Just a suggestion regarding this screen's latest incarnation (click on image for better view):

Cluttered map views are bad map views!

Or, better still, dispense with the map and using the vast majority of the screen pushing a single feature (which I, for one, have absolutely no interest in whatsoever and would never use) and put useful information and links to promote MRA’s diversity instead.

Under ‘Save As’ we are offered the following .gpx file options:

And using ‘Export’:

While the descriptions do tell us a little when using ‘Save As’, I do think they fail to tell users the most salient details. And the drop down in ‘Connector’ when using ‘Export’ offers no description.

While much has been regularly discussed in this forum about the various .gpx options, I have not seen any outline of their differences in one place and have remained uncertain as to what happens when, as a Garmin sat nav user, I use each variant. So, this evening I tried the three available via ‘Export’ in ‘Connector’ (a rare foray into using Routeplanner on PC for me) to see what I got for my trouble...

On creating three differently titled versions of the same route in order to ‘fool’ my Zūmo 390, I installed them onto it using .gpx 1.0, .gpx 1.1 and .gpx 1.2 respectively. The end results, once installed and loaded were:

.gpx 1.0 A track and an accurate route, but with all waypoints shown as via points (i.e. all shaping point locations present, but converted to via points).

.gpx 1.1 A track and an accurate route with all waypoints present and as created (i.e. shaping points and via points correctly displayed).

.gpx 1.2 A track and an accurate route but with only those via points included upon route creation in Routeplanner visible (given the accurate rendering of the route, I think it’s probably safe to say all shaping points are present and correct, just not shown?).

All three options apparently offer inclusion of any POI’s added to routes but I can’t verify this as I never use them*, but I have no reason to doubt that POI’s will be successfully transferred to the device.

No track and POI only option is available in ‘Connector’. I don’t use tracks as I find routes better suited to my needs. However, I did use ‘Save As’ to open a .gpx 1.1 (track, POI) version in BaseCamp… All good and as anticipated.

Don’t try opening a .gpx 1.2 in BaseCamp though - the two are definitely incompatible! (.gpx 1.2 is an MRA peculiarity, is not a current standard and, to my knowledge, is not found elsewhere).

Having completed this small exercise, I am now much clearer in my mind about which option works best for me in any given circumstances**, and I hope it is of some help to others(?). Maybe work through them using your particular Garmin (and presumably many, if not all, BMW Navigators?) to get the best insight. It didn’t take me very long to do it - about 15-20 minutes total from booting up the PC.

I do think that MRA could easily make a much better set of descriptors for the file types available in both ‘Save As’ and ‘Export’ though. It would make the process clearer and more user friendly.

(*I prefer instead to use self researched and checked locations and venues represented as named waypoints - likewise via points, though I do drop in an occasional one for fuel stops/breaks/rendezvous point for group rides)

(**almost always that will be .gpx 1.1 for me, but others may find greater use for the other types depending on sat nav model and waypoint preferences)

@jack-van-tilburg said in Print Itinerary:

@herko-ter-horst said in Print Itinerary:

But when actually going on a ride/drive, stops take however long they take, in my experience, and I don't care if the stop takes an hour and 45 minutes when I had originally planned for the stop to take an hour and 30 minutes.

I like this phrase
Modern life already consists of tight schedules and performance commitments. Do not allow that in your motorcycle rides.
Route planners are important and MRA has a big function for us. But don't let it take away the adventure of motorcycling.
Live Free and Ride

If I could, I’d upvote that a thousand times!

@timo-martosatiman-mra Regarding the RouteXpert Library on a stick proposal.

Personally, I particularly enjoy the process of researching, creating and refining my own routes rather than just follow something created by others. That’s not to cast doubt on the work of the Route Experts - I’ve looked at a few and they look great. I’m sure many would find them of benefit.

But having a collection of routes on a USB stick all seems a bit… let’s say ‘retro’? Power bank and flashlight or not. It would be yet another bit of kit to carry - and a very lose-able one at that.

Why not just make Route Expert routes, along with those in MRA route lists, individually downloadable onto mobile devices for offline use in the Navigation app, much in the manner that we can already install regional routable maps?

Ik zou zeker niet proberen om iemand te bekritiseren op basis van hun aanpak van routeplanning en organisatie tot in de ‘n’ graad - het vergt allerlei soorten om een wereld te maken.

Het zou geweldig zijn als producenten van allerlei technologie, met name smartphones en tabletten, en software dat zouden herkennen!

Windows 10 is een enorm geval in punt - ik zie het als grotendeels bloatware, waarvan ik sommige kan en verwijderd hebben (inclusief sommige ik ‘niet toegestaan’), maar andere dingen zijn zo diepgeworteld dat het niet kan worden verwijderd, ondanks het geheel overbodig, of zelfs grondig ongewenst.

