bunkerdave
-
Posts
231 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by bunkerdave
-
-
I have used Delorme TOPO USA 3.0, and MapTech Terrain Navigator 2001. I have used Expert GPS to a limited degree. Each has its advantages.
I also use Micrsoft Streets and Trips, for certain operations, as well, though it is not topographic.
Delorme is a nice topographic software, and reasonably priced. It is limited in its detail, however, and leaves out much of the elevation detail that you get with USGS Quads, as well as lacking the detail that I like to have when I am hiking. The more landmarks you have, the better, and TopoUSA simply leaves most of them out. HOWEVER, TopoUSA DOES have a good routing package. YOu just click on your start, and any intermediate waypoints, and your finish, and it creates the route for you. It does NOT optimize the route for you, however, so when I need an optimized route, I use MS Streets and Trips. Delorme also gets derailed if your waypoints do not have roads/trails going to them, or at least pretty close, which is something MS S&T compensates for. Again, however, S&T is not topographic, so for hiking is basically useless.
Expert GPS is not something I have used extensively, but what I do know, I like. You can use a variety of different maps, including topoquads and aerial photos, and overlay waypoints, routes, and tracks on any supported map format. It also has a nice GPS interface, and supports tracking in a vehicle if you have a laptop. Delorme also does this, and is pretty slick the way it does. With Delorme, you can also record a trip (although I am not sure why you would) which is a neat "gee whiz" feature. Delorme's waypoint editor is easy to use, but for me, the GPS interface has been nothing but headaches. Uploading/downloading waypoints is only semi-reliable, at best, and is an all-or-nothing affair that takes painfully long. Tracks are a less temperamental, but similarly lengthy ordeal.
Maptech is my personal favorite. It contains all the USGS 1/24,000 and 1/100,000 topographic maps for the area you purchase, has a good waypoint editor, GPS tracking, 3D map rendering (Delorme also does this, but Maptechs superior detail renders better maps. Additionally, the viewer interface for Maptech allows many more viewing options than Delorme, which makes it a lot easier to get the view of the terrain you are looking for. Both Maptech and Delorme have downloadable demos on their websites that will give you a good idea of their functions. Routing in Maptech is extremely easy. Although it will not calculate a route for you, (Many USGS maps are rather old, so odds are the roads are out of date anyway) it shows a lot more trails and backroads than Delorme does. You simply use your line drawing tool to trace the route on the map that you want, then tell the software to create a route from your line. This is automatic, and customizable, and uploads to the GPS are customizable as well. You can select to upload all, some, or one waypoint, route, etc. to your GPS, greatly reducing the upload time. Downloads are also customizable, except that it downloads all the waypoints in the GPS, and you select the ones you want to accept into Maptech. For laptop users, Maptech also supports GPS tracking, although for the reasons stated (sometimes old USGS topo maps) the tracks shown do not always correspond to the roads. This is not a issue for concern, however, since hiking and backcountry travel is what Maptech is designed for, and is where it really shines. Maptech and Delorme both provide elevation profiles for routes/tracks, which also is quite handy when planning a hike.
Okay, now COST.
I purchased Delorme for $50. I got MT,CO,UT,WY and ID.
I paid $150 for Maptech, and got UT and CO. I know you can get Delorme, the whole US (excluding AK, I think) for $90.
I don't think Maptech offers a whole USA package. (It would be very $$$.) The Delorme I got included 2 disks, one for setup, and one for data. Maptech included 16 disks, plus one for enhanced elevations data, plus another for setup. That gives you an idea of the detail of Maptech, compared with Delorme.
Anyway, I can tell you that while I paid three times as much for less area with Maptech, it is what I use most, and I feel I got my money's worth. I do not travel out of state a whole lot, and when I do, I just use paper topos or Topozone for hikes.
