geo-jedi

These are two separate devices. The ForeRunner is made for running workouts but can also find waypoints. The ForeTrex is similar in physical design to the ForeRunner but obviously has different firmware that makes it more suitable for hiking. Neither have detailed maps, or the ability to load maps. Team Geo-Jedi

There have been a few caches in similar situations around here. One of them was mine. It was in a public park behind bushes but at the boundary of a private residence. It soon went missing, probably because the neighbors were curious about all the activity behind their house even though it was in the park. In another case, there was the barking dog. It made it really hard to search without alerting lots of people. It seems to me that the hider should want geocachers to be good neighbors and move it. Good hides should provide the finder with two kinds of cover: physical and motivational. It is always better to be able to find a cache knowing that no one is watching. It is also nice to be able to have an easy reason to be near the cache site whether it is hiking, relaxing on a bench, or photographing an interesting plant. Hiders should be nice to finders and not put them in situations where it looks like they may be planning a residential burglary. So my vote: Be a good neighbor - archive that cache and move it BEFORE there is any trouble. Team Geo-Jedi

This is always a fun topic. I think the Garmin 60C addresses much of what I'd like to see but they still left out expandable memory, directory structure for waypoints, non-proprietary maps, and an open operating system. Here's a link to the Dream GPSr discussion last May. Heads up displays were mentioned but the cost would keep it away from a production model. Here's my take from back then.

Only 1680 for me but about 1/4 of the 50 mile radius circle is in the ocean.

Good work GC - I like the new look and functionality. Some questions: 1. Do PQ's run on the search page go against your count? 2. Is the 5 queries/24 hours based on an individual time clock, or is it simply midnight to midnight Pacific time, or something else? I can't wait for archive caches to show up so that I can get a PQ with all of my finds. Thanks for all of your hard work, Team Geo-Jedi

Currently, one can get caches closest to a single point. Does this impose an undue load on the server? The ellipse around a route that I am proposing doesn't seem that is should be only about a factor of two (or so) more work. It requires the following: Two points need to be specified (instead of just one for the radial query)... Two distance calculations for each cache (instead of one distance calc) An addition for each cache - to sum the two distances A sort on the sum of the two distances (same work as before) Any cache that was exactly on the line between the two points would have a value equal to the distance between the two points. Other caches close to that straight line would have values not much larger. This does not solve the "route" distance problem or closest to the freeway exit, or even address the fact that roads aren't straight lines... but I think that it may be useful in that it forms an ellipse around any two points. I'm still not sure of the heavy computational load that this might impose. It doesn't seem that it is too much worse than the other distance type calculations. What am I missing? Team Geo-Jedi

Here's an idea that might be computationally tractable. Note that an ellipse can be defined as the locus of points such that the sum of their distances from two points is constant. As a trivial example, a line is an ellipse but the only points within the ellipse must be on the line. If the endpoints of a straightline (or route) are given, and the distances to each endpoint from a set of caches is computed and then added, one can then sort the caches by the sum. Those with the smallest sums will be nearest the straightline. This technique might be useful for a number of geocaching software tools. It isn't quite the same as a bounding rectangle, but it seems that it will end up with a shape that is probably quite useful. Comments? Team Geo-Jedi

I have a 2004 Subaru Forester XT - a cool caching mobile! Subaru's Rule! Team Geo-Jedi

ExpertGPS is supposed to be the upgrade to EasyGPS - it's written by the same folks. It asks me to specify which GPS device and there is no Forerunner in the list. Do you have to do something similar in Easy GPS? Which model Garmin is closest to the Forerunner? I am running 2.10 Forerunner software. Has anyone uploaded the new 2.20 software yet? Has anyone also been able to upload tracks? Geo-Jedi

Does anyone know how to use a PC to talk to the Forerunner? We just got one of these and have been using it as intended for tracking running workouts. It works as advertised. I wonder what the logging software will do. The garmin website says it is due sometime in February. I figured out the serial cable but I don't seem to have any software that recognizes the device. I saw somewhere on the gc boards that someone was able to talk to the 201 with some kind of Mac software but on the PC neither garmin's mapsource nor ExpertGPS seemed to be able to connect. With that said, it will be rather painful using this to geocache if you really have to enter each coordinate by hand. Although you can enter coords by hand, it is even more tedious than some of the older garmins. One must linearly scroll through the alphabet and use a combination of "enter" and arrow keys to get the data in. Team Geo-Jedi

