I know, I know - get a NAVI but.....
Going away on a holiday soon. Finally got the USB to serial Adapter drivers working after much gnashing of teeth but now I cant get any of the GPS programs to recognise the GPS. I think I've tried swithching COM ports but no luck.. very basic computer knowledge so be gentle!
Running laptop with Vista..
Hi Red,
Did the same exercise but the usb to serial port cables don't work with vista. I tried everthink but in the end bought a navi gt-11 and run the garmin also in case the navi has a problem.
@red
If you have USB to serial cable/converter, I hope you know that with that cable you need to have original drivers. That Usb to serial cable is first need to install, and when you have in device manager "usb to serial converter" working properly, in that case you need to connect GPS. But, if you need GPS and Usb to serial cable, in software, now you must switch serial to USB, becouse GPS is need to be shown as USB device. Hope that helps
Device manager shows USB to Serial Adapter as working and I've gone an played with all the COM port settings seeing if that would make a difference but no joy. All the different software packages just do "see" the GPS
I run a USB to serial converter with Vista (fkn @#$#%@$# #%@$^ !@*&)...
It does work... you need to use the same port always... and you need to tell your gps software (I use easy GPS for downloading tracks) the com port which has the USB plugged in...
To get the COM port number on XP you go to control panel, system, hardware tab, device manager, expand ports. Plug the GPS in and see which new com port number appears. Can't remember if the device manager needs to be closed and reopened to refresh, I think its automatic. Hopefully its similar on vista. Also make sure the GPS is on and set to connect. At least you'll know if you have the correct com port number.
Also the GPS manual should give you the baude rate etc, download it if you don't have it.
Besides being tight, the only reason you dont want to get a Navi is that your posted speeds will be slightly lower. Be a real shame that ![]()