Co-Stars

I'm a newbie to all of this paperless stuff, Palm and Pocket (don't even know what they are), and what software works on what. 1) What is the difference between a Palm Pilot and a Pocket PC and what advantages/disadvantages does one have over the other? 2) What caching software works best only on a Palm Pilot, what works best only on a Pocket PC, and what works just as effectively on both? 3) Will cachemate work on a Pocket PC or just on a Palm Pilot? 4) Will BeelineGPS work on a Palm Pilot or just on a Pocket PC?

Alkaline will always outperform NiMH because 1) two alkalines are 3.0 volts where two NiMH are 2.5 volts, and 2) alkalines last 3-5 times longer than NiMH (before they need recharging) for the same current draw, and 3) alkalines have a shelf life 100 times that of NiMH. I started with NiMH but got so frustrated with them constantly dying that I never use them anymore.

Here's a site that will rate it for you after you answer some questions: http://www.clayjar.com/gcrs/

I'm a newbie to all of this paperless stuff and what software works on what. What is the difference between a Palm Pilot and a Pocket PC (I'm a newb here also)? Will cachemate work on a Pocket PC or just on a Palm Pilot? Will BeelineGPS work on a Palm Pilot or just on a Pocket PC?

Another item (not exactly an abbreviation) used often is geobeacon or just beacon. What is this?

Ok - maybe I just never noticed them there before. thanx.

All my private bookmark list links just started showing up on cache web pages today (if there's an entry for that cache in it) even though I do not have them marked public or shared (eg. GCYXQW). I tryed logging off/on but they are still there. Any one have any ideas?

I just realized I said it wrong (wrong polarity). I meant to say "I propose just a simple check box which is to be checked if there is NO bushwacking or undergrowth more than 1 foot high." This way not checking it doesn't change anything as to the way the system exists right now. So it is backward compatible. Now obviously any system will depend on it being used properly. The fact that at times it may not be used properly is not a reason for not having it. The existing system is not always used properly right now but that is not a reason to abolish it. It still is better than not having it. Anyway a "NO Bushwacking" checkbox would be far easier to judge than the difficulty or terrain. Some typical examples of intended usage is where the hide is in a paved parking lot, or concrete parking ramp, or in a building, or on a golf course, or softball field, etc. You get the idea. The hider purposely intends there to be no bushwacking whatsoever but he has no way of expressing that. A terrain of 1 doesn't mean no bushwacking - just that there is no steep hills. Now he can check "NO Bushwacking" and still specify a terrain.

There are a significant number of cachers and potential cachers who are turned off by bushwacking. Indeed many when they discover the bushwacking involved will never cache again. And some, like myself, are just too old or not able to physically do bushwacking. The terrain attribute is totally subjective and rarely has anything to do with amount of bushwacking involved. I propose just a simple check box (or it could be a number I suppose but why make it complicated and more subjective?) which is to be checked if there is bushwacking or undergrowth more than 1 foot high. Geocaching.com could then add this attribute so people can search using it (along with pocket queries). This would greatly expand the sport to allow those who won't do or don't like bushwacking to enjoy it also. What do you all think?