Jump to content

The Rat

+Premium Members
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by The Rat

  1. I'm definitely of the view that a tough puzzle should have an easy find for the reasons already stated here. I own a lot of puzzles and I want people to solve and find them. Even for my traditionals, I want people to find them. I try to make those easy, too. What's the point of a hard hide? Sadism? When I first started geocaching I thought a cache on a mountain trail was a "good" location because I hadn't been on those trails before geocaching. But having trekked those same trails for 13 years now, I am almost sick of them. One oak tree looks like another now. ho hum. This gets to the question of what is a good hide. For a puzzle, a hide in theme is the best reward, in my opinion. If it's themed on baroque music, a hide in a parking lot in front of a baroque music store is a delight. If the theme is finance, a hide on a lamppost at the corner of Dow and Jones is, too. You get the idea. I have some puzzle hides in nice parks but most are in locations that would be boring or skippable to the CO, but whenever possible, are in theme with the puzzle. When I hide in a park, I try to find a corner or end that leaves room at the other end for another hide if possible. Nowadays with the density so high, almost any suitable location will have to suffice. There some very good challenges, but not many. I would just as soon see those discontinued, at least for new ones, so the location is a moot point.
  2. I understand that, but if that were to happen, the explosion in the number of FPs would make them less useful than they are now. The number of FPs I have to award continues to grow even though I am not a high-volume cacher. That's because very few caches are worth FPs in my opinion. I think FPs should be granted perhaps only for every 20 or 30 finds, not every 10. There are already way too many granted on caches that if not lame, are no more than ordinary. I have sometimes taken one fork in a trail or chosen a route to pick up a cache or two with multiple FPs and almost always have been disappointed to find the cache is just another routine cache like many others I've seen. Allowing finders to grant the same FPs multiple times (which is what would happen under the OP's idea) would just exacerbate the problem.
  3. I'm with funkymunkyzone. I love reading long logs, whether on my own caches or other people's. I believe the log is for the benefit of the CO, not future finders. I would never put information in a log that I thought would help future finders. That's the CO's prerogative. It is up to the CO to decide how much information to give. Anything helpful in a log is a spoiler, although I make an exception for bad coordinates or changed conditions. If the CO has them wrong, I post corrected coordinates, or if the hint says waist high and it's now on the ground I'll mention that the hint doesn't apply now, but I won't say more. I don't have hundreds of active caches out there, but I do have dozens and sometimes people log five or six at a time. I don't remember anyone ever pasting the same long log on a series of caches. I've gotten a cut and paste short log on a bunch sometimes, which is disappointing, not because they're the same, but because they're short and meaningless. If I did get a long log repeated that discusses several caches, like the ones the OP posted links to, I would be delighted. His logs are well-written and enjoyable to read. Once I realized the second and third were the same, I would just delete the remaining emails, or just open them enough to see the length appears the same. That only takes a few seconds and would in no way detract from the pleasure of reading the excellent log in the first place. I have some of my favorite caches (by others) on my watchlist and look forward to the logs of finders who have had the same enjoyable experience with those caches I did.
  4. This thread has strayed a bit into the area of the best search page. I've been using Boulter's tool: Geocaching Quick Search for over a decade and still consider it the easiest and best tool. It will find an archived cache if you enter the GC#. I don't use either the new or old gc.com tool. The original poster doesn't specify exactly what he's trying to find. If it is caches he's already found to see if he qualifies for a challenge, then many here have answered how to do that: MyFinds PQ, or use the Project-gc challenge checker or one of the GSAK macros challenge checkers. Or if he has GSAK just use a filter. If it's for caches by a CO (but ones you haven't found) then go to that CO's profile page and look at all cache hides, Archived caches show up there. BTW, the word is archived, not archieved. I thought at first the OP was talking about achievements. I'm not sure what other reasons there could be for wanting to find archived caches but there may be other ways. For example, if you want to see if there have been caches placed in an area but are now archived in order to determine whether it is okay to hide a cache there, you can try posting the question on a local forum, emailing old-timers, or go to the profile pages of people you know have searched in the area for years and examine their past finds. That would be tedious, but it could work.
