Garmin reveals Windows Phone 8 supported GPS heads-up display

Stand alone GPS devices for cars have become less and less popular for consumers as they have taken to using navigation apps on smartphones to get around. Now the well known GPS hardware company Garmin is trying to combine smartphone apps with a new hardware product that creates something right out of a sci-fi movie.

Garmin's press release reveals what they simply call HUD, which when mounted on the dashboard of a car generates a heads-up display on its windshield. The information can also be displayed on a attached reflector lens that is included with the HUD. Garmin states:

HUD displays turn arrows, distance to the next turn, current speed and speed limit, as well as estimated time of arrival. It even lets drivers know what lane to be in for the next maneuver and alerts them when they exceed the speed limit2. HUD also warns users of potential traffic delays and upcoming safety camera locations.

The HUD connects via Bluetooth with a smartphone, which provides the actual navigation directions and information. The device is compatible with iOS, Android and, yes, Windows Phone 8 smartphones via Garmin's StreetPilot and NAVIGON apps. The Garmin HUD product will be released later this summer for $129.99.

Source: Garmin | Image via Garmin

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Windows 8.1 to be 'made available to OEMs' in late August

Next Story

"Amazing TV content experiences" coming to Xbox, as Microsoft hires UK TV exec

55 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

Someone needs to make a gadget that will work with any navigation app, but specifically Google Maps, and provide an HUD like this.

Well. To be fair now that I'm back on Google maps with Android I'd really wish the Nokia maps that I had on WP Maybe it's the region or something but here HERE maps are simply better, to each their own though right? But this HUD thingy would be useful anyway, someone should just make it so you can use what kind of maps you want and not just lock it down to 1.

Already doing this with an old cell phone and 4inch square of window tint material. Cost me 45 dollars to get it all set-up. GPS turn by turn and all.

NastySasquatch said,
Already doing this with an old cell phone and 4inch square of window tint material. Cost me 45 dollars to get it all set-up. GPS turn by turn and all.
Mass produce that and deploy. Go.

FloatingFatMan said,
Android has have apps that do exactly this for ages...
Yea, I'm not putting my phone on my dash for a 4 hour trip in the sun. That's what I thought this was a first. Their idea is solid.

MrHumpty said,
Yea, I'm not putting my phone on my dash for a 4 hour trip in the sun. That's what I thought this was a first. Their idea is solid.

Yea, that's true too. I bet that would tend to bake your screen. I was in my convertible waiting in line for state inspection and my phone screen started to fail from overheating. It came back when I let it cool back down. The HUD I have now which plugs into the OBDII actually gets pretty hot both from the Sun and from the intensity of the light it puts out.

Mugwump00 said,
That's very, very cool - an on-board video camera would make it irresistible.
Then we'd get dash cam vids of wrecks all over the world and not just in Russia.

XerXis said,
does it work in direct sunlight?
That's what I'm wondering. I know in my new BMW, the HUD is visible in pretty much every situation I've encountered, so I hope the same is true for this device. I love HUD's - they are so useful, not distracting, and it's already in view of sight.

XerXis said,
does it work in direct sunlight?

Based on other ones I've used, it works good in any light with that reflective material you stick on the windshield. Personally I find that stuff annoying and ugly and leave it out. It's also hard to stick down without bubbles in it. Without it, I can see the HUD in the direct Sun but it's faint. Factory units have the reflective material neatly integrated in the windshield.

to bad Navigon is the worst POS navigation you can get.

it refused to map the 2 hours shorter route when we drove to my GF's mother last week, bought TomTom for the phone up there and it showed the shortest route right away, as well as not having a whisper quiet voice and you can actually change voice on it, not to mention the horrible high speed performance on it..

besides that, it's not very useful since you're supposed to follow the voice guides not look at the screen or HUD.

ILikeTobacco said,
But distracting. Should be interesting to see what the law makers do with it.

More or less distracting than the other numerous vehicles with factory installed HUDs? It is one of the features I miss the most from my last vehicle. It actually kept my eyes on the road more as I didn't have to look down to check gauge readouts.

ILikeTobacco said,
Distracting is distracting. The amount is irrelevant. Law makers will end up having to address it just the same.

