as77

Well... looks like I was wrong, the problem is not related to the OS. I remember that I was able to load xml files (loc and gpx are xml files) before I upgraded my Axim to WM2003. Also, I have e-mails from users with PPC2002 Axims who report that PMNCacher works fine for them. joeface, did you update your Axim to the latest ROM version of PPC2002? (I think A05 is the latest). Also, do you happen to have a proxy server configured for network access? (Not sure if that could cause a problem but it might.) I found a possible workaround but it causes problems with the encoding (Unicode hell again!), so I don't wan't to do this.

Thanks. I identified the source of the error. It is a bug in the Microsoft MSXML component which is included with the Pocket PC 2002 OS. Windows Mobile 2003 has a fixed version, that's why I didn't see the problem. I will implement some workaround for this bug. Stay tuned.

GEO, on my device I can load a LOC file even if it is read-only. Something wierd is going on. It seems to be related to some security setting in some versions of the Microsoft XMLDOM control, which I'm using. I'm trying to figure it out.

OK. It looks like this could be operating system dependent. What Pocket PC and what OS are you using?

Hi joeface, "Access denied" means that the file is not readable. Maybe another program is using the file? Are you using another program at the same time? Is your Pocket PC still connected to your desktop when you are getting this message It could also be a memory problem. e.g. if the file is on a memory card, the memory card could be corrupted. It is certainly not a program error. Something is wrong about the file, it's not readable.

The Armor 3600 from otterbox.com with a CF pod would protect the PDA plus the CF GPS (depending on which brand you are using) while leaving the touchscreen accessible (it has some plastic film over it). Provided you are willing to pay around $150 for the whole outfit. I have a transparent Otterbox 3000 ($20) and my Dell Axim with a CF GPS fits in it. However, the touch screen cannot be used. Also, the case is kinda heavy. The whole thing is heavy and bulky. Doesn't seem very practical in comparison with e.g. a Garmin Geko.

There is magic file whose presence or absence in the card's root directory determines which files are to be "seen" on the storage card by programs that use the OS's file dialog (such as GPXSonar). This file is an empty file named ignore_my_docs. If you have that file on your card, delete it. If you don't have it, create it. It should work one way or the other

Maybe gc.com doesn't have appropriate hardware and bandwidth to allow that? Or what's their problem? This "e-mail only" solution seems a bit outdated...

JeepCachr, come on. You can download the manuals for both the Geko and the Foretrex from Garmin's web site. Compare them. Like I said, the software is essentially the same. Of course you have the bearing to the goto point displayed (as an arrow), what makes you think that there is even a remote possibility that Garmin omitted this feature from the Foretrex? Are they that stupid? Like I said, we know everything about the Foretrex, your review is of course welcome but I'm positive that it will bring no surprises.

I still don't understand what the source of your uncertainty is. As far as the gps receiver part is concerned, the forerunner and the foretrex must be essentially the same (same size and type of antenna, etc.). In addition, the foretrex has waas capability. That means that the reception with the foretrex must be the same as with the forerunner (or even better if waas is available), and that is good and adequate according to the reports on the forerunner. Software-wise, you know that the forerunner is identical to the Geko 201. Then what is it that you still don't know? I see no unknown variable in this equation. Of course it is good for geocaching, no doubt about that.

JeepCachr, I just searched for "forerunner", any date, all forums, search in posts, show results as posts. I get four pages of posts. About 2-3 people specifically said that they had used the Forerunner for geocaching for some time and it had performed great. There is also a more detailed review with a similar conclusion (appropriate for basic geocaching usage). I only read one negative comment: someone complained that the forerunner had lost the fix easily in the woods. Given that the Foretrex has more features in the firmware, I think it must be more than adequate for geocaching. But I'm also looking forward to your review if you decide to write one.

The forerunner is good for geocaching according to the reports I read in this forum. Consequently, the foretrex should be at least as good as the forerunner, but probably even better. So in my opinion, there is no big mystery here.

