+2outforfun Posted February 26, 2010 Share Posted February 26, 2010 I searched and found no recent topics on this so I have started a new one I created a new PQ yesterday and when it was imported with cach register to my pn-40 it showed up as Push pins. All the Geo caches from a different earlier PQ still show correctly. Has anyone else experienced this issue recently and if so have you found a solution? Quote Link to comment
+dakboy Posted February 26, 2010 Share Posted February 26, 2010 Make sure in your account preferences on gc.com that you've selected GPX version 1.0, not 1.0.1. Quote Link to comment
+2outforfun Posted February 26, 2010 Author Share Posted February 26, 2010 GPX version 1.0 is selected Quote Link to comment
+2outforfun Posted February 26, 2010 Author Share Posted February 26, 2010 I have been following a topic in the delorme forums that seems related See below Re: CR PQ unavailable by Robert Shelley » Fri Feb 26, 2010 4:18 pm Well, it looks like you are on to something I just reran 4 PQs that I hadn't run since early January. CR claims they are all a few minutes old now, but they are unavailable. When selecting a new unavailable PQ the Sync button remains gray, so the Sync function doesn't do anything. Three PQs that I ran last week are still available and can be Sync'd. I just took a look at the GPX files that came zipped in the emails. The January PQ starts out with: Code: Select all <gpx xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" version="1.0" creator="Groundspeak Pocket Query" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.topografix.com/GPX/1/0 http://www.topografix.com/GPX/1/0/gpx.xsd http://www.Groundspeak.com/cache/1/0 http://www.Groundspeak.com/cache/1/0/cache.xsd" xmlns="http://www.topografix.com/GPX/1/0"> The new PQ from today (2/26/'10) starts out with: Code: Select all <gpx xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xmlns:xsd="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema" version="1.0" creator="Groundspeak Pocket Query" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.topografix.com/GPX/1/0 http://www.topografix.com/GPX/1/0/gpx.xsd http://www.Groundspeak.com/cache/1/0/1 http://www.Groundspeak.com/cache/1/0/1/cache.xsd" xmlns="http://www.topografix.com/GPX/1/0"> Note that they both have version="1.0" in the first line in accordance with my GC.com preferences. But on the third line the old PQ has .../cache/1/0, whereas the new PQ has .../cache/1/0/1 (twice on that line). The last time GC.com put out PQs like that, it broke CR and a few other things. A workaround used the last time was to extract the zip files, then use a text editor to do a global replace of all occurrences of /1/0/1 with /1/0 (there are a lot of them). Then you can import the edited up GPX files into CR. Just remember to select the cache GPX and its associated child waypoint GPX as a pair when you do each import. I wonder if DeLorme tech support knows about this yet Bob... Team Serious Topo 2—8, XMap 5—7, PN: 20, 40SE Robert Shelley Trailmaster Posts: 1205 Joined: Sun Jan 21, 2007 3:46 am Location: San Diego I searched and found no recent topics on this so I have started a new one I created a new PQ yesterday and when it was imported with cach register to my pn-40 it showed up as Push pins. All the Geo caches from a different earlier PQ still show correctly. Has anyone else experienced this issue recently and if so have you found a solution? Quote Link to comment
+PeoriaBill Posted February 26, 2010 Share Posted February 26, 2010 This is a known problem. Download macro from GSAK: DelormeGpxFix.gsk. Run this macro for the file that you will be downloading to PN-40. Best Regards, Peoria Bill :>) Quote Link to comment
+2outforfun Posted February 26, 2010 Author Share Posted February 26, 2010 This was not a problem last weekend. My PQ files imported fine thru cache register. I have not yet started to use GSAK. I guess I will have to add another couple of steps to this mess now. This is a known problem. Download macro from GSAK: DelormeGpxFix.gsk. Run this macro for the file that you will be downloading to PN-40. Best Regards, Peoria Bill :>) Quote Link to comment
+Team CowboyPapa Posted February 26, 2010 Share Posted February 26, 2010 You might take a look at this thread: http://forum.delorme.com/viewtopic.php?f=141&t=23630 and try removing corruption, if any, with this: http://forum.delorme.com/viewtopic.php?p=146842#p146842 Quote Link to comment
+Team CowboyPapa Posted February 27, 2010 Share Posted February 27, 2010 Update to the above: My PQs of today have been affected. I have added my fixes to the post to which I link above. Quote Link to comment
+Pax42 Posted February 27, 2010 Share Posted February 27, 2010 I think there may have been some tinkering going on. Some folks whos' earlier PQs showed evidence of 1.0.1 have now run PQs that are back to 1.0. Things may be working now. I know PQs I ran in the last couple hours are working fine. Quote Link to comment
+2outforfun Posted February 27, 2010 Author Share Posted February 27, 2010 Being a fairly new premium member who paid for the services provided by Geocaching.com this incident prompts me to ask the question. Does GC acknowledge these types of issues officially anywhere or is the only source of information on such items come from the dedicated user comunity? I think there may have been some tinkering going on. Some folks whos' earlier PQs showed evidence of 1.0.1 have now run PQs that are back to 1.0. Things may be working now. I know PQs I ran in the last couple hours are working fine. Quote Link to comment