  5. I find the idea of retrieving FPs from archived caches disturbing and unhelpful. For starters, I haven't found FPs to be useful in identifying caches I like to find, although I know that some people do. I just don't consider that the main purpose of them. The main purposes are to provide a bookmark of sorts for the finders who award them and a reward for the CO of the cache. I have over 400 FPs on my caches including on many archived caches. When someone awards a FP to me, I know I've brought some enjoyment to someone, that I have succeeded in producing a good cache. That incentivizes me to continue to put out quality caches (mostly puzzles). I'm more interested in accumulating FPs than accumulating finds. If people started pulling their FPs from my old, archived caches I would be reluctant to archive caches that had FPs on them. Around here with the cache glut, I sometimes have to archive an old cache in order to have a good place to hide a new one. I only do that on hard puzzles where I think everyone who is going to solve it and find it already has done so. If I lost those FPs,though, I probably would not archive it and replace it with a new one, even though no one is finding the old one any longer. The point is, of course, that the original poster's idea would prevent new quality caches from being put out because the COs with the most FPs would be penalized for archiving old ones.
  6. I would love to get some waterfall shots with my drone, but with our drought here in California, it's not possible anywhere near me. I love some of the shots here, though.
  7. I think I qualify as an old timer. I've been geocaching since 2002. I don't know what my value is to geocaching because that is so subjective. I know I'm opinionated and have ticked a few people off, including a moderator in this forum. I "only" have 2200 finds, but I've completed the original fizzy challenge, have over 400 favorites on my placed caches, and have spread the word about geocaching through my books. I think I've contributed quite a bit, but I'm sure there are some out there who'd just as soon I go away permanently.
  8. I've combined geocaching with aerial photography, using my drone. See, for example . I have a couple of other geocaching videos you can see if you follow my channel. My most all-consuming hobby that I've combined with geocaching, though, is writing novels. Three of the four Cliff Knowles Mysteries are geocaching themed. I donate a lot of them to Megas and other events as prizes, including GeoWoodstock, the S*W*A*G Yuma Mega, the Texas Challenge, a British Halloween Mega, Florida Finders Fest, and others. I've also donated them as prizes to a couple of the popular geocaching podcasts. They seem to be well-received.
  9. I think favorites are a reasonable concept, but I don't like the same the same things most other people do, so they aren't particularly useful to me. Sometimes I do look for a route that includes two or three caches with quite a few favorite points, but then I read the logs to judge what it was about them that warranted the favorite point. It's usually someone who thinks the container is "cute" like a rubber duckie or something. Meh. I don't care much about the container, although I have admired the craftsmanship of quite a few. To me a film canister under a lamppost cuff can be a favorite if it's the final location of a really fun and clever puzzle or it's over a bench that overlooks a spectacular view. I give favorites to those I enjoy, not those that I think others would enjoy, because I know others don't necessarily enjoy the same things. I used up a large percentage of my points when they first came out - awarding them to favorites I'd experienced over the years, but then once that splurge was over, I now only give them to new favorites. I find that the total I have left stays nearly constant, although I don't make an effort to keep it that way. It just turns out that I only think about 10% of my finds warrant it, and that's true even though I try to only go after caches I think I'll like. I'm not a numbers hound, so if I was out just grabbing every cache I could, the percentage would be much lower and my favorite points would accumulate.
  10. I think your question pertains to the Boxcar Children series, but I know of several geocachers who first learned about geocaching from novels. I learned about it from a newspaper article in 2002. I've gotten some fan mail from people who said they learned about it from one of my books. There's even someone who posted a review on Amazon of Cached Out who wrote, "I'm a novice to Geocaching and was astounded as to the interest the book created in this pastime. Great explanations of how to participate." I have no idea who the person is and I'm not so sure about how accurate his or her perceptions are. I don't claim to be responsible for its popularity, but I do know of some people who did learn of geocaching through my books and subsequently tried it.