You missed the point. These are systems which are already integrated into vehicles today which already have to pass government safety tests. I guess I'll rip out my radio too.

warwagon said,
See, now that's useful!

Not really when it shows oversimplified directions like that. Makes going through roundabouts a nightmare.

scorp508 said,

You missed the point. These are systems which are already integrated into vehicles today which already have to pass government safety tests. I guess I'll rip out my radio too.

You mean like in Germany, where radios are barely legal anymore? They can't even modify the speakers without taking the entire vehicle in for inspection because they have to make sure the speakers are not capable of being to loud.

You are the only one missing any points. Every time anything new happens with cars, new rules, standards, and laws have to be made.

ILikeTobacco said,
Distracting is distracting. The amount is irrelevant. Law makers will end up having to address it just the same.

As far as I understand it, in the US, driver distraction guidelines are all voluntary. I can't speak with certainty about other regions, though.

Still, as anyone who plays video games knows, quick glances at a transparent minimap off in a corner are a fraction of a distraction when compared to looking at an image on a second display.

It's the difference between simply moving your eyes and having to move your whole head.

ILikeTobacco said,
Distracting is distracting. The amount is irrelevant. Law makers will end up having to address it just the same.

More distracting than turning your head completely to look at a GPS mounted somewhere in your car?

warwagon said,

More distracting than turning your head completely to look at a GPS mounted somewhere in your car?

Are you really using pothead logic? Pot isn't as deadly as cigarettes so its perfectly healthy even though its not.... It's distracting, period. It will have to be reviewed, period. Is it that hard to comprehend or are you just arguing for attention?

ILikeTobacco said,
Are you really using pothead logic? Pot isn't as deadly as cigarettes so its perfectly healthy even though its not.... It's distracting, period. It will have to be reviewed, period. Is it that hard to comprehend or are you just arguing for attention?

You are the one with Tabacco in your name, not me

Doubt it will be reviewed in the US thoroughly. By your logic, we might as rip out every single piece of infotainment in the car and just purely drive. This is really not any more/less distracting than any other car based navigation systems.

ILikeTobacco said,
It will have to be reviewed, period. Is it that hard to comprehend or are you just arguing for attention?

Reviewed, sure. But again, voluntary. All distraction guidelines are voluntary. The only thing lawmakers would do is update--again--voluntary guidelines.

Which has nothing to do with anything in this discussion since I personally can't stand tobacco. Try to stay on topic instead of making assumptions about people over the internet.

ILikeTobacco said,
Which has nothing to do with anything in this discussion since I personally can't stand tobacco. Try to stay on topic instead of making assumptions about people over the internet.

tsupersonic said,
Doubt it will be reviewed in the US thoroughly. By your logic, we might as rip out every single piece of infotainment in the car and just purely drive. This is really not any more/less distracting than any other car based navigation systems.
That is not in any way my logic. My logic is it needs to be reviewed just like everything else always is. Don't try a strawman.

Joshie said,

Reviewed, sure. But again, voluntary. All distraction guidelines are voluntary. The only thing lawmakers would do is update--again--voluntary guidelines.
Depends on where you are. Places like Germany, for example, are not voluntary.

ILikeTobacco said,
Which has nothing to do with anything in this discussion since I personally can't stand tobacco. Try to stay on topic instead of making assumptions about people over the internet.

You seem grumpy!

Edited by warwagon, Jul 8 2013, 5:24pm :

ILikeTobacco said,
You are the only one missing any points. Every time anything new happens with cars, new rules, standards, and laws have to be made.

No, new laws do not have to be made. Perhaps this is true in countries which are determined to be the "parents" of all citizens and determine for them what is and is not safe and/or for reasons of tax/fee generation.

I'll stand by my comments that this is a far more natural interface than having to move my head to glance of updated data. Should fighter pilots rip out their HUDs and go back to only having physical gauge clusters? I mean... they're distracting and they are flying multi-million dollar pieces of equipment and all. </s>

scorp508 said,

I mean... they're distracting and they are flying multi-million dollar pieces of equipment and all. </s>
Right back to the straw man argument. Let me see if I can do that too. I guess no rules at all should ever be made for anything related to distracting drivers. Cellphones, loud music.. why not make the entire front windshield a display to watch movies on? Sound ridiculous? If so, stop trying to use a straw man argument. You are right obviously though. When seat belts, speed gauges, mirrors, headlights, breaklights... all of it.. when they were made, they never made any laws about them right?

