frisbee'r

Thanks Semper Questio. I appreciate coming back again to address the offline feature of Cachemate.

========================================= Thanks to all for taking the time to express your opinions and experiences. This is tough call. I'm evaluating the pros and cons...... again ..... taking in this new information. Yesterday morning, it looked like a slam dunk to move towards the 62s. I'm concerned about wear and having to retool with the 62s but it's not a deal breaker. I've found more caches than I have left to find. I'll be slowing down quite a bit and what I have left falls into more rugged territory. The remaining biggie is viewing cache page information and jettison the PDA. I use a waterproof, shock resistant phone that is coming up for renewal in June. Cell coverage is spotty in most of the outlying areas of the Pacific Northwest. The 62s solves this.

This is great material jchabalk. If there was a version of the Pulizer Prize awarded to those who simplify the GPS complexities, your segment would be in the running. I appreciate the honesty and field comparison notes. I'm looking forward to a better more restful night's sleep being so well informed. One thing I'm checking into is how various maps are layered forming a single database and transferred to the 62s. Using Mapsource for the 60CSx, the process concatenates City Navigator 2009, Garmin's 2008 Topos, and something unique to the Pacifc Northwest called Northwest Trails, created and updated over the last few years by Moun10Bike, a local cacher who now works for Groundspeak. I couldn't find any notes in the online manual for Mapsource. Maybe the program has a new name. For the 62s, City Navigator North America NT for 2012 will be released at the end of May. I'm hoping the other mapsets will transfer. Thanks again,

Thanks jchabalk. I've now had two responses to keep the 60CSx. My gut is starting to feel better. I'll check with the new REI store in Olympia, Wa. If the price is reasonable, this may be it. Come to think of it, I'd never buy a car in its first model year. It takes time to work the bugs out.

Thank you very much for your response at this late hour. You brought up concerns for me to ponder. When most of the buttons are worn down to the chassis, I really have no choice but to replace. Repair is no longer an option. I'm very tough on my gadgets and the 60CSx has been resilient in the mud, snow, and sub-zero temps for example. I've found that the production date (serial number) of a device is crucial. When I purchased the 2nd 60CSx through Garmin, they sold me an earlier serial number and I've had delay issues when navigating the menus and it's getting worse. That's the concern I have now about buying used. I'm taking a risk though with the 62. I should submit my resume to Garmin to be a field tester.

I'm about to wear out my 2nd 60CSx, a great GPS in all respects. I've been using this model for 3 years. I've been struggling with the decision whether to purchase a third or go to the 62s. REI is running a sale on May 20, 2011 for $299. The cost of a good looking but used 60CSx is $150 on average. A new 60CSx (rare but available) runs $225 on average. My Dell PDA (yes, I still do it the old fashioned way) is also becoming unreliable. To replace it runs about $50. So, I'm looking for anyone out there that can shoot holes into NOT moving to the Garmin 62s which combines PDA, 60CSx, and a few new features. I'm looking for kill shots. Thanks

Both Rino GPS units have only been used on one trip, Disneyworld in Florida. Condition is without flaw. One of the original boxes is still intact. Both units have the standard Lithium Ion plug-in chargers. Original packaging for Garmin's North America City Navigator NT software on DVD.