  11. The list has grown huge in recent years, no doubt due to the increasing popularity of geocaching. Here is a list I've compiled, probably incomplete, of novels that contain geocaching. For some it is a major plot element, but for others it is less so. It's sorted in alphabetical order by title. It's Christmastime and people may be shopping for a gift for a geocacher right about now. Abomination by Colleen Coble Ben and the Geocache Treasure by Heather Gregory Cache a Predator by Michelle Weidenbenner Cached Out by Russell Atkinson Caching In by Deb Jacobson Caching In by Tracy Kimmer Cell-out by Peter Armstrong Code: A Virals Novel by Kathy and Brendan Reichs Coordinates for Murder by Darren Kirby Death Row by Russell Atkinson Death Will Attend by Morgan C Talbot Fatal Dose by Russell Atkinson First to Find by Mark Gessner First to Find by Morgan C Talbot Geocache by Errol Bader Geocache Surprise by Jake Maddox HIDDEN AWAY by Phyllis J. Perry Hide and Seek by Katy Grant Nine Feet Under by Morgan C Talbot Rainbow's End by Valerie Comer et al. Serial Finder by David Klug (icecreamman) Spiral by Paul McKuen The Book of Lies by Brad Meltzer The Box That Watch Found by Gertrude Walker Chandler The Geocache Killer by Julian Flood The Gorry Brothers: First Leap by Eve McGuire Unspeakable by Laura Griffin Wake Unto Me by Lisa Cach Waypoint Alaska by Shauna Shober Waypoint: Cache Quest Oregon by Shauna Shober Why Casey Had to Die by L.C. Hayden
  12. Wow, I didn't check on this thread for a few days and now I see it has blossomed into exactly what I was hoping it would. It's a great discussion with plenty of valid points on all sides, as well as a few rather lame ones. Let me first agree with whoever it was who said they really liked that Freudian typo "poopularity." Great word, intentional or not. Second, I was not in the least offended by being called an elitist jerk. I am proud to be called an elitist, since that logically mandates that the speaker considers me to be among the elite. Who wouldn't want to be consider elite? As for the jerk part, I have no doubt that you wouldn't have a hard time finding people who know me personally who would agree, although I hope not too many. But just to be clear, my stating what I like and don't like isn't a criticism of those who like other things. If I say I like TV show A but think show B is boring, and you like B, that doesn't mean you are boring or have bad taste, just that you have different taste. To be an elitist, that's just an example of De gustibus non est disputandum, or for the less elite, different strokes for different folks. You probably think show A is boring, or stupid or elitist. Don't take offense. (But this is the Internet after all, and that seems to be what everyone does these days.) So if disputing taste is pointless, why did I post this thread? What I would like (but, sadly, don't really expect) is that relative newcomers, by reading what I and others like me, enjoyed about old caching, may pick up on some things that make the caching experience better for most people, including them. For example, maybe some newbies will write longer, better logs when they see how much those logs mean to some people and how much of an incentive they are to CO's to put out quality hides. Some may take the trouble to spell check and correct their cache description before posting so that people like me can actually understand what you meant to say instead of what you actually said. Hey, that wiggly red line is right there as you type; it only takes two seconds to fix. Some people may look a little longer for a better hiding spot than underneath the dumpster next to the weed patch with the dog crap and used condoms strewn all over. Anyway, carry on. I'm enjoying the thread.
  13. When readers have contacted me about typos I have fixed them. It is now quick and easy to fix small things like that in ebooks and even print books (since they are now print-on-demand). Just upload a new file, although it can take a few days for the process to work its way through the system. Changing something more substantial isn't always practical. For starters, the author may have a certain dramatic purpose in mind that isn't accurate in real life. For example, in the opening scene of Death Row I have the characters going for a fictional ammo can cache under a ferry landing, kayaking in. One of my beta readers pointed out that the CO would probably have used PVC or other material since a metal ammo can would rust there. Perhaps so, but I wanted something that could be opened and closed quickly with a single motion because the tide was coming in rapidly and trapping them. Almost all mystery novels involving the cops or FBI have them working with partners, but I'm a retired FBI agent and can attest that in reality that isn't typical in real life. However, I do the same thing in my books because it is so much easier to develop the character through personal interaction and dialogue, and of course there's usually a romantic story line going too. In other words, the story line takes precedence over reality. I have a long thread in Goodreads called FBI Myths that explores this. As a practical matter, you can't reprint books cheaply and even for print on demand books, if you change the number of pages it may require a new cover since the spine thickness changes. This could mean paying the artist again unless the author also has the right graphics software and knowledge.