For the outdoorsman who travels around the US a lot, it is obvious that Delorme is the best choice. For $90 you can get a lot of coverage, although the detail is lacking. If you combine it with paper topos, you will be fine. If you stay in a region most of the time, and want to use your software for routefinding and serious backcountry navigation, then Maptech is your best bet. Additionally, if you do go with Delorme, you will need to use Easy or Expert GPS or something else to handle your waypoint management, since Delorme's is simply inadequate.
bunkerdave
-
Well, I gotta tell you, after having a MOC posted for ONE day, I am more convinced than ever that there is no way to know for sure who plundered a cache. Darn it. Here is the visitor log for my cache, at the present:
3/9/2002 4:44:55 PM bunkerdave (32 times)
3/9/2002 4:38:55 PM Gromit (10 times)
3/9/2002 3:50:16 PM Utahbill
3/9/2002 1:11:43 PM Paul Morrison WaylandersMA (2 times)
3/9/2002 11:31:41 AM rdwatson78
3/9/2002 10:38:22 AM jimmonty
3/9/2002 6:13:45 AM Harrald (2 times)
3/9/2002 4:54:08 AM fractal (7 times)
3/9/2002 12:39:06 AM tslack2000 (2 times)
3/9/2002 12:00:34 AM mikemtn (2 times)
3/8/2002 11:58:22 PM cbx2
3/8/2002 11:51:17 PM Kimrobin
3/8/2002 11:25:47 PM CacheCows
3/8/2002 10:42:36 PM mark71mark
3/8/2002 9:11:12 PM keithpilot
3/8/2002 8:21:33 PM DLiming (7 times)
3/8/2002 8:15:53 PM Kevin & Susan (9 times)
3/8/2002 8:14:50 PM ladybuggers (6 times)
3/8/2002 7:50:26 PM Web-ling
3/8/2002 7:44:00 PM DutchBoy
3/8/2002 5:56:28 PM clatmandu
3/8/2002 5:35:28 PM Prime Suspect
3/8/2002 5:30:32 PM erik88l-r (2 times)
3/8/2002 5:05:54 PM ttepee
Fact is, there are SO many visitors to a cache page, that it is simply impossible to tell. Now, most of these folks live nowhere near me, but look at all the visits!
Given that, I would very much like to see this function extended to ALL caches, not just the MOCs.
How about it, Jeremy? (just add this to my ever-growing wish list.)
bunkerdave
-
Well, I gotta tell you, after having a MOC posted for ONE day, I am more convinced than ever that there is no way to know for sure who plundered a cache. Darn it. Here is the visitor log for my cache, at the present:
3/9/2002 4:44:55 PM bunkerdave (32 times)
3/9/2002 4:38:55 PM Gromit (10 times)
3/9/2002 3:50:16 PM Utahbill
3/9/2002 1:11:43 PM Paul Morrison WaylandersMA (2 times)
3/9/2002 11:31:41 AM rdwatson78
3/9/2002 10:38:22 AM jimmonty
3/9/2002 6:13:45 AM Harrald (2 times)
3/9/2002 4:54:08 AM fractal (7 times)
3/9/2002 12:39:06 AM tslack2000 (2 times)
3/9/2002 12:00:34 AM mikemtn (2 times)
3/8/2002 11:58:22 PM cbx2
3/8/2002 11:51:17 PM Kimrobin
3/8/2002 11:25:47 PM CacheCows
3/8/2002 10:42:36 PM mark71mark
3/8/2002 9:11:12 PM keithpilot
3/8/2002 8:21:33 PM DLiming (7 times)
3/8/2002 8:15:53 PM Kevin & Susan (9 times)
3/8/2002 8:14:50 PM ladybuggers (6 times)
3/8/2002 7:50:26 PM Web-ling
3/8/2002 7:44:00 PM DutchBoy
3/8/2002 5:56:28 PM clatmandu
3/8/2002 5:35:28 PM Prime Suspect
3/8/2002 5:30:32 PM erik88l-r (2 times)
3/8/2002 5:05:54 PM ttepee
Fact is, there are SO many visitors to a cache page, that it is simply impossible to tell. Now, most of these folks live nowhere near me, but look at all the visits!