Business travel is made more fun with geocaching. Because of this, we now have found caches in 14 states. It is interesting to see the differences in caching philosophy as you travel around. We found one in New England (Massachusetts or New Hampshire) where the clue was - "By a big rock." We walked to the site and there it was - in the middle of a rocky wooded area, in plain sight, by a big rock. In the south and the midwest, most of the caches are fairly easy to find. Indeed, they are placed to be easy to find for the searching geocacher but hard to find for any muggle. In southern California, on the other hand, many cachers take devious delight in placing caches such that confound the most dedicated searchers. The on trail versus bushwhacking argument also reveals differences. Much of the wilderness in southern California is rather sensitive - a couple of off-trail forays can easily lead to major erosion during the winter's rain. Some of the New England woods and midwestern grasslands seem that offtrail hiking will have no impact. I'm looking forward to finding at least one cache in every state! Team Geo-Jedi

In Southern California (Orange county), it used to be Otis Pug. The Pugster was the man with some of the most clever hides imaginable. When a new Pug cache appeared, hordes of cachers would descend upon it hoping and striving to be the first to figure it out. Unfortunately, the Pug has retired from the game. Rumor has it that there was too much politics associated with caches placed in some local parks. Otis is sorely missed in this part of California. Team Geo-Jedi

Although this is not an answer to your question, the notion of a bad multicache is certainly related. 1. Descriptions od multi's that don't tell you what you are getting into (i.e., how many stages) can be quite annoying. 2. Multi's that are not maintained are even worse. I have found all but the last cache of a couple of multi's only to be told that the final stage had gone missing and will not be replaced. Team Geo-Jedi

Snow Crash is actually Stephenson's third [and perhaps best?] novel. His first was The Big U, a very forgettable weird story that required a big explosion to wrap up loose ends. His second novel, Zodiac is an ecological thriller that is not all that thrilling. One of the amazing things about Snow Crash is all that Stephenson predicted about the Web way back in 1992. It carried on the spirit of The Shockwave Rider by Brunner that was published in the late 70's. Without the web, geocaching wouldn't be what it is. In 1995, NS put out The Diamond Age which is also fairly interesting. In 1999 came the massive and very interesting tome Cryptonomicon which covers a lot of ground. There was also the non-fiction piece in 1999 called In the Beginning... was the Command Line in which he discusses operating systems and points out that perhaps the biggest idea of Bill Gates is/was the notion that it is possible to sell an operating system. Before Bill, everyone thought that only hardware could be sold. Software was something to help you sell the HW. How the world has changed! For those who like Stephenson, you might also like Stephen Bury. NS uses that pseudonym for political science fiction written with J. Frederick George. Maybe I'll put a copy of Snow Crash in my next cache!

I have an eMap that I bought a few years ago. You can still buy it at some retail stores although it was discontinued by Garmin recently (4Q2003). It doesn't have WAAS and is limited to storing 500 waypoints (instead of 1000). The screen isn't color and entering text/numbers is rather tedious. In spite of all that, the eMap is a very decent unit. The screen resolution is adequate and easier to read than some of the newer units with their tiny type. It has the capability to do mapping and is one of the few Garmins that lets you add memory. You can also attach an external antenna. They cost over $500 fully loaded when they first came out but can be bought new for about $150 now. The main point - the eMap is a very capable unit for geocaching. It is an old high end portable unit that still does the job!

Yes - I'd say 32 MB should do it. I have version 5 Metroguide USA which replaced my version 3. I skipped Version 4 so I can't say anything about ver 4 vs ver 5 differences. Hooking the emap up to the computer via the cable that goes from a serial port to the emap port is the standard way to upload. The first part of the process will wipe the memory clean and then load the new map regions that you have selected. The process can take 20 or 30 minutes if I remember correctly. After doing it once or twice, I bought the USB memory card device that can write to the card directly. It takes only 2 or 3 minutes. I also keep the old 8 MB card loaded with my local area. The 32 meg card is for travel. I'll load a few areas of places that I know I'll be going and carry along the 8 MB local card for when I return from my travels.