  14. I'm not entirely innocent of the inconsistencies of which I'm "accused" but not entirely guilty either. First of all, as to the other thread, I saw the title but didn't click on it because I didn't read the subtitle. I thought from the title it was a discussion about a recent change in the website - a type of thread that regularly appears here. I thought it was someone complaining or wondering about what the latest Groundspeak innovation (whatever that may be - I don't keep track) did to change the sport. In any event, threads on this same old vs. new topic have regularly appeared, as the OP in that other thread acknowledged, so rather than dig up an old one by searching, I did the same thing he did and started a new thread. I confess I should have read that subtitle, though, and probably would have posted there if I had. And as for the micros vs. ammo boxes, it's not the container that's the point. As pointed out by one kind soul, it's very difficult to find a suitable location for a full-sized cache in my very cache-dense area. Many of my early caches were regulars or smalls, but eventually they almost got archived for all the usual reasons or converted to micros because groundskeepers removed the original containers. The last time I needed to place a full-sized cache I had to archive one I was maintaining for a friend who moved back to Europe and use that spot. (Before you flame me for that, his cache had a mechanical aspect to it that broke and I couldn't fix it, so it had to be archived anyway). The point is that when you found a cache back then there was a reward of some kind, even if it was just a nice big log book containing greetings and sometimes stories from geocachers from all over the world, or meeting a fellow cacher, or that disposable camera I mentioned. My micros don't usually contain swag, although I have put a tenner in a couple of them for the FTF. What I do try to do, though, is make the hide in theme so that there is that little "aha, that's clever" when you find it. The vast majority of my hides are puzzles. E.g. the hide for my Route Cipher cache is on a route marker. Several of the puzzle hides are on streets named consistently with the puzzle theme; I don't want to name them so I don't spoil the puzzle. But this thread wasn't meant to be about me. Most of the points made about my post are fair comment and not particularly mean-spirited, but I am disappointed that so many of the responses are about playing "gotcha" with me rather than addressing the subject of the thread. I do appreciate the above comments of those who share my views or like my hides, but I don't begrudge those who don't. Certainly the sport has room for everyone to play the way they want to and I don't want to deny anyone their preference. But getting back to the original theme, is it better now or worse? In what way? It seems to me that when I get to most cache sites now and don't find the cache right away there's not much incentive to keep looking. I know there's almost no chance there's going to be anything different or rewarding there. It's not about the numbers for me, and even if it was, I know I can just move 530 feet and find another one just like this one. I make a point to try to find a route with caches that have several fav points to make the find worthwhile, but I find very few with a lot of favs are actually all that interesting. Maybe they have good camo, but so many are stuck in trash-strewn vacant lots or planter boxes, strip mall parking lots, and similar locations. I can sympathize with the difficulty in finding good hiding places, but why bother if you can't make the cache a little bit different or at least pleasant? I'm not even blaming the CO's. I think the main reason for the changes I am complaining about is simply that the sport has become too popular, too easy, too crowded.
  15. I'm going to sound like an old fogy driving a Model T here, but I like the old style of geocaching better than the way it is now. When I started in 2002 there was no such thing as a smart phone, a nano cache, or GoogleEarth. GPS units like my original yellow eTrex often had little or no satellite reception and normally had only 50 - 100 feet of accuracy. Geocaches were almost always nice large ammo boxes or similar hiding styles in the remote woods or other non-urban areas. They almost always contained logbooks (not log sheets) and people wrote interesting notes in them. Many had those disposable cameras in them and finders would take a "selfie" (although that word wasn't invented then) and when the camera was full the CO would retrieve it, get the film developed, and post the pictures. FTF prizes were often good swag, like T-shirts or $10 bills. There was something fun to read in the log book at the site. Going geocaching was an excursion that took planning. You had to look at printed maps or download USGS photos of the area to figure out a good route. You needed to write down, print out, or memorize the cache information and maybe draw yourself a map or load various guide waypoints into your GPSr to tell you the route and the critical turns. When you got to the cache, it was often hard to find because the coordinates were so dicey and your accuracy bad, too, but the cache rarely had hard camo on it. The challenge was in the planning, navigation, and physical effort to get there. When you found it, you felt like you accomplished something, and the number of geocachers was small due to the effort involved. You felt like you were part of an exclusive group of similarly accomplished people. You wrote a nice long, good log. I knew most of the regular geocachers within 50 miles and made many friends or at events, many of whom are still good friends. You often met other geocachers at a cache because the placing of a new cache was a big event that drew many of the local cachers for the FTF. Nowadays it seems everyone expects all the information on a cache to be at their fingertips on their smart phone. If they have trouble finding a cache, they call for a lifeline. Most hides are urban and contain nothing more than a log sheet, or occasionally some geo-trash trinkets for the kiddies. People log TFTC from their phones and that's it. Hiding a cache brings little or no benefit to the CO. The caches are usually bison tubes in a bush, a magnet under a lamp post skirt, nanos, or something equally uninteresting. If they're challenging it's just because of good camo that serves no purpose other than to make it hard, unpleasant, and frustrating to look for. I never meet other cachers at the cache sites now. There are just too many caches out there. When I go to events most other cachers have not found the same caches I have so we have little in common to talk about. Even when we have found some of the same, the caches are so unmemorable that they don't even recall them - they all blend together. Too many just talk about numbers and powertrails. Their hardware and software is so different from mine it feels like they have an entirely different hobby. There are still ammo cans out in the woods to find, but it just isn't the same kind of accomplishment. It's sort of like a mountain climber who struggles up a high peak for the view only to find a parking lot full of luxury SUVs there. Why bother to climb? By becoming so accessible, geocaching has become less rewarding. So there's my take. Let's hear some other views.
