The OsmAnd development team mentioned many years ago that an hc=1.0 would deliver the only really "correct" route, as all "paths" will be checked in the "shortest path" algorithm. Therefore, the only correct route would be chosen. So it was not a bd algorithm or bad implementation: it was a design decision. One I "fought" really hard at that time as at that time I was more involved in the entire project (as I considered it nonsense. Use hc=1.0 in a city with lots of possibilties. Use hc=1.2~1.5 for anything else). In practice this hc=1.0 is hardly ever necessary, especially on (slightly) longer routes, but for that you have to read the posts from several people here (and I do not mean myself), or simply check my pdf and redo the tests for yourself. Or search on "A* shortest path", "heuristic coefficient" etcetera. When you start there you will find a wealth of articles. Also check youtube if you are more visually oriented.
I simply did not test 1.4. If 1.3 and 1.5 deliver the same route, why should I test 1.4. (You can do the tests yourself. ;) ) I use an hc=1.2 in cities, as I do consider OsmAnd the best in cities (like explained earlier ;) ) I use an hc=1.5 for longer trips, but only again since 2 months or so since the profiles option became available, and with roads_only maps (another option OsmAnd offers, BTW). The last 2 years I used Magic Earth. Before that and starting from approx. 2014 I used Mapfactor Navigator for car routing. I used OsmAnd for everything else and now again more and more for car routing as well. And indeed 3D (or 2.5D or birdview, etc) is nicer for navigation, but actually I do not care much. I drive a lot of rental cars for my work, and some also have 2D only or "some other renter" put it back to 2D and/or "North up". I don't care much. Once in traffic I am not going to fiddle with it. Most advanced systems rotate the map back to 2D in case you need to go right/left in a city, and move back to 3D when going straight ahead again. So I guess that map makers consider 2D better when you really need to see which right/left turn you need to take (not talking about motorway exits here). Anyway, you have to watch the road, not the screen. Op za 28 mrt. 2020 om 13:11 schreef zanny <[email protected]>: > Thanks for the PDF summary, very explicative. > A couple of questions from my side (I apologise if those have been asked > and answered somewhere else already). > 1) why is hc=1 the standard parameter? in 5 of 7 cases the results (in > terms of distance and travel time) is the same as hc=1.5. And in the > others, the gap between the results of hc=1 and hc=1.5 is minimal > (negligible). > 2) out of curiosity: is there a technical reason for factor 1.4 not being > tested? > > thanks > > Il giorno sabato 28 marzo 2020 11:46:12 UTC+1, Harry van der Wolf ha > scritto: >> >> Like I have stated before: Use a different profile with a different >> heuristic coefficient(See .xmls attached). >> In another mail thread "heuristic coefficient comparisons" recently, I >> did comparisons also against Magic Earth. See attached pdf. I don't care >> about differences in seconds. I do care about differences in minutes as >> this makes it unusable. >> I wrote extensively about using these profiles and how they improve >> OsmAnd a lot for car navigation, next to being it the "swiis knife" for all >> other navigation/tracking/hiking functionalities with overlay/underlay >> maps, and you name it. >> >> Finally: 3D is in the make. I also posted about that in this mailing >> group, referring to one of the telegram groups where this is shared. >> >> Just do what you want with it. >> Trying to prove that OsmAnd is "bad" mail after mail, only leads to one >> conclusion: Use another app and stop wasting your time on such a "bad" app. >> >> Harry >> >> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "OsmAnd" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/osmand/a0dfee17-b1b9-4569-886a-e329f4d7e39a%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/osmand/a0dfee17-b1b9-4569-886a-e329f4d7e39a%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "OsmAnd" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/osmand/CAGARPpt0igt-kj%2B%3DtfpHCLdhvvvi3qQp2UDq_ncvoMJfjFKpEw%40mail.gmail.com.
