Update: Release Notes 1/12/10

[+DeRock & The Psychic Cacher]

If I wanted IE8 on my computer, I would have IE8 on my computer.

 

2001 called. It wants its browser back.

 

Deane

AKA: DeRock & the Psychic Cacher - Grattan MI

[+thebruce0]

Double hyphens are technically the comment delimiters – they need to be escaped somehow for that comment.

Yes. I know the basic syntax for an HTML comment. I also implied the double-dashes should be escaped, if only because Firefox (not chrome or IE) recognizes the pair of lone dashes as a comment sub-delimeter, however it won't uncomment when it reaches the actual comment end bracket, but rather keep going until it reaches the next lone double dash, then the next comment end tag.

 

eg, in this case (with a brace instead of html bracket)

 

(!-- comment --)

is typical

(!-- comment1 -- -- comment2 --)

is technically valid

here:

(!-- comment with--inside the text --)

SHOULD be valid, but Firefox ignores the end brace (and, apparently, the end "-- ") until the next comment containing "--" not attached to a brace.

 

This is the problem, spelled out:

Regular HTML (!-- comment with--inside the text --) standard HTML but hidden and still considered to be comment (!-- comment with--inside the text --) back to regular HTML.

Neither Chrome nor IE render the cache page in this way. Whether that means that Firefox is the only one interpreting the standards correctly, or it has a bug, I don't know. Regardless, the cache page isn't rendering correctly due to the text of a member username. It's a legitimate unexpected bug that exists due to a browser quirk, and something that can easily be fixed, by escaping any "--" within generated HTML with user-generated dynamic text.

 

Nobody I know that works in IT uses IE let alone version 6.

 

No professional web developer or web application programmer ignores a significant user base in their target market, especially for a website where the vast majority of users are NOT tech-literate. I would not trust your IT acquaintances to build a massive publicly usable website, let alone one people pay for, and ignore IE, just because your IT acquaintances "don't use IE".

Edited January 18, 2010 by thebruce0

[Skippermark]

Problem: sending email to another user removes all line breaks in the sent message. everything gets mashed together into a single paragraph, at least as it is shown by the site after it is sent.

This is only on the preview screen. The email itself is formatted correctly. It was acknowledged in the original thread I think, and they're looking into it.

[+obsidianspider]

Even Microsoft is telling users to upgrade from IE6.

 

http://blogs.zdnet.com/Bott/?p=1645

 

Heck, the German government is telling people to stop using IE all together.

 

http://www.sitepoint.com/blogs/2010/01/18/...-stop-using-ie/

 

I can understand that some people CAN'T upgrade due to IT policy at their job, but refusing to upgrade is just ignorant.

Edited January 18, 2010 by obsidianspider

[+thebruce0]

That I can agree on - encourage users to upgrade from IE6. I also detest it. I was referring to the statement about shunning IE altogether.

 

Heck, if I did my research and found that a significant number of my users were using IE6, YES, I would still do my best to support it in some manner. Even if it meant polling to find out how many of them are consciously choosing NOT to upgrade, and then base my minimum requirements on that number.

But simply saying "no IE because we don't use it and no one should" is ludicrous (yes I realize that's not what was said, but it was implied )

Edited January 18, 2010 by thebruce0

[+obsidianspider]

Completely agree with that.

 

Basic functionality should exist, regardless of what browser you're using.

 

That said, if a snazzy new feature comes along and it doesn't work because you're a curmudgeon and actively refuse to upgrade, you have no right to complain.

 

In the case of the IE6 Google maps no longer working, I'm not sure what the issue is, but it apparently worked before, so hopefully it's a quick fix once they get a chance to work on it.

[+Let's Look Over Thayer]

No professional web developer or web application programmer ignores a significant user base in their target market, especially for a website where the vast majority of users are NOT tech-literate. I would not trust your IT acquaintances to build a massive publicly usable website, let alone one people pay for, and ignore IE, just because your IT acquaintances "don't use IE".

I can understand that some people CAN'T upgrade due to IT policy at their job, but refusing to upgrade is just ignorant.

I, too, would love to see IE6 vanish from the Earth, but the fact remains that there a lot of people of who just can't be bothered to upgrade. (My mom, for example...) From their perspective, what they've got works just fine. The enemy of "better" is "good enough".

 

Those that provide a service via the web therefore have a decision to make. Continue to support the above constituency or stop supporting IE6 and abandon them. It's a basic business decision. For the web site that I maintain, the decision is to continue to support those people, and thus I continue to have deal with it.

Edited January 18, 2010 by Let's Look Over Thayer

[+t4e]

What boggles my mind is how some people want others to change. What if I were to tell you that you need to switch to Linux?

i already switched to linux on my laptop and i use FF

Well, good for you. And I suppose you made that switch because somebody told you that you had no choice?

