Star*Net Upgrade or MOVE3?

I agree that Star*net could improve the importers a bit. I find I have to do a lot of cleaning. It can be quite quick though once you've done it a few times.
I am not sure why there isn't a Leica XML one either.

Move 3D
$3500 (floating license)
Ouch.
+ $990/year for maintenance. Yipes. Dang... fell off my chair.
I won't be signing up for a $990/year expense. These recurring software maintenance agreements are really discouraging me from expanding my toolkit.

I just checked from MOVE3 website and the price for MOVE3 Full Version Single User License is $2,500. Yes, floating license is at $3,500. For me, I just need the Single User License. Maybe I'll just get the maintenance for one year.

Star*Net Pro 6 to Pro 8 Upgrade is $2,000. With a difference of $500 and you'll get ease of work and more robust environment, a justifiable option in my opinion.

If I consider the MOVE3 option, the end result is me having two least squares machines while considering the Star*Net upgrade option would result to only one machine.

amdomag, post: 424197, member: 1683 wrote: Star*Net Pro 6 to Pro 8 Upgrade is $2,000.

A brand spanking new copy of StarNet Pro is that much. Upgrades are much less.

I would go with Move 3 if:

1. You use Leica exclusively and are certain you always will. If you will ever use data from another format StarNet's wide array of converters will be a big help.
2. You intend to run networks over a very large area. Like over your whole island archipelago at once. Or across an entire western state.
3. Move 3 is just one module of LGO, you intend to use more.

Otherwise I'd go with the flexibility of StarNet. I used LGO/Move3 for about a year and a half. It's a very capable program. But difficult to edit raw data.

There is a Leica converter for StarNet but you have to get it from Leica.

Mark Mayer, post: 424203, member: 424 wrote: A brand spanking new copy of StarNet Pro is that much. Upgrades are much less.

I would go with Move 3 if:

1. You use Leica exclusively and are certain you always will. If you will ever use data from another format StarNet's wide array of converters will be a big help.
2. You intend to run networks over a very large area. Like over your whole island archipelago at once. Or across an entire western state.
3. Move 3 is just one module of LGO, you intend to use more.

Otherwise I'd go with the flexibility of StarNet. I used LGO/Move3 for about a year and a half. It's a very capable program. But difficult to edit raw data.

There is a Leica converter for StarNet but you have to get it from Leica.

I am impressed with Star*Net's power. You have the complete control of observation data. You can rewrite stories. It calculates so fast and smooth. Etc. The only downside that I see is on observation data integration. At least in my experience, it requires quite a tedious manual work. I don't know if I miss something.

I installed the MOVE3 trial version and tried integrating data from different sources. I am impressed with how it works.

I am an LGO and Infinity user with the MOVE3 kernel onboard and working. My problem is also data integration. I can't just bring in SurvCE raw file. I don't know if Leica provides routines that automate SurvCE import.

amdomag, post: 424207, member: 1683 wrote: My problem is also data integration. I can't just bring in SurvCE raw file. I don't know if Leica provides routines that automate SurvCE import.

That's the thing with living in the Leica universe. They assume that there is no life outside of it. Leica integrates very well with other Leica stuff. It does not play well with others. SurvCE is not Leica brand stuff.

If you are using SurvCE you might look at a 3rd option - Carlson's SurvNet, which is included in Carlson Survey.

If you are using SurvCE you might look at a 3rd option - Carlson's SurvNet, which is included in Carlson Survey.[/quote wrote:
I'll take a look at SurvNet. Thanks for the input.

Is your SurvCE data integration problem related to TS, GNSS or both?

Jim Frame, post: 424279, member: 10 wrote: Is your SurvCE data integration problem related to TS, GNSS or both?

More on the TS. The $200 set of Star Converters (particularly the StarCarlson) does not provide clean solution. I always need to manually traverse the command file, do some manual modifications as needed, sometimes twist a bit some stories, etc. to achieve modularity in structure.

