Jump to content

Google map changes


K-Ddid

Recommended Posts

The new map in its present state is a horrible decision and really a step back.

Much more disadvantages than advantages:

No cachlisting on the side

No numbers assigned to the caches - so which cache in the listing is where on the screen

Pop-up window with cachelisting much too small

Size of the map - extra wide but too small

Maybe its fine for areas with high cache density - but what vice versa?

Did anyone test it with MS IE? Open the cachelisting and close it again and the map is block forever!

The changes are really frustrating - some minor advantages but huge disadvantages.

When you tried the update first some time ago I was glad you moved back the other day - you really should think about that again and improve the new page before going online.

Link to comment

I vote to change it back too!

This morning I was looking up a couple caches in a park and the map didn't even show that the caches where there! I had to keep moving the map and after about the 5 times moving it one popped up and the I moved it again and the other popped up. It is clearly not showing all caches.

:D

Edited by carolyn247
Link to comment

I love the new map! The usability, look, and speed are much improved. I love that hovering the mouse over the icons gives the name and clicking opens in a new tab/window.

 

Kudos on the innovation!

I wish you much success in continued ironing out of the kinks.

Nice Job!

Link to comment

I, for one, like the new map. At first glance, it seems alot cleaner. Only thing is where do I 'bookmark' the caches? (Not that the old 'bookmark' feature on the list worked. I would only get about half of the ones I marked actually added to the bookmark. Any suggestions for that is appreciated)...

 

When you click on the cache in the map, in the bubble that pops up, bookmark it is the first option followed by send to garmin and log visit!

 

HOpe it helps

Link to comment
:D I have never chosen to make an entry on a forum before, guess I'm just a lurker, usually someone else has said it all before (thank you), so just my two cents, I did notice the map change, and I also dont care for it as it has made bookmarking a large list very tedious among the other things I've noticed, good and bad, until I figure out some other way to do it better I guess? Always learning, then I suppose it will change again? Thanks for the forums, keeps us posted this way.
Link to comment

I like it, has bugs, but you know grounspeak is working on it. It will get better have faith. I like the look and the size and style. I'll admit, there are bugs.

 

What I want is to be able to enter destinations, and using the google map feature it would show caches within say ten, twenty or fifty or hundred miles of your route! And you can put in the features your looking for and filter out what pops up in the list! That would be cool!

Edited by Rubisco42
Link to comment
:D I hate the new format. Can't bookmark, no list of the caches on the sidebar. I liked to print this page to help with a day of hiking - it worked really well with using my PDA - only one piece of paper needed to identify the caches I wished to seek. Why go and fix something that is not broken!!!
Link to comment

I, for one, like the new map. At first glance, it seems alot cleaner. Only thing is where do I 'bookmark' the caches? (Not that the old 'bookmark' feature on the list worked. I would only get about half of the ones I marked actually added to the bookmark. Any suggestions for that is appreciated)...

 

When you click on the cache in the map, in the bubble that pops up, bookmark it is the first option followed by send to garmin and log visit!

 

HOpe it helps

 

But you can't generate a visual list of the caches you want to look for in a particular area since they've eliminated the sidebar that lists the caches numberically. UGGH. I used this feature ALL THE TIME!

Link to comment

I like the new map, but I also likee being able to print the old map and show the locations of the caches with numbers on the tags and the description on the side. Take a few minutes to use the new map and get used to it. Don't trash a new thing just because you haven't played with it enough. You can see more than 20 caches at the same time, you can filter out what you don't need, you can click on a cach and see if it has any trackable in it without opening the cache page, you can see a larger area. All of these things are good. The only thing i miss is printing the page with the caches numbered and the listing posted on the side. There is also a problem with loading the cache to the GPSr and having it show as a blue flag instead of a closed cache container - minor problem - I just go into the waypoint and change the icon. (This would be a pain thoug if you had downloaded a ton of caches). The description of the cache is also missing. Good job on the map though - just a few bugs to work out.

Link to comment

 

 

Ok, update time.

 

Most, if not all of the bugs with the Geocaching Google Maps should be fixed, so please let us know if you see anything wonky.

 

As for the hate hate hate comments, let me try to explain what's happening with the new maps. Basically, the third party software we use to serve the maps updated and forced us to update as well rather than implement a complicated workaround to keep the old maps. The result is the "new" Google maps you see now, containing the bare minimum of features. Our goal is to integrate all of the old features you loved into this new map as well as some cool new ones (e.g. view your caches along a route).

