ohgood

So even after the mystery is solved (thanks for the "how we cache everywhere" story unimogger!) people are still arguing about ... I'm not even sure what ?

pretty much, yes. usually it's both if it's either.

maybe even with all the hand wringing and arguing here on the Interwebles, there is still a cache at the location?

That's a great dis-courtesy to the people who've put out caches, and maintain them, for you to find. The least you can do is say thanks. There are some great caching apps from other providers. You don't need to use the house-brand one if you don't like it. Or use the website. But please, log your finds. PS, you just re-activated a rather old discussion from 2014... if they are interesting (contents or location or both!) enough, we will log them online. if it's just another 515feet cache, we'll probably skip logging it online, and writing in the log, all together. of course we'll save it in our "found - not interesting" database offline, so we can skip it next time. we'll log a online if it isn't there, since THAT is beneficial to the cache owner, and there is no way to know if it was an interesting cache until it's actually found. hopefully we can help shape the future caches placed by propping up the interesting locations and contents, and ignoring the +515feet caches.

1 make sure your gps settings (the android settings) are set to include google / wifi / cellular. 2 download and install either GPS Status or GPS Test from the market. once installed you'll want to find the "reset a-gps" and "update a-gps" or similar in whichever app you installed 3 set your android settings back to "GPS ONLY" 4 try again with the geocaching app. i'm assuming your gps was working off old positional data, or ONLY using wifi / cellular at the time, and that was the cause for the location error. if it's a bug in the app (very likely, the gc app is terribly in my opinion) this will not fix it.

That's pretty cool, I'll scatter some for you oops, i just realized i didn't email you per the instructions. sorry about that. i hope i can have a couple for my kids to place and watch. would you prefer they be placed in difficult cache areas or somewhere they will quickly take off ?

Oh lol

You may have to do a little mowing to find the horse or you could simply toss a grenade over the wall into the high grass and hope for the best.What if there is a Caterpillar®-brand hydraulic dead horse beater on site? You would need permission to use it but it would be handy. You could automatically beat the horse while looking for the cache at the same time. lol at all of this. :-)

OK, this had crossed the orange fence three times and arrived at the hallowed fence of plaid. I'm not sure what to do with my automatic dead horse beating robot arm, my dead horse throw downs, or my secret decoder ring for the plaid fence. Are we supposed to automatically beat the orange horse as a distraction while giving the secret plaid handshake key card, or.... Did I already say to much and going to lose my plaid privileges? First rule of Orange Fence club ? I'm so confused!

how often do you check all of your cache logs? How often do you check yours? About twice a day I trip over all of them. Im curious. Is your ohgood name a sock puppet? Because I don't see how you check your caches every day when it doesn't show you own any. Ohgood is my caching username. I don't know what a sock puppet is as far as geocaching terminology goes. Earlier when I was curious and asked got often the poster checked, it was because I saw a comment about comparing and/or deleting logs that didn't match the physicals. From my guesstimation , checking on twenty or thirty interesting caches (not micros along a guard rail) might require a hours hike (or more?)for each one, and an hour (or hours) of driving in between. That made me wonder how often a person like above would go out and check each cache log vs the online lists. I haven't looked up that persons profile to see if he/she owns one or one thousand. My one cache that my family naively placed prior to finding out abbot all the permission forms for state parks and land owner is in the garage, and o do trip over it about twice a day. I don't think we will ever place one. I know internet forums make curiosity sound like sarcasm, but that wasnt my intention. Edited. I just noticed you didn't answer earlier and it was another user that asked how often I checked mine. Oops I might have been replying to the wrong poster. Keeping up fail I guess. So, how often do you check yours to compare vs online logs? To be honest almost never. If I suspect that a log is bogus I'll look for the signature on the log during my next maintenance run. I just don't think that it's all that detrimental to the game. It violates the guidelines and I'm sure in some cases it's caused a few unnecessary DNFs but contrary to some of the responses I don't think it's worthy of running out to my cache every time I suspect one. The other issue was in response to the idea that Groundspeak could/would archive my cache if knowing or un-knowingly I didn't delete an armchair log. Let's put the blame, and the punishment, on the actual guilty party. Thanks for that. I'm not blaming anyone for anything here, I'm more interested/curious in how cache owners handle the time and distances required to do some of the things they talk about, like filtering out faked (cheated?) logs. I can't imagine traveling the same trail twice a month (assuming/guestimating) instead of finding a new path. That's partially my own preferences showing too. After seeing the time lapses between some caches at of my local favorite areas, I also assumed the co's didn't check on them very often, but this thread leans contrary to that. :-)