Waarom maken we niet pakketten (zoals MRA) zeer aangepast?

Als het allerlei soorten nodig heeft, waarom maak je dan niet allerlei soorten gelukkig?

I certainly wouldn’t seek to criticise anyone on the basis of their approach to route planning and organising to the ‘n’th degree - it takes all sorts to make a world.

It would be great if producers of all kinds of technology, particularly smartphones and tablets, and of software, would recognise that!

Windows 10 is a huge case in point - I see it as largely bloatware, some of which I can and have removed (including some I’m ‘not allowed to’), but other stuff is so deep rooted that it can’t be removed, despite being utterly superfluous, or even thoroughly undesirable.

Why not make packages (such as MRA) highly customisable?

If it takes all sorts, why not make all sorts happy?

@Nik-Player If you have a phone signal and data turned on you will be able to create routes while on the road. And, unless you know something I don’t, you can’t use Basecamp ‘on the fly’ at all.

The amount of data used to create a route, either in MRA Route Planner, or in the Navigation app, and to set it up in Navigation to run in offline mode will be small. Data consumption for navigating a route can be a bit more of an issue if data is limited in a phone plan, but offline mode works well in my experience.

To use offline mode, you will need to install the relevant maps onto your device. To do so, just select the ‘Offline maps’ tile on the Navigation app home screen, select the ‘Download map’ button on the next screen, then choose and install the required maps.

@con-hennekens I have always got on fine with BaseCamp, but readily admit that it has a steep learning curve. Probably several! Time and effort invested bring worthwhile rewards in my experience though. But here’s the thing… As I said recently, MRA’s studying and including BaseCamp features but making them more intuitive and accessible has to be a very attractive prospect for generating new subscribers, surely?

@con-hennekens I wouldn’t want to speak for @Martin-van-der-Linden, but for me this goes hand in hand with planning/working with/presenting multiple routes, multi day routes and route segments. For instance, a long group ride route that might deter some, with options to take short cuts to a selection of rendezvous points. It’s all basic BaseCamp stuff really. All routes being visible on the map view when a ‘parent’ folder is selected being another related feature that is missing.

Such things are of vastly greater value and use to me, and I suspect for many others too, than all this press a button, ‘lucky dip’ approach that quickly yields a route of sorts. How do you know it’s a good route? What are the criteria used and how do they compare to an individual’s? How well did the originator(s) of such auto-generated routes know the region? I’ve looked at such things from MRA and numerous other sources and they always fall short. There’s no substitute for a bit of effort.

Hi everyone

My name's PAD and I'm a socialmediaphobe. I tend to steer clear of forums even these days, but think the My Route apps are going to be extremely useful and I look forward to making contact occasionally to help me get the best out of MyRoute. And, who knows, perhaps even be of some help to others?

I'm fairly ancient and a life long motorcyclist who has travelled the UK and Ireland very widely, but with little experience abroad on a bike. I'm hoping, once we can be rid of Covid-19 restrictions, that MyRoute will play a large part in changing that.

Slán go fóill

(Moved from EN FORUM - SELF SERVICE, where I recently managed to post it in error!)

The blog starts by outlining what the Navigation app is intended to be and who it is for. But it is not reliably fit for either the purpose stated or, as a result, for subscribers matching your intended user profile. Existing customers have been waiting endlessly for improvements in basic functionality, let alone in its user interface, to make it a genuinely viable option and an alternative to expensive dedicated sat nav devices. The closest we have got to it is hot air promising ‘jam tomorrow’.

Yet that same blog ends by proposing a new app which would be, let’s say, a ‘nanny app’ for those who fall outside of the existing Navigation app’s target audience - those who want everything done for them short of heading off down the road! While I wouldn’t dispute that there might be demand for such a thing, that you are promoting this right now is nothing short of an insult to existing subscribers. It clearly indicates very little intent or effort on the part of MRA to honour their marketing claims of the app being a genuine alternative to those expensive devices, or to service all the support tickets raised and provide a satisfactory customer outcome. This in itself should make anyone wary of the mooted ‘Next’ variant. Why might the outcome for that be any different?

‘Next’ must be to…

MAKE - THE - EXISTING - APP - WORK - EFFECTIVELY - AND - RELIABLY - AS - A - MATTER - OF - URGENCY

…THAT is what you need to do. Not go off on some half baked tangent to create a new fiasco, disappointing a whole new user group!

In the past, new features tended to be announced on this forum (often by @Timo-Martosatiman-MRA). There’s even a special section for it - it’s called ‘Announcements’!

