High frequency processors could put your GPS on the fritz

Just when you think things couldn't get any more gloomy in the world of in-car navigation systems, here comes news that high frequency processors surrounding your GPS system could actually cause some seriously screwy routing. According to a study by the Swedish Defense Research Agency, "computers used near a NAV could disturb the signals utilized in the GPS receiver." More specifically, Intel CPUs with clock speeds of 1.7GHz, 3.0GHz, and 3.2GHz were pinpointed as potential troublemakers, but a member of the study actually went so far as to suggest that a variety of other (untested) chips could indeed wreak the same havoc. The study showed that "modern computers produce interfering signals that reach as far as the frequency bandwidths used for GPS systems," and while specific reactions weren't apparent, testers did suggest to move any computer equipment further away from the GPS unit if it began to "play up" for no ostensible reason. Of course, we've huddled our own laptops and GPS systems together on many occasions with no ill consequences, so as always, your miles may vary.

[Via NaviGadget]

[nemi @ Apr 26th 2007 11:23AM]

I knew there would eventually be a good reason for the "spread spectrum" BIOS option....

[Josh Warner @ Apr 26th 2007 12:31PM]

Hmm, my laptop has a 1.7 GHz Pentium-M and my desktop has a 3.2 GHz P4... I hope my cell phone's E911 GPS is never needed when I'm sitting at my desk.

[paul34 @ Apr 26th 2007 1:54PM]

That depends on what kind of phone you're using. I think there's a bit of misconception that all cell phones use actual GPS coordinates for the E911 system, but this isn't necessarily true.

It is true that CDMA carriers use actual GPS modules in their phones, but for GSM carriers, it isn't GSM - its really a triangulation method which depends on the existence of at least three accessible towers.

This is also why carriers are having a hard time with E911 compliance in rural areas - where towers are often set up like a chain. Basically, the problem is "how do I triangulate with only one tower?"

[paul34 @ Apr 26th 2007 1:55PM]

That depends on what kind of phone you're using. I think there's a bit of misconception that all cell phones use actual GPS coordinates for the E911 system, but this isn't necessarily true.

It is true that CDMA carriers use actual GPS modules in their phones, but for GSM carriers, it isn't GSM - its really a triangulation method which depends on the existence of at least three accessible towers.

This is also why carriers are having a hard time with E911 compliance in rural areas - where towers are often set up like a chain. Basically, the problem is "how do I triangulate with only one tower?"

[Jeff @ Apr 26th 2007 12:40PM]

also, i'm pretty sure that you're using "ostensible" inappropriately.

I know it SEEMS like "ostensible" can be substituted for "apparent" but that's not really the case:

-- The APPARENT reason for something is not necessarily the real reason. In this sense, the word applies to what appears only on the surface, not to what is borne out by scientific investigation or an examination of the relevant facts and circumstances

-- The OSTENSIBLE reason for something is the reason that is expressed, declared, or avowed; but it implies that the truth is being concealed.


You can make fun of me for being a word-nerd, I'm okay with that.

[chris @ Apr 26th 2007 2:06PM]

Grammar problems not withstanding, is anyone actually worried about the rate of people who are going to try to drive across the Atlantic Ocean when all they really want is to go to Olive Garden?

[Waruwaru @ Apr 26th 2007 2:28PM]

Who knew teleportation devices can come so soon!

[Jesse G. @ Apr 26th 2007 3:14PM]

haha if you type in ny to paris in google maps on number 24 it tells you to swim across the atlantic ocean =0

[The Utilitarian @ Apr 27th 2007 1:20AM]

LOL Swedish defense