  16. The American Cryptogram Association site mentioned by fizzymagic provides excellent, clear descriptions for most pen-and-paper type ciphers that you're likely to see in a puzzle cache. You don't have to be a member to view it. The link is here: Cipher Types. For interactive online solvers for these types, probably the best site is BION's here: BION's encode-decode. The best beginner's book in my opinion is Cryptanalysis by Helen Fouche Gaines (originally named Elementary Cryptanalysis). It gives you all the basics, including a history of most simple cipher types, principles like frequency counts, contact information, index of coincidence, and so forth. It was written decades ago, but has been reprinted many times and you can get a used copy on Amazon for 5 or 6 bucks. If you can do any computer programming at all, even simple BASIC, you can also learn how to write tools you need with Cryptanalysis for Microcomputers by Caxton C. Foster. That book also has some useful tables and tools in the appendices like pattern word list. That, too, is available cheap for used copies.
  17. I was surprised too, although not so pleasantly. Geocaching.com sponsored a Racketeer geocoin contest (http://www.geocaching.com/johngrisham/ and the prizes included 11 copies of that book, which is quite "adult"-themed. They still advertise it on GC.com. I wouldn't be surprised if some young kids were among the winners. I would say there's some hypocrisy in action there.
  18. Because our esteemed moderator, Keystone, has repeatedly deleted my posts and banned me from commenting on topics even though they were right on point of the thread. In fact, he'll probably delete this one, too. Even paranoids have enemies.
  19. That is an outstanding video. I loved it, even though you may have stolen from me what I thought were my bragging rights to the first geocache "find" video made from a drone (ahem, multirotor unmanned aerial vehicle). I didn't recognize your quadrotor. What make/model is it? It looks like you have a gimbal and FPV. I have neither, just a Phantom 1 and SJ1000 camera, about as cheap a set-up as possible for making aerial videos. I like that the aerial footage was minimal. It shouldn't be (and wasn't) the focus of the story. Here's my video below. It can't compete with yours, but then, it's not a competition. I actually didn't want to make this one at first, but the CO has done me some huge favors and she asked me to make the video. I ended up having a lot of fun making it.
  20. Here's a video of an event cache. The CO asked me to video it with my DJI Phantom. So far as I know this is the first and only video of a geocache "find" using a drone. I've posted it on the Google+ geocaching community because they are a lot more rule-free than Groundspeak. I don't think there's anything here to offend anyone, but I see a lot more complainers here than appreciators, so you never know.
  21. Puzzles can be ridiculously easy or ridiculously hard. I loved the early ones (pre-2005 or so) because they were original at the time and the solving method was clear. So many puzzles today require complex computer programming skills or other specialized knowledge or talents that they exclude most geocachers. A lot of "puzzle caches" really aren't puzzles at all, but research caches. They are themed on something, like a movie or TV show, or baseball teams or players, etc. If you enjoy looking trivia up or maybe you're a baseball or movie fan yourself, these can be fun and not too hard. Sometimes it's not easy to figure out what you are supposed to do with those once you have done the research. Do the coordinates come from the year of release, the episode number, the first letter of the name, etc.? There is a good facebook group to give help to people like you who are just starting to do puzzles. It's called Geocaching Puzzle Help. Don't be shy about asking for help there or from the CO. After you've solved a few, even with a lot of help, it gets a lot easier and they can be so much more fun than the same old lamp post hides and bison tubes hanging on a fence. Often the final location is in theme with the puzzle.
  22. The latest Cliff Knowles novel Death Row qualifies as geocaching fiction. Chronologically the story follows Fatal Dose, but the story line connects heavily to Cached Out. Here's the summary from Amazon: When a court ruling once again halts the carrying out of the death sentences of hundreds of condemned murderers, a frustrated vigilante organization decides to take matters into its own hands. In a mysterious and grisly act of horror, San Quentin's entire population of condemned prisoners is executed in the dark of night. But how? And who are these vigilantes? Answering those questions falls to retired FBI agent Cliff Knowles, now a successful lawyer. His lover, Special Agent Ellen Kennedy, is intent on completing a geocaching challenge known as the Fizzy Challenge, but inadvertently turns Cliff into suspect number one by going for one cache too many. She has no doubt Cliff is innocent, but he's kept a secret from her. He's kept a secret from everyone – and he knows that her faith in him is misplaced. His only chance of keeping Ellen in his life, perhaps even of staying off death row himself, is to get to the critical evidence before the FBI does.