Given that, I would very much like to see this function extended to ALL caches, not just the MOCs.
How about it, Jeremy? (just add this to my ever-growing wish list.)
bunkerdave
-
I could give you better feedback if I knew what you were talking about.
I know these are all types of 2-way radio, but I am not clear on how this would relate to Geocaching.
Clarification?
bunkerdave
-
I could give you better feedback if I knew what you were talking about.
I know these are all types of 2-way radio, but I am not clear on how this would relate to Geocaching.
Clarification?
bunkerdave
-
I have done the double digits thing 4-5 times. 12 is my high.
While it does tend to cheapen the experience of each cache, my opinion is that if the caches are easy enough that you can do more than one or two of them in a day, they were probably pretty "cheap" to begin with. No offense.
I have found that logging a whole schmear of caches in one day makes for a TOTAL experience that is quite satisfactory, regardless of how insignificant it might make each cache seem.
Actually, I seldom go out after ONE cache, unless it is clear that it is going to take all day. Even then, I will always look for caches to pick up along the way. When you have to find time to cache, it only makes sense to visit as many as you can while you have the chance. Caches come and go, and you are never sure how soon you will be back to an area. Very seldom do I get near a cache and not make at least an attempt to bag it.
Actually, I think an interesting stat to track would be caches logged in a day, a week, or a month. There are some cachers that will always lead the total numbers, but for those who like the competitive aspect of the sport, it would be fun to go for the single day or single week or month record. Would make for some interesting cache logs too, no doubt.
bunkerdave
-
I can appreciate the spirit of this suggestion - anything to increase the number of caches must be good, right?
Well, not exactly. Utah has enjoyed probably the fastest growth of any area in the world, and I have witnessed every bit of it first hand. It has not been "all good."
Last summer, a friend of mine approached me for my thoughts on implementing a full-scale Utah caching campaign to try and catch California in the total number of caches. The idea was that if everyone who had a cache in Utah hid two or three more, we would catch California and be the undisputes cache capital of the world.
Of course, my immediate response was a BIG thumbs down, for all the obvious reasons. First, odds are, many, if not most of those caches would have SUCKED. Second, it would be nothing more than Geotrashing, and it would only increase the risk that more caches would be abandoned, and draw the attention of an already hostile environmental extremist faction in our state. And so on.
I can appreciate the sentiment in many parts of the country where there are not a lot of caches - yet. I notice the OP is from MI. I do not know off the top of my head how MI is doing cache-wise, but let's assume this is an effort to jump-start the caching in your area. My advice: give it time. Eventually "it" will happen, and you will have all the caches you can stand. And all the frustrations that go with them.
Happy caching.
bunkerdave
-
I can appreciate the spirit of this suggestion - anything to increase the number of caches must be good, right?
Well, not exactly. Utah has enjoyed probably the fastest growth of any area in the world, and I have witnessed every bit of it first hand. It has not been "all good."
Last summer, a friend of mine approached me for my thoughts on implementing a full-scale Utah caching campaign to try and catch California in the total number of caches. The idea was that if everyone who had a cache in Utah hid two or three more, we would catch California and be the undisputes cache capital of the world.
Of course, my immediate response was a BIG thumbs down, for all the obvious reasons. First, odds are, many, if not most of those caches would have SUCKED. Second, it would be nothing more than Geotrashing, and it would only increase the risk that more caches would be abandoned, and draw the attention of an already hostile environmental extremist faction in our state. And so on.
I can appreciate the sentiment in many parts of the country where there are not a lot of caches - yet. I notice the OP is from MI. I do not know off the top of my head how MI is doing cache-wise, but let's assume this is an effort to jump-start the caching in your area. My advice: give it time. Eventually "it" will happen, and you will have all the caches you can stand. And all the frustrations that go with them.
Happy caching.
bunkerdave
-
Certainly an argument can be made against the apparent irony of prohibiting advertising on (what has recently become) a clearly commercial site.