 

Let me repeat that: Over time we will return as many as possible of the cool features you enjoyed with the old map. I recognize that this has inconvenienced some of you and for that I'm really sorry.

 

Just wanted to bump this as all the hate vibes are giving me a headache <_<

Link to comment

Without adding anything productive to the discussion, I'd at least like to register my dislike of the new Google maps with an "UGH". Needs to be more than 15 miles; and really, I used the old ones to set up bookmark lists of strings of caches I might like to do when I'm out traveling... so I could see the map, see the caches, put two and two together and voila, convenient. This way doesn't really do anything helpful for me. Casting my vote for the "bring back the old way" too.

 

I agree with CTKayak that the bookmarking feature in the old version was necessary. It needs to work a little better then it did. I need to be able to create a bookmark list which I can then create a pocket query to send to GSAK. The problem with the old bookmarking system was that if you clicked on a cache to add it to the list and then, in the next view (after moving the map to find more caches nearby) you happen to click that same cache again it left the bookmark list. If you can. make it so that once you add a waypoint to the book mark list the icon turns blue immediately (or changes somehow). Also once you visit your bookmark list you can't go back to the map and add more waypoints. You have to start over by going back to a cache page and clicking on the geocaching map link, move the map to where you left off marking bookmarks, and select your bookmark list by it's unique name. I'm OK with change. Why wasn't this announced in your (LOBOT) Groundspeak weekly notification update-or did I miss your announcement? Meanwhile I will create a bookmark list by selecting my caches one by one...slowly and painstakingly until the maps are fixed. But please hurry. Life is too short to spend so much time just getting ready to cache!! Thanks

Edited by MamaBe
Link to comment

Without adding anything productive to the discussion, I'd at least like to register my dislike of the new Google maps with an "UGH". Needs to be more than 15 miles; and really, I used the old ones to set up bookmark lists of strings of caches I might like to do when I'm out traveling... so I could see the map, see the caches, put two and two together and voila, convenient. This way doesn't really do anything helpful for me. Casting my vote for the "bring back the old way" too.

 

I agree about the bookmark feature aslo. I use it as well when I create my routes. It is nice to be able to turn on a bookmark and see what caches are in the bookmark. This way I know which caches I still need to add oto the bookmark.

 

If you could make the pop up cache listing highlight the cache on the map when you mouse over the name, it would be great.

Link to comment

"Your search was larger than 15 miles. Please zoom in closer." = NOT COOL! I know this has been brought up numerous times during the testing phases but apparently has not been addressed. A variety of ideas on how to address the broader search area were suggested. I had my favorites but would accept basically any one of them as long as the search area is much larger than 15 miles!

 

The 15 miles is fine for dense urban areas but what about the rural areas where the cache density may be less than 1 for every 15 miles? I can reiterate suggestions if need be but I know they are out there...let's us them!

 

agreed

it's too much of a hassle to search over a large area with few caches.

Link to comment

"Your search was larger than 15 miles. Please zoom in closer." = NOT COOL! I know this has been brought up numerous times during the testing phases but apparently has not been addressed. A variety of ideas on how to address the broader search area were suggested. I had my favorites but would accept basically any one of them as long as the search area is much larger than 15 miles!

 

The 15 miles is fine for dense urban areas but what about the rural areas where the cache density may be less than 1 for every 15 miles? I can reiterate suggestions if need be but I know they are out there...let's us them!

 

agreed

it's too much of a hassle to search over a large area with few caches.

 

I like the new way better than the old, and I will tell you why: it is more honest. With the old way, you could view areas larger than 15 miles, but it was not really showing you all the caches on the map. As you expanded your view, the previously shown caches would be dropped off, and new ones would appear. With this new way, you are really seeing all the caches in that area, I think. And if the area is too small, just move the map around to a new center point.

Link to comment

Aloha all from Honolulu...

 

I too feel overly compelled to chime in on this topic as I really did get better results with the way the google maps were BEFORE the change. If this is the way it is and there is no way to go back to the old way, then I'm going to be very sad indeed. The features I liked most were the way I could drag the map around and if I wanted to quickly look at the cache listing, all I had to do was click on the baloon and the listing would be summarized at the top (without opening a pop-up to open yet another window).

 

PLEASE bring back the old way, even if you need to add another option to the mapping list:

 

For online maps...

