frefel

It would be very subjective. I think you'd be very surprised by the number of people who would give a check mark to parking lot lamp post skirt lifter type caches. How is this check mark any better than or an enhancement to an accurate cache description both by the hider and the finders? Simple, the checked cache shows up as an attribute that can be instantly digitally sorted by the likes of GSAK. You wouldn't need to review the cache description of each and every hide in your PQ. I often set up a PQ for an area I'm unfamiliar with and end up with many more caches than I have time to search for. I prefer to spend my limited time on more "interesting" caches so now I have a reduced list to work with that didn't require me to look at every cache description in the PQ. Of course if there were a couple more catagories to check, such as easy caches or challenging caches, all the better for those into that type of geocaching.

It still looks like a rating system. If I was out caching one day for "numbers" (personally I don't but I can understand those that enjoy this game), then I'd probably want to give all the easy-access, quick micros a thumbs-up of some sort. Using your system, it could end up that almost all caches in an area are "recommended", even the light-pole ones. Or the super, all-day experience type of cache gets lots of feedback but no-one can be bothered to fill in the box for caches that took two minutes, so it looks like they're inferior when in fact they're aimed at a different style of caching. My favourite attempt at solving this problem is that the cache owner does the "recommending" of his/her own cache, by giving the cache a "category" attribute (or more than one); reflecting the inspiration for the hide. The cache owner knows why a particular hide was set up in a certain way; no-one else does. So it should be the cache owner that decides. Once a cache is in a category (perhaps "quick caches near the car", or "adventure caches", or "easy caches with plenty of swaps", or "all-day challenges", or even "caches strictly for numbers" or "fills a gap") then you know straight away which ones to put on your list and which ones to ignore, depending on your preferences for the day. It's similar to bookmark lists, which are a type of categorisation and work quite well as long as you can find one that suits your requirement. You could think of it as being a set of "global" bookmark lists, which everyone is aware of and which are searchable. Surely that's the main point of cache rating, to allow you to easily select suitable caches from a list? And this sidesteps all the bother surrounding the concept of making a cache look "good" when a neighbouring cache isn't. I agree that this is a good alternative to what I am suggesting. However the fact that the cache owner categorizes (and rates?) his cache, instead of the finder, does not eliminate the incentive to make the cache "look better than it is" and as such makes it a rating system also. It also involves having a number of categories, which I see as good, but about which many have complained that it would be too complicated. Ideally I would have several categories to check also. In short I would gladly go along with this idea as better than what we presently have but I don't necessarily see it as advantageous over mine. I think I trust the judgment of the finder more than that of the hider.

These ideas make a good point or two but, in my humble opinion, are inferior to mine. Trying to judge a cache by indirect methods such as the length of logs, number of photos, where it is hidden, whether it is a micro or not, etc. are all imprecise at best and certainly add work with the need to review comments and sort by macros and bookmarks. My idea is quick and easy both for the person developing the cache and the person seeking it. It does not reflect negatively on other caches and is likely to be unbiased since there is no "award" involved. It is totally optional and unobtrusive, showing up only as an attribute of the cache. Best of all it makes a geocaching session at a place with more caches than I have time to seek much more productive and interesting.

Thanks for your support Jesperqvist. I'd like to keep this thread alive until we see a response from the Geocaching.com people giving some indication that they are interested in improving the experience for their users.

Trailgators, I hope you realize I'm not proposing some kind of compensation for a cache well done but rather a system where others can easily access such caches and avoid the mundane ones. StarBrand, I see what you are saying but it sounds cumbersome to have to survey other finder's lists to gain that info. With my system it would automatically be a part of the stats of that cache's home page and could be filtered instantly if it were an attribute of GSAK for example.

I like to use geocaching as a means to explore places new to me since caches are often placed in sites of particular interest using local knowledge and ones frequently overlooked by guide books. Upon arriving at such an area with a large number of caches and a limited amount of time to hunt it can be overwhelming to exclude caches of less interest. I realize there have been many suggestions to rate caches and none have caught on. I don't know if this idea of mine is original but I see it as a refinement to geocaching to make it more appealing to those who want to use their time for more than just accumulating numbers of finds. Therefore I suggest that at the bottom of the "I Found It" login page there be a check box (or several) to designate that cache as one of notable worth in terms of, for example, cleverness, beauty, challenge, etc. There could also be a line to describe in a few words what it is that makes that cache stand out. I would prefer several categories but one would be a vast improvement. Now the lengthy list could be filtered to show only the recommended caches, paring it considerably I suspect. Of course a checked cache would be the subjective opinion of that finder but I still see that as valuable, especially if many agree. It would probably eliminate from my search list the umpteenth micro at the base of a light pole in a WalMart parking lot - a definite benefit.

looking for ID

looking for ID

looking for ID

looking for ID

If you can do it in native Ubuntu (without Wine) how about some tips for the Linux newbies like myself?