+rbell01824 Posted February 27, 2010 Share Posted February 27, 2010 As of today 17:12 EST this is still an issue. There is a partial fix using Notepad to Replace all occurrences of "/1/0/1" with "/1/0" in the GPX files and then use CR to send the edited GPX file to PN-XX. However, this works only to a point. Import of the subsequent file shows the cache OK but does NOT properly show the cache name! It is not clear if the associated waypoints are imported. This appears to be an issue of lack of communication between Delorme and GC. Does anyone have any insight if there is a fix in the works by one or both? Quote Link to comment
+Pax42 Posted February 28, 2010 Share Posted February 28, 2010 It now appears that the "tinkering" affected the GPX setting in our personal accounts. Even though the setting may have said you were set to GPX 1.0 format, the site was still sending GPX 1.0.1 format. It seems that if you go to your account settings and change the preference back and forth between 1.0 and 1.0.1 three or four times (saving each time) and then finally leave it set and saved to 1.0, things may start working again. Of course you'll have to resend your PQs after the final save to 1.0. This is working for a number of people. A case of "What you see isn't neccessarily what you get". Quote Link to comment
+Pax42 Posted February 28, 2010 Share Posted February 28, 2010 Being a fairly new premium member who paid for the services provided by Geocaching.com this incident prompts me to ask the question. Does GC acknowledge these types of issues officially anywhere or is the only source of information on such items come from the dedicated user comunity? If you go to the Geocaching.com Website forum there is a thread after each site update called "Release Notes" where you can post issues related to the latest updates. The Groundspeak folks monitor the thread and do their best to respond. Quote Link to comment
+dakboy Posted February 28, 2010 Share Posted February 28, 2010 Here's a head-scratcher. I have not had the problem referenced. At all. I have not used GSAK to reprocess the PQ files. I have not "tinkered" with my account settings. For the past 3 days, my PQs have been loading to my PN-40 via CR perfectly fine. It was mentioned in the Web Site forum that one of the 2 PQ generators (2 servers, one handles the odd-numbered PQs, the other handles the evens) was having trouble after the last site maintenance. Is it possible that one of them was causing this issue and the other was not? Nevermind - I just checked my last 3 PQs run and 2 were odd, one was even. Quote Link to comment
+Team CowboyPapa Posted February 28, 2010 Share Posted February 28, 2010 As of today 17:12 EST this is still an issue. There is a partial fix using Notepad to Replace all occurrences of "/1/0/1" with "/1/0" in the GPX files and then use CR to send the edited GPX file to PN-XX. However, this works only to a point. Import of the subsequent file shows the cache OK but does NOT properly show the cache name! I was getting the cache IDs, GCXXXX, instead of the cache names as previously. However, I do not use CR to send PQ results to my PN-XX. I have installed FW 2.7 on my PN. I perform the character string subsitution noted above. I then use Topo USA 8.0 to Export the modified GPX files to the SD card in my PN. In that fashion, I again have caches identified with their names. Quote Link to comment
+W. B. Taylor Posted March 4, 2010 Share Posted March 4, 2010 I could never get Cache Register to work in any fashion. I was really disappointed. Quote Link to comment
+Pax42 Posted March 4, 2010 Share Posted March 4, 2010 (edited) I could never get Cache Register to work in any fashion. I was really disappointed. Must be that time of the month again. Here you are taking your regularly scheduled shot in multiple threads at Delorme. You, yourself, said in another thread it was time to move on but you just can't seem to follow your own advice. We all get it....really! You had problems with your PN-40 and you were upset about it but rather than listen to any suggestions or even Delorme's offers to help, you just wanted to vent. Edited March 4, 2010 by Pax42 Quote Link to comment
+Team CowboyPapa Posted March 4, 2010 Share Posted March 4, 2010 I could never get Cache Register to work in any fashion. I was really disappointed. 99% of the other user's had no trouble whatsoever, must be the fault of CR. I sure wish you better luck with this product, as a similar result, though no fault of your ineptitude, could be quite costly. Quote Link to comment
+The Yinnies Posted March 5, 2010 Share Posted March 5, 2010 (edited) It now appears that the "tinkering" affected the GPX setting in our personal accounts. Even though the setting may have said you were set to GPX 1.0 format, the site was still sending GPX 1.0.1 format. It seems that if you go to your account settings and change the preference back and forth between 1.0 and 1.0.1 three or four times (saving each time) and then finally leave it set and saved to 1.0, things may start working again. Of course you'll have to resend your PQs after the final save to 1.0. This is working for a number of people. A case of "What you see isn't neccessarily what you get". I ran a PQ last night and loaded my PN-40. It only shows the cache name and no description. Now I was trying something today and it sends the caches as waypoints. What did I do wrong. I have never had a problem with CR before. Thanks Edited March 5, 2010 by The Yinnie's Quote Link to comment
