ArtieD

Don't come into a thread with an agenda if you don't want to be called out for it. what is the agenda? That's smart phones are better for caching. Every time someone comes up with evidence or a feeling that GPS units are better, you always have to question it. Pro-smart phone posts aren't questioned. Yes, no agenda at all.

Don't come into a thread with an agenda if you don't want to be called out for it.

To what end? You say you've used both while caching, so why ask? You know what works best for you. People like what they like, so why the need to have people justify their opinions? For someone who allegedly has no dog in the fight, you really seem determined to prove cell phones are the best caching devices. It's strange because this geocacher wants particular details about people's tests of different devices, but rejects result from actual scientific testing of devices. Starting to smell like an agenda to me. oh, this is interesting. tell me more. Again, what is your real motivation? Don't say you're trying to help people out. People can look this up on their own quite easily.

To what end? You say you've used both while caching, so why ask? You know what works best for you. 1 People like what they like, so why the need to have people justify their opinions? For someone who allegedly has no dog in the fight, 2 you really seem determined to prove cell phones are the best caching devices. 1 "i like eggs but not bacon" doesn't give much usable information for people that may search for it here. 2 best is subjective /preferential. i don't think that could be stamped on any one device, but I'm sure someone could disprove that. It's cute that you are presenting it like some philanthropic exercise, but it's patently obvious what you're actually doing . You have an agenda. Admit it.

To what end? You say you've used both while caching, so why ask? You know what works best for you. People like what they like, so why the need to have people justify their opinions? For someone who allegedly has no dog in the fight, you really seem determined to prove cell phones are the best caching devices. It's strange because this geocacher wants particular details about people's tests of different devices, but rejects result from actual scientific testing of devices. Starting to smell like an agenda to me. Precisely.

1)"GPS navigation devices vary in sensitivity, speed, vulnerability to multipath propagation, and other performance parameters." Although the gap is narrowing the stand alone GPSr generally outperforms the smartphone in these areas. Thus in high multi-path (urban and heavy tree covered areas) my 7 year old GPSr still outperforms my smartphone in my own empirical observations. In open areas the difference is much less noticeable, but they both get me close enough to ground zero eventually. Again, my own empirical observations from finding various benchmarks; indicate that the dedicated GPSr is more "accurate" in a side by side comparison. (The quoted article in the OP basically confirms those findings.) 2)Power usage/Battery performance. Notwithstanding, all the tip, tricks, and (low cost) hacks people suggest to keep their phones powered, GPSr's are more power efficient. There is something comforting about having a couple of widely available, easily transportable, AA batteries available. 3)From a purely personal perspective I spend less time "messing" with the GPSr; select cache or enter waypoint... get searching. While the apps on the smart phone are too busy updating nearest caches, scrolling through lists, selecting the search technique, and doing other things in the background (social media logs) that time is wasted while it continually sorts itself out. I will say having access to the cache page/hints/logs/pics is nice if your up against a tough cache, but I could get that info through the browser vice the app anyway... For me I have no problem using the smartphone for the easy or opportunity caches (or even harder ones), however anytime we are going off the beaten path we bring the GPSr. So to summarize for ohgood: handheld GPSr; improved sensitivity, improved multi-path rejection, improved ionosphere modeling, improved accuracy, improved battery life and power management, ease of use... YMMV Very well said.

To what end? You say you've used both while caching, so why ask? You know what works best for you. People like what they like, so why the need to have people justify their opinions? For someone who allegedly has no dog in the fight, you really seem determined to prove cell phones are the best caching devices.