Ah, if you can get to the shell you should just run it: ./geoqo.bin However, you'd need to 'cd' to your 'Desktop' folder first. And if you renamed it (eg, removing the '.bin' ending) you should run it however it's named now. (and FYI to everyone watching: it's a compiled perl executable and is a straight binary... It isn't a sh script or even a perl script at this point but is a raw executable) Now remember you are addressing some novices also, like me, so just exactly how do I ¨cd to my DT folder first¨? Thanks for the basic Linux course material. F

If you want to just see some GPS output for now, try this: install gpsbabel and run the following in quote in a terminal: "gpsbabel -T -i garmin -f usb:" Thanks for the reply BurnAss. You are spot on correct in saying I shouldn´t attempt to recompile the kernel at my level of knowledge. And you were again right in suggesting that at this point it would be satisfying to just see some activity between my eTrex and computer. However, as seems to be discouragingly common with Linux tasks, I can´t even make the code you supplied work. I´m getting: ¨kernel driver blocking access to USB device > hotplug website > explanations for various versions of Ubuntu but not Hardy (mine) and mention in Gutsy note that it is not certain if kernel works natively or not. I´m not sure what to do from here. While I´m at it, how do I use the Options that are displayed on opening gpsbabel? Could you give me an example?

A similar situation I've seen is the Google Earth installer - you might need to run: sh filename.bin in a terminal That doesn´t work either: ¨sh: Can't open geoqo.bin¨

Thanks DarkAngel188 Here is the result of a not connected then connected X´s 2 from the dmesg command: 506.750020] usb 1-1.2: new full speed USB device using uhci_hcd and address 4 [ 506.801597] usb 1-1.2: configuration #1 chosen from 1 choice [ 581.167363] usb 1-1.2: USB disconnect, address 4 [ 1696.115672] usb 1-1.2: new full speed USB device using uhci_hcd and address 5 [ 1696.244768] usb 1-1.2: configuration #1 chosen from 1 choice [ 1714.942420] usb 1-1.2: USB disconnect, address 5 [ 1724.267150] usb 1-1.2: new full speed USB device using uhci_hcd and address 6 [ 1724.288540] usb 1-1.2: configuration #1 chosen from 1 choice It´s all greek to me but it does look like the eTrex is being seen, although not as a Garmin device in particular.

to use gpsdrive, you need to have gpsd installed. If you have a USB Garmin, like Vista HCx, you also need to recompile the kernel with the garmin module enabled to have the device recognized. What gps model and which distro you have? Thanks for the reply BurnAss. I already have gpsd installed. I have both an old eTrex Venture which I´ve saved because it uses a serial connection and a newer eTrex USB Vista C. Distro - Ubuntu 8.04 Now when you say I need to ¨recompile the kernal¨ you have left me in the dust. I am trying to achieve a useful Linux OS but for the present the only thing that works flawlessly for me is the Firefox browser, because it ¨runs out of the box¨. I´ve read a couple of Ubuntu get started books but they told me nothing about recompiling the kernel. I figure my progress from now on is by doing things with the patient help of forum contributors like yourself (whom I view as extremely generous) since I doubt there is a single source of info for beginners to deal with the myriad steps to make some apps function (Skype, GPSTurbo, Google Earth, Palm syncing etc.). Too many support sites require a pretty advanced background in Linux. So, in short, I´m going to need a lot of really basic explanations to get there but I figure these are the same questions a lot of potential Linux users will be asking also, so it should result in a public good.

Is anyone using GPSDrive out there? I´ve downloaded it, it looks great, but can´t figure out how to get to a setup menu and how to get the app to recognize my Garmin gpsr. Of course it doesn´t help that I´m a Linux newbie also. Thanks for any offered advice.

Sorry for the delay (I was out of town). I think the problem is the .bin extension. Can you rename the file (right click on it to do so) and remove the ".bin" from the end of the name. At the same time, make sure the properties say it's executable and then double click on it again and hopefully it'll work. If that works, I'll create a new version this week that fixes some bugs (with importing; sigh) and also adds the ability to display caches (with dots) on a map! As I detailed in an email to you removing the .bin extension did convert it into an executable file according to Properties but double clicking on it still results in a ¨couldn´t open, no app for this file type¨. I´m doing this in Ubuntu 8.04.

Wes; I´m finally back in town and just downloaded the bin version of GeoQo but I´m getting this: geoqo-linux.bin > Couldn´t display ¨/home/fred/desktop/geoqo-linux.bin¨ No application installed for this file type. What am I doing wrong? Thanks Fred

Rather than add to the already long list of complaints I'll start a new thread so hopefully it will stand out better. I've submitted 3 PQs today beginning at around noon and now it is 6PM and none have arrived at my email box. This is not good as I'm heading out of town to a place with possibly no internet access and had planned on geocaching. What's going on?

I'm playing with Ubuntu also. I have not been able to install GeoQO for the life of me but I'm in contact with the developer who hopefully will help me. Linux will take off as soon as the process is less arcane, less technical, like the evolution of Windows from DOS. In the meantime I'm feeling smug at cheating MS from obscene profits by using Win 2K Pro on one of my laptops. I have not yet found an app that won't run just as well as on XP and that includes Google Earth.

Thanks for the reply Motorcycle Mama. This is crazy but I went away and then came back and did exactly what I had tried multiple times before that did NOT work and now it's fine. Go figure! I wonder what is now different?