Jump to content

opencaching? really?

roogie

By roogie
in GPS technology and devices

Followers 6

Recommended Posts

Whatever-

+Whatever-

Posted
Posted

It's sort of fun to see this… I really think Groundspeak should allow GPX downloads to free users. Just that… Go on a map and download GPX… maybe even limit the number of downloads… PocketQueries (which are more complex and recurrent), Notifications, Caches along a route and so on is Premium stuff…

Link to comment
tozainamboku

+tozainamboku

Posted
Posted
My concern is that if you take the GPX file from your My Finds query (or any other PQ) and upload it to opencaching.com, you will be in violation of the Waypoint License agreement with Groundspeak.

but only a puritan would worry about that <_<

 

Pow! And dfx knocks it out of the park!

 

Too funny. :)

I fail to see the humor. Are you saying I've checked something that says I agree to delete Found It logs if someone wasn't able to sign the physical cache log? I don't remember doing this. :huh:

 

By the way last time I checked (last night, so it may be different now), cache owners couldn't delete Found logs at all on the opencaching.com site.

Link to comment
tozainamboku

+tozainamboku

Posted
Posted (edited)

It's sort of fun to see this… I really think Groundspeak should allow GPX downloads to free users. Just that… Go on a map and download GPX… maybe even limit the number of downloads… PocketQueries (which are more complex and recurrent), Notifications, Caches along a route and so on is Premium stuff…

I believe this is what it ultimately comes down to.

  1. Topografix publishes the GPX specification.
  2. GPS manufacturers build units that can read GPX.
  3. Groundspeak adds geocaching extenstions to GPX and offers PQs to premium memebers.
  4. Groundspeak encourages GPS manufacturers to create units that import geocache information from extended GPX. Garmin becomes first manufacturer to offer paperless geocaching.
  5. Geocaching.com offers free month of premium membership to people who buy paperless caching GPS units.
  6. Some of those people decide that it's not worth $30/yr to continue premium membership. They complain to GPS manufacturer that they paid for a feature they can't use.
  7. Garmn and Groundspeak can't come to an agreement to allow sending GPX information to non-premium member GPS.
  8. Garmin starts its own site.
  9. Maybe Groundspeak counters by making some GPX information available to non-premium members?

Edited by tozainamboku
Link to comment
TotemLake

+TotemLake

Posted
Posted

Beginning of last month I think. I was surprised to read it was at 3 days now. I didn't check for differences after the last update on 11/9.

 

sorry for being off topic. carry on

 

TL, what would these folks have said if they saw GC.com back when WE started caching? Tons better now than what it started out as...

You think the whining is loud now? :huh:

Link to comment
BlueDeuce

+BlueDeuce

Posted
Posted (edited)
My concern is that if you take the GPX file from your My Finds query (or any other PQ) and upload it to opencaching.com, you will be in violation of the Waypoint License agreement with Groundspeak.

but only a puritan would worry about that :)

 

Pow! And dfx knocks it out of the park!

 

Too funny. :D

I fail to see the humor. Are you saying I've checked something that says I agree to delete Found It logs if someone wasn't able to sign the physical cache log? I don't remember doing this. :huh:

 

By the way last time I checked (last night, so it may be different now), cache owners couldn't delete Found logs at all on the opencaching.com site.

 

You used to be a fun person, what happened? <_<

Edited by BlueDeuce
Link to comment
btl-a4

+btl-a4

Posted
Posted

My concern is that if you take the GPX file from your My Finds query (or any other PQ) and upload it to opencaching.com, you will be in violation of the Waypoint License agreement with Groundspeak.

 

This is the exact thing that irks me about Groundspeak. We as users give them the waypoint data, we author the caches, and on top of that a good many of us pay them a yearly fee. After all that they claim ownership of the data.

Link to comment
jholly

jholly

Posted
Posted

My concern is that if you take the GPX file from your My Finds query (or any other PQ) and upload it to opencaching.com, you will be in violation of the Waypoint License agreement with Groundspeak.

 

This is the exact thing that irks me about Groundspeak. We as users give them the waypoint data, we author the caches, and on top of that a good many of us pay them a yearly fee. After all that they claim ownership of the data.

Did you ever stop to think that I just might not want you uploading *my* data on to another site? Maybe the TOU is in place for a reason. If you read the TOU, I still retain the ownership of the material (i.e., cache listings) I submit to Groundspeak. I also grant them a license to use this material. Groundspeak says you can not share my data with another site. I really don't see a problem with that.

Link to comment
geodarts

+geodarts

Posted
Posted (edited)

In the past 24 hours the amount of caches placed world while has gone up by 25%. So at this rate, in 2 months, there will be over 2 million caches placed world wide.

 

I see about 3500 caches on opencaching,com. Not bad for a few days - South Korea and Germany seem relatively popular. I am not sure how that compares to the combined total of the other opencaching sites around the world -- but a 25% increase? Particularly considering the number of cross-listed caches or experimental "hides." They have a way to go.

Edited by mulvaney
Link to comment
btl-a4

+btl-a4

Posted
Posted

Did you ever stop to think that I just might not want you uploading *my* data on to another site? Maybe the TOU is in place for a reason. If you read the TOU, I still retain the ownership of the material (i.e., cache listings) I submit to Groundspeak. I also grant them a license to use this material. Groundspeak says you can not share my data with another site. I really don't see a problem with that.

 

I wasn't suggesting that information posted on Groudspeak sites should be pulled to another site. I'm just saying that any info we as a community post to Groundspeak should be able to be available for us to access any way we want to.

 

Did you post your caches so other cachers could access the data and find caches, or did you post the information so Groundspeak could take ownership of it and parse it out as they see fit?

Link to comment
btl-a4

+btl-a4

Posted
Posted

What does "import finds and hides" do?

