bladesedge

Cezanne - wasn't talking about my phone except to say the ONLY time I use cache page maps is on my phone when a cache is newly released and am going for a FTF but am not near a computer. Otherwise the ONLY map I use is the global one with all caches. This change fully affects the way I cache.

For me, there are roads that just aren't there on the map, and roads that connect on the map don't IRL (2 examples of this within 2kms of me). There's street names that are straight out wrong (Marama Ave Street it says instead of Marama Ave South) and street names that changed 10 years ago still have the old names. Schools missing, schools not named as schools (just says St Johns.... doesn't say St Johns Girls School), churches are the same. Areas marked as trees aren't accurate (I use my place as an example here - its not right and is obvious from any Sat map) And google has property divisions. Oh yeah - and when I do 'Find my Location' it puts me in Dunedin - which is about 200kms away. I'll do a screenshot and mark in red everything thats wrong in someway - but I just don't have the time right now - maybe over the weekend. Awesome.

Cezanne..... Just like you think I missed your point I think you've completely missed everyone else's, including mine.

Maybe, but: - current maps are full of mistakes IN MY AREA - are slow loading - and aren't as good as Google maps, - to get to Google earth takes too long and isn't live, - Google Earths compasses and zoom function also have a habit of spinning around out of control on me - and uses too many resources on my net book, - cache page Google does hold other caches, -and that open source maps can't be trusted as a true and accurate representation just like wiki isn't everything....... All of these points still stand and are accurate and valid reasons for complaining. Let me pay to keep Google. In fact it would be benficial to gc.com if only a small number of peeps took up a 'paid for' Google add-on. They would drop out of the 0.35% and be able to keep the profits rather than give it to Google. So maybe I should just smile and nod at all the people who say there's no need and petition gc.com in private :-)

I still manage to cache reasonably without the personalized cache map and I live in an urban area. I agree that for urban caching satellite views are helpful (even though the accuracy your are used to is not avaible in my area even for the very, very best maps) and good maps as well, but they are still available on the cache pages. When I want to narrow down cache A, I do not need to see cache B, C, D, E, F etc at the same time. It appears to me that too many cachers ignore the maps links on the cache pages because using the personalized map is the only thing they I am aware of on gc.com. Cezanne You may not see the need, but others do as they cache different to you! Sorry but your comments to people complaining are starting to get irksome. There's no need for the global maps for the way YOU geocache, but for others there is a need. No ones forgetting the maps on each cache. I use them on rare occasions when im going out seeking singular caches and I look them up on my phone. But that's about it. They're useless to me otherwise as I can't see all the other caches around it. Your generalisations about those complaining really aren't helping your cause. I have replied to you on several occasions with how I used the global maps and why I use them over the cache page ones and yet you're still posting that there's no need for them. Not cool.

The detail is only better where there are dilligent mappers updating it. Where I am its not better. I have next to no detail, and inaccuracies everywhere.

Bing is used by that 'other' geocaching website isn't it? I wouldn't touch it with a 50foot barge pole. Map accuracy is worse than OSM! When I checked out the other website, it had all the local rivers labelled wrong. Loads of streets were wrong. Haven't been back to it since.

Testing only tests so far. The real test comes from teh end users - the annoying ones who only know how to do something one way. And its that one way that you would never think to test for. We always test everything before giving to the end user, but there will always be outages, and there will always be bugs after release. Until they can simulate people it ain't gonna happen.

Just click on the Google map link directly available on each cache page. No export necessary at all. BTW: One can easily go caching with no maps at all. The default is Mapquest which is not open source at all. Cezanne Thats not how I prepare to cache. I look up the map with at ALL the caches in the area, not the individual ones, and plan out which caches I'm going to attack, in which order, and how best to find them. I've basically done all of the caches within a 100km zone of me, so when I'm going caching, I have to plan to get as good an experience as I can. If its a numbers run, I plan out the route I'm going to take. If its a multi, I look at a birds eye view to see likely trails that could be used, landmarks etc. If its a long hike, I have a look for the best possible route. But I do it all on the one map. As I've said several times now. I will gladly pay more money on top of the Premium Membership I already have, just to have the maps stay as they are. They suit my style of caching.

Yes we can export caches off to Google Earth and use from there, but isn't the goal of geocaching to spend more time out caching and less time in front of the computer? I don't like the new maps, in my area they're full of mistakes, and that will be BECAUSE they're open source. Anyone can update them. How is that good?