Geocaching.com Maps

Geocaching.com Google Map (old school)

Geocaching.com Google Map (new school - advanced)

Google Maps

MapQuest

Microsoft MapPoint

Yahoo Maps

Rand McNally

Topozone

Terraserver

Tiger Census Maps

 

This seems to be the best solution to suit all, if programically feasible. However, personally the older style Google was far more useful than the new style for many of the reasons mentioned in this thread.

Link to comment

The new map in its present state is a horrible decision and really a step back.

Much more disadvantages than advantages:

No cachlisting on the side

No numbers assigned to the caches - so which cache in the listing is where on the screen

Pop-up window with cachelisting much too small

Size of the map - extra wide but too small

Maybe its fine for areas with high cache density - but what vice versa?

Did anyone test it with MS IE? Open the cachelisting and close it again and the map is block forever!

The changes are really frustrating - some minor advantages but huge disadvantages.

When you tried the update first some time ago I was glad you moved back the other day - you really should think about that again and improve the new page before going online.

 

A definite "Amen" to the above.

Link to comment
Basically, the third party software we use to serve the maps updated and forced us to update as well rather than implement a complicated workaround to keep the old maps. The result is the "new" Google maps you see now, containing the bare minimum of features. Our goal is to integrate all of the old features you loved into this new map as well as some cool new ones (e.g. view your caches along a route).

 

Ok, I'm not going to fall over the cliff following everyone else's dissatisfaction with the new system, but I am wondering something.

 

As an owner and manager of a couple of website communities myself, I am responsible for implementing and testing all of the second and third-party software that is used on the site. From the chat software to the basic software package that drives the galleries and the forums, it's all developed and programmed by others and installed by me—on my own schedule.

 

Which means that if I want to choose to use 3 year old vBulletin software and not "upgrade" to the newest version, I can if I want to. As long as the forums and everything else are working, I am not forced to make a change from what works, and my readership is comfortable with.

 

So I'm puzzled as to why you were "forced" to update this map software? And what seems to be from the outside as a very complicated fix to make these new maps serve correctly and have the features that users have become reliant on, looks to me more of an effort than the predicted "complicated workaround" to keep the old system functioning.

 

Call me confused, but I'm a designer—and inherently lazy—so I look for the easiest and simplest solution for all issues in front of me. It just seems to have created a LOT more issues to revamp everything completely than it would have been to adapt the old system to the new maps.

 

Just a guess, but the feedback on the forums seems to be 30 to 1 against the new maps. And while I know that people generally are abrasively resistant to change of ANY form, that ratio seems like a seriously losing number to me.

 

 

Just some feedback and wondering from the peanut gallery...

 

 

doug

Edited by upon3
Link to comment

"Your search was larger than 15 miles. Please zoom in closer." = NOT COOL! I know this has been brought up numerous times during the testing phases but apparently has not been addressed. A variety of ideas on how to address the broader search area were suggested. I had my favorites but would accept basically any one of them as long as the search area is much larger than 15 miles!

 

The 15 miles is fine for dense urban areas but what about the rural areas where the cache density may be less than 1 for every 15 miles? I can reiterate suggestions if need be but I know they are out there...let's us them!

 

agreed

it's too much of a hassle to search over a large area with few caches.

 

 

much better now.

i'm heading out to central america soon and was hoping to find a few caches out that way. it was way too hard searching on the 15 mile maps but works well now. just takes a little while to load.

no complaints.

 

tbs

Link to comment

:D The new google map search is not working well. Sometimes it takea ages till the caches are shown. At the moment I receive just the map without any caches showed. I do not understand why the working version was changed with a not working version.

I realy hope, that they will soon change back to the old google search map, or they bring it to work.

 

Sorry that I write with my lousy English in this forum, but this change has realy annoyed me.

Link to comment

NEARLY FUNCTIONAL - well done

 

I dont know what the numeric limit is on caches to be displayed, but instantly zooming out from central London les than 10 miles gets caught up in that one. The reason why this is an issue is a little bizarre: it seems that the downloaded zoomed out web page retains all the caches downloaded if one zooms back in. The effect of this is that if one zooms back in to 'see' the missing caches, some are not there because they were not in the 'zoomed out set'. A page refresh didnt work so the work around was to exit the map entirely and start the process again being slightly more contrained on the map scale one was dealing with. I can cope with that - methinks

 

One can zoom out more than 15 miles, and now it seems if the cache density is low, the caches will be displayed - GREAT.

 

A list of cache names on the map can now be toggled on and off - greatish - except that one has to move it around to not cover up caches on the map and it still doesnt relate the caches to their location. I can see you dont want to go back to a numerical reference, but being able to toggle on/off the GC nums on the map itself would be nice.