However, I must interject, that regardless of whether there is hypocrisy in that or not, I do not want to see Geocaching become a forum for advertising every cacher's business. Fact is, a line must be drawn somewhere.
There is a significant difference between posting a link to a site that has no relation whatever to geocaching, other than that the poster participates in caching, and posting a link to a GPS, mapping, hiking, or some other site that actually might increase the enjoyment of other cachers.
There are links to various business sites all over the site. www.maptech.com is one of my personal favorites, www.magellan.com is another, www.garmin.com, www.mapblast.com, and on and on. All of these are legitimate posts, whether I work for any of them or not, because Geocaching is about GPS-ing and mapping and navigation and all that.
This fall, we had in Utah a cacher who posted a cache which required finders to go out and purchase the poster's album (cacher was a musician) in order to "complete" the cache. This was an obvious violation. I personally asked Jeremy to remove it, which he did.
IMO, there is a not-so-fine line between what is a violation and what is not. And I think most of us are plenty smart enough to know it when we see it. Kind of like pornography. But I digress.
bunkerdave
-
Well, I am not quite sure how this would work, but if there were some way I could generate a little income from this hobby, I would definitely give it a serious look. I would be inclined to purchase stock whatever the arrangment was in Groundspeak, if that time ever came. However, I doubt it will, since the reason most companies go public is to raise needed funds for implementation of aggressive growth strategies. Given the fact that Geocaching.com/Groundspeak already has its growth strategy in place, I wouldn't think that there would be an immediate need for cash that will dramatically exceed that which can be generated by the current revenue stream.
Interesting, though, since Tslack and I were discussing this very thing yesterday as we sped across Utah's West Desert on one of those mega-multi-cache hunts. I would like to be a shareholder, not necessarily for the income (although that wouldn't hurt) but just to be able to say that I was one. I have gotten a lot from this sport, and I wouldn't mind giving/getting even more. Just so I don't go too broke.
bunkerdave
-
Well, I am not quite sure how this would work, but if there were some way I could generate a little income from this hobby, I would definitely give it a serious look. I would be inclined to purchase stock whatever the arrangment was in Groundspeak, if that time ever came. However, I doubt it will, since the reason most companies go public is to raise needed funds for implementation of aggressive growth strategies. Given the fact that Geocaching.com/Groundspeak already has its growth strategy in place, I wouldn't think that there would be an immediate need for cash that will dramatically exceed that which can be generated by the current revenue stream.
Interesting, though, since Tslack and I were discussing this very thing yesterday as we sped across Utah's West Desert on one of those mega-multi-cache hunts. I would like to be a shareholder, not necessarily for the income (although that wouldn't hurt) but just to be able to say that I was one. I have gotten a lot from this sport, and I wouldn't mind giving/getting even more. Just so I don't go too broke.
bunkerdave
-
I understand where you're coming from, but I think you might be overreacting a bit.
I think we will all be a little surprised how few MOCs there actually will be. I am placing one this weekend, weather permitting, but to be honest, it is just to see how the plan works. I will probably be switching it to a regular cache sooner than later.
Bear in mind, too, that the main reason the MOCs were implemented was to increase the level of security for caches, which will hopefully result in a higher level of caches overall, not a general degradation of the cache pool.
If the "best" new caches are MOCs, so what? Most of the caches out there now are not too bad, and even those that are lame still get plenty of action.
I don't see a whole lot of threat to caching likely to result from MOCs. I will be very surprised if the number of MOCs ever exceeds 10% of total caches. Barring a major epidemic of plundering, what would be the purpose?
That said, I still would like to see the option to audit cache page visits extended to ALL caches. This is the most useful security measure I see in the MOCs, and if it is truly any good, then all caches should have the same "protection." Restricting the access to cache pages provides limited protection at best, and as was stated by Tslack in another thread, even if we could find out for certain who plundered/stole a cache, what are we really going to do about it? A few great ideas were kicked around last Monday in the Clayjar Chats, but beyond that, it really makes little difference.
bunkerdave
-
Of course, JI is already on the case, as I suspected. Looking forward to testing this one out. I am sure it will be outstanding.