Guys, why don't you search the forums for "forerunner"? It's almost the same as the Foretrex, and several people have already reported good results using the Forerunner for geocaching.

Just add the hints manually in a text editor. Find the long description (<Groundspeak:long_description> ... </Groundspeak:long_description>) for the cache and insert the hint after it like this: <Groundspeak:encoded_hints> This is the text of the hint (it should not be encrypted). </Groundspeak:encoded_hints> Or you can also use an xml editor such as the one at http://www.iol.ie/~pxe/ to edit an existing gpx file.

GEO, I think that if you want to export waypoints to road navigation software then the ability to add parking coordinates is high priority. My solution to that is that the user can view the cache description (containing the parking coordinates) and enter the parking coordinates manually on the same screen. I have been thinking about how you could add the PMN export capability to your program so that it would be easy to use and practical for the user. I think it would work if you are willing to do the following in your program (this would be the complete export procedure): 1. locate the PMN favorites file and identify the installed version of PMN (locations, file name and output formats depend on this); issue warning and abort if PMN is not installed. 2. load the favorites file into an internal list in your program, 3. remove the caches that are currently in the list due to the previous export (caches are distinguished from other points by the string "Cache: " at the beginning of the point name). 4. add to the list the caches from the current gpx file: in the point description field, combine the various fields from the gpx file. 5. (add the parking coordinates, too, if any, e.g. using cachename+" parking" as point name). 6. trim the description to 240 characters if the user has PMN 2004 (otherwise PMN will crash). (My program also offers optional trimming for PMN 2003, to keep the filesize small.) 7. check if there are more than 300 points in total; if yes, refuse exporting the file or warn the user (PMN does not handle more than 300 points). 8. export the list, overwriting the current favorites file (location and format depends on the version of PMN, there are two different versions). For PMN 2003 export, you also need to convert to UTM coordinates. So as you see, there are many PMN-specific idiosyncrasies that you would have to handle here, and I wouldn't have thought that you would want to bother with complexities of this kind in a general-purpose GPX viewer. Also, testing would be difficult unless you have PMN installed on your PPC yourself. However, if you are still willing to include the above procedure in your program, I can help by providing my source code and the specific details you need (adapting the source code would need some work: different programming languages). You may simplify things somewhat by only supporting PMN 2004 (I myself still use PMN 2003 and I don't plan to upgrade, but probably the number of PMN 2003 users is decreasing), and then you only have to handle one format. Also, my impression is that PMN is not that popular among geocachers, so you may want to start with supporting the more popular programs first. (Probably Mapopolis is by far the most popular, although IMHO PMN is definitely better.)

BottomFeeder, there are some useful tips in the help file that I think are worth reading, e.g. how to add parking coordinates (although you could figure that out yourself). As to the sorting by various properties... I tend to think that would be an overkill for this program. It does not want to be a full-featured gpx viewer, and since PMN always sorts alphabetically just by the name of the point, it wouldn't make much sense anyway. But frankly, I find that I don't really need sorting, actually I noticed that I don't use the sorting options in GPXSonar either, except the sorting by distance. I sort by distance (in GPXSonar or I just by eye looking at the map) and then I check the descriptions of the closest caches to see the other properties, e.g. is it multi, etc. All in all, currently I don't see a compelling reason to add these capabilities to my program. I'm quite satisfied with the current state of things

GEO, I'm still thinking about whether what you've suggested would work or how practical it would be. Certainly, PMNCacher has a few features that GPXSonar is missing and that I would not like to give up, such as the ability to edit the existing favorites and especially the convenient addition of parking coordinates to caches. That latter one is more important to me (especially when we are talking about exporting the waypoints to road navigation software) than the ability to filter the list. Do you have plans to extend GPXSonar's features to be more like GSAK? I mean the ability to edit the cache data, add/delete points, and export modified/filtered gpx files.