 

Generally its starting to bed down well.

Link to comment

The new maps are working a lot better now after some bugs have gotten worked out. But the one thing I can't get to happen again is the waypoint marks were showing up in the new maps and now there not. I kind of like that. Am I doing something wrong. Like click on some sort of box or something.

Link to comment

Neat, clever, smaller icons, lots of advantages - BUT

 

I am an old techie type person: in other words I print out this page and take it with me when I go to do a bunch of caches. Previously down the right I had all the names of the caches numerically cross referenced to where they were. This was an excellent aid to deciding what to do: even as we were doing them.

 

Now I have lost this facility: in other words my functionality has moved backwards. Just a simply 'toggle' button to 'see all cache names' would be great. Presumably the code for both displays exists, so this wouldn't be great shakes would it?

 

Best wishes - kewfriend

 

I agree. I liked having the caches identified numerically on the map and then listed but ame along the right navigation bar.

 

The current option for the cache listing does not corelate the list of cache names with the icons on the map so it is is not very practical - ots of cachs but no cahe names. Also, the cache listing window is not resizeable and uses a large font, meanig if you try to include it on a screen print it covers a lot of the map.

 

There are definate benefits to the new format in the number of caches displayed on the map area,but I think this was achieved at the expense of other practical funcions.

Link to comment

I am an old techie type person: in other words I print out this page and take it with me when I go to do a bunch of caches. Previously down the right I had all the names of the caches numerically cross referenced to where they were. This was an excellent aid to deciding what to do: even as we were doing them.

 

Now I have lost this facility: in other words my functionality has moved backwards. Just a simply 'toggle' button to 'see all cache names' would be great. Presumably the code for both displays exists, so this wouldn't be great shakes would it?

 

Best wishes - kewfriend

 

+1 I miss the listing of caches on the side that corresponded to a numbered point on the map!

Link to comment
:wub: On the old map page I would print it out and take it with me to see what order I wanted to do them. It would also list the name of the caches on the right side, with the #s showing where they are at. The new ones I have to # each one and print out to take with us. The new map seems to work better, but did like the old ones features better.
Link to comment

I'll throw my voice in too. I don't like the new format as much as I liked the older. Maybe it is possible to mix the two formats together. For instance, the "additional information" panel could be tabbed allowing us to select the information to be seen. A tab for "filtering" would show the panel like we see it now with the filtering options. Another tab for "names" would list the names and number the caches on the screen.

 

Also, the icons are much smaller on the map. The older icons were bigger and tended to colide more, but I would rather have the bigger icons still.

 

Bill

Link to comment

I appreciate improvements to any site and your geocaching site is excellent. However it would be helpful to have the ability to show the map with the caches names via a toggle button. That way the map can be printed either way. Also, I notice the hand will grab and move the map until I click on the cache list and then the ability to move the map freezes. I have to exit out of the page and come back for this ability to return.

 

 

 

It’s nice to have this mapping feature but if it is not functional then it detracts from your site.

 

Thanks!

Link to comment

Oh man, when I used to go to an event I could make a quick bookmark list and do a PQ on it. This is SOOOOO tedious. I do not know how I am going to get my list made in time for tomorrow. Really bad bad bad that the feature to show the names and add them to a bookmark list is gone

Link to comment

I'm not very happy with the new maps either. I've only been caching for less than a year. And, found the old map very helpfull with keeping all my printouts organized, since I still haven't figured out how to send info to my gps. The old map with the listing on the side that corisponded to the numbered caches on the page was great. Now, I have to make sure I am writing down everything. I know that sounds lazy for me to complain. But, the old map sure did save time. Also, it seems that when I move to a new location on the map, the caches don't automatically appear. I have to fiddle around with the zoom. And, even then, some that I know are in the area, still don't appear.

One more thing that I find frustraiting, is that when I print the page only have of the map prints out. Hmmm... annoying.

Well, I know feedback is always good. So, maybe Groundspeak will "hear the voices" of their loyal cachers.

Thanks Groundspeak!

Link to comment

Oh man, when I used to go to an event I could make a quick bookmark list and do a PQ on it. This is SOOOOO tedious. I do not know how I am going to get my list made in time for tomorrow. Really bad bad bad that the feature to show the names and add them to a bookmark list is gone

 

One work around would be to do a PQ centered on the event Put it in GSAK, then export it to MS Excel as a .CSV file. This is what I do when I want a list.