 

you can think of it that way, it was Mr Gates and the ever demanding windohs that made me change

[knowschad]

All of this chatter about upgrading from IE6 is just wasting bandwidth. As has been pointed out here in other posts, some users are trying to access the site from work where IE6 is the only authorized version, in some cases because they have applications that will not work with other browsers.

 

If Groundspeak has intended to make IE6 obsolete, I have complete faith that they would have given plenty of notice.

[+niraD]

If you don't care about nitty-gritty details of HTML/XHTML comment syntax, then you can ignore this message.

 

Yes. I know the basic syntax for an HTML comment. I also implied the double-dashes should be escaped, if only because Firefox (not chrome or IE) recognizes the pair of lone dashes as a comment sub-delimeter, however it won't uncomment when it reaches the actual comment end bracket, but rather keep going until it reaches the next lone double dash, then the next comment end tag.

That sounds like FF is implementing correct HTML/SGML comment parsing. I wasn't aware that any browsers actually got it right, even in standards mode.

 

Technically, XHTML/XML comments are defined to

- start with <!--

- end with -->

- not contain -- anywhere inside

 

That's a good rule to follow for HTML/SGML comments too, because it's safe and matches what browsers actually do when they're trying to make sense of the junk HTML found on most web sites. But technically, HTML/SGML comment declarations are defined to

- start with <!

- end with >

- contain zero or more comments, which begin and end with --

 

Therefore, your example:

<!-- comment with--inside the text -->

is not a valid HTML/SGML comment, nor is it a valid XHTML/XML comment. In XHTML/XML, it violates the rule against including -- inside the comment. In HTML/SGML, it technically should be interpretted as:

<!				 [begin comment declaration]
--				 [begin comment]
comment with	   [comment text]
--				 [end comment]
inside the text	[invalid characters between comments]
--				 [begin comment]
>				  [comment text]

Note that there is no -- to end the comment, so technically the > and all the content that follows it is part of the comment.

 

But as I said, I wasn't aware that any browsers actually got this right, even in standards mode.

 

But your main point, that user-supplied content should not be able to break the structure of a page, is indeed correct.

[+obsidianspider]

But your main point, that user-supplied content should not be able to break the structure of a page, is indeed correct.

Indeed. If any bad code is put in the description it should be cleaned up. I can't believe I'm saying this, but MySpace does a great job of that. They don't allow certain code (mainly JavaScript and certain aspects of CSS) and when it's seen, it's simply removed from the submitted form.

[+t4e]

All of this chatter about upgrading from IE6 is just wasting bandwidth. As has been pointed out here in other posts, some users are trying to access the site from work where IE6 is the only authorized version, in some cases because they have applications that will not work with other browsers.

 

If Groundspeak has intended to make IE6 obsolete, I have complete faith that they would have given plenty of notice.

 

work imposing the use of IE6 i one thing, at home is different story

you can have/use numerous browsers at the same time, regardless of applications that are dependent on IE6

[ggmorton]

Something new I'm seeing on my profile page (excuse me, I meant to say Your Profile page...seems it's no longer mine, rather it's yours)...

 

What does "Your Profile (Close)" mean?

 

 

It's not a clickable link.

 

It's just plain text that I never remember seeing before the recent update (I can't call it an upgrade because I think it's actually a downgrade...yes, I'm one of those members who liked the way the site looked before the recent changes).

 

Will it go away after I finish posting my pending field notes?

 

Thanks,

fegan

 

P.S. bring back the old site or at least get rid of all the extra white space

 

The (Close) is in relation to your field notes. You can click the text "(Close)" and it will go away. The "Your Profile" is larger letters is something else and apparently close to the field notes. There use to be a picture of an X near the Close but I guess the image is not loading and the (Close) is the alternate text which is showing.

[+fegan]

Something new I'm seeing on my profile page (excuse me, I meant to say Your Profile page...seems it's no longer mine, rather it's yours)...

 

What does "Your Profile (Close)" mean?

 

 

It's not a clickable link.

 

It's just plain text that I never remember seeing before the recent update (I can't call it an upgrade because I think it's actually a downgrade...yes, I'm one of those members who liked the way the site looked before the recent changes).

 

Will it go away after I finish posting my pending field notes?

 

Thanks,

fegan

 

P.S. bring back the old site or at least get rid of all the extra white space

 

The (Close) is in relation to your field notes. You can click the text "(Close)" and it will go away. The "Your Profile" is larger letters is something else and apparently close to the field notes. There use to be a picture of an X near the Close but I guess the image is not loading and the (Close) is the alternate text which is showing.

 

Nice guess...but that doesn't seem to be the case.

 

I tried....(Close) was NOT clickable text.

