it would just focus on market penetration.

Austrians complain that they cannot buy x40 units.
Apparently no provider is prepared to work with TomTom there.
The traffic density is a heck of a lot higher than here but TomTom will have to find a provider who will offer the SIM cards jsut for th HD Traffic.
I wouldn't hold my breath for North America.
I hope you all watched that excellent Demo on TomTom's web page.

As far as I am concerned the Beta Route Planner is a great sales tool for TT and it comes dirt cheap, relative to media advertising.

 

[Arno]

Keep in mind that IQ routes are only as good as the amount of data points they have for any given road. It does make you wonder just how many people with TomTom's actually connect to HOME so it can send its data back for incorporation with IQ routes.

IQ routes data is collected as we drive. (Speedo info.)
The only thing we send back is MapSchare info.

 

[Arno]

Last Tuesday, I got a call from the electronics store that they had received my new Sony alpha 200 camera kit. I was with a friend who has the latest 930 with the latest NavCore and NA map. He came along with me with the 930 and we asked for the route. It was 16:45 and it recommended taking the congested highway Metropolitan Boulevard in Montreal (store is about a 5km distance from my home). I'm not impressed!

Did you take a note of the time the 930 suggested and the compared it with the time it took you on your alternative route?

I drive a 10 km route daily and with Fastest route 930 wants to send me a 1 km shorter route whit is littered with traffic lights so I saved an ITN with the route I always take.

A couple of weeks ago I used a stop watch and followed the 930 route and found it to be a minute faster. The constant stop lights and heavy traffic just made it seem to be slower.

ALG? Same thing! Sure they may have some data for both features but if the coverage is minimalist then I consider that as simple marketing hype to try to sell new units and maps.

ALG worked extremely well for me in London, Dublin and other parts of the isles.

You know the trouble I had with it here and I agree with you, they should not push the capability of their machines if there is no data available for the machines to display that capability.

 

[Arno]

When I did the heavy duty testing the first day it was mostly done on routes in the UK and Germany.
The details on those maps are just phenomenal.

I was testing a route from the Shoreditch area of London to a little village two exists north of Luton.
I started at 6 pm local time and as expected was routed via the North Circular to the M1 all the way up to the exit. 1h 22m.
Ten minutes later the time had gotten to 1h 27m and a lane closure and short stretch of congestion where the traffic from the M25 merges.
Another ten minutes later it had gotten to 1h 32m, the congestion stretch got longer and there was a car accident just before the Luton exit. Instead of North Circular to the beginning of the M1 it now directed to take the A1 (not limited access but multi lane) towards St. Albans then take the M25 to the M1 and carry on.
I hadn't planned on doing this multiple times but after the first change it became intriguing and now even more so.
Again ten minutes and I see that the route was now leaving the M1 one exit earlier. On blow up I saw that it had picked tiny little back roads, just a faint grey line at the largest resolution. Dragging the map down to see details I saw that there was a stoppage on the highway going just below I would have to take the normal exit. Time had gone to 1h 35m.

Once more, fifteen minutes later and I see the route off the M1 altogether, now following the A1 (partial Motorway) all the way up and then across country roads for 1 hour 47 minutes.
Dragging the map that I could see the M1, the stoppage had now reached all the way down to two exits below Luton.
Following the map upwards there were five accidents shown on one spot with the motorway closed completely.

To show construction sites.
View attachment 2316

And showing being routed off and on again.

This was done half an hour ago, 0230h GMT for 1h 17m.


Being on a roll ( a week a go), I punched in the the route from the little town at the Brenner pass in Austria and the Hotel we stayed in just around the Vatican.

This software probably would have made no difference over the TomTom (if I had had one at that time) but I was really, really cheesed off.
When I planned the trip out with Google three years ago I carefully laid out an approach keeping us away from the direction of the center of the city.
Biggest problem was that they had a lot of one way streets set up in a manner that no one would use the neighbourhood as a thorough fare, almost like a maze.
Now, looking at the Route Planner it was going across the river towards the center of Rome and the arrived at the hotel in a virtually straight line, coming from the wrong direction.

