Select to expand quote

tbwonder said..
Just wondering if by some chance this dual tier system gets up, how will it work?

1. Will people who only use unapproved devices have a page that shows their best 5 in each category?
I suspect these people will want a way to track their best sessions. For people who post sometimes with approved and sometimes with unapproved will they have two different best 5 summary pages?

2. Will sessions with unapproved devices count towards your overall 'Distance Travelled'?
Or will I still need to carry a GT31 on my foil sessions to track the kilometers

I assume everyone agrees that the overall ranking tables and team scores will only be for approved devices.

Very good questions that deserve agreement on answers.

With regards to the first point, I can see how someone with only a non-approved device would want to follow his PBs. That said, I have seen many examples with problematic PBs from non-approved devices, simply because software cannot identify artifacts nearly as well. One idea would be to simply always rank results from approved devices higher for PBs.

Second point is also very relevant. I think it should count for the personal distance totals, since (a) this is not a competition number, and (b) it will be close enough. However, I do not think it should count towards rankings - partly just to keep things simple.

Those are two examples of things that need to be figured out for a 2-tier posting system. There will be multiple others. We won't be able to make everyone happy, since different people have different idea. However, I think we can keep the current level of accuracy, and improve on inclusiveness, to adapt to the constraints we have to live with.

Select to expand quote

sailquik said..
Such a poll is a silly idea. It has very little credability and just give a focus for a few diaffected people to stir, and a few whiners to winge even more. Anyone with any intelligence knows that this sort of Poll is just rubbish.

Andrew, 95 people have responded to the poll. 13 indicated that they do not want a 2-tier posting system, and 82 have indicated that they like the idea. Most of them have provided their GPSTC nicknames or their names.

Why on earth do you keep talking about "a few whiners"?

Why do you insult my intelligence and the intelligence of the 95 people who have answered?

Select to expand quote

REDhat said..
Some people cant count very well.
70 for change is probably nearly a full count of those with an appetite for change.
That only leaves about 1650 without appetite for change .
The silent majority has spoken very loudly on this issue!

How convenient - every one who has not voted obviously must have the same opinion as you do!

The poll now has been up for a little more than a day, and there have been 95 responses so far. Of those, 82 voted for a 2-tier system, 13 against.

Most people who have posted with a clear opinion about this issue in this or other threads have voted. The excludes the person who declared such polls to be "rubbish", but includes many others on both sides of the debate.

Select to expand quote

Richiefish said..
It seems a bit strange to me that this whole competition is reliant on one companies products. I reckon trying to validate the accuracy of Garmin and other units is the best option. Starting a "dodgy data" division would most likely detract from the whole speed quest thing. What happens for example at the Burrum speed comp when all the sailors with non compliant gear cant play ?

The whole of Modern GPS Speed sailing was/is based on one companies products which were originally designed by some very clever people (Tom Clarko, Manfred Fuchs etc) specifically for speed sailing. Clean data (not filtered) and more of it than what was previously available, doppler not trackpoints accuracy and traceability

Garmin was what we used to use unfortunately it was designed for a generic use (and still is).

There are a truck load of GPS data loggers out there, but very few of them (read Lycosis Trimble and now Motion) have the capabilities of doing what is needed for speed sailing.

Found this bit of light reading re watch accuracy

fellrnr.com/wiki/GPS_Accuracy

forums.garmin.com/sports-fitness/running-multisport/f/forerunner-245-series/165287/horrendous-gps-accuracy-with-firmware-2-70-gps-glonass-in-gent-belgium

support.garmin.com/en-AU/?faq=CC5azODuBd9BhRbKvp82JA

If the GPSTC stops aiming for the best as the best of its competitors do then that would be a loss. On the other hand getting new people involved is necessary to build a future, so perhaps a new web site and competition is needed for unapproved device users, to run on their own and also as a "feeder league" to the GPSTC. You could of course post to both comps if you wished. There seems to be some qualified voices here asking for change so perhaps we could respect what the GPSTC is and has been and aim to the future with a new product of your creation.