 

So, I uploaded some more field notes...none of the text between "Your Profile" and "Your Inactive Caches" is there now.

 

I hate being a beta tester.

 

They need to bring the old site back until they're finished testing.

[+Artemis&Apollo]

XP and IE6 - what version do we need to be using?

 

IE6 is a difficult situation. It was released in 2001, which is ancient by computer and web standards, yet because it was what was installed by default on one of the more popular OS releases of all times, it is still in use by a significant portion of users. For that reason we still want to support it. However, the significance of its market share is quickly dwindling, so if you have the ability and opportunity, I do recommend that you try updating. Your web browsing on a whole will be much better for it.

 

To better understand some of the issues with IE6, you should read this informative blog entry at Mashable.com.

 

I seem to have appointed myself the spokesman of those Geocachers who want to Geocache rather than spend their time updating PCs because of a websites decision to make unannounced changes. I understand eliminating the outdated but feel that it should be done with some consideration to the users/customers.

 

I ask Groundspeak: What is the status of support for IE6?

See Groundspeak Ticket ID: UVP-544521.

[MnCo]

Until now I've only been mildly annoyed by the new changes to the GC site, mainly from the visual layout point of view, but now I am really pissed...

 

While editing a new cache and working with the waypoints I've just discovered that ALL the waypoints have reverted to the main coordinates, in other words, when you edit a waypoint it does not remember the coordinates for that waypoint and automatically substitutes the main coordinates entered in the cache edit page. Now I'm going to be forced to revisit the waypoints and get the coordinates again.

 

I don't know if this issue has been picked up by anyone else, but I've not seen anything about it in the fix lists and I would have thought this constituted a major flaw in the backend. It used to work fine, so it's clearly something which got broken in the update.

[MnCo]

I hate being a beta tester.

 

They need to bring the old site back until they're finished testing.

 

I'll second that.

[+MickEMT]

Until now I've only been mildly annoyed by the new changes to the GC site, mainly from the visual layout point of view, but now I am really pissed...

 

While editing a new cache and working with the waypoints I've just discovered that ALL the waypoints have reverted to the main coordinates, in other words, when you edit a waypoint it does not remember the coordinates for that waypoint and automatically substitutes the main coordinates entered in the cache edit page. Now I'm going to be forced to revisit the waypoints and get the coordinates again.

 

I don't know if this issue has been picked up by anyone else, but I've not seen anything about it in the fix lists and I would have thought this constituted a major flaw in the backend. It used to work fine, so it's clearly something which got broken in the update.

 

OK, now that's a flaw!

[Moun10Bike]

Until now I've only been mildly annoyed by the new changes to the GC site, mainly from the visual layout point of view, but now I am really pissed...

 

While editing a new cache and working with the waypoints I've just discovered that ALL the waypoints have reverted to the main coordinates, in other words, when you edit a waypoint it does not remember the coordinates for that waypoint and automatically substitutes the main coordinates entered in the cache edit page. Now I'm going to be forced to revisit the waypoints and get the coordinates again.

 

I don't know if this issue has been picked up by anyone else, but I've not seen anything about it in the fix lists and I would have thought this constituted a major flaw in the backend. It used to work fine, so it's clearly something which got broken in the update.

 

That is indeed a flaw and I apologize that you encountered it. We will get that corrected as soon as possible. Thank you for your patience.

[+Artemis&Apollo]

XP and IE6 - what version do we need to be using?

 

IE6 is a difficult situation. It was released in 2001, which is ancient by computer and web standards, yet because it was what was installed by default on one of the more popular OS releases of all times, it is still in use by a significant portion of users. For that reason we still want to support it. However, the significance of its market share is quickly dwindling, so if you have the ability and opportunity, I do recommend that you try updating. Your web browsing on a whole will be much better for it.

 

To better understand some of the issues with IE6, you should read this informative blog entry at Mashable.com.

 

I seem to have appointed myself the spokesman of those Geocachers who want to Geocache rather than spend their time updating PCs because of a websites decision to make unannounced changes. I understand eliminating the outdated but feel that it should be done with some consideration to the users/customers.

 

I ask Groundspeak: What is the status of support for IE6?

See Groundspeak Ticket ID: UVP-544521.

 

Re: IE6 Support

 

I’m not a developer but I am employed in a highly technical area – just not in the PC/WinTel Server world. I want to be helpful so I went out and found a few examples that Groundspeak might be able to use to allow IE6 users to continue to use Geocaching.com until Groundspeak can stage a migration away from the older browsers. Basically, it’s what other websites do.

 

I can’t know if these examples will serve Groundspeaks needs exactly but I can say that there are enough examples on the internet that Goundspeaks developers could figure out how to do it. The basic idea is that if it is IE6 execute the code that existed and worked before the 1/12 release else execute the code that existed after the 1/12 release. It’s really very basic. IE6 users may not get new functionality but they do not lose old functionality. I hope that Groundspeak finds this useful.