Hi GEO, technically, that would certainly be possible but unfortunately, I don't think it would be practical. PMN's favorites files are not like Pocket Streets' pushpin files. All of PMN's favorites are stored in a single file that must have a certain name and it must be in a certain special directory for PMN to find it. This means that you cannot just export a file in the appropriate format; you would have to locate the existing favorites file, import it, then merge your waypoints into it then export it, overwriting the existing file. If you just exported a favorites file then 1. the user would have to locate his existing favorites file, rename it (to avoid losing it), then rename the exported file to the appropriate name and move it to the appropriate directory, 2. the user would not not be able to use his existing favorites within PMN unless he concatenated the two files, which is not a trivial task to do on the PPC. The name and the location of the favorites file are also different for different versions of PMN. Also, there are two different versions of PMN that use different formats for the favorites file. I don't think it would make sense to handle all these complexities within GPXSonar; and if you just exported a favorites file then using that file would be rather inconvenient for the user. However, if you could export a GPX file (after filtering the cache list) from GPXSonar then users could use that filtered file with PMNCacher and add those caches to their PMN favorites in a jiffy, without losing their existing favorites and without moving around and renaming various files. I think that would be a much better solution.

Hey, glad to hear the program worked right for you. Actually, if you look at the help file, I mentioned in it that it is not a good idea to use the cache location directly in PMN as destination. Once when I did that, PMN generated a route that ended more than 20 miles away from the cache. Maybe in your case it wanted to generate a route that ended off the map. PMN is obviously not prepared for off-road locations and it will get confused if you use an off-road location as destination. I would advise you to select a section of a nearby street and set it as destination, instead of the cache. What other features would you like to see? E.g. sorting the caches by distance? (I thought that this would not really be necessary because a glance on the map will immediately tell you which caches are closest to you.) And actually if you need some sorting/filtering, you can just start GPXSonar and then switch back and forth between GPXSonar and PMN. What do you think? PMN's favorite structure is limited, it only has a name and a description field. PMN 2004 is even more limited because if you have a description that is longer than about 250 characters, PMN 2004 will crash. (This is a bug in PMN 2004, I notified the developers about it.) Therefore, for PMN 2004, my program always truncates the cache descriptions to prevent the crash. PMN 2003 users are luckier because they can include descriptions of arbitrary length.

The Forerunner 101 does not have a PC interface but the Foretrex 101 does. It is also thicker than the 201 (.9'' vs .6'')

I just uploaded a new version (the previous one didn't run under PPC 2002).

There is now a Pocket PC version, which is much more convenient to use than the Windows version and has more features. See the separate topic about it.

PMN Cacher is a program I wrote to be able to import cache locations into PocketMap Navigator. First I wrote it for Windows (there is a topic about it somewhere here) and some of you have downloaded and used it. Now I have created a version of PMN Cacher that runs on the Pocket PC. It is much more convenient to use than the Windows version and it has more features. It can be downloaded from here: PMN Cacher home page. For those of you who have not yet heard about this program, here's a summary of what it can do: - It can import GPX and LOC files and merge the cache locations and descriptions into PocketMap Navigator's "My Favorites" file. All cache locations will appear on the map in PocketMap Navigator and you can easily navigate to them. - It allows the user to manage the favorite points easily: the descriptions and the coordinates of the points can be modified, points can be deleted, added, etc. - A useful feature of the program is the easy adding of parking coordinates for caches. Here's a screenshot: And this is PMN's map after adding the caches with PMNCacher (the icons are all cache locations): PMNCacher is freeware. Comments and suggestions are welcome, just write here.

The Haicom provides one more digits than the Etrex. But that is not a problem. How many times did you compare the Etrex and the Haicom coordinates for different locations? Is the difference consistent, systematic? All I can say is this is definitely not normal. Is Vito the only application you are using with the Haicom?

Are those the actual coordinates you read from the devices? If yes, that's quite a difference! The distance between those two points is more than 4 miles. Even different datums cannot give such a big difference. So which one is closer to the published cache coordinates? And what kind of GPS receiver are you using with the Pocket PC? Vito doesn't know about different datums, it just displays whatever it gets straight from the GPS receiver.