how often do you check all of your cache logs? How often do you check yours? About twice a day I trip over all of them. Im curious. Is your ohgood name a sock puppet? Because I don't see how you check your caches every day when it doesn't show you own any. Ohgood is my caching username. I don't know what a sock puppet is as far as geocaching terminology goes. Earlier when I was curious and asked got often the poster checked, it was because I saw a comment about comparing and/or deleting logs that didn't match the physicals. From my guesstimation , checking on twenty or thirty interesting caches (not micros along a guard rail) might require a hours hike (or more?)for each one, and an hour (or hours) of driving in between. That made me wonder how often a person like above would go out and check each cache log vs the online lists. I haven't looked up that persons profile to see if he/she owns one or one thousand. My one cache that my family naively placed prior to finding out abbot all the permission forms for state parks and land owner is in the garage, and o do trip over it about twice a day. I don't think we will ever place one. I know internet forums make curiosity sound like sarcasm, but that wasnt my intention. Edited. I just noticed you didn't answer earlier and it was another user that asked how often I checked mine. Oops I might have been replying to the wrong poster. Keeping up fail I guess. So, how often do you check yours to compare vs online logs?

how often do you check all of your cache logs? How often do you check yours? About twice a day I trip over all of them.

I was thinking perhaps it's time to add an emoticon if Signal beating a horse to death. It would come in handy on the forums these days. What if the horse or stick is wrapped in orange fence?

how often do you check all of your cache logs?

I'm in favor! Yep. I'm that good. lol that's funny :-) thanks to this thread passing an orange fence will bring a sneaky smile to my face. has anyone posted a dead horse gif yet?

It never happened. Here's what Moun10Bike said about it in 2012: It seems like the schema update may never happen at this point, and a new solution of downloading caches using the API may be the way of the future. The mentioned overhaul of the search functionality appears to be largely complete now, so a new data delivery method may not be far off. 'Old school', eh? Yet it's the only way I have of downloading cache info to my GPS. I wonder how a new or revamped API will deal with that? Thanks for your response - I suppose that puts it to bed can you import a large gpx file to your (non api capable) device ? if so, you can download a ton of caches with your tablet/smartphone/etc and then transfer them to a sdcard, then over to your (non api capable) device. i'm assuming it doesn't have bluetooth/wifi functionality for file transfers ? I'm sorry, but your comment has nothing to do with the subject of this thread. This thread is about a promise made by geocaching.com to implement a new standard for GPX files that would include information not included in the current format. That information would include favorite points, attributes, and other values that are available through the API but not included in GPX files. I hope the above clarifies the issue we are discussing. see the Bruce comment above, i assumed that was currently possible. should i delete my comment to prevent confusion?