 

 

JavaScript function to determine if the current browser is IE6:

//CHECK FOR IE6

function is_ie6(){

return ((window.XMLHttpRequest == undefined) && (ActiveXObject != undefined));

 

 

In order to detect IE6 in javascript you can use the below code

<script>

var IE6 = false /*@cc_on || @_jscript_version < 5.7 @*/;

if(IE6)

{

// Implement browser specific activities for IE6

}

</script>

[+Frank Broughton]

IE6 was a joke on the world. IE8 still has a revealed unpatched security issue. Opera or FF is a much better option.

 

I refuse to upgrade to IE8, myself.

 

Your right to do as you please, some people smoke cigarettes knowing it kills them.

[+cerberus1]

"I seem to have appointed myself the spokesman of those Geocachers who want to Geocache rather than spend their time updating PCs because of a websites decision to make unannounced changes. I understand eliminating the outdated but feel that it should be done with some consideration to the users/customers.

 

I ask Groundspeak: What is the status of support for IE6?

See Groundspeak Ticket ID: UVP-544521."

 

I have to sorta agree with A&A...

 

Lucky for me my other half is an IS techie at a large company.

I'm not.

She leaves me alone on my own computer that until this situation occured, had XP IE6 (now IE7.)

She has all the bells and whistles on her computer and plays with an iphone.

I still have dial up on my computer and can use a cell phone .

I don't "pq" a zillion caches into my gpsr, but log each I CARE to do separately.

I have NO desire to Wherigo.

I carry a notebook (the paper kind) or a printout and have NO desire to go "paperless."

I AM a "premium member."

I'm sure there are a lot like me.

I believe that Groundspeak is losing contact with it's less tech-savvy members, who simply want to go OUTDOORS AND PLAY, rather than wasting anymore time at the computer than they have to.

 

This forums is made up of less than 1% of the caching community., yet TPTB seem to be making changes that only the folks HERE understand. Notice (and a brief tutorial maybe ?) would have been great for the rest of us.

Curious how many cachers like myself have yet to figure out they need to go to an "upgraded" browser just to get onsite.

- or are they still hangin'...

[+Artemis&Apollo]

IE6 was a joke on the world. IE8 still has a revealed unpatched security issue. Opera or FF is a much better option.

 

I refuse to upgrade to IE8, myself.

 

Your right to do as you please, some people smoke cigarettes knowing it kills them.

 

Frank, do you think you contribute anything to this forum? I don't!

[+Artemis&Apollo]

"I seem to have appointed myself the spokesman of those Geocachers who want to Geocache rather than spend their time updating PCs because of a websites decision to make unannounced changes. I understand eliminating the outdated but feel that it should be done with some consideration to the users/customers.

 

I ask Groundspeak: What is the status of support for IE6?

See Groundspeak Ticket ID: UVP-544521."

 

I have to sorta agree with A&A...

 

Lucky for me my other half is an IS techie at a large company.

I'm not.

She leaves me alone on my own computer that until this situation occured, had XP IE6 (now IE7.)

She has all the bells and whistles on her computer and plays with an iphone.

I still have dial up on my computer and can use a cell phone .

I don't "pq" a zillion caches into my gpsr, but log each I CARE to do separately.

I have NO desire to Wherigo.

I carry a notebook (the paper kind) or a printout and have NO desire to go "paperless."

I AM a "premium member."

I'm sure there are a lot like me.

I believe that Groundspeak is losing contact with it's less tech-savvy members, who simply want to go OUTDOORS AND PLAY, rather than wasting anymore time at the computer than they have to.

 

This forums is made up of less than 1% of the caching community., yet TPTB seem to be making changes that only the folks HERE understand. Notice (and a brief tutorial maybe ?) would have been great for the rest of us.

Curious how many cachers like myself have yet to figure out they need to go to an "upgraded" browser just to get onsite.

- or are they still hangin'...

 

Here, here! I am not a forum guy and would not be here if it were not for the terrible release upgrade that goundspeak did on 1/12. Cerberus1 is very right. The forum community and the geocahing communit are not the same. Groundspeak, unfortunately, seems to feel that the forum community reflects their customer base when they are such a tiny fraction of the Groundspeak customer base. I'm not sure how they can possibly believe that but, apparently, they do.

[jholly]

Here, here! I am not a forum guy and would not be here if it were not for the terrible release upgrade that goundspeak did on 1/12. Cerberus1 is very right. The forum community and the geocahing communit are not the same. Groundspeak, unfortunately, seems to feel that the forum community reflects their customer base when they are such a tiny fraction of the Groundspeak customer base. I'm not sure how they can possibly believe that but, apparently, they do.