Question on MOCs: First, are there any yet, and second, how to search for them?
bunkerdave
-
Okay, I know Jeremy's got his hands full, and is getting all our wishes accomplished as quickly as possible.
I was just going through the always insufferable tedium of downloading waypoints into my GPS using Expert GPS, and frankly, I am quite tired of it. I NEED to be able to download ALL the waypoints for a selected area into my GPS with a minimum number of clicks. I also need to not look at all the caches I have found. BEEN there, DONE that. NEXT! Here's my list:
First, block out the caches I have found (and preferably those I have no desire to find, as well)
Second, give me a bulk download of ALL the caches I haven't found for a region, preferably one that I set.
Third, if possible, I would like to be able to screen out caches by type and difficulty level. The more search options, the better.
Here's how it should work:
I decide to put a few hundred caches in my GPS, so I go to Geocaching.com, and type in a ZIP code, and set the range to, say 100 miles. When I hit "GO" all the caches within 100 miles of the ZIP code that I HAVEN'T found pop up, nice and neat, and when I click the "select all" button, it actually selects all the caches within 100 miles that I haven't found. Not just one page, but ALL of them. Then I hit download to EasyGPS, and all those caches are sucked into Easy/Expert GPS in "one fell swoop." I go to Easy/Expert GPS, and there they are. Beautifully cleaned, pressed and wrapped, ready for delivery. I click "Send to GPS" and off they go, like little lemmings, into my Little Green Buddy. 2-3 minutes later, I hit the road, secure in the knowledge that my GPS is chock full of a few hundred (maybe) geocaches I have not been to, waiting for me.
Okay, I know I sound like I am complaining mightily. Actually, I am delighted with what has been done so far. One of the reasons I am so in favor of the memberships is that I know that the only thing keeping some of these features from becoming reality is that Jeremy only has 24 hours in a day. And has to work, like the rest of us. I REALLY want to see Jeremy go full time in Groundspeak, for purely selfish reasons. I am super excited to see what he will think of next, and the sooner he gets to it full time, the less waiting I have to do. So let's get to it! BUY MEMBERSHIPS. The suspense is KILLING me. (and I am sick of clicking the download button)
bunkerdave
-
Went out yesterday with Tslack and bagged 10 caches, revisited 2 I had been to, but he hadn't yet, for a grand total of 12 visited for the day. Haven't done anything like that in a long time, and it was as much fun as ever.
Pick a cache
Find it
Sign the logbook
Go find another
Still pretty simple, no? Also still a blast.
bunkerdave
-
Geocaching is
Going out and getting lost
and still getting home
-bunkerdave
bunkerdave
-
I also use Avantgo, with a few custom channels Brian was good enough to put together for me, as well as other Utah cachers. It is fantastic, and I swear by it.
Before that came along, I used my memo pad. I just copied all the text from a cache page, pasted it into the Palm interface, and hotsynced. This is the long way around, but worked well for me for a long time. Be sure (if you go this route) and get the hint decoder as well. The Pathetique channels do the decoding for you, which is also very handy.
There is another endorsement. Go nuts.
bunkerdave
-
We have had enough get-togethers in Utah that it is not too hard to know which caches are widely regarded (locally) as the best ones. These are those about which folks sit and talk and talk about their quest to log it. They are local enough that lots of folks can visit, but challenging enough that it takes something to get them.
None of my caches are close enough that they get much action, except for one that is lodged in the fence around my backyard. This one might be in the top 25% for Utah, just because so many have visited it.
It always helps to put a little more effort in to the container, too. Contents come and go, but with a little luck, the container and the logbook will always be there. If I was trying to do a really nice cache, that is where I would spend my time and money.