Get ready for this folks: I need to do this to begin the process of eliminating the iphone as a recommended GPS device on Groundspeak's website. If this doesn't happen soon, Geocaching as we know it will come to a crossroads of whether it's doing more harm than good. Have I peeked your interest yet? The iPhone of all vintages, used as a GPS, is a misearble failure. I cache in the Pacific Northwest of the US which is mostly forested on the western side of the Cascades. I started taking statistics over the last 3 months finding 800 caches released over the same period over a 60 mile radius. What I've been finding are these important issues: 1) More cachers then ever are placing containers with less than 10 finds. 2) Most of these new cachers are using the iPhone to find caches. The average distance of error is 185'. 3) I do iPhone rescues in the field all the time. People are off on less than social trails, usually bushwacking and not ever close to the prize. I inform them that the best GPS is a hand-held, water-proof, shock resistant, dedicated GPS, etc, etc. It's bad enough to see trees, vegetation, trails, logs, stumps get hammered by those carrying an iPhone but what's WORSE by degrees is wannabe cachers PLACING geocaches using the iPhone. Now you have the worst of scenerios. Bad coordinates and all geocachers handling any GPS, even those with considerable experience, cannot possibly make the find. 4) Everything that Groundspeak was founded on, all the instructionsl slide shows, all the material developed in the first few years, the books written, ....... to do a good job placing and finding caches has been waived by placing the iPhone on the [GPS] screen. 5) If Geocaching goes down, the major manufacturers of GPS's will loose 60-70% of their hand held GPS business. So, this is a business decision. Shut down the iPhone GPS app recommendation now or it's going to get ugly. 6) How ugly .... let me expand on this. I've witnessed iPhone hides where the coodinates are far enough off that it's clearly on private property. You want to see nasty confrontations of homeowners, business people, civil servants, stewarts of the land, just stay tuned. 7) Law enforcement is no longer saying "carry on" when they find geocachers, day or night, disturbing the peace, or illegally on private or on public lands after hours. More evidence is now being posted in logs. 8) One last detail, the iphone is NOT field reliable. It's not water resistant no matter the style or purpored claims of protection of cases. You can't expect to get any accuracy when it's tucked away in your pocket as you're climbing, fording creeks, in a rainforest and the list is endless. Things Groundspeak could do to better: 1) Every new cacher must have a Beta Tester, an experienced cacher to take readings for verification. Actually, this should be done regardless of experience whenever and wherever challenging terrain caches are placed. 2) New cachers should seek out and the approvers provided a field on the [Online Placement Form] the Goocaching name of the "advocate" or "mentor" for the first 5 hides. An approver needs only 5 seconds to check this out. The time saved over the life of a cache would be huge. 3) The [Online Placement Form] should have a checkbox or an attribute that a cache was placed using an iPhone or other device prone to providing inaccurate readings. I'm passionate about this sport that I love so much. I want it to survive another 10 years so I can take my grandson on treks to find treasures. Maybe, those will end up being incredible views, finding works of art, historical places, and just the exercise as the highlights. Mark this date, 8/25/2010. In a couple of years or so our "precious" may have melted away in the fires of Mt. Doom. Part 1 complete. ================================

==================================== I don't get into the Forums because topics, other than technical, are without merit, thought, or direction. They soon degrade and become worthless pieces of information and take up valuable data storage. On this topic, it's clear (including the charter member) that all responders are inexperieced in modern Geocaching. I'm into 5 figures in finds and have over 500 FTF's, most of which are in the forests and logging country of the PNW, so far in the bush that I'm the only visitor in over three years. I hate skirt lifters, ivy, micros in the woods, rock walls, and fish bowls. I have the experience and knowledge about the background within this topic although I'd rather be solving puzzles or be in the field right now. So..........when I was made aware of this I had to chime in. Over two years ago, I shared with friends that I felt that the rise and fall of urban GC would take four years. I didn't know how the grim reaper would appear but now it's clear ....... FACEBOOK. Since it's worldwide and an addiction, the foundation of the cancer will spread rapidly. I have run into more county, city, and state law enforcement officers and deputies than most of the responders combined. I know it by the flakey comments. I just hand out the geo-caching spiel on hardcopy now. If any of you are that ignorant to not see the impact of nighttime geocaching in neighborhoods, city and country parks for example, need to get a clue and wake up. The FTF Feeding Frenzy (I coined that about five years ago) is pushing a lot of this. Anywhere from one to 12 people show up according to logs. I feel the approvers need to do what was common once, no releases before dawn or after dusk. This is a sign that "the end is near".

Thanks, I appreciate all the input. The power on both units is set to 5 watts. Line of sight is the common denominator. I'm impressed with the caring attitude.

There is a ham radio in geocaching forum on this site that you might try. I'm not sure changing channels and bands would make any difference unless the channel is crowded. My impression is that GMRS is line of sight so a any small hill can be significant.

Thank you Starbrand for responding. I will reduce my expectations. The owner of the Rinos is statisfied with the results so far and that's what counts. I may run tests on some straight and flat stretches on the Interstate to satisfy my curiosity.