This one has been foisted on customers unannounced. I don’t recall a single request or suggestion for such a feature and I haven’t seen any positive reaction to it at all. I know people are often more inclined to complain than to praise, but that has tended not to be the case on this forum in my experience, with plenty of enthusiastic feedback to features announced, in the relevant place, and introduced thoughtfully.

It seems that MRA has undergone some changes and, in the process has acquired the kind of arrogance displayed by huge corporate players such as Apple, Google and Nike and is no longer responsive to customers, or even listening to them. Those huge organisations have got away with it having created such a strong brand that many see them as indispensable - often for quite misguided reasons such as snobbery, perceived image and ‘lifestyle statements’, exaggerated marketing claims (now there’s MRA all over) and broad abandonment of critical faculties among consumers. Yet MRA is a tiny fish in a huge ocean, and while such arrogance is never good, for small, developing companies to display it is suicidal. Particularly for one that continues to claim that it does listen. MRA is not even a brand yet. It certainly is not indispensable - even for the poorest of reasons and, as that small fish, it is very vulnerable to ‘predators’ and to being ousted from its tiny niche.

My question is, who are the management and owners of MRA listening to now? Not it’s forum acolytes, who continue to seek to justify such moves as this invasive and childish ‘development’, that seems clear. Is there some new, influential person or team calling the shots, perhaps? That’s conjecture of course, but to me this development smacks of sudden undue and misguided influence bouncing around like Tigger.

MRA not seeing the problem with this introduction is symptomatic of a wider issue - that they no longer see any customer issues, needs, suggestions and requests as their problem. And that really is a problem… For their business, not me. I vote with my feet…

@sudolea

@maik-6 Ich musste deinen Beitrag durch eine Interpretations-App laufen und es machte ein ziemlich spektakuläres Chaos! Wie es wahrscheinlich mit dieser passiert, aber ich habe genug gesammelt, um zu glauben, dass du absolut richtig bist.

I had to run your post through an interpretation app and it made a pretty spectacular mess! As it probably did with this . But I've gathered enough to believe you're absolutely right.

@con-hennekens Sure, BaseCamp is anything but intuitive. At the time I started using it, I rode quite high annual mileage and all year round so no winter layoffs. Now it”s ingrained. Though, even after all this time, I still find and am pointed to new tricks and even features! Routeplanner is streets ahead (sorry, bad pun) in ease of use.

@con-hennekens I have always got on fine with BaseCamp, but readily admit that it has a steep learning curve. Probably several! Time and effort invested bring worthwhile rewards in my experience though. But here’s the thing… As I said recently, MRA’s studying and including BaseCamp features but making them more intuitive and accessible has to be a very attractive prospect for generating new subscribers, surely?

@con-hennekens And as I say above, that’s fine by me once it doesn’t compromise other aspects. Which is very much what appears to be the case.

@herko-ter-horst I think it has a community basis in that it’s a source that can be accessed widely and is, thus a shared resource. I think of it as dumbed down, but not ‘social media’ per se. Though it does sit close to it in my view. My previous comment was a general one about the direction MRA has taken. And that’s fine by me once such developments aren’t made to the exclusion of more ‘technical’, creative features and, indeed, to the detriment of support functions. And here I include the Navigation app which, for me at least, is a vital aspect of MRA. No navigation? No good!

@con-hennekens I wouldn’t want to speak for @Martin-van-der-Linden, but for me this goes hand in hand with planning/working with/presenting multiple routes, multi day routes and route segments. For instance, a long group ride route that might deter some, with options to take short cuts to a selection of rendezvous points. It’s all basic BaseCamp stuff really. All routes being visible on the map view when a ‘parent’ folder is selected being another related feature that is missing.

Such things are of vastly greater value and use to me, and I suspect for many others too, than all this press a button, ‘lucky dip’ approach that quickly yields a route of sorts. How do you know it’s a good route? What are the criteria used and how do they compare to an individual’s? How well did the originator(s) of such auto-generated routes know the region? I’ve looked at such things from MRA and numerous other sources and they always fall short. There’s no substitute for a bit of effort.

@con-hennekens Yes, I concluded that eventually. I very rarely look at Routeplanner on PC so was a little surprised to see that as a home page. But I still think its a waste of space and far, far too focussed on one feature when the page could easily be promoting several features and developments - maybe some of a more technical and creative nature instead of this dumbed down, lazy, ‘community’/social meejah stuff that MRA seem to have become fixated with.

Checked on Android device and is fine. What a surprse!

It also works ok in Windows using a browser (Qwant/Firefox).