Jump to content


+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by pppingme

  1. I think the biggest thing to come from the chirp was the beginning of the alienation between Groundspeak and Garmin. If I recall correctly, the introduction of the chirp came as somewhat of a surprise to Groundspeak. And things have only seemed to go downhill from there.

    I don't think it was the beginning, but rather more like the final nail in the coffin.


    I don't believe that Groundspeak knew nothing of the introduction, despite their claim otherwise, but rather Groundspeak couldn't figure out how to extract more money out of Garmin for the concept. Garmin did try to work with Groundspeak on the introduction of the chirp and had units in hand for testing before Garmin released them. Later Jeremy came out and even claimed the design, showing pics of some old usb memory stick or something, but an honest evaluation could only conclude it is indeed different from his idea, thus not Jeremy's design.


    The dispute goes back much further, as can be shown by the Wherigo client/player on some of the Garmin receivers, they were introduced on the brand new Oregon in late 2008, early 2009 or somewhere in there, but have NEVER been updated. Groundspeak lays claim to a patent on the concept, so technically Garmin can't update the client without permission and input, which has never happened. By the way, Groundspeak currently gets some royalty $$ for every Oregon sold because of the Wherigo player. This is the reason that the player was not part of the Dakota or Montana series.


    I look for Garmin to drop the Oregon this year, with the Dakota and Montana, the Oregon has just become a middle of the road unit, everyone either wants more (Montana) or less (Dakota), or even less (etrex 10, 20, 30), they've essentially dissolved the market for Oregon's, thus also dissolving groundspeaks lay to claim for $$ of each unit.

  2. If you get the program GSAK it can find it for you. You'll need to run a few PQs of just your found caches so it can sort through them all for you. Looks like it will use up your 5 PQs for a day to do it.

    Or just run a myfinds pq, which will grab all of them, and doesn't even count against your daily pq limit.

  3. As everyone is saying, GSAK is probably the best answer, but I would tell you to use the %SMART tag in GSAK, then you get a 6 character short name, too short to get the full name in, but it gives you enough that you will probably recognize the name, where just stripping the gc code leaves what amounts to random characters with no meaning for most people.

  4. I agree. Definite name malfunction. Who is Cjfarf who appears in the screen shot vs. Rick-O-Shay who appears in the gc.com logs on the cache page?


    Rick-O-Shay now has 3 finds per the cache page. Cjfarf doesn't even exist as a username in the gc.com database.

    thats wierd that you're seeing it like that, I am seeing cjfarf, I can pull up his page, and visit his three finds, and it shows as cjfarf on those pages as well, the only place I see "rick-o-shay" is in the text of one of his logs.


    Either way, this definitely appears to be a site issue and not a c:geo issue. After all, if the site can't show it right, how can a 3rd party app expect to work right?

  5. Over all, I'd say its frowned on so no, but I think there are two scenario's where its acceptable.


    1 - If its a cache that you have adopted, and you've never found it in the past, after all, you've never found it, so you probably have no significant knowledge or experience about how its hidden.


    2 - If its a challenge (I mean a real challenge, not this new stuff floating around), such as a delorme challenge, county challenge, those type of caches, because the real goal in those is completing the challenge, not finding the final.

  6. I just think they need more servers. I wonder what they are doing with our Premium Membership dollars?dry.gif LOL, J/k!laughing.gif

    Poor programming and poor database usage won't usually be fixed long term by throwing more hardware at it.


    Most likely, something in the update last week, went untested, and is now hitting the database harder than expected.


    Its not likely that there are significantly more users now than there were a couple weeks ago, and at that time the site didn't dog down as bad.

  7. Ewww... is that the way that the logs are really supposed to look?


    You're supposed to moved the slider in Photoshop until you can't read the text you're blurring.

    Why blur the log to start with? I don't get it. Some cache pages are formatted wrong and cause wacky issues, but this one doesn't seem to be.

  8. Since PQ's are typically loaded into another app/device/something else, there's usually no need to sort a pq in any order.


    If you are planning your route with any type of mapping program (s&t, google earth, the map on your gps etc), then that program will show them visually.


    If you are driving along your router and just hit the nearest option on your gps, then you get the closest caches.


    Either way, its probably good to get that visual look, just because a cache happens to be near a route, doesn't mean its a typical vacation or easy cache you typically think about along a route, if you're route happens to go through some otherwise very rough terrain that you have to go around for miles to even enter the area, its probably not one you would grab if you're doing the along a route thing.


    I'm curious how you are trying to use it, maybe based on that, better suggestions can be made.

  9. 1000 is just the max that pq will return, since both pq's and bookmarks are limited to 1000, there's no real issue here.


    Unless something is broken, the pq will return only whats in the bookmark.


    You can preview the PQ and you will only see the 20 to 40 that you have in the bookmark.

  10. PQ's just don't get that complicated.


    Have you looked at GSAK? It would be pretty easy to do this with GSAK, and a short macro (and there is a ton of support on the GSAK site, if you aren't comfortable writing a macro to do this, I bet someone over there would put one together for you).

  11. I use Vista on a couple computers and have never had this issue, I do however use a standards compliant browser, Firefox.


    I've not heard of this being a big problem, only a few rumblers, even with IE, you might try the basics first like clearing both your cache and cookies then try to login.

  12. then de-listing the cache on this site makes sense.


    I bet the email messages are bouncing. It's the only explanation that makes sense.

    Why does it make sense?


    I can find dozens of caches that the owner doesn't seem to have a valid email or whatever, some for a year or longer, and the caches don't get touched until there is a problem with the cache itself, usually by someone logging a needs archived on it.


    The surprising thing on this one is how quickly it seems to have been done, and gs is stating its "automatic".

  • Create New...