Does any Rino 520 or ham radio operator have experience in what GMRS bands/codes should be used to maximize radio performance/distance? Garmin techs now say, keep trying different bands/codes. The combinations are mind boggling. ====== Some background ================== A friend recently purchased two Rino 520HCx 2 way radio/GPS units. The primary driver is to track each other with base and City Navigator NT maps and have a radio for communication. It's a fact that Garmin has the only single solution for public use in the world. These units will be used in downtown areas, resort parks like Disney World, National Forest and Park campgrounds, trail systems, the list is endless. The secondary use would be to do a little Geocaching and have the tracking and radio functions to boot. This is really an advanced use of a GPS but so underrated and very impressive. Now, here is the problem for those that have the unit and for Garmin if they are listening in. My friend is legal by acquiring an FCC license for $85 which allows her to use the GMRS bands going beyond the walki-talki FRS 8-14 bands. The problem is the distance her Rinos can communicate. Using the FRS bands, the max distance for clarity seems to be around .20 miles. Changing to GMRS bands 15 and 22 for example, the max distance is about 2 miles. That's a far cry from the advertised 14 miles. Are there certain codes within the GMRS band range that will carry further. Garmin Tech Support has verified that the units have the correct parameter values set. (Repeater turned off, 5 watts, for example). Now Garmin lives on the plains of Kansas. There's not a whole lot to get in the way there. My friends and I live in Western Washington. A few more hills but nothing significant in Olympia. I have a pair of $ 89.99 Midland Walki Talkis that range out over seven miles without any difficulty. Why can't a pair of $350 Rinos specifically built for radio communication in the higher bands have such a short range. The GPS signals max out at 4 - 5 bars. No problem with the map functions. Best I've seen with the NT version. To recap, I would greatly appreciate any feedback. - frisbee'r (Dan)

Please, let's get this back to the original topic. How to evaluate whether a hide is a traditional, puzzle, or a multi. In my opinion, a traditional cache is a single container which requires no tricks to open. A multi consists of more than one container or waypoint ending with a final container with a log. A puzzle can be a multi which requres that you solve a problem either as shown on the cache page or in the field. The problem with this particular cache was that the decoy was a tube containing a PEN with paper firmly lodged in the bottom of the tube that most cachers would have thought was the log. It took us 10 or 15 minutes to extract it with a special tool. Many cachers would not have bothered and possibly added another log. We attempted to rectify the problem and offered suggestions to the cache owner who is a newbie. His response was totally off the charts. There was no discussion, just hate mail.

The caching community should have a sense of responsibility to help newbie cachers learn the sport. These are valuable lessons and will help define how the cacher will grow. When I am in the field and I find a cache in distress, I will do what's necessary to add a new logbook, bundle contents in baggies, and even clean up the area within 50' of the cache to safeguard it from accident discovery. I've had no problem with any cacher when I perform maintenance as I notify them the same day.

A traditional cache is simple. You are seeking a container at the posted coords. A puzzle or a multi is more than one step. One which I found began with a no-brainer container which was a small puzzle box. You slid a couple of sides and the container opened presenting the log. This was considered a puzzle by the volunteer approver and the cache owner had to change it from a traditional in order to have it approved. Another example: I found a great cache where there were six decoy containers within 20' of a very difficult final hide. This was considered a puzzle cache, and rightly so. A problem arose recently when I found a cache which had a rolled-up paper at the bottom of a 12 tube, and I believed the paper to be the log. It was jammed at the bottom and I needed a special tool to extract it. Once out, the paper said, "Sorry, this is not the cache. It can be found 6 feet away." There were no other instructions on the cache page or on the note. I found the bison tube buried in the ground around a stump, attached by a chain. Is this a traditional, puzzle, or multi? It required special search and logging requirements. To me, I consider the first tube a puzzle or a stage in a multi. Nowhere in the cache description does it state, "please restore the cache as you found it" (i.e., with the note jammed tightly in the bottom). As a responsible cacher, I placed a 6" stick at the bottom to make it easier for the next cacher to retrieve the note. The owner went ballistic and sent out a message calling me an A--hole, "LIER," and idiot for altering his cache and other various personal assaults. Also, he deleted all my logs for his caches, as well as those of my caching partner. This cacher has only 105 finds as of this date. This has never happened to me in nearly 7K finds. The approver said this was a traditional. What's the difference? After all my years as a geocacher, I am now confused by the inconsistency of how caches are classified.