Mark Mayer, post: 424211, member: 424 wrote: That's the thing with living in the Leica universe. They assume that there is no life outside of it. Leica integrates very well with other Leica stuff. It does not play well with others. [SNIP][/SNIP]

I totally agree with this, having used Leica equipment for almost 20 years now. As one now-retired surveyor put it, "Engineered by Germans, FOR Germans." Great equipment IMO, but quite thoroughly proprietary.

Another issue for me is the text command file. Given all the development tools today, I would think that creating a spreadsheet form of command file is not difficult to do from programming point of view. Imagine the difference traversing the command file in spreadsheet form compared to what it is right now.

HI and HR appear in every observation command line. This doesn't promote modularity in structure. My eyes are suffering everytime. Text command file is absolutely inefficient.

SellmanA, post: 424403, member: 8564 wrote: I totally agree with this, having used Leica equipment for almost 20 years now. As one now-retired surveyor put it, "Engineered by Germans, FOR Germans." Great equipment IMO, but quite thoroughly proprietary.

Swiss, not German! Don't forget the Wild lineage!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Leica_Geosystems
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wild_Heerbrugg

amdomag, post: 424405, member: 1683 wrote: HI and HR appear in every observation command line. This doesn't promote modularity in structure. My eyes are suffering everytime. Text command file is absolutely inefficient.

I regard this as a benefit rather than a detriment. I can tell at a glance if I got a bad HI or HR for a particular shot, and change it on the fly if desired (though more often than not I change the backup RW5 and reprocess). I'm a big fan of the ASCII data input file, because it's simplifies the task of automating data conversion. I don't have to learn how to program an Excel-compatible output file, all I have to do is write out a space-delimited ASCII and I'm done.

Jim Frame, post: 424410, member: 10 wrote: I regard this as a benefit rather than a detriment. I can tell at a glance if I got a bad HI or HR for a particular shot, and change it on the fly if desired (though more often than not I change the backup RW5 and reprocess). I'm a big fan of the ASCII data input file, because it's simplifies the task of automating data conversion. I don't have to learn how to program an Excel-compatible output file, all I have to do is write out a space-delimited ASCII and I'm done.

Editing the RW5 file is easier for me due to its structure though still in ASCII form.

I just got a demo copy of MOVE3 and let's see how it goes.

One element to the problem that I'd consider is how easy or not it will be to import observations from old projects to combine with new observations. Part of the real value that I get out of Star*Net is using the network adjustment file as a thing to which additional GPS vectors and conventional observations can easily be added in the future. I have networks that are now about 25 years old to which multiple projects have been aded, beginning with only conventional observations and addting both more conventional observations and GPS vectors to extend the network and connect it to more distant control points. The ASCII text format of Star*Net is perfect for these applications.

I'll try the demo version and see if moving to MOVE3 is a logical thing to do. Doing so, still leaves me with my existing Star*Net 6 Pro package.

Yes, I agree that Star*Net ASCII input file provides the most powerful storyboard as you can do everything though manually. Star*Net is a big hero for me as it just delivers results with no excuses. It is just that my eyes are getting tired with my eyeglasses getting more expensive if not thicker.

I use the Move3 module in LGO, so that is my only experience, I have looked at the Move3 website and read through the manual on occasion to get a better understanding (hopefully) of what is going on in the LGO version. Move3 is a very robust and powerful software from what I can determine.

Another viable option might be to look into the Columbus package available http://bestfit.com/&apos ;">here. $375 and you can play with a free version before buying. I don't know if it has the converters you need, but certainly worth a look. I have messed around with the free version and for us USA guys, it is a great way to get a LSQ adjustment on OPUS solutions for free.

SHG

Microsurvey has been bought by hexagon and is part of the Leica family now, so I expect updates to Star*Net to make it work better with Leica equipment.... just a guess...