JBnW

Looks like the Vista HCx has the same button layout as my basic Vista. The reset proceedure for the basic Vista is 4 keys; Page (top right), Enter (down on joystick), Find (bottom left) and Poweron (bottom right). And yes, all data is lost and settings are returned to default. Mine did the same thing last weekend in the middle of a multicache

KBI, Thank you for your considered and considerate response. We may be approaching the detailed point where we agree to disagree (or maybe even agree), but let me clarify one thing. I was not commenting on the inherant moral values, or the underlying motives, of a bogus or mistaken log. I was responding to your statement of: "How, exactly, does a bogus cache log violate your rights? Does a bogus log pick your pocket or break your leg?" (Sorry, I'm a noob, not quite adept at quoting.) In my hypothetical example, I contend a bogus log could "pick my pocket" by luring me (or others) to spend money (a tangible thing that sometimes fills my pockets) searching a cache that may no longer exist, or may not be accessible. I think I mentioned a cache near my home; it's either under water from the constant rains here, or gone. I'll not revisit it until the rains stop and/or the water level goes down, and/or someone posts a new find. A bogus log at that site would lure me to go to the tangible expense of returning to the site...and suffering a loss. No moral comment here, just a statement that I (or someone else) woud expend time, effort, and money returning to the site based on a bogus log. Do I consider this a violation of my rights? NO! I completely understand that I have the right to explore for any cache, or not. I also understand that I may not be as cunning as the CO who placed it, and that a DNF is a possibility. But only if the cache was actually there. A bogus log, in this hypothetical, robs me of "fair chase" and the expense of the chase. Does a bogus log break my leg? Well, hopefully not, but I can be clumsy at times. I also agree with you that this hobby is entirely too entertaining!

DocDitto, you got it right. But I'll go ahead and categorize myself anyway. I'll put myself in the "Overqualified Aging Noob" list. Through my work as a field biologist, I started doing something very similar to this game of geocaching back in 1984. Didn't realize someone had made it fun until this summer! Nope, didn't have a GPS back then. But someone had placed a whole bunch of survey points (a.k.a. re-bar posts pounded into the ground) all along the South Platte and Platte Rivers from the Continental Divide to Grand Island, Nebraska. And I got to find them by eyes, hands, and feet. Fed lots of ticks that way. Then we "upgraded" to the old Trimble backpack, about 1993. Great! as if I wasn't carrying enough &%#* around looking for these things, now I got this heavy back-pack and the goofy-looking antenna over my head! Sometime about 1995 or so, we were actually allowed to see, touch and use the venerable PLGR, military issue, hand-held GPS (programmed to function even through the heaviest satellite "outages"). Much better than the Trimble, but the user interface was as friendly as a Missouri Mule! How did this happen, you might ask?? I'm from the Government, and I'm here to help you! Used this brick until Katrina compelled us to move to the 21st century, when our office bought a couple of GPSMAP 76es, and I got a Vista. Got started in the "official" geocaching game when our state parks started a contest to encourage visits to the parks/allow geocaching. I was fairly sure I could do this, and its a great way to spend time with the family, and hopefully teach our 1-yr-old to appreciate the outdoors. All this is a good reminder for me that "numbers don't matter", because, well, there's been a few beers between then and now, and I don't even want to think about numbers. All I'm concerned with is getting JBnW together on a tour of the countryside "looking for tupperware"! But I am looking forward to becoming more of a "placer" rather than a "finder"! (Patience, grasshopper!)

Thank you Webscouter!

KBI, have been waiting to see your responses, and I must say “bravo”. As the OP suggested, most involved in this game seem to be of good character…and I would agree. Unfortunately, some want to make more of it no matter how often people say “numbers don’t matter”. To them, it likely does. The “gain” or “profit” of virtual logging is (and should be) only in improving their own opinion of their abilities as a cacher. And I’ll keep trying not to judge someone by their stats. However, virtual logging does create the possibility of a “loss” to future visitors to a cache. I don’t have a real-life example of this, but if I were planning a caching road trip, I would skip caches that had several recent DNFs assuming that particular cache is probably no longer there or is currently inaccessible (like one near my home). Why go looking for something that hasn’t been found in several tries over a period of months? However, a virtual log at one of these sites could cause me to spend time, effort, and money (gas) searching for something that doesn’t exist, or that I couldn’t access. That, to me, is a "loss". Were virtual logging to become more common, some of us might start spending more time scanning cache pages looking for bogus logs, and therefore less time out looking for caches or other more-productive pastimes. Another “loss”.

Romouw...I'm with you. I have the basic Vista, and the Gordian knot of GPS-to-serial-to-serial-to-USB pile o' cables. But I'm no expert, just a user. Do you have any of the mapping CDs/DVDs, or anything else, to let you know that the computer and GPS are actually communicating? Try getting your unit ID through that. Ay least you'll know that there is communication. Have you checked all of the possible COM ports? I had to reset the clock on my Vista tonight, the default brought up COM 1, but it was actually on COM 4. I purchased my serial-to-USB converter from Radio Shack, and it came with a CD, but it seems there was something strange about which driver to use (Win or the CD, I forget)...maybe uninstall the driver and try the other. It does seem that these GPS-to-serial-to-serial-to-USB converters are tempermental, could be that you got a bad one. Hope this helps, good luck.