ILikeTobacco said,
Right back to the straw man argument. Let me see if I can do that too. I guess no rules at all should ever be made for anything related to distracting drivers. Cellphones, loud music.. why not make the entire front windshield a display to watch movies on? Sound ridiculous? If so, stop trying to use a straw man argument. You are right obviously though. When seat belts, speed gauges, mirrors, headlights, breaklights... all of it.. when they were made, they never made any laws about them right?

Traffic studies have already been done to show HUDs as being less distracting to a driver than a in dash monitor.

Heres one done in Taiwan of all places.

http://www.mendeley.com/catalo...e-commercial-vehicle-opera/

if you want to find more do your own google search.

ILikeTobacco said,
But distracting. Should be interesting to see what the law makers do with it.
If anything HUDs are less dangerous than phones or other devices used for GPS.

Great example. Did you know phones are being banned while driving all over the globe. Those are not some magical standard to go by. Now, READ. It has NOTHING to do with what is more or less dangerous. If it is more dangerous than nothing, it is dangerous. Notice how every single person said it is "less distracting." They didn't say it wasn't distracting, thus admitting it is in fact distraction.

Is nobody using a bit of common sense? Look at the picture. A none stationary device that projects something on the windshield. Can anyone honestly say that having that thing moved to take up the entire windshield won't be distracting. Stop trolling and use some actual logic. Models that have HUD do not have moving projectors. They stay in one spot for the precise reason of not being able to take up the entire windshield, causing a major distraction. But go ahead and be ignorant and pretend that a windshield filled with crap is not distracting. That has got to be one of the dumbest lines of thought anyone has tried to argue in a while. Fact, this thing is distracting. Fact, most civilized countries are making laws regarding things that distract the driver. Look at cellphone texting as an example.

I feel like there is a major disconnect between you and everyone else. You are just rambling on about this being a distraction. Well no ****. Everything a driver does besides focusing on the road is a 'distraction.' Thanks captain obvious.

Every country has their own laws about what's acceptable/not. In the US, I don't see this device getting resistance to being released to the public. Is it a distraction? Yes (but then again what isn't in a car these days). Is it LESS of a distraction that your typical Garmin/handheld GPS units? Yes, by far.

Please read for a change before posting nonsense in response to something you failed to read. Who said anything about resistance? Stop putting worlds in peoples mouths. It is a distraction, it will get reviewed and action will be taken where necessary. Laws with limits on how much of your windshield can be covered will eventually exist. You have to be incredibly stupid to think otherwise. Again, for those that are challenged in comprehension. I never said it was more distracting than another device. I never said it wouldn't be allowed. I said it would be interesting to see what lawmakers do with it. Take your ignorant assumptions to someone who cares for your trolling.

If anyone has comprehension problems, it's you...Two different train of thoughts going on, and yet all you do is reiterate the same thing without making a point. Stop trolling and saying others are 'challenged in comprehension'.

You are right. They are right. There is no possibly for this thing to be a safety hazard. Nobody would ever think to move it directly in the view of the driving area. Nobody would ever think to make it take up more than a few square centimeters. That makes perfect sense. There is no reason, whatsoever, to ever, under a circumstance possible in this realm of existence, for law makers to look at any device and make laws regarding their use while driving. It is perfectly legal in the United States to watch movies on your laptop screen while driving. It is perfectly legal everywhere in the United States to drive while texting. That is what you are arguing for and it is a well known fact that those two things are illegal in many places. But no, you are right. Distracting things never have laws made dealing with their use while driving. Facts are on my side. You are simply trolling because you have nothing else to argue with for why you should be allowed to make a HUD that fills the entire windshield so you claim it is in no way distracting. I said comprehension problem because you either have that or you are a troll and trolling isn't allowed. Since you claim to not have a comprehension problem, you are admitting to simply trolling. But please, continue posting about how driving will texting is legal and no laws have every been made anywhere on the planet about driving with distractions.