+Team CowboyPapa Posted March 6, 2010 Share Posted March 6, 2010 (edited) You have probably done nothing wrong. This has happened to many others through no fault of their own. I might suggest two things things. 1. To correct the current PQ: 1) unzip the GPX files that you received via email 2) open the cache file (the one does not end with -wpts.gpx) in a text editor (notepad will do) 2a) do Edit -> Replace... 2b) Find what: /1/0/1 2c) Replace with: /1/0 2d) Click on Replace All 2e) When it is finished, do a Save As using a different file name (e.g., 3549687.gpx => PQ3549687.gpx) 3) Rename the associated child waypoint file so that it also starts with the same new name (e.g., 3549687-wpts.gpx => PQ3549687-wpts.gpx) 4) In CR, do Import Pocket Query 4a) Select both modified files (use Ctrl or Shift to select both at the same time) 4b) Click Open Repeat the above for each PQ. 2. To prevent this with future PQs: 1- go to GC.com and click on YOUR PROFILE 2- then click on Your Account Details 3- scroll to the bottom of that page to Your Preferences 4- if it is set to 1.0.1, skip to step 10 5- click on change 6- find GPX Version Preference and change it to 1.0.1 7- click on Save Changes 8- click on change again 9- if the GPX Version Preference setting now says 1.0, go back to step 6 (yes really) 10- find GPX Version Preference and change it to 1.0 11- click on Save Changes 12- re-run the PQs that have the version problem, the new PQs should be OK (you may need to do this several times for it to take) Edited March 6, 2010 by Team CowboyPapa Quote Link to comment
+Team CowboyPapa Posted March 6, 2010 Share Posted March 6, 2010 (edited) I ran a PQ last night and loaded my PN-40. It only shows the cache name and no description. Now I was trying something today and it sends the caches as waypoints. What did I do wrong. I have never had a problem with CR before. Thanks I might add that I had a problem a PQ last week. I applied the fix in the first patch that I post above and it corrected the PQ results. I subsequently applied the preventive fix above and just now had two PQs generated that look OK. Edited March 6, 2010 by Team CowboyPapa Quote Link to comment
+The Yinnies Posted March 6, 2010 Share Posted March 6, 2010 After the changes on both the site and the unit, everything is working now. Thanks to eveyone who helped. Quote Link to comment
+W. B. Taylor Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 I could never get Cache Register to work in any fashion. I was really disappointed. Must be that time of the month again. Here you are taking your regularly scheduled shot in multiple threads at Delorme. You, yourself, said in another thread it was time to move on but you just can't seem to follow your own advice. We all get it....really! You had problems with your PN-40 and you were upset about it but rather than listen to any suggestions or even Delorme's offers to help, you just wanted to vent. No, actually my response was about Cache Register, the software. That's what this post was about also. Yes it's true that I had many problems with the PN-40 but this person was having issues with Cache Register. Two different issues. Just trying to help a guy out. Quote Link to comment
+Pax42 Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 (edited) No, actually my response was about Cache Register, the software. That's what this post was about also. Yes it's true that I had many problems with the PN-40 but this person was having issues with Cache Register. Two different issues. Just trying to help a guy out. Oh yes, your post was extremely helpful. Edited March 7, 2010 by Pax42 Quote Link to comment
+The Yinnies Posted March 7, 2010 Share Posted March 7, 2010 I could never get Cache Register to work in any fashion. I was really disappointed. Must be that time of the month again. Here you are taking your regularly scheduled shot in multiple threads at Delorme. You, yourself, said in another thread it was time to move on but you just can't seem to follow your own advice. We all get it....really! You had problems with your PN-40 and you were upset about it but rather than listen to any suggestions or even Delorme's offers to help, you just wanted to vent. No, actually my response was about Cache Register, the software. That's what this post was about also. Yes it's true that I had many problems with the PN-40 but this person was having issues with Cache Register. Two different issues. Just trying to help a guy out. I would hate to see if you were not helping someone out. Quote Link to comment