Then there is location, of course, which I am sure is the most important item of all. I have always been drawn to the high mountains, and I think the best caches are to be found there. My favorite ones, both hidden and found, are over 8,000 feet, which isn't that high for mountains, but is pretty high for a cache. Anything over 10,000 feet is in a special class, and if you can break 12,000, well, that's something special. Keep in mind, though, that those caches, like hermits, tend to attract only the most devout among us, and most of the pleasure for the owner is in just having it there. Also would recommend hiding anything that high VERY well, as these mountains tend to attract a lot of enviro-wackos who like to remove caches, or anything else they, in their infinite wisdom, deem unacceptable. I don't put caches on summits; I usually hide them somewhere en route, so that the cachers can hunt and sign the log in peace.
Enough for now.
bunkerdave
-
Clayjar -
Confession time: I actually got an e-mail from Jeremy in response to an e-mail I sent him asking him what we could do to alleviate the plundering that seems so rampant these days. His response was that he would soon be implementing all the things that have come out this week.
When I started discussing that in the forums, I was hoping to provide some pre-release feedback for Jeremy, although I didn't know he would be coming in. I sent him an e-mail mentioning that I might be bringing it up, but I was surprised (though probably not as much as others were) when he actually showed up to see what was being said.
So there you go.
bunkerdave
-
1. My camera is an Olympus C-700 UltraZoom 2.1mp
2. Digital
3. I usually just use MS Paint to re-size photos, although I also use Camedia Master, which came with my camera.
4. What I usually do is use Paint to crop the image down to show the part of the image I really want to show, and then I just use the "stretch/skew" function until the image gets under 100k. This is kind of Mickey Mouse, but it seems to work okay. I will be watching this thread to see if anything better is available.
bunkerdave
-
We have always had these issues. There are still many cachers who have found many caches, and never placed one. We know who they are, and while there is occasionally a flare-up regarding their mode of participation, I would hardly say it is out of hand.
If someone doesn't want to pay, then they shouldn't pay. And I don't care whether they do or don't. Personally, I think not placing any caches is a greater violation of caching etiquette than not buying a subscription. By far.
bunkerdave
-
Well, I don't still have them, I don't think, but from my first cache I took a military-type pin and several used golf balls. I left a dollar and a stress ball that looked like a globe. I thought that was appropriate for geocaching.
bunkerdave
-
Having only actually owned a Magellan, I have to vote for the one I have used. I do believe that in some ways (the ones that matter to me) it is the better GPSR, but this is really based more on the volumes I have read in these forums about other users' experience with their unit(s). Only a relative handful of cachers own more than one, by my reckoning, so asking which is "best" is kind of hopeless.
IF I ever do feel the need to acquire another GPSR, I will very possibly go with the Garmin GPS V, not because I have not been thrilled with Magellan, but I would like to have the routing capability of the Garmin. I already have essentially all the abilities of the Meridian line in my Map330, so to me, I would not be getting much new fun if I were to get another Magellan. Besides, then I would know that much more about GPSRs, since Magellan and Garmin pretty much have a corner on the market.
bunkerdave
-
Having only actually owned a Magellan, I have to vote for the one I have used. I do believe that in some ways (the ones that matter to me) it is the better GPSR, but this is really based more on the volumes I have read in these forums about other users' experience with their unit(s). Only a relative handful of cachers own more than one, by my reckoning, so asking which is "best" is kind of hopeless.
IF I ever do feel the need to acquire another GPSR, I will very possibly go with the Garmin GPS V, not because I have not been thrilled with Magellan, but I would like to have the routing capability of the Garmin. I already have essentially all the abilities of the Meridian line in my Map330, so to me, I would not be getting much new fun if I were to get another Magellan. Besides, then I would know that much more about GPSRs, since Magellan and Garmin pretty much have a corner on the market.
bunkerdave
Locked up 330x
in GPS technology and devices
Posted
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/m330/
This is a Map330 users group. Someone here will surely be able to help you.
bunkerdave