NY Times: “Are GPS Devices Going the Way of the Tape Deck?”

I use both approaches – a dedicated, non-connected PND and Sprint Navigation. I think it is a stretch to associate the sharp decline in PND sales to the rise of smartphone navigation. I have no doubt that it is a component of the decline, but I would bet that the economy is a much bigger reason. Instead I think people are saying “I’ll wait to spend $300 and instead pay $9 / month for awhile.”

Why do I use both? Because neither solution provides a holistic solution yet. I think the answer to your question depends heavily on whether you are talking about a first time user of GPS technology or someone that has used a PND for several years.

One of the only big benefits of a smartphone approach right now is convenience – everything in one device. For that, currently, existing PND customers have to sacrifice. So, the question is: Is the convenience worth the sacrifice? “Maybe” is my answer, which is why I use both.

The smartphone has the potential to be a superior method, but so far you aren’t leveraging it to replace the PND. With few exceptions, your smartphone app lacks functionality compared to a PND. Examples: No ability to create or save a route, no ability to do via points, no ability to batch install customer POI’s (i.e., Garmin Custom POI and TomTom OV2 files), no detour functionality, no autozoom based on turn to next distance, no junction view, no lane assist, etc.

These features are becoming standard at a $300 PND price point. So to move to a smartphone solution, you are asking customers to give up all of that functionality and giving them only “convenience” as the reason.

The smartphone platform COULD be leveraged to do things that a non-connected PND can’t. But it isn’t being leveraged.

1) Maps. A connected smartphone with server-side maps should be able to provide significantly more current maps. But your Navteq based app has less current maps than my non-connected Navteq based Garmin PND. They shouldn’t be beating you to the punch when it comes to updated maps. Every PND customers knows now that they get quarter map updates. We don’t know that with TeleNav.

2) Routing – with server side calculations, we should be able to do more robust things with routes like vias, road segment level detouring, saving of routes, web based web planning, etc.

3) Traffic. The smartphone is the PERFECT means of distributing traffic information. You’ve got a bigger pipe and you’ve got a massive coverage area. You aren’t leveraging that though. Your traffic solution is the least robust of any current offering with only half of the market coverage of FM-TMC (Clear Channel or Traffic.com), MSN Direct, and XM NavTraffic. AND, the PND guys are now giving it away for free or a one-time cost for the “life” of the device. You’ve got the perfect content delivery mechanism but you aren’t delivering the content through it. Every other traffic provider is delivery more content, using a less superior delivery mechanism.

4) Feature upgrades. I’ve had my Sprint Treo 800w since the week it was released. Yet, I’ve had one single Sprint Navigation update since then and I can’t find anything that changed in the app. The connected smartphone gives you a great delivery mechanism to kick out robust feature updates more frequently. No PND can compete with that. But again, it isn’t being leveraged. In contrast, my non-connected PND has gotten about 4 firmware updates in that same amount of time. I get a Google Maps or Bing update about once a month. I am sure the reason why is because I am actually using Sprint Navigator, and with that, comes you dealing with the bureaucracy of Sprint – which brings me to my last issue….

5) Interacting with TeleNav through a branded application. Do you know anyone that likes to deal with their cell phone company? I’d prefer a direct relationship with TeleNav as a consumer. If my Sprint plan didn’t include navigation, I wouldn’t pay them $9 for it. I’d rather pay TeleNav $9 than Sprint. What makes no sense to me is why my phone (Treo 800w) runs Sprint Navigator but yet isn’t listed as a supported phone for TeleNav 5.x. (But the Treo Pro is). Having a direct relationship with the consumer allows you to role out more frequent and robust features and bypass the bureaucracy of Sprint. It seems like you ought to support every phone directly that you support through your carriers.

Sure, I’d be glad to provide any additional feedback you’d like.

re: Maps – over the last 5 years, there has been much build-out of “The Avenue of the Saints” which is a 4-lane divided highway from St. Paul to St. Louis. This consists of US-218 in Iowa and 61 in Missouri. At the same time, Iowa has built out 4-lane divided highways with city bypasses from Des Moines to connect to the Avenue of the Saints at Mt Pleasant, IA. This is to establish a better way to get from Des Moines to St. Louis. This construction is complete and Navteq has picked up all but one bypass in the last quarterly Garmin update and the quarter before that. Your maps don’t have these bypasses – mainly involving highway 34 and 163 as you work your way down from Des Moines to the US-218 in Mt Pleasant. It appears you are 1 to 2 quarters behind in the timeliness of Navteq data compared to what Garmin is able to get to their customers. I’d hoped that you’d actually beat them to it given you have server-side maps. That would make you more attractive than a PND, instead it is less attractive right now. While my example is isolated to Iowa, I extrapolate from my experience here that you are 1 to 2 quarters behind nationwide.