 

[offthegrid]

You're right I've seen some questionable route times by time of day where the rush hour travel time is less than a low traffic time of day. They aren't doing a good job of showcasing the IQ Routing this way. Of course with all things TomTom Europe comes first, the US is TomTom's b@stard child.

I have sent feedback to that effect and with every feedback I send I ask for the US traffic to be shown as it would be to a unit with Plus traffic off the TomTom servers.

There are quite a few glitches but its a nice start.

Well, I find that functionality (IQ routing) questionable.....

I planned a route yesterday during morning rush hour in my area and then set it for later in the day when traffic would be much lighter. Same route but the rush hour version showed 1 minute LESS than later in the day.

Sorry, but having done that route during rush hour, I KNOW the travel time would be at least 20 minutes MORE during rush hour, not 1 minute less.

 

[Old Baldy]

The beta is fairly useless, IMO. Here's why...

The product seems to be designed to be a very simple known point - to - known point traffic optimizer ONLY. It does NOT seem to pretend to be a trip planner....as it is without any basic POI searcher for destination or POI addresses, that I can find.

Example. If I want to plan a route across country, and find hotels or campgrounds in specific places or cities....no such search of POI, is built in that I can find.

It may or may not one day be able to generate optimized traffic routing, BUT...because it transfers ONLY the SINGLE end or start destination point for the route, it is absolutely USELESS as a TomTom PND routing utility. The TomTom PND will generate its OWN route to that single destination point - thus effectively bypassing ANY and ALL of the offline programs's traffic optimization detours.

It lacks basic route-draggability functionality - presumably because it wants to "optimize" the route for you through traffic but again, this is useless as an actual trip planner - where you might want to visit or drive along a different route or road or via point without having to manually add a separate via point.

I think the integration with TT PND is terrible, due to the lack of effective route transfer to the PND. My suggestion would have been for TomTom to simply automatically generate a large number of via points on the optimized route, and transfer them all as an Itinerary to the PND. This will at least HELP direct the PND to follow the traffic optimized route.

The basic issue with the software in current form, for me, is that it does not seem to know what it wants to be. It is clearly NOT a trip planner. If it is simply a traffic routing tool from known address to known address, then it again fails with its integration with the TT PND. If it tries to ONLY be a printable offline traffic optimizer from Point A to point B, then OK. But I don't see a huge demand for that product, when one owns and wishes to use the actual PND device from the same company, in the car, instead of reading off a printed route map and directions!

Nice start...but definitely NOT ready from prime time, IMO.

 

[Arno]

The product seems to be designed to be a very simple known point - to - known point traffic optimizer ONLY.

So you did find that Route Planner works well for what it is designed.

It does NOT seem to pretend to be a trip planner....

Precisely.

Example. If I want to plan a route across country, and find hotels or campgrounds in specific places or cities....no such search of POI, is built in that I can find.

May I suggest you have a look at the Demo video so that you will see what TomTom is trying to achieve with Route Planner.

It is a sly advertising tool to entice TomTom users who have not yet signed up to Traffic, to do so.

 

[Old Baldy]

So you did find that Route Planner works well for what it is designed.

Who knows...it serves little purpose for anyone with a PND.

Precisely.

Good, so we agree.

May I suggest you have a look at the Demo video so that you will see what TomTom is trying to achieve with Route Planner.

Thanks. It doesn't really help...as the tool is of little use for my own purpose. As a TomTom PND owner, I was looking for a tool to plan trips/routes and then use them on the PND. This does not do that, as we agreed.

It is a sly advertising tool to entice TomTom users who have not yet signed up to Traffic, to do so.

Perhaps, but sly would mean it is clever and enticing, and I find it neither. Perhaps others will find it more useful.

 

[Arno]

Thanks. It doesn't really help...as the tool is of little use for my own purpose. As a TomTom PND owner, I was looking for a tool to plan trips/routes and then use them on the PND. This does not do that, as we agreed.

Right, it doesn't do what you imagined it would do therefore it must be bad for anyone else!

Perhaps, but sly would mean it is clever and enticing, and I find it neither.

Read post # 34 and you will see that it is clever and enticing for someone who lives in an area with extreme traffic density and which has excellent Traffic feed back.

 

[dhn]

Be nice, boys!