+W. B. Taylor Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 No, actually my response was about Cache Register, the software. That's what this post was about also. Yes it's true that I had many problems with the PN-40 but this person was having issues with Cache Register. Two different issues. Just trying to help a guy out. Oh yes, your post was extremely helpful. Wow! Not sure why the DeLorme apologist group gets so upset each time I point out a flaw in the system. The response was not directed at you. I don't want people to go through the same problems I had to deal with. I point out a problem with the software or a problem with the hardware and you people proceed with your personal attacks on me. I thought we had put this behind us. It just makes me curious why you two are so adamant about trying to discredit me personally. If you are thrilled with your DeLorme experience (or employment?) that's great. But by the looks of this post and hundreds of others and countless other blogs, I'm not alone in my dissatisfaction. Please, let's keep this forum clean. Comments about "that time of the month" and other derogatory remarks are not welcome here. Quote Link to comment
+TotemLake Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 (edited) No, actually my response was about Cache Register, the software. That's what this post was about also. Yes it's true that I had many problems with the PN-40 but this person was having issues with Cache Register. Two different issues. Just trying to help a guy out. Oh yes, your post was extremely helpful. (or employment?) And this is just as uncalled for. This is rumor mongering. Is this the direction you really want to go in? Try practicing that which you preach. ...other derogatory remarks are not welcome here. As for your original remark. I took it as a complaint and left it at that. A helping hand is providing a solution. Your comment didn't do that. Edited March 8, 2010 by TotemLake Quote Link to comment
+RRLover Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 I had some discourse pertaining, but alas the irony, the help it could have provided was not directed towards the OP, . . . so in the spirit of staying OT, I'm pre-retracting any statements about not availing oneself of, or giving positive advice. Norm Quote Link to comment
+Team CowboyPapa Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 Please, let's keep this forum clean. Comments about "that time of the month" and other derogatory remarks are not welcome here. Sheesh, the guy who can't make the PN-40 and Cache Register work has now self-appointed himself to moderator and decides what is and what is not welcome here. Quote Link to comment
+The Yinnies Posted March 8, 2010 Share Posted March 8, 2010 I could never get Cache Register to work in any fashion. I was really disappointed. How is this helping out? I have had a few Garmins (Colorado 300, Oregon 300, Dakota 20 and just sent back my Oregon 450) and I always went back to the PN-40. You do not see me bashing any other units. Most of my comments are Pro PN-?? But I also recommend the Dakota 20. To me there are a lot of things about all the units that are disappointing but you have to buy what is the best for you. These forums are for helping not bashing a brand. If you notice most of the people that give advice and help on the forums about Delorme products do not go to anther forum and bash it. We all know you had problems with your unit, but you did not take any advice and just bash the unit. I along with others have had problems and we take the advice of these very nice people here, the Delorme forums and from Delorme them selves and it is usually taken care of. I see a lot of problems with Garmin also, why are not bashing them? I apologize for this post but enough is enough. If you don't like a restaurant you don't go there do you? Same here if you don't like the topic don't post. These very nice people are doing us a solid by helping anyone out who has a question. Thanks And a very big thanks for all of you who help us out. Quote Link to comment
+W. B. Taylor Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 I guess I didn't understand the purpose of the forums. I thought it was to offer advice about products pro and con. If this forum topic were "nothing but good things to say about DeLorme" I would have known. Quote Link to comment
2oldfarts (the rockhounders) Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 I guess I didn't understand the purpose of the forums. I thought it was to offer advice about products pro and con. If this forum topic were "nothing but good things to say about DeLorme" I would have known. For your post to be helpful you need to explain exactly what the problems were and what steps you took to try and rectify them. This would give others some direction to look and see where to offer meaningful help. Just saying you could never get it to work without an explanation of what was tried is like telling a chef that the food taste bad and expect him to know what needs to be done to improve the taste. What were the exact problems that you could not get resolved? And what steps did you take to try and get the program to work? John Quote Link to comment
+TotemLake Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 I guess I didn't understand the purpose of the forums. I thought it was to offer advice about products pro and con. If this forum topic were "nothing but good things to say about DeLorme" I would have known. I get it now. Your advise was to return it. Thanks for the helping advisement. Sorry your post was misunderstood. Have a great day! Quote Link to comment