 

Between emails and the forums, how else is GS suppose to get there customer feedback?

[+Artemis&Apollo]

Ok, I’m out of this forum. I never was a forum guy anyway and it is clear that this tread is not about communicating with Groundspeak. They closed that thread when they decided to commit to their 1/12 release and this thread is all about US coping with the changes that THEY made. What was THEIR problem is now OUR problem. If you are interested in getting your point across to Groundspeak this is not the place to do it. They are not listening.

 

If you have serious concerns you might want to contact Groundspeak directly. I did and I got an official problem ticket opened. We will find out what that is worth going forward. I used the General Inquiries email address.

 

General Inquiries

contact@Groundspeak.com

 

(one of the email addresses was removed by moderator as it is not appropriate for any of these issues)

Edited January 19, 2010 by mtn-man

[jholly]

If you are interested in getting your point across to Groundspeak this is not the place to do it. They are not listening.

 

not true.

[+Frank Broughton]

IE6 was a joke on the world. IE8 still has a revealed unpatched security issue. Opera or FF is a much better option.

 

I refuse to upgrade to IE8, myself.

 

Your right to do as you please, some people smoke cigarettes knowing it kills them.

 

Frank, do you think you contribute anything to this forum? I don't!

 

Sorry if logic is not a contribution. There is NO EXCUSE for ANYONE to use IE6 in 2010, sorry that is a plain old fact. If your work is using it..... spare me, what are people accessing gc.com at work for?

 

IE 8 is still a security risk according to Secunia: http://secunia.com/advisories/product/21625/

 

Let alone 6: http://secunia.com/advisories/product/11/ of which 17% of 177 vulnerabilities remain unpatched. Help yerself the Russians will love ya - "pay $20 to remove the malware" haha

 

Sorry pal, I simply am contributing... I cannot make people think though.

[MnCo]

... it is clear that this tread is not about communicating with Groundspeak. They closed that thread when they decided to commit to their 1/12 release and this thread is all about US coping with the changes that THEY made. What was THEIR problem is now OUR problem. If you are interested in getting your point across to Groundspeak this is not the place to do it. They are not listening.

 

I would strongly disagree. If you look at my posting a little further up this page about the waypoint issue, you will see there is an acknowledgement of the issue within 20min.

 

With regard this whole IE6/IE8 and non tech babble. I would again have to disagree with some comments made here. If I look at my local caching community, a diverse bunch from all walks of life, that I've met through events and am happy to now call friends, can be used as an average cross sections of cachers, then I would have to say that the majority are fairly tech savy.

 

As to IE... it's common practise for corporates to lock down things like browsers... but then again they do have additional levels of security and firewalls in place. For those not in a corporate environment... why on earth do you have windows updates turned off ?!? I'm assuming it must be turned off because otherwise you would have all the updates, including IE8, so there shouldn't be any techie stuff.

 

That said I'm in no way condoning the related issues with GC. I believe that browser and cross platform compatibility should be at the top of the developers brief in big, bold, underlined, bright red text for any website, let alone one with as large international user base as GC has. Not to mention fully beta testing EVERYTHING before going live. Thats basic development 101.

[+bittsen]

Sorry if logic is not a contribution. There is NO EXCUSE for ANYONE to use IE6¹ in 2010, sorry that is a plain old fact. If your work is using it..... spare me, what are people accessing gc.com at work for?²

 

¹ -I have already said WHY I am still using IE6. It's important as well.

 

² -None of your business where and why people are accessing GC.com

[nobleb]

I'm not sure if this is a release problem but I don't have any Field Notes before the New Years Day after Jesus was born! Could you fix the 'Ignore logs before 1/1/0001 6:00:00 AM' problem? I don't want to upload all my field notes from my Delorme evrytime I upload to the site!

Thanks

 

Upload Your Field Notes File

By default, the site will not upload Field Notes contained in your file before 1/1/0001 6:00:00 AM to reduce accidental duplicate logs. Uncheck the option below to include all Field Notes.

 

Ignore logs before 1/1/0001 6:00:00 AM

 

Just upload a new set of field notes, next time the date/time should be for the last log in the uploaded field notes.

No it does not change! It always says Ignore logs before 1/1/0001 6:00:00 AM after I have browsed to my field notes file to upload!

[+Dgwphotos]

IE6 was a joke on the world. IE8 still has a revealed unpatched security issue. Opera or FF is a much better option.

 

I refuse to upgrade to IE8, myself.

 

Your right to do as you please, some people smoke cigarettes knowing it kills them.

 

Frank, do you think you contribute anything to this forum? I don't!

 

Sorry if logic is not a contribution. There is NO EXCUSE for ANYONE to use IE6 in 2010, sorry that is a plain old fact. If your work is using it..... spare me, what are people accessing gc.com at work for?

