No, I will give them the JAVAD data sheet and they can get other data sheet from others if they want to compare. Tell them the stuff that costs much more will probably get similar results as far as fixed positions go, but they will have no way of really knowing that. No other system has the analysis and documentation capabilities of JAVAD to determine if a fix is bad, and then to determine a least squares positional tolerance. This is a huge issue for me. Some using the other stuff will analyze in a least squares program afterward, but many do not. And, that does not have any analysis of whether you had a bad fix. Six different algorithms (engines), all the channels, 3 different solutions to compare on each shot, 3 step confidence consistency verification and screen shots of same. There's all the other GNSS stuff, then there's the JAVAD way that removes the guesswork from modern measurement. A meaningful comparison is not really possible at this stage of the game. Much of the benefit is in the J-Field software. So, the sale point is convincing folks that yes they can have a dedicated GNSS system and make money with it. With this system you don't need to haul the robot around everywhere and switch back and forth (or come back and reoccupy 3 days in a row) just to make sure; the system will tell you those rare instances when you need to measure with conventional equipment.