Last month the garmin let me down - I'd loaded caches from gsak as usual, tested they were all there, set it to the first one. I arrived and did the first cache, hit "Find next closest" (extremely useful feature) and... Nothing. It had lost every other cache. So I switched to the phone and C:Geo. I had to miss the next two caches as I climbed the hill far enough to get a signal, and c:geo took about 20 minutes of weak signal to load the 20 other caches I wanted to do, but it did so and I was able to rescue most of the day. I mention this because it was the first time I used C:Geo for an extended time and it wasn't as good for me - in fact I ended up copying the coords of each cache onto the garmin and setting them as a waypoint for navigating. The "Going backwards" issue is my assumption of why C:Geo would freeze. The screen would stop responding and eventually Android would give its "No longer responding, Wait/Close" warning and I had to bail out. I then learned that if I didn't go from cache to cache each time, instead navigating back from each cache once done to the first menu page, the crashes stopped. So I'm assuming, rightly or wrongly, that it's not freeing memory when used in the way I was doing so. (The phone is a Moto-G4, 2gb ram and plenty of onboard memory, everything else runs well) I don't want to be negative about c:geo because it's the best I've tried and it's truly awesome that it's free and not crippled with adverts. It's just... I don't find the interface as intuitive as Garmin (personal choice) although every feature I want is there, somewhere... It is difficult to be fair and impartial because each of us forms a strong routine for doing this stuff; we have a personal set of tools, systems and methods and there is probably a default negative position when we have to change from that routine. Much as I like tinkering with software and maps, I'd rather things worked perfectly and as I want them when I'm out and caching, allowing me to focus more on my surroundings than on the technology. My perfect system probably will never exist unless I write it, and its user base will be exactly 1 if I do. oh OK. thanks for the explanation. first off, having a poor signal is bad for processing power/RAM and battery life. personally i do not cache online, because of the issues listed above. my current devices are much older than yours, and have not frozen. i would assume it has something to do with poor signal or trying to pull data from the internet. honestly i have no idea, but i haven't had an application crash in the last three or four months. i would suggest downloading caches prior to leaving a good cellular and or wifi signal area. it's much easier on the battery, and caching offline works much better. normally i use locus or cgeo, but i know the forum is completely against cgeo so i don't provide much info beyond that. i will tell you that gathering data about caches while in a good wifi/cellular area makes for a much better experience. you can use locus to navigate right up to the end of the road, and then guidance for the rest of the easy, or even plot your own path while offline. it's extremely powerful for offline routing/planning, and has the ground speak blessing because it strips out the useful info they want you to pay for. cgeo doesn't play by the rules, and gives a better data set to cache from so it gets lots of hate here. personally i could care less, but you should expect some backlash from mentioning it very much. :-) i think you could get used to using either application while offline just like your stand alone. I've been traveling with only offline applications for years without issue, through some fairly rough terrain. hopefully I'll continue to enjoy it as is for much longer.

yup, it's a really good idea to check the logs and filter out nm / na /micro /old before heading out instead of including those caches in your search. there are a lot of caches that aren't being maintained, is part of the journey to filter them. .

It never happened. Here's what Moun10Bike said about it in 2012: It seems like the schema update may never happen at this point, and a new solution of downloading caches using the API may be the way of the future. The mentioned overhaul of the search functionality appears to be largely complete now, so a new data delivery method may not be far off. 'Old school', eh? Yet it's the only way I have of downloading cache info to my GPS. I wonder how a new or revamped API will deal with that? Thanks for your response - I suppose that puts it to bed can you import a large gpx file to your (non api capable) device ? if so, you can download a ton of caches with your tablet/smartphone/etc and then transfer them to a sdcard, then over to your (non api capable) device. i'm assuming it doesn't have bluetooth/wifi functionality for file transfers ?

Boy, those surveyors who spend thousands of dollars on their high-end GPS systems must be chumps, if a smartphone can really get zero-meter accuracy... i have noticed they always have their iPhones out. maybe the rig is to make them look like billing $$$$$ when they're really working $$ ?

Maybe there wasn't any doubt. A while back, a local open space district actually asked geocachers and other hikers for help finding/removing the old "no trespassing" signs that remained. The property had been private, but had since been donated to the OSD. They had removed as many of the "no trespassing" signs as they could find, but they knew there were more. There was no doubt that the remaining signs were invalid. There have also been cases where neighbors of public trailheads have posted "no trespassing" (and "resident parking only") signs. The trailheads are public spaces, providing access to public spaces, and they're signed as such. But because they're next to private residences, sometimes the neighbors get too possessive of "their" parks and trails. There was no doubt that those signs were invalid. yup, it happens everywhere. a lot !

I will answer that point in two ways; Firstly, I have never found an android app that is as good as the Oregon for offline caching. The basic geocaching interface on the Garmin is as good as I've seen - everything I expect and need is on the map or the geocaching sub-menu. I use C:Geo on my phone as a fallback, but I found it quite crashy especially if you forget to go backwards. I also paid for Neongeo which I really like for its live map, but it doesn't seem to be in active development any more. If you can recommend an Android app that is as good as the Garmin, uses OSM offline mapping and operates from .ggz files so I can store a lot of caches, and also does cache notes so that I can integrate nicely with GSAK for offline logging, I'll be very interested in trying it! (In fact, if Garmin made an app that replicated the Garmin's geocaching and tracking UI I'd probably pay and use that) Secondly - I have never used an android app that is as BAD as the oregon for ONLINE caching. The much vaunted "Live geocaching" aspect of the new 7xx range is very basic, and that's being kind. However, it is in its early stages and perhaps I shouldn't be so forgiving - but it may be a handy fallback for those days when you forgot to load a recent PQ/GGZ, or the caches got lost somehow. i don't know what you mean by "forget to go backwards" ? I've been beta testing cgeo for a while and not seen a crash yet. cgeo and locus share a gpx file that contains about 13,000 caches. they don't seem to have a problem with handling those, or the other 150mb of tracks and waypoints. I'm not familiar with the ggz format you mentioned, maybe it's proprietary? unfortunately i can't compare anything Garmin to these apps, as I've shelved the stand alones until they can start doing everything as easily as smartphones. gsak is awesome, but there is no Mac OS client, so i don't really have a machine for it to run on, or really a need for it. the phone handles databases very well in locus. I've heard gsak may come to Mac, tomorrow ? ;-) you sugar coated the review of tethering the Garmin you'll a wifi source, it's really poorly done. just my opinion. your solution is working well, don't mess with it.