I do wonder what the "real" issue is with "approved" devices and the expectations of a second tier of the GPSTC. It doesn't read like a whole lot of sense, by my simple mind. I joined the GPSTC, purchased my gT31, moved to a GW60, which proved to be quite useful for 2 years before falling apart and now have moved onto the Motion and have enjoyed the accurate improvement and being a member of the GPSTC.
If a second tier was added, using non approved devices, what does this bring to the sport. In Netball, you have to use an approved "Netball". In Soccer, one must use an approved Soccer Ball, outside of that, in the local park you can kick a tin along, still call it soccer or netball, but you cant be judged accurately by it.
When all your mates have arrived back at the beach and are bragging about their exploits that day on the water, how can you judge your self and see improvement in your sailing if you are using a "Non Approved Device". It doesn't mean anything - we must be lucky up here in FNQ, as long as we all beat Fred, we go home happy .
So, I still don't see what a second tier non approved device will achieve. As so many have indicated, its about the camaraderie, being on the same page. Outside of that, just post what a great day you've had out on the water. We belong to the best sport in the world, and I just wonder if it deserves being pulled apart like it has been recently.
I said to the Windtech lads last week, its time i got back to "just having fun". Yes, use the device, but use it to show improvements in gibing and the like. With the guns on our team, I'm more than happy to last the first 2 days of a new month with beans, and watch them all drift off onto another page as the sessions stack up

Just voted.

I get a good laugh at the argument that unapproved devices have no meaning. What meaning are they lacking. I use an unapproved GPS device for many sports all the time and it gives me plenty of meaning. I even use one for windsurfing and its results have meaning for me.

The truth is that 99.9% of the time it will read within a percent or so of an approved device. The tiny amount of time when it does not, it is pretty evident that something went wrong with GPS signal even if it does not tell you home many satellites it had like an approved one.

there is a huge difference between 39.99 and 40.01

Another issue I see is if you allow 'other ' devices , will you allow every other gps device, no matter how bad it could be? who will decide? ...

Select to expand quote

Richiefish said..
It seems a bit strange to me that this whole competition is reliant on one companies products. I reckon trying to validate the accuracy of Garmin and other units is the best option. Starting a "dodgy data" division would most likely detract from the whole speed quest thing. What happens for example at the Burrum speed comp when all the sailors with non compliant gear cant play ?

Sorry Richie as often stated here, unless Garmin add accuracy data to it's output file, we aren't going to bother trying to determine it's accuracy,.
There's just too much work and time involved.
In the past we invited owners of both devices to participate in validation, but that just didn't work. The necessary procedures were just too hard.
Garmin won't provide units for testing, somebody has to pay for them.

I thought Burrum was included in the KA72 thing. That will allow anything to post.

Select to expand quote

decrepit said..

I thought Burrum was included in the KA72 thing. That will allow anything to post.

Not quite anything Mike, the following is from last years NOR

11. GPS DATA & COLLECTION 11.1 All sailors enter their own data into KA 72. KA 72 will have event filters in place to calculate results. (GPS device must record at 1 second intervals and be able to output a compatible file format to upload to KA72.com)

Select to expand quote

powersloshin said..
there is a huge difference between 39.99 and 40.01

Just because a device is approved does not mean its result is any closer to what you were actually doing. All devices have stated accuracy and it is not 0%. The approval just means you can more readily detect when a GPS error caused by poor satellite reception (from crash or other interference like reflection off an object) caused an artificial result. 99.9% of the time you get good GPS reception from multiple satellites and a good quality Garmin/Sunto etc. would be as accurate as an approved device.

Just because your approved device says you did 40.01 does not mean you did 40.01!! In fact it is highly unlikely you did exactly 40.01 no matter what device you used. An 0.01kn error at 40kn would be 0.025% accuracy.

It is a little amusing how people think that approved devices have some magic inside of them that makes them more accurate. Like Garmin and others are purposely trying to make their products read wrong!! No GPS devices are accurate to 0.01 knots. Does that mean no GPS results have meaning?

Select to expand quote

vosadrian said..

powersloshin said..
there is a huge difference between 39.99 and 40.01

Just because a device is approved does not mean its result is any closer to what you were actually doing. All devices have stated accuracy and it is not 0%. The approval just means you can more readily detect when a GPS error caused by poor satellite reception (from crash or other interference like reflection off an object) caused an artificial result. 99.9% of the time you get good GPS reception from multiple satellites and a good quality Garmin/Sunto etc. would be as accurate as an approved device.

Just because your approved device says you did 40.01 does not mean you did 40.01!! In fact it is highly unlikely you did exactly 40.01 no matter what device you used. An 0.01kn error at 40kn would be 0.025% accuracy.

It is a little amusing how people think that approved devices have some magic inside of them that makes them more accurate. Like Garmin and others are purposely trying to make their products read wrong!! No GPS devices are accurate to 0.01 knots. Does that mean no GPS results have meaning?