ILikeTobacco said,
Great example. Did you know phones are being banned while driving all over the globe. Those are not some magical standard to go by. Now, READ. It has NOTHING to do with what is more or less dangerous. If it is more dangerous than nothing, it is dangerous. Notice how every single person said it is "less distracting." They didn't say it wasn't distracting, thus admitting it is in fact distraction.

Is nobody using a bit of common sense? Look at the picture. A none stationary device that projects something on the windshield. Can anyone honestly say that having that thing moved to take up the entire windshield won't be distracting. Stop trolling and use some actual logic. Models that have HUD do not have moving projectors. They stay in one spot for the precise reason of not being able to take up the entire windshield, causing a major distraction. But go ahead and be ignorant and pretend that a windshield filled with crap is not distracting. That has got to be one of the dumbest lines of thought anyone has tried to argue in a while. Fact, this thing is distracting. Fact, most civilized countries are making laws regarding things that distract the driver. Look at cellphone texting as an example.

ROFL. Man, do you have some whiskey near you?

I've used HUDs and GPS devicse and my phone. A HUD is by no means as distracting as a phone. While it would provide more distraction than nothing (apparently your barometer) it is still safe for most. And if you're worried that a user would fill up their entire windscreen with the HUD (which I doubt is even possible... cause you know it's so close to the window.

Bottom line, you seriously need to chill out. Your breathlessness is coming through in your posts and you're creating arguments that didn't exist to smack them down.

Here's what I'll stand behind. A HUD, used properly, adds minimal distraction so it's value is more than justified over the slightly increased risk of an accident. Other GPS devices that must be mounted to the windshield or are in the cars console offer much higher distraction than a HUD though I don't find them to be such a risk as they should be banned. I'll also stand behind that if an idiot uses a device improperly it is a bad thing, but I don't believe that since there are idiots in world that the rest of us should be muzzled and have blinders on while driving our cars.

MrHumpty said,
A HUD is by no means as distracting as a phone.

Nobody ever made a claim otherwise, or at least I haven't. But since you seem to think I did, please quote exactly where I said it.
MrHumpty said,
And if you're worried that a user would fill up their entire windscreen with the HUD (which I doubt is even possible... cause you know it's so close to the window.
A simple lens would make it happen on a small projector. Basic science.

MrHumpty said,
Bottom line, you seriously need to chill out. Your breathlessness is coming through in your posts and you're creating arguments that didn't exist to smack them down.
Read what I said when I made up arguments. I was illustrating that they were doing that exact thing and how absurd it was. Sort of like in the beginning of this post where you were arguing that a HUD is less distracting than a phone even though it was never argued otherwise.

MrHumpty said,
Here's what I'll stand behind. A HUD, used properly, adds minimal distraction so it's value is more than justified over the slightly increased risk of an accident. Other GPS devices that must be mounted to the windshield or are in the cars console offer much higher distraction than a HUD though I don't find them to be such a risk as they should be banned. I'll also stand behind that if an idiot uses a device improperly it is a bad thing, but I don't believe that since there are idiots in world that the rest of us should be muzzled and have blinders on while driving our cars.
How would a law that prevents you from making it a full windshield display muzzle you? How would a law that says it can't be directly in your line of sight of the road muzzle you? We are talking about laws that make it illegal to do actual dangerous things which is no different than the no texting while driving laws that are coming out everywhere. Nobody argued that nobody would be allowed to use the device so please take your own advice and stop making up arguments.

And lastly, who becomes breathless and worked up about an internet post. That is just plain immature. So far, everyone is using a straw man or pothead logic to claim that no laws should exist regarding the safe use of HUDs and that is nothing short of moronic or they are trolling. One person already admitted to trolling.

You do realize there are many production cars in the US/World that have HUD based systems that are in direct view of the driving area? These things do NOT fill the whole screen. I have a BMW HUD system - and it's very minimal in terms of what it projects. You can choose what you want to project - I have mine set to project speed, and navigation (only displays if I have a destination set in the navigation system). It's very out of the way, and you're still looking at the road. If you don't like it, you have the ability to turn it off. If you think it's that distracting, don't use it!