 

IE 8 is still a security risk according to Secunia: http://secunia.com/advisories/product/21625/

 

Let alone 6: http://secunia.com/advisories/product/11/ of which 17% of 177 vulnerabilities remain unpatched. Help yerself the Russians will love ya - "pay $20 to remove the malware" haha

 

Sorry pal, I simply am contributing... I cannot make people think though.

 

Apparently, you misunderstood my comment. I'm using IE7, not IE6. My previous job was as an Computer Tech assistant for a school district, and my boss chose not to install IE8 on district computers because she had not heard good things, so I chose then not to upgrade to IE8 myself.

[jholly]

Sorry if logic is not a contribution. There is NO EXCUSE for ANYONE to use IE6¹ in 2010, sorry that is a plain old fact. If your work is using it..... spare me, what are people accessing gc.com at work for?²

 

¹ -I have already said WHY I am still using IE6. It's important as well.

 

² -None of your business where and why people are accessing GC.com

 

1. You have a valid reason to use IE6. You also said you have other computers running a more recent browser.

2. Give me a break. Your asking GS to maintain IE6 just so folks can access GS at work? Most employers would take a dim view of messing with GS at work. And just because corporate IT departments wish to remain in the stone age of computing does not mean that GS should be bound by those decisions. The number of IE6 users is dwindling daily, maybe the support for IE6 should also dwindle.

[+bittsen]

Sorry if logic is not a contribution. There is NO EXCUSE for ANYONE to use IE6¹ in 2010, sorry that is a plain old fact. If your work is using it..... spare me, what are people accessing gc.com at work for?²

 

¹ -I have already said WHY I am still using IE6. It's important as well.

 

² -None of your business where and why people are accessing GC.com

 

1. You have a valid reason to use IE6. You also said you have other computers running a more recent browser.

2. Give me a break. Your asking GS to maintain IE6 just so folks can access GS at work? Most employers would take a dim view of messing with GS at work. And just because corporate IT departments wish to remain in the stone age of computing does not mean that GS should be bound by those decisions. The number of IE6 users is dwindling daily, maybe the support for IE6 should also dwindle.

 

OK, lets spin this from a different angle.

 

Let's pretend I ONLY have ONE computer and it runs IE6 because of my legacy program.

 

NOW, I signed up for a premium account with Geocaching.com and paid my $30. Now, they say I'm out of luck because the website, and all the caches I have placed, aren't going to show on the equipment I used to start my account and I have to upgrade my equipment if I want to keep playing.

 

Bad business idea there.

 

Nuff said.

[+Chrysalides]

Another bug, not sure if it has been reported. I don't recall seeing, but as another forum user can point out, my speed reading leaves much to be desired.

 

In Manage Bookmarks, if I click on a bookmark with at least one entry, the blue box on upper right ("Bookmark it!") shows up. However, if I click on an empty bookmark, it's missing, even though it says "Bookmarks can be added on the page for the listing or on this page using the waypoint name."

[+Jumpin' Jack Cache]

Sorry if logic is not a contribution. There is NO EXCUSE for ANYONE to use IE6¹ in 2010, sorry that is a plain old fact. If your work is using it..... spare me, what are people accessing gc.com at work for?²

 

¹ -I have already said WHY I am still using IE6. It's important as well.

 

² -None of your business where and why people are accessing GC.com

 

1. You have a valid reason to use IE6. You also said you have other computers running a more recent browser.

2. Give me a break. Your asking GS to maintain IE6 just so folks can access GS at work? Most employers would take a dim view of messing with GS at work. And just because corporate IT departments wish to remain in the stone age of computing does not mean that GS should be bound by those decisions. The number of IE6 users is dwindling daily, maybe the support for IE6 should also dwindle.

 

OK, lets spin this from a different angle.

 

Let's pretend I ONLY have ONE computer and it runs IE6 because of my legacy program.

 

NOW, I signed up for a premium account with Geocaching.com and paid my $30. Now, they say I'm out of luck because the website, and all the caches I have placed, aren't going to show on the equipment I used to start my account and I have to upgrade my equipment if I want to keep playing.

 

Bad business idea there.

 

Nuff said.

 

If you're knowledgeable enough to realize that you need IE6 for that one program, you are probably knowledgeable enough to know how run another browser in addition to IE6, now aren't you? If your computer can't handle both browsers, whatever the other might be, your web experience is likely not very pleasant anyway these days.

 

Not defending the changes but your logic is faulty for someone who "operates only on logic", I smell some emotion in there (however feigned)

 

edit to change . to ?

Edited January 19, 2010 by Jumpin' Jack Cache

[+bittsen]

If you're knowledgeable enough to realize that you need IE6 for that one program, you are probably knowledgeable enough to know how run another browser in addition to IE6, now aren't you. If your computer can't handle both browsers, whatever the other might be, your web experience is likely not very pleasant anyway these days.