+synthacide Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 I had the smae problem... goto the delorme forums, there is already a solution for this, and it worked for me Quote Link to comment
+W. B. Taylor Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 I guess I didn't understand the purpose of the forums. I thought it was to offer advice about products pro and con. If this forum topic were "nothing but good things to say about DeLorme" I would have known. For your post to be helpful you need to explain exactly what the problems were and what steps you took to try and rectify them. This would give others some direction to look and see where to offer meaningful help. Just saying you could never get it to work without an explanation of what was tried is like telling a chef that the food taste bad and expect him to know what needs to be done to improve the taste. What were the exact problems that you could not get resolved? And what steps did you take to try and get the program to work? John John, Thanks for your civil response. It is refreshing. My problem with Cache Register has already been hashed over several times so I will give you the readers digest version. It crashed every time it was launched. DeLorme told me to reinstall and I did six different times. They then told me it must be my computer. I tried loading it on three other computers with the same results. I became frustrated and asked for my money back. A forum member told me DeLorme would not refund my money but they did. Quote Link to comment
+Team CowboyPapa Posted March 11, 2010 Share Posted March 11, 2010 What were the exact problems that you could not get resolved? John Apparently, we'll never find out; sometimes it is hard to determine which cure is applicable when the symptoms cannot be analysed for the cause and effect diagnosis. And what steps did you take to try and get the program to work? John Whatever they were, they seem to have been ineffective as success was never obtained. Might have been a corrupted download, however. Like the time that I bought this song, http://www.amazon.com/Highwayman/dp/B00137...N2YTN13JJMXPH9F but when I played it, it sounded like Alfred & The Chipmunks. Quote Link to comment
+W. B. Taylor Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 What were the exact problems that you could not get resolved? John Apparently, we'll never find out; sometimes it is hard to determine which cure is applicable when the symptoms cannot be analysed for the cause and effect diagnosis. And what steps did you take to try and get the program to work? John Whatever they were, they seem to have been ineffective as success was never obtained. Might have been a corrupted download, however. Like the time that I bought this song, http://www.amazon.com/Highwayman/dp/B00137...N2YTN13JJMXPH9F but when I played it, it sounded like Alfred & The Chipmunks. Please don't have my comments erased and then post that I did not respond. I took the time to respond to every question and detail of Johns and you not only erase my comments but then post your own to make it look like I would not respond? This reminds me of our current administration. If you don't like the message, eliminate the messenger. If you are going to erase my comments at least have the guts to say you didn't agree with my comments so you erased them. This is just cowardly. People come to these forums for advice from all sides, not just your opinion. If that's not the case, change the name of the forum. You are a coward! Quote Link to comment
+Pax42 Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 So much for derogatory remarks not being welcome here. Quote Link to comment
+dakboy Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 People come to these forums for advice from all sides, not just your opinion. And yet in this thread, you've neglected to post any advice at all. Mr. Kettle? A Mr. Pot is holding for you on line 2. Quote Link to comment
+Team CowboyPapa Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 People come to these forums for advice from all sides, not just your opinion. And yet in this thread, you've neglected to post any advice at all. Mr. Kettle? A Mr. Pot is holding for you on line 2. He can't give advice because he is the only one out of hundreds that can't figure out how to make it work. Quote Link to comment
robertlipe Posted March 12, 2010 Share Posted March 12, 2010 Moderator note:Once again, we have a Delorme topic dragged into the land of disrespect and way off topic by the same people that have been repeatedly asked to quit doing that. Please return this thread to the original topic as it's not clear if that problem has actually been solved or not and cool it with the name-calling and general sniping. Quote Link to comment
+W. B. Taylor Posted March 14, 2010 Share Posted March 14, 2010 Moderator note:Once again, we have a Delorme topic dragged into the land of disrespect and way off topic by the same people that have been repeatedly asked to quit doing that. Please return this thread to the original topic as it's not clear if that problem has actually been solved or not and cool it with the name-calling and general sniping. I agree. Thank you. Quote Link to comment
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.