No....sooooo wrong ??

Stop making stuff up vosadrian, third time. Do you believe people who actually have tried every possible device on the market looking for solutions to be wrong ? Do you know better than them ? Do you know better than timekeepers ? Do you, as an RF engineer, forgot the importance of surface area ? Of polarization ? Of the battery draw required to keep data valid ? Do you not know that speed accuracy is part of computation and as such is definitely always known, always present ? That the only real decision is whether to publish it or not ? And that some manufacturers keep on making the conscious effort not to publish it ?

There's people out there working hard on this. They actually organize events, they actually curate records, they actually test devices, they actually know why a device you mentioned with its massive low-pass-filter to hide issues isn't valid. They also know that their workload is enough as it is, that some have been blatantly trying to game events, that many open events challenges have disappeared before due to curators exhaustion and the never ending quarrels.

To be clear, I'm all for unapproved devices. I'm all for growing the sport. Yet I know this part to be a massive undertaking where many have tried and stopped before for good reasons. As such, I'm all for it but not pushing for it. A similar project was just dropped.

Select to expand quote

vosadrian said..

powersloshin said..
there is a huge difference between 39.99 and 40.01

Just because a device is approved does not mean its result is any closer to what you were actually doing. All devices have stated accuracy and it is not 0%. The approval just means you can more readily detect when a GPS error caused by poor satellite reception (from crash or other interference like reflection off an object) caused an artificial result. 99.9% of the time you get good GPS reception from multiple satellites and a good quality Garmin/Sunto etc. would be as accurate as an approved device.

Just because your approved device says you did 40.01 does not mean you did 40.01!! In fact it is highly unlikely you did exactly 40.01 no matter what device you used. An 0.01kn error at 40kn would be 0.025% accuracy.

It is a little amusing how people think that approved devices have some magic inside of them that makes them more accurate. Like Garmin and others are purposely trying to make their products read wrong!! No GPS devices are accurate to 0.01 knots. Does that mean no GPS results have meaning?

Vosadrian, you are asking us to see your point of view. I get that. There is a debate going on and it would appear that its going to get a lot of interest in our community. I see your POV, I do, I get, but unless it happens with approved devices its just a written post (which is great - you sometimes wish Fangy didn't have the proof to prattle on about how good he is , but he writes a mean story). The whole requirement of having a team structured sport, such as ours, across 5 hugely differing disciplines, needs a base point - and that point is an approved GPS's data. With out it, you don't have the beginnings with which you can start.
My previous post was possibly a little ill written in that I mentioned "Accuracy". That was possibly a poor choice of words in one specific area. I couldnt give to stuffs what GPS I need to use or how "accurate" it is. If blokes like the Hard One, Decrepit and so on, who have the brains and the nous to develop this sport and they tell me I require a certain "approved" gps, then Im in and all for it.
Any ways, I still reiterate - "what will a second tier add to the sport or give you, that you haven't got already?". You can still post a report, which I love reading, your still out on the water with your mates and occasionally its a Top Ten Day.

Select to expand quote

powersloshin said..
there is a huge difference between 39.99 and 40.01

But two approved devices will show that kind of results even more difference...
So are we correct talking about accuracy or should it be precision???

To close the debate, set a speed course based on time over gates... level playing field then!

Select to expand quote

Rob11 said..>>>But two approved devices will show that kind of results even more difference...
So are we correct talking about accuracy or should it be precision???
To close the debate, set a speed course based on time over gates... level playing field then!

Well there is one of those, but it's not that user friendly, and probably will cost you a lot more than an approved GPS to participate.

The issue is consistent verifiable accuracy. My DiY devices and the motion at 10hz on my head give typically +/- 0.08kts for the 2s division. +/- 0.04 for 10s and +/- 0.002 for the 1hr. And the big thing, the difference between the two units side by side on my head, is significantly less than these accuracy numbers.

Here's the comparison between the motion and my DIY logger at 10hz on the roof of my car.

The differences between the two, are much less than the estimated accuracy. So for the 2s the actual accuracy is about a 10th of the +/- values. So these differences are less than the 0.02 in the case above, 0.008 is the greatest difference I see in the 2s results.
But if the devices are worn on different places on the body, much bigger differences will be see.