 

Not defending the changes but your logic is faulty for someone who "operates only on logic", I smell some emotion in there (however feigned)

 

The logic is, asking customers to change their hardware/software (or even their bathroom habits) in order to continue to do business with them, is bad business.

 

My scenario, though filled with an emotional tone for effect, was still based in logic.

 

[+Jumpin' Jack Cache]

If you're knowledgeable enough to realize that you need IE6 for that one program, you are probably knowledgeable enough to know how run another browser in addition to IE6, now aren't you. If your computer can't handle both browsers, whatever the other might be, your web experience is likely not very pleasant anyway these days.

 

Not defending the changes but your logic is faulty for someone who "operates only on logic", I smell some emotion in there (however feigned)

 

The logic is, asking customers to change their hardware/software (or even their bathroom habits) in order to continue to do business with them, is bad business.

 

My scenario, though filled with an emotional tone for effect, was still based in logic BS

 

Fixed it for ya.

Devil's advocate is one thing, lack of knowledge is another, your statement was something else considering your status as Uber genius Volume XXVII. (And I'm gonna miss the strike tag, but that's life.)

[+WRASTRO]

Sorry if logic is not a contribution. There is NO EXCUSE for ANYONE to use IE6¹ in 2010, sorry that is a plain old fact. If your work is using it..... spare me, what are people accessing gc.com at work for?²

 

¹ -I have already said WHY I am still using IE6. It's important as well.

 

² -None of your business where and why people are accessing GC.com

 

1. You have a valid reason to use IE6. You also said you have other computers running a more recent browser.

2. Give me a break. Your asking GS to maintain IE6 just so folks can access GS at work? Most employers would take a dim view of messing with GS at work. And just because corporate IT departments wish to remain in the stone age of computing does not mean that GS should be bound by those decisions. The number of IE6 users is dwindling daily, maybe the support for IE6 should also dwindle.

 

OK, lets spin this from a different angle.

 

Let's pretend I ONLY have ONE computer and it runs IE6 because of my legacy program.

 

NOW, I signed up for a premium account with Geocaching.com and paid my $30. Now, they say I'm out of luck because the website, and all the caches I have placed, aren't going to show on the equipment I used to start my account and I have to upgrade my equipment if I want to keep playing.

 

Bad business idea there.

 

Nuff said.

 

If you're knowledgeable enough to realize that you need IE6 for that one program, you are probably knowledgeable enough to know how run another browser in addition to IE6, now aren't you? If your computer can't handle both browsers, whatever the other might be, your web experience is likely not very pleasant anyway these days.

 

Not defending the changes but your logic is faulty for someone who "operates only on logic", I smell some emotion in there (however feigned)

 

edit to change . to ?

In the software universe there comes a point where each developer/publisher must make the hard choice to stop supporting a particular version of a particular program. It would appear that GS has made the decision to stop supporting IE6 after neary 10 years. I am amazed that anyone can find fault with this. Do the folks who think that GS should continue to support IE6 believe they should also continue to support programs that only run on WIN95 and WIN 98, or Millenium?

 

I have no doubts that the folks at GS have looked at the data and made a decision based on economics. If you have a special need that is your issue, not Groundspeaks. I am certain there are a decreasingly few users who are affected by this. Those users are far behind the curve and quickly become irrelevant from a business perspective.

 

Bittsen: you may believe that your position is one of logic, but to me it is one of emotion. As one who is informed on current technologies you should clearly understand that companies, programs and users must evolve. The players in the consumer market place for software require that we evolve. You can choose not to evolve. You can not demand that other software publishers follow suit.

[+bittsen]

Bittsen: you may believe that your position is one of logic, but to me it is one of emotion. As one who is informed on current technologies you should clearly understand that companies, programs and users must evolve. The players in the consumer market place for software require that we evolve. You can choose not to evolve. You can not demand that other software publishers follow suit.

My position is based on experience with customers. I admit that customers are usually emotional, but that's as far as it goes.

[+WRASTRO]

Bittsen: you may believe that your position is one of logic, but to me it is one of emotion. As one who is informed on current technologies you should clearly understand that companies, programs and users must evolve. The players in the consumer market place for software require that we evolve. You can choose not to evolve. You can not demand that other software publishers follow suit.

My position is based on experience with customers. I admit that customers are usually emotional, but that's as far as it goes.

Yep, and if you have to deal with those customers then you need to be prepared to deal with the complaints about why 10 year old technology can't support the current versions of software required to operate the business.