I never said anything about texting/watching movies while driving, that's just you putting words in my mouth. Texting/using phones may be illegal depending on what state you are in, same with watching videos. I never said systems like this aren't distracting - I said HUD's are less (keyword = less) distracting than your typical Garmin/<insert other brand> GPS handheld units.

My point is everything you're doing besides driving is a distraction - I guess your brain can't comprehend that for some reason. There is no such thing as distraction free driving - it's just a reality we live with. Anything that becomes more transparent and not having to move your eyes off the road is a good thing. Yes, there will be laws/restrictions based on your country/state on these sort of things. No one said there wouldn't be...

Here's an example of the BMW HUD system:
http://i208.photobucket.com/al...-16638-000006C8911E022B.jpg
I don't find that distracting, but again, if you do, you can turn it off.

ILikeTobacco said,

Nobody ever made a claim otherwise, or at least I haven't. But since you seem to think I did, please quote exactly where I said it.
A simple lens would make it happen on a small projector. Basic science.

Read what I said when I made up arguments. I was illustrating that they were doing that exact thing and how absurd it was. Sort of like in the beginning of this post where you were arguing that a HUD is less distracting than a phone even though it was never argued otherwise.

How would a law that prevents you from making it a full windshield display muzzle you? How would a law that says it can't be directly in your line of sight of the road muzzle you? We are talking about laws that make it illegal to do actual dangerous things which is no different than the no texting while driving laws that are coming out everywhere. Nobody argued that nobody would be allowed to use the device so please take your own advice and stop making up arguments.

And lastly, who becomes breathless and worked up about an internet post. That is just plain immature. So far, everyone is using a straw man or pothead logic to claim that no laws should exist regarding the safe use of HUDs and that is nothing short of moronic or they are trolling. One person already admitted to trolling.

I need to find a way to get you a hug bud

I should add: The person destroying straw men in this thread is you. It's actually very comical.

tsupersonic said,
You do realize there are many production cars in the US/World that have HUD based systems that are in direct view of the driving area? These things do NOT fill the whole screen. I have a BMW HUD system - and it's very minimal in terms of what it projects. You can choose what you want to project - I have mine set to project speed, and navigation (only displays if I have a destination set in the navigation system). It's very out of the way, and you're still looking at the road. If you don't like it, you have the ability to turn it off. If you think it's that distracting, don't use it!

I never said anything about texting/watching movies while driving, that's just you putting words in my mouth. Texting/using phones may be illegal depending on what state you are in, same with watching videos. I never said systems like this aren't distracting - I said HUD's are less (keyword = less) distracting than your typical Garmin/<insert other brand> GPS handheld units.

My point is everything you're doing besides driving is a distraction - I guess your brain can't comprehend that for some reason. There is no such thing as distraction free driving - it's just a reality we live with. Anything that becomes more transparent and not having to move your eyes off the road is a good thing. Yes, there will be laws/restrictions based on your country/state on these sort of things. No one said there wouldn't be...

Here's an example of the BMW HUD system:
http://i208.photobucket.com/al...-16638-000006C8911E022B.jpg
I don't find that distracting, but again, if you do, you can turn it off.

facepalm. You really don't get it. Nobody, NOBODY, NOT A SINGLE PERSON... said there was a such thing as no distraction. So can we move past that already. How are you not getting that nobody is trying to say it is more of a distracting? Let me repeat that. IT IS NOT MORE OF A DISTRACTION. It is a distraction, and a very serious one when put directly in view of the driver. Like you said, less is the key word so stop trying to claim its not yourself. Please quote where I said that a little display that doesn't hinder the driver was an issue? That's right, you can't, because I never did. Did you ever wonder why your BMW doesn't have a full display HUD? If you say anything but distraction, we know you are just trolling at that point. That is what is being talked about. Displays that impair the ability of the driver to see what is going on. The same thing that texting does. The same thing that watching videos do. Two things that laws are being made for. Stop trying to argue that such rules and regulations do not need to be considering just for the sake of argument.