GPS accuracy is an issue that appears to be rather straightforward, but actually is rather complex. I am still learning about this issue, after spending hundreds of hours evaluating GPS units, building prototypes, and writing my own software to enable better comparisons. But I fully agree with the GPSTC decision makers about which GPS units are suitable for the competition aspect of the Team Challenge.

Select to expand quote

FNQBilly said..
So, I still don't see what a second tier non approved device will achieve.

Well, this is an important question. Many of the now 100 windsurfers who responded to the poll have taken the time to explain why it is relevant to them by adding a comment. You can read many of them at boardsurfr.blogspot.com/2019/09/gps-device-poll-initial-results.html

I'll illustrate some of the reasons by looking at several members of our GPSTC team. Two of them, G and C, wear non-approved watches for every session. They like sharing what they did, and others in the team like reading about it. C has stopped posting to GPSTC rather than buying and carrying a second GPS that's approved. G has bought GW-60, which he already had to replace for $100 US when the armband broke, and usually sails with 2 watches. G dislikes the GW-60 since it is larger, and does not have some of the functions that his other GPS watch has. Both post "recreational" sessions, and never get jelly beans (or, for C, would get them if he posted).
With a 2-tier system, C would post his results, and G would not have to wear a second watch unless it is one of the rare speed session days. Other members in the team would be happy to see when and how C sails when they check GPSTC postings.

A third team member (myself) is in a similar position to G. Most of my sessions are not speed sessions, but I still like to post them, and others like to see the numbers and read about them. Foil session are one example. I would much rather use a cheaper and/or more customizable watch that the GW-60. I had to replace one GW-60 at full price already, and the second one is showing signs of going. The Motion is a great device and I have one, but for tracking regular sessions, it is overkill, and watches are easier and more convenient.

A fourth team member has a GT-31, but very much dislikes the armband, so he usually "forgets" to bring it. I sometimes give him my GW-60 to use so we can get two entries for a session. He often quite excited when looking at his speeds, but rarely is in jelly bean territory. He would buy a GPS watch if not for the reported problems with the GW-60.

A fifth team member mostly foils or does freestyle when the water is warm. She'd still often like to know her speeds, or jibe results, or how fast she was sliding backwards, but not with an armband. She is hesitant to use the GW-60 for her normal sessions since she does not like the idea of spending $250 to replace it when it breaks after a limited number of sessions. Other times when she wants to use her GW-60, it's gone into "deep sleep" and won't wake up.

A sixth team member used to have four GT-31s, and even had some of them repaired by Locosys for a very reasonably price. When he replaced them with GW-52s, he had problems with battery life, especially when going for the world record in ice surfing (he got up to the #2 spot I think). He also had several issues with the GW-60, and has stopped posting afterwards.

Those are stories from the GPSTC team members that I see most often; I sailed with a few of them in the last week. None of them are "whiners". All of them think they have a good reason for being able to post "recreational" results from a non-approved GPS. You can disagree with their reasoning, but it will not change what they think, or invalidate their preferences in any way. I am sure there are other GPSTC teams with similar stories from multiple members.

I had a really good session with my unapproved GPS, luckily GPSTC still allowed me to post my results and share the stoke with the other guys who had ripper sessions. Because my device was unapproved my numbers appeared as light grey, and my 2S, 5x10 and NM values were capped at a maximum of 29.9 knots and alpha at 19.9 knots. Was brilliant because this is the first time I had hit those limits. Maybe time I now buy an approved GPS and fully participate.

Select to expand quote

kato said..

vosadrian said..

powersloshin said..
there is a huge difference between 39.99 and 40.01

Just because a device is approved does not mean its result is any closer to what you were actually doing. All devices have stated accuracy and it is not 0%. The approval just means you can more readily detect when a GPS error caused by poor satellite reception (from crash or other interference like reflection off an object) caused an artificial result. 99.9% of the time you get good GPS reception from multiple satellites and a good quality Garmin/Sunto etc. would be as accurate as an approved device.

Just because your approved device says you did 40.01 does not mean you did 40.01!! In fact it is highly unlikely you did exactly 40.01 no matter what device you used. An 0.01kn error at 40kn would be 0.025% accuracy.

It is a little amusing how people think that approved devices have some magic inside of them that makes them more accurate. Like Garmin and others are purposely trying to make their products read wrong!! No GPS devices are accurate to 0.01 knots. Does that mean no GPS results have meaning?

No....sooooo wrong ??

So you can show me two approved devices consistently reading within 0.01kn for 2S for sessions when both devices were used at the same time? I'm not talking a one off here.