testing sig line

Hey everyone. I'm looking for a little help with my migration to paperless geocaching. Is anyone still using GPX spinner and know how to edit the *.ini file? I have an eTrex Vista and a MotoQ Smartphone. I used Spinner to process the Pocket Query, MapSource Topo (which I already owned) to push the spinner.gpx file to the Vista, and simply copy-pasted the pile-o-HTM files into a directory on the SD card in the Q. The Q is able to read the .htm files as Internet Exporer is a native application (so no need for iSolo or Plucker, etc.). All this seems to work (well…function), except that the waypoints on the GPS are a condensed version of the cache's common name (for example “A Red Bridge Treasure” equals something like “RDBRDGTRSR”), and the HTM files on the Q are listed by the Cache Number (GCxxxx). Being kinda new to the game means I got a bunch of caches in the 40-mile neighborhood, and scrolling through each GCxxxx.htm file to find the one most likely to be “RDBRDGTRSR” is a battery killer on the Q (and a time killer on the hunt). I see from the GPX Spinner website that there might be a way to get these naming protocols to match, but I’m not sure what it may be, and am also a bit hesitant when it comes to rewriting *.ini files without adult supervision. On the possibilities that a) this is the way it's supposed to work, or I'm completely missing something, please let me know as this will help as well.

Those would be Chick Tracts, which some people prize as highly collectible since they are so overboard as to be funny. Jesus is probably rolling in his grave at these anti-religious tracts. Jesus is not rolling in his grave, he was resurrected from the dead! That's my belief, and one that is shared by many, but not by all. If someone does not share this belief, then can we agree to disagree, and, my hope, that we move along in peace? Along a similar line, I recently found a nearby cache that a previous finder had taken the time to mention in their Found It post that they had left an American flag. When I got there, the only representation of a flag was on an unopened condom wrapper. Not my idea of quality swag. I passed over it to the other trinkets inside, signed the log, replaced properly, and went my way. The more I think of it, the more I wish I would have CITO'd this cache! So, to this group, 4 miles is nothing out of my way...is this something that should be CITO'd??

Being a little new the the game part of all this as well, "I feel your pain"! Unless you have the time and effort to reach a Librarian-level of paper organization, it may help to apply the K.I.S.S. theory, target a few caches along a route, print those (if you stay with paper), log them into the site when found, and then next time search for new sites by clinking the "ignore found caches" link. It's the old question of "How do you eat an elephant?"..."one bite at a time!". If you do decide to go paperless, in addition to the recommendations of Palms and PDAs; Smartphones (if you have or plan to get one) can also help manage the "paper", and don't require as many of the freeware programs to process/download the data. I just started this with my Motorola Q, and it is much less daunting for a newbie like me to be able to drag-drop, copy-paste, and be done with it. Just my .02!

Garmin Kansas 100 - Topographical display not needed (for obvious reasons) - Windspeed and Direction mode (Hard from the North in Winter, Hard from the South in Summer) - All roads displayed in 1-mile squares, N-S and E-W (wait, that's actually true! ) - Autolink to show location of tornados - Autolink to show locations of cattle in road - Waypoint icons are C (=corn), W (=wheat), and B (=soybeans). Icons change automatically every 6 months. And the Garmin Kansas 200 - All of the above features, PLUS!! (wait for it...) - Built-in basemap includes the location of the tree AND Mt. Sunflower AND the Geodetic Center of the Conterminous US. Location of the World's Largest Ball of Twine included in our Accessory software.

Greetings all, Looking for a little help with my migration to paperless geocaching. I have an eTrex Vista and a MotoQ. I used GPXSpinner to process my first Pocket Query. Used MapSource Topo to push the spinner.gpx file to the GPSr, and simply copy-pasted the pile-o-HTM files into a directory on the SD card in the Q. All this seems to work (well…function ), except that the waypoints on the GPSr are a condensed version of the caches “common name”, for example “A Red Bridge Treasure” equals something like “RDBRDGTRSR”, and the HTM files on the Q are listed by the Cache Number (GCxxxx). Being kinda new to the game means I got all of the caches in the 50-mile neighborhood, and scrolling through each GCxxxx.htm file to find the one most likely to be “RDBRDGTRSR” is a battery killer on the Q. Especially annoying are cache names that start with “a” or “the”, which get truncated from the common name, which is then condensed (I was looking for the one above in the “R” section of the Index.htm file, rather than in the “A”s…silly me ). Is there a way to get these naming protocols to match? I don’t really care which one, would prefer everything be by GCxxxx to make logging the find easier, but one or the other works for me. Also, I’m a bit illiterate when it comes to rewriting software, so if that’s the answer, specific instructions would be appreciated. Thanks!!

My two-cents worth on the "TechBlazer"calculator is that it mixes differing concepts of "difficulty" in its selections; for example, "Environment/GPSr Reception" and "Vegetation/Wildlife". In our neck-o-the-woods, we can easily be completely muggler-free, yet under trees so thick a GPSr is just extra weight. Also, "vegetation under 12 inches in height" is where the ticks and chiggers like to hide, and coming in contact with them during the summer is "probable". Alternatively, shorter vegetation is where our poisonous snakes can be found. How would one split these out to use this calculator for rating a cache, and as mentioned earlier, how would a searcher know that a higher terrain rating means a long, flat hike rather than a short ascent up a cliff? For me, these numbers should be guidance at most, a more clear description (or carefull reading) of the cache location and logs are much more useful.