Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.acorn.misc > #5331
| From | M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Subject | Re: Wakefield (second attempt) |
| Newsgroups | comp.sys.acorn.misc |
| Date | 2012-05-03 20:08 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <528a35b136riscos@mdharding.org.uk> (permalink) |
| References | <5289868527richtnews@uwclub.net> <109c238a52.thebears@sarno.freeserve.co.uk> <b72c2f8a52.chris@o2.co.uk> |
| Organization | None |
In article <b72c2f8a52.chris@o2.co.uk>, Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> wrote: > Re the GPS point, when I tried Google maps it opened at the current > location of where we were. so seems to have someway of working the > location out. Maybe Google worked out your position from having recorded where your specific router was located when it surveyed the area for its pictures . . . ? A clue is that, when I use my iPod Touch which doesn't have GPS on it, Google Maps shows me in a slightly wrong location - probably because the car didn't come down our (private, unadopted) road and my house backs on to the houses of the road where it claims I live. Whereas with my new iPhone with GPS, its location is spot on, of course. I'd better try and stop being paranoid about Google. Michael Harding Rev. Preb. M.D. Harding riscos@mdharding.org.uk
Back to comp.sys.acorn.misc | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Wakefield (second attempt) Richard Travers <richtnews@uwclub.net> - 2012-05-02 12:15 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-02 13:19 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Richard Travers <richtnews@uwclub.net> - 2012-05-02 14:08 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-05-04 23:20 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 05:23 +0200
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-05-05 21:13 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Richard Travers <richtnews@uwclub.net> - 2012-05-05 10:26 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 12:10 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Bryn Evans <d@a.invalid> - 2012-05-05 12:31 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 13:03 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Alan Wrigley <spamhater@keepyourfilthyspamtoyourself.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 13:14 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Geoffrey Baxendale <thebears@sarno.freeserve.co.uk> - 2012-05-03 16:51 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-03 18:57 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) M Harding <riscos@mdharding.org.uk> - 2012-05-03 20:08 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Thomas Milius <Thomas-Milius@t-online.de> - 2012-05-03 21:46 +0200
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Thomas Milius <Thomas-Milius@t-online.de> - 2012-05-03 22:04 +0200
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Evans <chris@cjemicros.co.uk> - 2012-05-04 16:48 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Martin Wuerthner <spamtrap@mw-software.com> - 2012-05-03 21:22 +0200
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Richard Travers <richtnews@uwclub.net> - 2012-05-04 09:20 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Brian <brferris@orpheusmail.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 12:11 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Doug Webb <doug.j.webb@btinternet.com> - 2012-05-05 12:39 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 13:01 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Doug Webb <doug.j.webb@btinternet.com> - 2012-05-05 13:18 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-05-12 11:34 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 12:31 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Brian <brferris@orpheusmail.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 13:32 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) charles <charles@charleshope.demon.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 13:43 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Brian <brferris@orpheusmail.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 15:06 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Doug Webb <doug.j.webb@btinternet.com> - 2012-05-05 15:23 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 16:41 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 18:59 +0200
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2012-05-06 11:28 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Fred Bambrough <fred@[127.0.0.1]> - 2012-05-06 14:58 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Dev <spam-addy@no.spam.invalid> - 2012-05-06 15:04 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-06 20:00 +0200
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 18:50 +0200
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 19:43 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Alan Wrigley <spamhater@keepyourfilthyspamtoyourself.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 15:18 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Brian <brferris@orpheusmail.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 15:48 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Alan Wrigley <spamhater@keepyourfilthyspamtoyourself.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 17:54 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-05-12 12:12 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Matthew Phillips <spam2011m@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-12 22:05 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Dave Symes <dave@triffid.co.uk> - 2012-05-13 06:53 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-13 13:14 +0200
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-05-15 11:40 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Chris Hughes <news@noonehere.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 16:36 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Tim Hill <tim@invalid.org.uk> - 2012-05-12 11:54 +0100
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) Rick Murray <heyrickmail-usenet@yahoo.co.uk> - 2012-05-05 18:28 +0200
Re: Wakefield (second attempt) charles <charles@charleshope.demon.co.uk> - 2012-05-03 17:36 +0100
csiph-web