I pretty much agree with all of this. I have owned a 550, 650 and a 750. The jump from 550 to 650 was immense and well worth the money. The jump from 650 to 750 not so much. The Live Caching has its uses but could definitely be better. The Activites I tried, but found them so awful, I rapidly swapped back to Classic View. I have not been able to get an IQ Apps working, but haven't tried again after I first got the device and found nothing worked. I won't compare it to a Smart Phone, as I often cache in areas where there is no data (and sometimes no phone) signal and I want to be able to have everything stored locally and be able to swap batteries easily. What it should really be compared to is the 600 series and currently the improvements aren't that great. The Live Services are the big selling point from Garmin's point of view, and I try hard NOT to use them (as I prefer to have the full data loaded onto the device via USB), but there are times when I don't have data loaded for the area I happen to be in, and it makes a very handy fallback. However for me the most useful everyday features are the faster processor and the faster upload speed (USB connection). This means when you have a lot of caches loaded and want to find the next nearest cache, you aren't hanging around waiting as long for it to chew through the data, and also when you send the data to the device from GSAK (I use the GarminExport macro) they get put onto the device quite a bit quicker. Therefore to quote dartymoor above "I don't exactly have buyers remorse, but I don't have buyer's elation either..." that pretty much sums it up for me too. When I bought my 650, I did indeed have buyer elation (as it spanks the 550), but I certainly did not get this feeling updating to the 750. There are some useful (but quite minor) updates, but are they really enough to stop people using the 600 series? I'm not so sure... BTW, is the WebUpdater software still a version 2.6? I was expecting a faster turnaround of update releases this early in the 700 series release lifecycle... You don't need data or cellular signals to use the phones GPS functions. You can store everything on a standalone GPS, just like you can on a phone, and access it all without cellular data or signal. It's interesting that people still mention that, I'm assuming they haven't ventured away from the official GC app when they do. I've heard similar take it or leave it impression from people that have paid for the latest 750, most are surprised how little has been improved.

Consider the situation from the viewpoint of the person/organization that erected the fencing. You presumably erected it to keep people out of that particular area, right? Now, wouldn't you find it irritating to learn that someone online was telling people it's fine to cross your fence and enter that area to play their game? Might you be tempted to ban that particular game from being played in that area if that's the way they're going to act? Is it really worth it for cachers to "poke the bear" and potentially irritate land owners/managers rather than simply disable the cache while the area is fenced off? Believe it or not, geocaching has been banned from areas for less. Again, it depends on the circumstances. Common sense instead of blanket generalities. Actual common sense should dictate that you put away the sense of entitlement and don't cross a construction fence to play a game. The only posts I've seen mentioning crossing a fence, are the posts that want the cache disabled. There are a lot of assumptions in this thread. The quote from the cache owner says the cache is behind the fence. When a geocacher finds that an area appears to be under construction, common sense dictates leaving it alone and coming back later. Someone with common sense doesn't climb over the construction fence or create excuses for entering a construction zone to play a game. so far, you are the only person talking about climbing a fence. i'm not. the construction zone can be completely closed, the cache behind the fence, and still completely accessible. think about it. the longer this thread goes, the more i think there should be a puzzle cache that has a orange fence between itself and the road. just to make some heads spin. maybe i could wrap the cache in orange fence. nuclear meltdown time ! lol

The official geocaching application is basically a teaser of what is possible. If you search the form you'll find a lot of threads with suggestions to improve it. It's a lot easier to use one of the other applications that hadn't been purposely limited in is functionality. The GPS in your device will function fine, with the right app.