Link to comment

Oh man, when I used to go to an event I could make a quick bookmark list and do a PQ on it. This is SOOOOO tedious. I do not know how I am going to get my list made in time for tomorrow. Really bad bad bad that the feature to show the names and add them to a bookmark list is gone

 

One work around would be to do a PQ centered on the event Put it in GSAK, then export it to MS Excel as a .CSV file. This is what I do when I want a list.

 

Do you mean by the coordinates and then the radius you want? I already did it one by one using the "show cache listing" A PITA but done.And I use GSAK and Cachemate, so I import the PQ then export to cachemate and my palm.

Anyway I am off to get to the event, hope the powers that be are listening to us

Link to comment

I have to agree with the majority here that the new map is awful. As with anything, some people embrace change and some people prefer when things stay the same. When the old map came out I loved it, it added so many cool features. Now, I don't know what the heck they did to it. If some people like the new version that's fine...they can have it. But for those of us that prefer the old map...please give it back to us. That way everybody is happy.

Link to comment

However it would be helpful to have the ability to show the map with the caches names via a toggle button.

Boy I wish I was a moderator to edit and decrease the font size.

 

I also wish this will be possible in the near future but since it's not a bug, it's a feature request then they will take it into consideration for the future. They are trying their best to work out nasty bugs for now.

Link to comment

I'm trying to be patient through all the tweaking, but one thing I did want to mention.

 

I'd really like it, if in the end, there is a way to get the "big picture" point of view. Is it possible?

 

If I am planning a trip, I initially just want to see where the cache density is greatest. I may want to go through the northern half of a state instead of the southern half of the state if there are more caches there. If I zoom in on a county, it would be nice to see where all the caches are located in that county. If most of them are near a large city, by a major thoroughfare, well, I may decide to get off the interstate and drive 15 miles up the highway to that city, instead of staying only along the larger interstate. Perhaps that is where I'll spend the night (then I can grab a few caches before I head out again, or perhaps I'll spend the day there).

 

Yeah, caches along a route was the suggestion for that. But if I don't know that a city just 10 miles off my main route has 100 caches, I may never route through that city; my all caches within 5-miles of route I-10 won't catch that.

 

If there is a way to easily pan and zoom across the country to see cache density, I haven't found it yet. Having random caches wink on and off the map page doesn't do that, having 15 miles limits on the map area certainly won't do that.

Link to comment

I just feel the need to express my lack of enthusiasm for the changes. While I like the clarity of the maps and the cute little icons, not having them identified on the map unless you scroll over them, leaves you clueless when you print them out. It would be so heplful to hae the menu back sot hat you could link icon to cache name, even manually. In addition, once you open the list of caches from the right menu (List all Caches), you may no longer go back to the map and pull it to visit another area. You have to close down and return to the list and re-open the map. This makes the system so very unwieldy. If those feature could be fixed, that would be a step in the right direction. One doesn't really need all the high tech stuff to geocache, but technology is supposed to help mankind, not frustrate us.

 

Thanks

Link to comment

"I just feel the need to express my lack of enthusiasm for the changes. While I like the clarity of the maps and the cute little icons, not having them identified on the map unless you scroll over them, leaves you clueless when you print them out. It would be so heplful to hae the menu back sot hat you could link icon to cache name, even manually. In addition, once you open the list of caches from the right menu (List all Caches), you may no longer go back to the map and pull it to visit another area. You have to close down and return to the list and re-open the map. This makes the system so very unwieldy. If those feature could be fixed, that would be a step in the right direction. One doesn't really need all the high tech stuff to geocache, but technology is supposed to help mankind, not frustrate us. "

 

-ditto to the above ,

 

I open a cache detail and lose the map, not that i could see where the cache was anyway. sometimes the icons just stay on the top left corner, seems you have to know where they are first??? you check a cache listing close it and want to look further ,now the map doesn't pan!! arrrgggghhh.. and you have to start over.....-some of us have to be on slow computers, so now it is agonizing!!! Geocaching is my favorite hobby,but you have taken the joy out of the research!! IF it wasn't broken why did you fix it, I am sooooo dissappointed in this "upgrade" I don't even want to look at it.

Please please go back to the old maps, I found them workable and useful and fun!

Link to comment

Hi, I´m quite new to Geocaching and may not have used the Map functionality much, but I like the new layout more. There is one thing I miss, is to have additional filter for archived and disabled caches.

 

The cat who found a cache.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...