For me - the only map that LOADED successfully was the first one in the list. All the others took too long, or didn't load at all. But the first one is choca full of mistakes - and being open sourced - I can see why. Backwards steps that force people to work harder for what they previously had tend to have a negative flow on effect for the activity. Frowny face - give me the option to pay for google. I will!

Do you carry your laptop with you to look at while you're in the field? Or can you photographically remember the satellite view. I just don't see how a different map can be a huge problem. It's not going to look like that when you get there, unless you're arriving by helicopter. Do you have a smart phone? Does it have an app that uses the maps you like? Before I leave home, I'll often plan a route to the various caches I plan to visit. In the city, knowing where the path entrance is located can save lots of time and walking. No smart phone. I am the same! before I leave home I know everything about where I'm heading - if its in a cityscape and the cache is in an alleyway - I like to know the best way to get there from a sat map. Also on parks - looking for the pathways, looking for unmarked trails in areas that aren't well mapped - looking for the obvious path into a cache if you head to that area. Generally with those ones the obvious path isn't obvious until after you find the cache...... so recon work before you leave home is a great idea.

I just checked out the Open Street Maps map for my 'suburb'... a connecting street to the left of me has the wrong name - the name was changed 10 years ago. a tributary street to the west of me is actually a Private Road for the residents. It also has this 'street' connecting to another road running along the back. The Private Road is a 'no exit' and the road running along the back doesn't exist. It never did. Its never been paved, and back in its hey day was about half a metre wide horsetrail through long grass! Don't do it! I'd way prefer to pay more for Premium membership and get googlemaps than go to that! Inferior!

I've used the official app, c:geo and now I use neongeo which I prefer. Neongeo has offline maps which was one of the main selling points for me. I'll definitely give neongeo a go then. What maps does it use and how does it store them?

My ideal app will have offline maps..... maps that are stored on it, and you have the caches loaded from PQs. I have a 3g card in my tablet, but that relies on me being in cellphone coverage, and quite oftent hats not the case....

I use c:geo, but i appease the Groundspeak gods by paying for the official apps also (I hope... please don't delete me!). C:geo is much better, sorry.

And me!

I saw a cache recently that had a $5 note in it. I left it for a kid to find.... they'd appreciate it / remember it more

Isn't there something in the rules about no commercial material in caches? I'm not a fan of seeing business cards. And they're likely to get soggy pretty quick.

That sounds a lot better. Maybe find some of differing terrain/difficulty levels, one that involves a walk of an hour or more or something that is challenging physically as well as mentally.

I see this happening more and more. Minnesota state parks did this as well. And many of Canada's national parks are doing it. Last week, we received a Banff National Park geocoin for finding at least three of their hides. Thats pretty cool!

Yes, but you couldn't drag that data out of the logs and show it visually in a picture.

What do you do for visiblity on that one when it can be seen from the other side of the world on youtube....... visible from 50,000kms?

They SHOULD be responsible for their own cache, but isn't there badge for keeping your room clean for a week??? There was when I was a Girl Guide - room was tidy for a week, and that was it! The badges I guess are good for kids who're really into it with their families and for those it's a long term thing, but I can't see putting out a cache as being a sensible requirement. That does require ongoing maintenance for years to come. I have to say I did meet one young man last year - all of about 9 or 10, absolutely enthused about geocaching! He was out checking on a cache while his parents were visiting a local market day. He liked to check on caches he'd previously logged to see who'd been there since!

I forgot about the coordinates thing, but I still think I have a point here.... out in the field my GPS says the cache should be 5m East of here. Is a lot easier to say this than to first note down or mark the waypoint and then to find that WP and type it onto the logs. The more people who say the same thing - it was 5m East of here, the more likely people are to hone in on the correct location, and not damage flora around them. 10m out may not sound too bad - but in dense undergrowth, 10m is a LONG way! I know of a cache near me that migrates around a 10m radius - for somewhere that is just 12m off a carpark it's surprisingly hard to find and has a lot of DNFs.... and its a 10litre bucket! The ground is clearly worked over by previous geocachers. A pattern of where cachers have previously found the cache may help to return some of that GZ flora to what it should look like! Coordinates are less likely to be filled out as it takes a lot longer. Plus you also rely on the CO to update the coords - which they should be going out and checking - its not that easy. And not all COs do update coordinates. Not all cachers know how to set a WP and retrieve it later. But they all can read their GPSrs and see that it says the cache should be 5m East of where they found it! If they're able to type in a number and then select a direction.... its not that hard and more likely to be used. I really do like the idea of the graphical bullseye though. From a glance if I don't find the cache at GZ I can start heading in the right direction, and leave the other directions along, allowing the foliage to grow back.