My trusty emap has served me well as a navaid when traveling and more recently as a geocaching tool. If you are using Mapsource topo maps, you have probably seen that they are very small. You can load lots of them on the 8 MB card. City maps, the ones with restaurant locations etc., each seem to take up just under 8 MB. The downside is that if you are visiting multiple cities, or if your visit puts you on a map region boundary, then you need more than 8 MB of memory. I spent way too much several years ago for a 32 MB card but it has served me well. I later found that there are a few places on-line that sell memory compatible to this Garmin proprietary format. The emap has just been discontinued. The current day equivalent is probably the soon-to-be released 60C but the current Garmin Legend has more capability although a smaller screen. Sometimes only 500 waypoints seems like a limitation. Back to the main question - 32 MB is probably a good size if you take trips that cross boundaries. The downside is that the emap only supports a slow serial interface so unless you are also willing to drop some cash on the external USB memory loader, it takes a fair amount of time to upload new maps. Even worse, the only way to upload maps is to first delete all loaded maps. Magellan has the right idea with using non-proprietary memory cards that can be loaded any way you want. I wonder what the pricing of all this obselete but functional equipment will be. I may end up selling my emap, extra memory, USB loader, cables, and car mount when I upgrade with the 60C. Team Geo-Jedi

I gave it a quick drive - seems like it might be useful. How does one delete a cache?

Zero out simply means that the GPS is indicating that there is zero distance to the coordinates that you seek. If you are stopped and the GPS (or GPSr if you wish) zeros out, then in an ideal world, you would be directly on, above, or below the cache. Many geocachers try to zero out as the initial part of their search. Others put the GPS away once they get to about 20 feet away. As one gets more familiar with the technology, one develops a better appreciation for variations in readings and understands that the same spot on the earth will get different readings. Team Geo-Jedi

Can CacheMate work with multiple GPX files? If I want to use CacheMate for a history of all my finds/hides will I be able to combine multiple GPX files and manual entries so that I can handle archived caches? Will CacheMate let me read old logs? Is the PC tool to convert the GPX files to a PDB equivalent to the Plucker Desktop, or is it more like the Spinner tool. One of Spinner cool parts is the changing of cache type. Does CM do this? BTW, this was a topic of discussion at a recent SoCal Geocacher's event. There were a couple of rave reviews for CM. Team Geo-Jedi

I have a Sony CLIE (Palm 4.1) and use Spinner and Plucker. I have recently been hearing good things about CacheMate. Can someone help me understand? Is CacheMate a replacement for the Spinner/Plucker pair? I know that CacheMate also allows one to make notes and preserve them while on the hunt. Does it back up that information to some sort of PC database? I currently use a spreadsheet on the PC to track hides and finds. Does CacheMate provide a more convenient mechanism? The cost of experimenting with another piece of software can far exceed the purchase price! Thanks in advance, Team Geo-Jedi

The pointer to forums at the bottom of the "Seek" pages (e.g., http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx...) still points to the ubbx page. What is the preferred method of flagging these tiny bugs? Posting in a forum seems like overkill. Team Geo-Jedi

It also seems that the link at the bottom of several pages that says "Discuss Geocaching" also points to the old site. Team Geo-Jedi

Thank you, GC.COM. The boards at gc.com are an important part of geocaching. Thanks for bringing them back. Team Geo-Jedi

This sounds like a wonderful idea. It is quite easy to set up a system that can be used only in a positive way and still be objective. Just as the item can stay "unranked" until there are at least n (e.g., 5) ratings, the site can also let any item not in the top half or top 100 or top whatever simply stay "unranked." No one needs to know why an item stays unranked. The site can then publish the best 100 items by state or city or whatever. Even better would be to allow users to list the best n items, or top x% of items by any way they can select/filter items. It might be by zip code, or within n miles of a location, or in a corridor around a route. Again, negativity is limited. There is no need to highlight or focus on items (caches, images, logs, ...) with low rankings. The idea is to get the good stuff recognized. Team Geo-Jedi, Searchers 4 Ground Truth