+Lizzy Posted May 25, 2007 Share Posted May 25, 2007 I read Jeremy's post about the static maps on the cache page listings. I use the maps as a general reference on whether or not to include new caches in my bookmark lists - nice & quick to review with a glance at the map on the cache page. This adds one more step for me to check, which is painful on dial-up. I'm hoping that a suitable replacement is in the works & not just another link from the cache page. I know ya'll get grief from people on each and every change you make - yep, I'm whining because I liked that feature... Link to comment
+Markwell Posted May 25, 2007 Share Posted May 25, 2007 The other thing I read from his announcement was that he was trying to be courteous to dial-up users by not going with just Google Maps, which tends to slow the page load down. I wonder if he could go with the old Tiger maps until a better solution is in place. At least that would give SOME idea for the US caches. Link to comment
+Miragee Posted May 25, 2007 Share Posted May 25, 2007 The other thing I read from his announcement was that he was trying to be courteous to dial-up users by not going with just Google Maps, which tends to slow the page load down. <snip> I didn't read the announcement, so I didn't know about that. How nice! I rarely open cache pages, until I am logging them, because with my 24 K connection, it takes way too long for the page to load. I just get my information from PQs and read the page offline, or on my Palm. I use maps on my computer to check cache locations from the PQ data. I am very appreciative of the change concerning Google maps. Link to comment
+HaLiJuSaPa Posted May 25, 2007 Share Posted May 25, 2007 What I can't understand is why the existing cache map pages would work but the "new" cache map pages will not. That doesn't make sense to me. Wouldn't the new database and code affect the maps on the existing caches as well? I have to admit, I like having a printout of the map for a cache hunt and am a bit annoyed and will miss it dearly, but maybe this will be an excuse for me to use the Google Maps caching app so that I'll better see what other caches are near the one(s) we intend to go to on a given day and all. Link to comment
+Ringo67 Posted May 26, 2007 Share Posted May 26, 2007 I agree, the maps will be missed. One of my pet peeves about the cache pages has been the lack of a city or town in the listing. All I get for caches in my state is "Massachusetts, United States." Now, I'm stuck in one corner of the state and knowing if the cache is in Attleboro or Pittsfield makes a HUGE difference. Without that map it will be even more difficult to judge what part of the state these caches are in. - Ringo67 Link to comment
+benh57 Posted May 26, 2007 Share Posted May 26, 2007 (edited) This is a horrible reduction in functionality. Even the tiger maps were better than nothing at all. I sure hope the 'v2 site' doesnt come with similar feature removals. Edited May 26, 2007 by benh57 Link to comment
+Lizzy Posted May 26, 2007 Author Share Posted May 26, 2007 I agree, the maps will be missed. One of my pet peeves about the cache pages has been the lack of a city or town in the listing. All I get for caches in my state is "Massachusetts, United States." Now, I'm stuck in one corner of the state and knowing if the cache is in Attleboro or Pittsfield makes a HUGE difference. Without that map it will be even more difficult to judge what part of the state these caches are in. - Ringo67 I agree absolutely! It would be very nice to have a city or county, but I can just imagine the volumes of work to have that included. Just think how far away some of my state's caches can be if one lives in one corner & a cache is in the other corner of the state (Washington). I'm guessing about 300+ miles as the crow flies. Just a little tiny state map with a push pin in it would be better than none. And I really do appreciate Groundspeak considering folks on dial-up - Thank you for that. I do like some of the new features! -Waiting & watching for more of the new stuff- Link to comment
+HaLiJuSaPa Posted May 27, 2007 Share Posted May 27, 2007 Much as I hate the new way with the maps, I have to admit that clicking on one of the links is not much different than when I'd click on the map on the actual cache page to "blow it up" some. Link to comment
+Geobun Posted May 27, 2007 Share Posted May 27, 2007 Those maps were an essential feature of the cache page. It showed WHERE the cache was located. A quick check, and we knew the general location. Now there is an extra mouse click and wait until a new page loads. This is NOT saving time. Link to comment
AbercrombieHollister Posted May 27, 2007 Share Posted May 27, 2007 OMG i can't believe that maps no-longer exist ! Maps can really help out a geocacher, and where the location. I think that they should put maps back on. Link to comment
+Miragee Posted May 27, 2007 Share Posted May 27, 2007 Can't you look at the distance and bearing at the top of the cache listing to get an idea whether you are interested? If new cache listing pops up and I see that it is 27.5 miles away to the NW, I know I won't be looking for it, although I still download the .gpx file to put in my GSAK database. Link to comment
+k6ccc Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 Can't you look at the distance and bearing at the top of the cache listing to get an idea whether you are interested? If new cache listing pops up and I see that it is 27.5 miles away to the NW, I know I won't be looking for it, although I still download the .gpx file to put in my GSAK database. Only problem with that is it's not accurate enough. From my house, a few miles NE could be in metro area, or a serious hike. I'm a pretty serious FTFer so seeing the map on my BlackBerry is very useful to determine if I am going to rush off for an attempted FTF. I miss the maps. Jim Link to comment
+Rockin Roddy Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 (edited) Wouldn't the cache description give you an idea of the nature of the cache? A metro cache would not be characterized as a serious hike in most cases (unless you have a serious park in that metro area)? Yes, this could be a bit of a hassle, but it IS just one more click...isn't it? edit to add...how serious an FTFer are you that you have to determine whether or not to go after one?? I see the cache listing pop up and I'm out the door! Edited May 28, 2007 by Rockin Roddy Link to comment
+nittany dave Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 I won't miss them at all. The links to at least 10 (US) mapping sites are on the cache page and I find those more useful than the little map anyway. Not having them slow the page load and waste paper on the rare occasion that I print a cache page is fine by me. Link to comment
+MtnGoat50 Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 Those maps were an essential feature of the cache page. It showed WHERE the cache was located. A quick check, and we knew the general location. Now there is an extra mouse click and wait until a new page loads. This is NOT saving time. Ditto! I'm in Montana visiting family and using a dialup connection. The older pages with the map load fine but the extra mouse click and wait on the new pages is a pain. I'm going to miss the static maps. Link to comment
+TheRedSquirrel Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 For a High-tech user this is no big deal; you all have your additional gizmos, laptops, and navigation software and what not. For a Low-tech user, such as myself, it is a big deal to lose the maps. I still have dial-up and looking at prices, upgrading is not an option at this time. Same thing with my gps, funds have become tight, especially with gas prices going up. In my area, I literally have to go 2 hours one way to find an area that has any density of caches. Link to comment
+WPee & mapp Posted May 28, 2007 Share Posted May 28, 2007 Okay! So I've got the worst of the geocaching world. I'm rural AND on dial-up! A week-end of geocaching can involve driving 100 miles minimum or frequently 200-300 miles (Thank God for my Prius!) The static maps allowed me to decide direction and pinpoint caches in that direction. I got my first example of mapless caching as I drove right by a cache because the map wasn't on the printout. Yes the cache shows up in the GPS. But if one is caching solo, driving while operating the GPS may lead to a short geocaching life! Link to comment
Recommended Posts