MrHumpty said,
I need to find a way to get you a hug bud

I should add: The person destroying straw men in this thread is you. It's actually very comical.

What does a hug have anything to do with anything? Are you getting emotional about a HUD?

Please, point me to the straw man without quoting the part where I was showing how ridiculous using a straw man was. I have been talking about rules and regulations needing to be developed regarding misuse of the technology. Saying that a full display that covers the entire windshield is the possible outcome is not a straw man. It is an example of something that the law should forbid. Straw man would be when someone tried to claim I was saying that all distractions, no matter how small they are, should be eliminated, which I never said. Straw man would be claiming that I have the ridiculous argument that a HUD is more distracting than a GPS or phone. Something that people keep trying to argue against even though nobody made that argument. This comes down to simple facts. Facts, it is very easy to make a full screen HUD. Fact, someone will do it. Fact, law makers will have to decide if it is safe or not. Please, point me to the straw man in any of those facts.

ILikeTobacco said,
What does a hug have anything to do with anything? Are you getting emotional about a HUD?

Please, point me to the straw man without quoting the part where I was showing how ridiculous using a straw man was. I have been talking about rules and regulations needing to be developed regarding misuse of the technology. Saying that a full display that covers the entire windshield is the possible outcome is not a straw man. It is an example of something that the law should forbid. Straw man would be when someone tried to claim I was saying that all distractions, no matter how small they are, should be eliminated, which I never said. Straw man would be claiming that I have the ridiculous argument that a HUD is more distracting than a GPS or phone. Something that people keep trying to argue against even though nobody made that argument. This comes down to simple facts. Facts, it is very easy to make a full screen HUD. Fact, someone will do it. Fact, law makers will have to decide if it is safe or not. Please, point me to the straw man in any of those facts.

Okay, this thread is getting out of hand and has taken over my notification backlog. Let's kill this.

Everybody is right. ILikeTobacco is right--his initial claim was just that it would be reviewed. It will. Obviously. That isn't incorrect. Arguing degrees of distraction doesn't make it incorrect. It will likely affect the outcome of those reviews, but the reviews will still happen.

As this conversation has been going, though, it's as if ILikeTobacco said "I wonder how the test will be graded", and everyone responded "Don't be stupid, they studied!" The response is on 'topic' but nonsensical with regard to what ILT actually said.

Saying over and over again that it's less distracting than something else doesn't change the fact that, yes, somebody somewhere will review it and something somewhere may come of it. Even if it's totally safe, that still needs to be studied and confirmed, no? Are we forbidding analysis because we feel the conclusion is obvious?

ILT isn't doing a very good job of backing his side of this discussion, and others aren't making an effort to read into his posts any further than looking for something to swipe at, and this is all getting very exhausting, and it's time for a coffee and I'd really like to come back to an empty notification backlog, so if everyone could just be a dear and calm the nips down.

Joshie said,

Okay, this thread is getting out of hand and has taken over my notification backlog. Let's kill this.

Everybody is right. ILikeTobacco is right--his initial claim was just that it would be reviewed. It will. Obviously. That isn't incorrect. Arguing degrees of distraction doesn't make it incorrect. It will likely affect the outcome of those reviews, but the reviews will still happen.

As this conversation has been going, though, it's as if ILikeTobacco said "I wonder how the test will be graded", and everyone responded "Don't be stupid, they studied!" The response is on 'topic' but nonsensical with regard to what ILT actually said.

Saying over and over again that it's less distracting than something else doesn't change the fact that, yes, somebody somewhere will review it and something somewhere may come of it. Even if it's totally safe, that still needs to be studied and confirmed, no? Are we forbidding analysis because we feel the conclusion is obvious?

ILT isn't doing a very good job of backing his side of this discussion, and others aren't making an effort to read into his posts any further than looking for something to swipe at, and this is all getting very exhausting, and it's time for a coffee and I'd really like to come back to an empty notification backlog, so if everyone could just be a dear and calm the nips down.

I just enjoyed poking a person who's argument was a binary one. "Distracting is distracting" "more distracting than nothing." Going to the whole "they could fill their whole windshield." I did learn something from him though, no way I'd live in Germany.