[+Jumpin' Jack Cache]

Bittsen: you may believe that your position is one of logic, but to me it is one of emotion. As one who is informed on current technologies you should clearly understand that companies, programs and users must evolve. The players in the consumer market place for software require that we evolve. You can choose not to evolve. You can not demand that other software publishers follow suit.

My position is based on experience with customers. I admit that customers are usually emotional, but that's as far as it goes.

 

Sometimes you have to tell customers that it's time to bite the bullet. They might not like it but that's the way it is, however much they dislike it. It's better in the end, kinda like getting a bad tooth pulled.

 

I'm not sure that GS has done that yet, at least not intentionally (which is a whole 'nother question).

 

Your facetious (I hope) arguments serve nobody except yourself.

[MnCo]

.... I am certain there are a decreasingly few users who are affected by this. Those users are far behind the curve and quickly become irrelevant from a business perspective.

 

Bittsen: you may believe that your position is one of logic, but to me it is one of emotion. As one who is informed on current technologies you should clearly understand that companies, programs and users must evolve. The players in the consumer market place for software require that we evolve. You can choose not to evolve. You can not demand that other software publishers follow suit.

 

While I don't entirely disagree with your standpoint, it is somewhat perched on the top of a slippery slope in this particular instance, because a similar argument might be raised about the ridicules changes to the design and layout, which don't look tooooo bad if you happen to have a high resolution, wide screen monitor.

 

Now, while these are becoming more common or dare I say mainstream, it makes little difference to all those people out there with 17" monitors, non wide screen laptops or even brand new notebooks. I trust you would not propose we all have to go out and buy new hardware to suit the GC website design

[+MuS162]

I'm not sure if this issue has already been mentioned, but: it is not state of the art to use HTML entities instead of specifying the encoding of an HTML page! Existing pages are messed up after editing and saving them. Especially the limitation to 500 characters in the short description is a real problem.

 

As the german "umlaut" ü used only one char in the original version of the GC site it is now translated into ü which needs five characters more! Short descriptions that already reached the limit of 500 characters are truncated automatically now after saving the listing. So it is not possible to edit existing cache listings without loosing information.

 

This issue should really be fixed in the next release!

 

Best regards

M+S

Edited January 19, 2010 by MuS162

[Badooleoo]

As I take my EeePC with mobile internet with me and log at GZ I have found that the new layout with all the white space is too much.

 

The white space takes up too much room and with a small screen it does not help.

 

I will be looking around for a greasemonkey script to fix the issue untill it is properly fixed.

 

I'm considering not renewing my geocahing.com subscription.

[+Harry the furry squid]

 

I can understand that some people CAN'T upgrade due to IT policy at their job

 

Yes, quite!

 

Can't get the cache pages to load at all, IE just stops responding. Using windows XP and IE6, don't have any choice in the matter as this is the corporate standard build and attempting to make unauthorised changes is something that you can, potentially, get the sack for.

 

(It's probably worth pointing out that when you have to roll out a change across tens of thousands of PCs in umpteen offices even something like a browser upgrade starts turning into a major project in its own right.)

[+MickEMT]

As I take my EeePC with mobile internet with me and log at GZ I have found that the new layout with all the white space is too much.

 

The white space takes up too much room and with a small screen it does not help.

 

I will be looking around for a greasemonkey script to fix the issue untill it is properly fixed.

 

I'm considering not renewing my geocahing.com subscription.

 

Opinion Nate has stated that they will be addressing that issue.

[+MickEMT]

I'm not sure if this is a release problem but I don't have any Field Notes before the New Years Day after Jesus was born! Could you fix the 'Ignore logs before 1/1/0001 6:00:00 AM' problem? I don't want to upload all my field notes from my Delorme evrytime I upload to the site!

Thanks

 

Upload Your Field Notes File

By default, the site will not upload Field Notes contained in your file before 1/1/0001 6:00:00 AM to reduce accidental duplicate logs. Uncheck the option below to include all Field Notes.

 

Ignore logs before 1/1/0001 6:00:00 AM

 

Just upload a new set of field notes, next time the date/time should be for the last log in the uploaded field notes.

No it does not change! It always says Ignore logs before 1/1/0001 6:00:00 AM after I have browsed to my field notes file to upload!

 

Ok that's a bug, and I'll post it in the appropriate thread.

[+MickEMT]

Never mind, this IS the appropriate thread. My bad.........

I know Opinion Nate does watch the thread, I'm sure he or one of the other Lackeys will see this and check the issue.

Silly question, but what browser are you using, and have you tried clearing your cache (on the browser) and reloading the page?

[+mtn-man]

Never mind, this IS the appropriate thread. My bad.........

Not your bad at all. The people bickering in this topic need to get out of this topic. Post factual information regarding bugs or don't post at all please. Take the bickering to email or private messages. Keeping this to the facts will help the developers and the general community as they read this topic to see if their problem has been reported.