Of course that's an option. Not necessary, but an option. As a smartphone-exclusive cacher, I've always said the best caching strategy is both devices - if only because they both have their technical strengths; a dedicated GPS will (on average) be better at GPS than a smartphone (on average), and the smartphone is a jack of all trades. Of course, one can cache just dandy with only a GPSr, just as with only a smartphone. So, whichever combination you use is entirely up to you. FInd one that works for you, and run with it. If you want the best technical capability, get a GPSr that is faster and more accurate than whatever smartphone you get (not all are). But whatever you choose, just realize that your preference may well be different than another's, and whether you have a good or bad experience doesn't mean everyone else will have the same experience what specific functions have you seen a stand alone GPS better at, than a smartphone? Ease of use while geocaching in 23 countries without a data connection. "ease of use" is pretty vague "x number counties" should have been a higher number to make it sound cooler "data connection" well, since everyone knows data isn't needed for caching.... try again? :-) Is there a reason why you're seemingly trying to prove phones are better for caching?

On August 4th, I got a FTF on a cache purely by accident. This cache (GC6PN3K) popped up on my radar while searching for something else. It had published two hours before we left the house. No email and other local cachers confirmed the same thing.

I still wonder why it's embarrassing...

Thanks, Frau Potter!

Actually, feel free to be an elitist too if you like. There's nothing wrong with a diverse set of opinions and attitudes. You don't have to hide in the corner cowering just because someone suggests you're not like them. Not my point. You can like or dislike a game all you want. Acting like you're somehow embarrassed because someone thinks you're doing something rather popular right now is silly. Just politely explain what you're doing and move on. Time-out! Elitism is not the issue here. Let's keep it cordial. And anyway, I thought that for an activity to be elitist, you needed to keep it closed and secretive (not inviting others to play, especially not the "wrong kind of people"), with bonus points if the activity is expensive. But some members of the public do judge either or both activities as silly - but people play in different ways. And if they don't play at all, that's their loss. I can agree with that.

Actually, feel free to be an elitist too if you like. There's nothing wrong with a diverse set of opinions and attitudes. You don't have to hide in the corner cowering just because someone suggests you're not like them. Not my point. You can like or dislike a game all you want. Acting like you're somehow embarrassed because someone thinks you're doing something rather popular right now is silly. Just politely explain what you're doing and move on.

This is like Ford vs. Chevy all over again...

BINGO!

You only want comments from people who have bought the phone, used it, and didn't like it. It doesn't make sense to buy a phone that doesn't appeal to me in the first place. Pretty much this. I will not buy something unless I have completely researched it and know it's the best unit for me.

Why is it embarrassing? Do you have some kind of problem with people enjoying a game? I play both. Both are fun. Don't be elitist.

Shiny Nickel = Regular Edition Antique Nickel = Limited Edition Antique Gold = VIP Edition Shiny Gold = Staff Edition I have all four.

Black Nickel GW12 coin? I am unaware those exist.

Tips and Tricks is checked, and I never got an email for this cache: https://coord.info/GC6PCF9 As far as I can tell, no one in my area got a notification.

I have both. I use a Moto G4 and a Garmin 62s. Both have their strengths and both have their weaknesses. That said, if I am doing some serious outdoors caching or am engaging in a long, all-day caching run, I use the Garmin. It's just a better machine for that. If I am just finding a few caches or am in an urban environment, then I use the phone. Lighter, on the fly caching is better with the phone. If I had to choose between the two and only use one, give me the Garmin. It's tougher, easier to use, better on battery life and is just plain better all around.

We have the issue here in Missouri. A cache published two days ago and it was found the next day, when usually it's found in an hour or two. Both finders reported that they got no emails of publication. I didn't as well.

Bug Reports and Feature Discussions > Website http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=340533 Instant Notify not working http://forums.Groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=340533 B. Thank you very much.

Has anyone experienced issues with new cache publication notifications? There was a cache that published in the area that sat for two days before being found. Normally it lasts only a few hours. The people that found it said they got no notification, and neither did I. Usually they are spot on. Is there something going on with this?

Since quite a few of the side events were downtown, the labs could have been there. A ton of historical and cool places are within a smaller area, and they would have made excellent subjects for the Labs. I didn't mind the brewery/distillery aspect of the ones they had, but parking was a nightmare and I could see how the Smith family with their 2.5 kids would not appreciate it.