Select to expand quote

FNQBilly said..

Any ways, I still reiterate - "what will a second tier add to the sport or give you, that you haven't got already?". You can still post a report, which I love reading, your still out on the water with your mates and occasionally its a Top Ten Day.

Here is how it would effect me (and I can't speak for others). Currently all my posts on GPSTC are with a Garmin Geko which is currently classified as a legacy device. I am allowed to post with it currently, but apparently the results cannot contribute to team scores. So in a way I am already in the category I am asking for (and the database is already corrupted by my poor quality data). I also have a Garmin watch. It is much more convenient to use then the Geko I currently use and is probably giving better data also (Geko sample interval is 2s), but I can't use it due to GPSTC rules. I spend very little on my gear compared to others here. I purchase all sails/boards second hand and get them for a good price. I have not purchased any replacements in around 5 years. I would not buy a device that is many hundreds of $$ that could be unreliable and inconvenient to use compared to a watch I have on my wrist 24/7 when I am satisfied with the quality of the data from that device. I am a mid level sailor without much impact on team results, and happy to have my results removed form team scores.

So currently using my Geko on the GPSTC I can see how many kms I have sailed. I can see all my PRs on a page and I can click on them to find out which day I did them. I can post in my team session and encourage others and be encouraged by others. I personally don't follow the comments on a session that I did not sail in, but I do often click a session I did not sail in and see what results people were achieving and may comment on them if a result stands out. I would not see someone's results in the comments section to do this. Also, I like all the results in a table at the top where you can easily compare results. If someone sailed in the same location as me, I like to see how my results compare which is easy if posted in the table, but would be difficult if results are in comments and I have to scroll up and down to compare. I see some people say my results have no meaning because I do not have an approved device. For me they have plenty of meaning. As an engineer, I look through data all the time, and if something looks like it is not right in the data than I would remove/correct it. There have been times when my 2s has seemed too high and I have done this. I know that my 2S is normally around 2kn higher than my 5X10, but can go slightly higher on a gusty day and lower on a consistent day. I trust the longer parameters (NM, overall distance), as errors in track position would be averaged out. I also know how I sail compared to others in my area, so I typically get similar results to those about the same speed as me and that is good enough meaning/accuracy for me.

Select to expand quote

JulienLe said..
Stop making stuff up vosadrian, third time. Do you believe people who actually have tried every possible device on the market looking for solutions to be wrong ? Do you know better than them ? Do you know better than timekeepers ? Do you, as an RF engineer, forgot the importance of surface area ? Of polarization ? Of the battery draw required to keep data valid ? Do you not know that speed accuracy is part of computation and as such is definitely always known, always present ? That the only real decision is whether to publish it or not ? And that some manufacturers keep on making the conscious effort not to publish it ?

There's people out there working hard on this. They actually organize events, they actually curate records, they actually test devices, they actually know why a device you mentioned with its massive low-pass-filter to hide issues isn't valid. They also know that their workload is enough as it is, that some have been blatantly trying to game events, that many open events challenges have disappeared before due to curators exhaustion and the never ending quarrels.

To be clear, I'm all for unapproved devices. I'm all for growing the sport. Yet I know this part to be a massive undertaking where many have tried and stopped before for good reasons. As such, I'm all for it but not pushing for it. A similar project was just dropped.

Hi Julien,

I'm not going to get into the technical here as it is beyond the point I was trying to make. In my current job I am designing cellular solutions including Antenna design for IoT health devices. I know how ground plane area/length/shape couples with an Antenna tuned element, but I'm not here to get into a technical argument.

I am sure some devices are more accurate than others. But none are 100% accurate. Many here are saying results of an unapproved device have no meaning. I am just pointing out that no GPS device is absolute accurate. So where do you draw the line of the results having meaning as people here are questioning the meaning of non-approved results? The arguments against unapproved devices I see presented by the GPSTC in this forum are typically about the lack of error data, satellite count etc. This data is typically presented as something to be used to determine if a high speed was in error. The lack of this data in a device does not imply that the data is inaccurate or does not have meaning. It just means it would be more difficult to determine if the data was in error. You imply the manufacturers make conscious effort not to publish it as if they have something to hide, but where did you get that from? Maybe they don't put it there because 99.9% of their market does not care about it. Have you noticed how modern cars have less information on the dash board (like often no coolant guage). If they provide information that can be misinterpreted and then cause a support enquiry they are just making a support issue that does not need to be there.