  23. Death Row, the latest installment in the Cliff Knowles Mysteries, is now available for pre-order from Amazon in Kindle format or in paperback from the author. The Amazon page quotes the foreword: "My second novel, Cached Out, was such an unexpected success that I was unprepared for all the requests I received to continue the story. I already had another story in mind, which I completed with Fatal Dose, but this did not satisfy all my fans of Cached Out. Now my fourth Cliff Knowles novel, Death Row, should serve to do so. Be warned: this book is a spoiler for Cached Out, which is a true whodunit. If you read far into this book, you'll ruin the mystery of that one, so I strongly recommend you begin with Cached Out."
  24. Here is a repost of my recent review/post from my local geocaching forum about a device given to me. The Axius ProntoTec is a 7-in. tablet. It doesn't have phone capability. Perhaps it's useful to know that I don't have, and have never used, a smart phone: This is an interesting little device. Today was my first field test of the Pronto. It was far from a resounding success, but it did provide value-add to show off my buzz words from a decade ago. I went for WaterRat's Cache (GCNTE4). I intentionally did not print out any info or memorize the simple puzzle for stage 1. I got to stage 1 and saw the item I was supposed to see that should enable me to solve the puzzle on the cache page. I then tried to pull up the cache page in c:Geo. I didn't have wifi connectivity so I couldn't look at the actual web page. However, I discovered that although I had transferred 930 caches to c:Geo before leaving, that did not include the cache I wanted. I had forgotten that I had set the limit at 8 miles from my house because the gpx file was so slow to load into c:Geo if I loaded all 3000 or so I had in GSAK. No problemo, I thought. I'll go find a wifi hotspot and look at the web page in the browser. After finding two or three more caches I went driving around looking for a wifi location. Denny's - no. Donut shop - yes. I connected, but kept telling me I timed out of the server on gc.com. Not sure what that meant. I thought maybe I didn't have a good enough connection. I went to Peet's. In the car, I had a weak signal and was able to connect, I thought, but it was nearly impossible to read the screen due to bright sun, even with the pronto on brightest setting. I moved over next to the building and huddled in the shade. I got c:Geo to connect to gc.com and pulled up the cache page info. The font on c:Geo was too small, though, and I was not able to read it. There was no way to enlarge it in the app. The pinch to expand thing didn't work. With lots of squinting and huddling in the shade, I was finally able to guess at enough of the text to get a solution. Then I went inside Peet's (where it was dark enough to make the page more readable) and confirmed it. I tried to open the cache page on geocaching.com with the browser but I kept getting a message that the web page was not available. I don't know what that was all about. c:Geo was able to access it, but not the browser. I went back to the stage 2 location, and I'm sure I was in the right place, but I DNFed. The DNF wasn't the fault of the Pronto; I just couldn't find it. It took me about a half hour to do what would have taken two minutes if I had had a paper printout of the cache page with me. It probably would have taken only 5 minutes if I had remembered to check to see if I had the cache in the Pronto before I left, and load it in when I saw that I didn't, although that's dependent on finding a dark enough spot to read it near the cache. I found that my car would work if I open up the sunshade and huddle under it to read the Pronto, although that's awkward and the car wasn't all that close to stage 1. Another problem that I would have had if I had the cache loaded in: there is no way to search the stored caches by name. You can sort alphabetically, but not search. Since the cache name is near the end of the alphabet, It took 30 or so very slow swipe/scrolls to get to the right spot in the alphabet, at least 3 or 4 minutes. If I had had all my caches loaded in, it would have taken even longer. I suppose I could have sorted by GC number instead of name, but I didn't realize I had the GC number. Only the GSAK short name displays in my GPSr. I'm sure a connected smart phone is a lot easier to use, but based on this Pronto, paperless caching is not very attractive. Still, I can see where this device can be a useful tool at times. For $48 it's pretty impressive, I'd say. The camera is lousy, but it does take stills and video. When I got home and connected to my home wifi I had no trouble loading the same web page in the browser.
  • Create New...