re: Routing – I am referring to the ability to use your Internet website to create a route and then send that route to the device using the cellular network. This is something a non-connected PND can’t do, and could be a plus for a smartphone app if you’d take advantage of it. First, though you’d have to give us that feature in the phone. Right now, without having via point capability, you are at a disadvantage when compared to a PND. Yes, I can just enter the via point as the first destination, then when I get there, enter the final destination. That is what the PND manufacturers said a few years ago before they added the functionality too. That band-aid ignores the point of via points. The point of via points is to control the route being taken, while at the same time preserving an accurate display of the final destination ETA. When you have to enter via points as separate destinations you loose the ability to know what your final ETA is. For frequently used routes, many PND’s offer the ability to create the route, including via points, outside of navigation mode. The route is saved on the device and activated when needed, complete with via points. For example, I have a saved route on my Garmin that takes me from my office, to my house, to our mailbox, to my kid’s school and to the gymnastics center. I do it twice a week. I know this route like the back of my hand, but by activating it on my Garmin, I can monitor my ETA against current traffic flow and since Garmin has traffic coverage in secondary markets (more on that later), I know the traffic situation on the route. If I had to enter those 4 locations manually and sequentially each time (like I’d have to do in your app) I wouldn’t bother. I’d settle for having this route building ability on the phone, but you COULD leverage the data connection on the phone and give us the ability to initially plan such a route on the website first.

re: traffic – I am not sure where you are getting your information, but what you’ve said just isn’t true at all. I’ve owned 4 different PND’s with traffic and every one of them has traffic that is “specific to your route.” And every one of them offers a reroute (if a better route is available) if there is traffic on your route. That is not a key difference for TeleNav – what you do is no different than Garmin or anyone else. I’ve owned PND’s with Clear Channel Traffic, MSN Direct Traffic, Dash Traffic and XM NavTraffic and they all have traffic “on your route.” My current solution is a Garmin 885T w/ MSN Direct Traffic. The very first traffic menu item is “traffic on your route.”

Sure, you have coverage in “most of the major metropolitan areas.” No one can disagree with that. The question is, is that a competitive offering? You offer traffic in 50 markets. And you only offer flow data in 30-some markets. Here is the competitive landscape: MSN Direct >120 markets, Clear Channel >90 markets, Traffic.com >80 markets, Networks in Motion > 120 markets and XM NavTraffic > 80 markets.

You guys, without debate, offer the worst traffic coverage of any solution on the market. DESPITE the fact, that you have the most robust traffic data delivery mechanism available (the cellular phone data network). Why you aren’t leveraging that and offering a solution that is at least competitive with everyone else, I will never understand.

You asked me if there were specific cities that I don’t think the traffic coverage is adequate. The answer is YES. And the list of them is the 70+ cities that you don’t cover, but MSN Direct does. The 40+ cities you don’t cover but Clear Channel does, etc., etc., etc. If part of your marketing strategy is to convert PND users, then you ought to have a competitive traffic offering that matches what those PND customers already have available to them.

All of your competitors have realized that there is a value in providing traffic in secondary markets. You guys haven’t for some reason. You stand alone in that conclusion. So, when the question is will the smartphone app displace the PND, the answer is “SOMEONE’s” smartphone app might, but right now, not TeleNav’s for any user that is seeking a best in class traffic solution. As a secondary market customer myself, why would I move to a solution that offers 50% less traffic content than all the PND competition? If I only lived and worked in California, I wouldn’t care. I don’t, so I do. There actually is traffic in “fly over country” and it is very frustrating that every one of your competitors has figured that out except TeleNav. I really WANT to use the smartphone as my GPS solution. But I can’t yet because I give up so much functionality and traffic content in the process.

re: feature updates – yes I have the latest update for Sprint Navigation. It was pushed out a month or so ago. My point is that you have released TeleNav v5.5 which offers more functionality than previous versions. I have a Sprint Treo 800w. And I’d love to pay you a monthly fee instead of Sprint, so that I could get the new features of 5.5 (and future versions) more quickly. Obviously, you are releasing software directly much quicker than you are releasing new versions of Sprint Navigation. Here is the issue though. The 800w replaced the 700wx more than a year ago. The 800w has since been replaced by the Treo Pro. You list the 700wx on your website still. You also list the Treo Pro. But you don’t even mention the 800w. How do you have the phone before the 800w, the phone after the 800w, but not the 800w itself? It makes no sense. There is little technical difference between the Treo Pro and the 800w, so there is no reason that TeleNav v5.5 wouldn’t run on the 800w, but I don’t dare try it because if I have a support issue I can hear your techs now saying “we don’t support that phone.” So here you have this great cellular network data connection available, that could allow you to push out new features to customers easier and more frequently than with a PND customer, yet my phone (and many others) is no where to be found on your website, despite the fact that it comes with Sprint Navigation pre-installed. How can the official position of TeleNav be “we don’t support your phone” when your app comes baked into the phones ROM? That makes absolutely no sense to a customer. My point is, TeleNav should be supporting every phone that is supported with your carrier branded apps. That way, we have a true choice whether to use Sprint Navigation (that is included in my plan) or pay you a monthly fee and get better access to more frequently updated software features.