I have seen many posts here from people using more than one device for a session. Typically an unapproved device reads similar to an approved device. Furthermore, there has been evidence that using two unapproved devices can yield quite different results. This is not a suggestion that unapproved is better. It is just pointing out that approved devices do not always read the same and most of the time two devices (be it unapproved or approved or combo) will read within a few tenths of a knot and this is good enough for many sailors.

Finally, I think your opinions presented here should be recognised as a conflict of interest. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but it should be recognised that your opinion is in line with the result that would give you more sales of your product.

I went to a georeference workshop in California, o E of the speakers described "Precision" as a close cluster of darts somewhere on the dart boat. "Accuracy" is how close they are to the bullseye.

(edited gibberish)

Select to expand quote

vosadrian said..Currently all my posts on GPSTC are with a Garmin Geko which is currently classified as a legacy device. I am allowed to post with it currently, but apparently the results cannot contribute to team scores. So in a way I am already in the category I am asking for (and the database is already corrupted by my poor quality data).

From the rules page (my bold):

*** GPS-TC also allows the legacy GPS, the GT-11 which has Doppler speed data, but only for those sailors not in the category mentioned above.
Note: The previously grandfathered, Legacy GPS's, mainly Garmin Foretrex 201 and Garmin Geko, which used positional speed data (T) are removed from the approved list as of March 2019.

Agreed that NO GPS device is '100% accurate' In fact, pretty much no device or measurement ever invented is. There is always an error margin.

The point is that with the approved devices, we actually know what that error margin is.

Select to expand quote

vosadrian said.. You imply the manufacturers make conscious effort not to publish it as if they have something to hide, but where did you get that from?

From the whole research branch dedicated to hiding poor GNSS from users.

Select to expand quote

vosadrian said..Finally, I think your opinions presented here should be recognised as a conflict of interest. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, but it should be recognised that your opinion is in line with the result that would give you more sales of your product.

I'm here to answer questions and notice good ideas. And I literally just said I was *for* unapproved devices but recognized it was a daunting task which I've seen fail multiple times over the past 12 years because it always starts with good sentiments but two years in everyone hates each other and curators leave.

Select to expand quote

vosadrian said..>>>> it should be recognised that your opinion is in line with the result that would give you more sales of your product.

Julien doesn't need to push the motion here, the product speaks for itself. I think he has as many orders as he can cope with.

Hopefully this can of worms is closed for good.

Walk in someone else's shoes? Try to understand why everyone is upset?

Adrian is windsurfing on a budget. To him, saying he has to spend $300+ often to replace a GPS that has questionable advantages but well documented disadvantages is offensive. Suddenly disallowing a device that he has used for many years, without any harm to the competition, does not seem to accomplish anything; it almost looks like a direct swipe at him.

Andrew has been speedsurfing at the highest level for decades. He has very closely experienced how important the introduction of accuracy estimates was for a valid results at the top end of the competition, where 0.1 knots sometimes make a difference. He has spend a lot of time looking at GPS accuracy and talking to people who know even more about it than he does. But his decisions are constantly questioned. Sometimes, it is by people to whom the question is new, for example because their approved device suddenly stopped working. More often, he hears the same arguments from the same people, who never acknowledge the validity of anything they disagree with.

Julien has spent a lot of his time to develop the best GPS for speedsurfing on the market. He keeps control of all possible aspects of the production so he can be sure the quality is there and he can honor warranties, rather than just outsourcing production for a quick buck. He has closely worked with the GPSTC to make sure the device works well for the competition, at times changing his decisions even against his personal opinions. Given demand, he could easily sell the Motion at twice the price and make more money, but he chooses to keep it as affordable as possible. But even though there is no way he can possibly meet the demand, he is accused of selfish reasons when he posts.

Everyone is pissed. Is that what we wanted? If not, can it change? Or can we remember that we all love windsurfing fast, albeit with different goals and constraints that can lead to different preferences?

As for the poll, responses have gone down to a trickle, so I'll disable new responses within the next day or two. I'll leave it open a little longer for anyone who has not yet gotten around to answering it.

In the GPSTC output shown above, why not add a column that shows what device was used, then let 'em all in?

By seeing the results from various devices, we could learn a lot about the quality of the results. We could still be reminded that results from only certain devices can be used to recognize official speeds. Asterisk the others, but keep them readable.

The worry is that this might make for too much ongoing work for the site owners.