I agree with Hoppingcrow. The twenty bookmark limit reminds me of the days when email service providers would allow only 5-10 megs of storage for a username. Reality has set in as most now average about 500 megs or unlimited to accommodate the proliferation of attachments consisting of hi-res JPG and movie files for example. I've cleaned up nearly all caches within a 50 mile radius of Olympia, Wa. It's not good enough to run PQs because I research areas going out two or more hours picking specific caches and placing notes like puzzle solutions in the bookmark. I've had to resort to word processing files with lists of links and relevant information. The reference to challenge caches really hits home. There are many in the PNW. Most creators of a challenge require keeping a bookmark at least three months. However, these bookmarks are beneficial to new cachers down the road as they provide a candidate cache list and are templates of how to properly setup the challenge bookmark. The limitation of 20 is an allocation that cannot meet the needs of today's evolving active cacher. It needs to be increased in 2009. My vote is to see it doubled.

I'll take 5 of each if a run is made to Lakewood or Olympia and the price remains the same. I would have to add $4.00 a can if I had to drive up there.

I've kept a bookmark going for the number of FTF caches I've found. For each cache, I assign a serial number. (i.e. 001 - cache name W, 002 - cache name X, etc) to the cache name stored within the bookmark. I need to keep them chronologically of course. When I reached 250 recently, I decided to look them over. Even though the cache count for the bookmark is accurate, when I try to view them, the latest are not listed. They are a part of the bookmark but where are they hiding. When I run a query on the bookmark, all the caches are there. I've had inconsistencies displaying cache titles within large bookmarks since I've become a member over 3 years ago. If you click on the scroll number at the bottom from 1 to 99, caches are left out. I have to constantly get out of the bookmark and go back in through or even close down Geocaching and come back in to display them. Sometimes this works, but most often it fails. Is there a maximum number of caches that can be stored in a bookmark? It seems that when exceeding 50, the problems really kick in.

I just noticed that "MaxB on the River" logged a problem earlier regarding not getting the top half of the print to appear, when trying to Print Friendly the cache page without logs. I've gone paperless but this feature is still invaluable. I'll add my two cents ......... It's broke and can be duplicated so ......... queue it up to be fixed. I have three dual core systems each with dedicated HP lasers. All processors are running XP Pro or Home Edition I.E. Version 7.0.5730.13.

**** Final Update **** 11/22/07 **** I received a quick response from someone within Contact@Groundspeak.com that it is not occurring to their machine. I was asked to pursue this further by going outside my network. I have now (11/22/07) visited two other geocacher's home machines and had the identical problem. In those cases they were not aware of it as it's so innocuously displayed at the bottom of the geocaching page. I confirmed it with two businesses as well. I polled 12 cachers from western Washington State and 5 of 12 report the error. The last responder to this issue mentioned that the status line can be suppressed in I.E. I did not pursue whether the status line option was checked with the 12. One user mentioned that it is occurring on I.E. but not Opera or Firefox. I have no experience with these. A system's programmer for a very large network confirmed the error and mentioned a Java scripting problem. That's out of my league. I'm going to post the issue on the GSAK forum as these folks are very active. I'll probably leave it at that since I'm not experiencing any functionality or navigation problems with Geocaching.com, just an annoying error message. Something is broken and it can be duplicated so there is hope.

I sent the following off to Contact@Groundspeak.com. I thought I'd submit this here as well ================================= I don't know how long this has been going on but it needs attention. When I enter Geocaching.com, every option or screen selected is displayed and operates properly but in the status bar on the left hand side, a yellow triangle with an exclamation point is display with the words "Error on Page" or "Done, but with errors on page". Whatever screen is displayed, I then click on the status bar and the following error message is displayed: [Problems with this web page might prevent is from being displayed properly or functioning properly. In the future you can display this message by double clicking the warning icon display in the status bar] For example, when I enter [My Account] and click on the status bar and receive the above message, I then click on {Show Details} button and the following is displayed........ Line: 2946 Char: 25 Error: object expected Code: 0 URL: http://www.geocaching.com/My/ Whatever screen I'm into, I can click on the status bar and the same information displays EXCEPT the line number changes and the URL screen info after .com. A good comparison: When entering [Hide & Seek a cache] and clicking on the status bar and {Show Details}, the following is displayed: Line: 593 Char: 25 Error: Object expected Code: 0 URL: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/ No other website has this problem that I've noticed. I have three dual-core computers running Windows XP SP2 and I.E. Version 7.0.5730.13. I do a lot of research and now that I'm keeping track, the error is associated only Geocaching.com. I'm curious as to whether you'll process this message/concern. How will I know whether you've received and can confirm it?