 

Here is what has happened so far. I manually put in my caches, so i don't know how that works. I did get my found caches query GPX file and imported it into opencaching. So basically I have a log of all my finds, but since there are no associated caches it just has a bunch of text saying "found such and such on xx/xx/xx date". My caching buddy did the same and since my caches are in the database it automatically put his finds of my caches on his profile along with the rest of his finds just being text. The weird thing is it automatically rated my caches for him. It gave them all a 3.5 awesome factor. So when I view my caches they have all been found 1 time each, all by my friend.

Link to comment
Prime Suspect

+Prime Suspect

Posted
Posted

5. Some of those people decide that it's not worth $30/yr to continue premium membership. They complain to GPS manufacturer that they paid for a feature they can't use.

That's where your logic fails. I just don't see this happening in numbers big enough to spur a company to create a website that's going to be a red entry on their account books for a long time to come. If you can buy a high-end GPS, you can probably afford the 57 cents a week for a membership.

Link to comment
Manville Possum

+Manville Possum

Posted
Posted (edited)

In the past 24 hours the amount of caches placed world while has gone up by 25%. So at this rate, in 2 months, there will be over 2 million caches placed world wide.

 

I see about 3500 caches on opencaching,com. Not bad for a few days - South Korea and Germany seem relatively popular. I am not sure how that compares to the combined total of the other opencaching sites around the world -- but a 25% increase? Particularly considering the number of cross-listed caches or experimental "hides." They have a way to go.

I just came across the site by reading in the forums, seems they are 2 sites with similar names, one not connected to Garmin. I tryed to register on one site, but the link in the email does nothing to activate my account? I think that it is great to have another geocache listing service in the US. :);)

Update: I forgot that I had a account with Garmin, now to start a GPX file to list my 92 hides on their site. No one else in our area is using it, yet. The site seems quite nice, with many different features than we have here on GC. :rolleyes::rolleyes::blink:

Edited by Manville Possum Hunters
Link to comment
gelfling6

+gelfling6

Posted
Posted

My only gripe about the site, is you don't even need to put in coordinates. Apparently the Bing app is already locating you via your IP location. (The map was already centered on the home location, which kinda freaks me out. And we were griping about putting caches too close to Terrorist targets? All they need do is look-up a location on Bing, and they're there!

 

I for one, will be keeping my active membership with GC.Com.. As someone else said, It's Garmin trying to use their 'Proprietary' muscle, to give GC.Com competition. I may own a few Garmin GPSr's, I may own a laptop with Microsoft Windows 7 locked into it too.. I have to use Windows, because I would love to use Linux, and get out of Microsoft's clutches. But, everything runs only under Windows. Give it time, Garmin will eventually realize it was a bad move, and close it down.

Link to comment
Manville Possum

+Manville Possum

Posted
Posted

My only gripe about the site, is you don't even need to put in coordinates. Apparently the Bing app is already locating you via your IP location. (The map was already centered on the home location, which kinda freaks me out. And we were griping about putting caches too close to Terrorist targets? All they need do is look-up a location on Bing, and they're there!

 

I for one, will be keeping my active membership with GC.Com.. As someone else said, It's Garmin trying to use their 'Proprietary' muscle, to give GC.Com competition. I may own a few Garmin GPSr's, I may own a laptop with Microsoft Windows 7 locked into it too.. I have to use Windows, because I would love to use Linux, and get out of Microsoft's clutches. But, everything runs only under Windows. Give it time, Garmin will eventually realize it was a bad move, and close it down.

Big Brother is watching us. I don't think it was a bad move for Garmin, I'm interested in giving the site a try. :) As far as with Terrorist targets, I love to take them out. Tango down, load another round....

Link to comment
jholly

jholly

Posted
Posted (edited)

5. Some of those people decide that it's not worth $30/yr to continue premium membership. They complain to GPS manufacturer that they paid for a feature they can't use.

That's where your logic fails. I just don't see this happening in numbers big enough to spur a company to create a website that's going to be a red entry on their account books for a long time to come forever. If you can buy a high-end GPS, you can probably afford the 57 cents a week for a membership.

fixed.

Edited by jholly
Link to comment
dfx

+dfx

Posted
Posted
My only gripe about the site, is you don't even need to put in coordinates. Apparently the Bing app is already locating you via your IP location. (The map was already centered on the home location, which kinda freaks me out. And we were griping about putting caches too close to Terrorist targets? All they need do is look-up a location on Bing, and they're there!

uh, that's nothing specific to bing. you do know that every single website you access can determine your approximate location through your IP address? google for "geolocation".

Link to comment
Manville Possum

+Manville Possum

Posted
Posted

It's sort of fun to see this… I really think Groundspeak should allow GPX downloads to free users. Just that… Go on a map and download GPX… maybe even limit the number of downloads… PocketQueries (which are more complex and recurrent), Notifications, Caches along a route and so on is Premium stuff…

I believe this is what it ultimately comes down to.

  1. Topografix publishes the GPX specification.
  2. GPS manufacturers build units that can read GPX.
  3. Groundspeak adds geocaching extenstions to GPX and offers PQs to premium memebers.
  4. Groundspeak encourages GPS manufacturers to create units that import geocache information from extended GPX. Garmin becomes first manufacturer to offer paperless geocaching.
  5. Geocaching.com offers free month of premium membership to people who buy paperless caching GPS units.
  6. Some of those people decide that it's not worth $30/yr to continue premium membership. They complain to GPS manufacturer that they paid for a feature they can't use.
  7. Garmn and Groundspeak can't come to an agreement to allow sending GPX information to non-premium member GPS.
  8. Garmin starts its own site.
  9. Maybe Groundspeak counters by making some GPX information available to non-premium members?

I bought a Magellan Triton 400 bundle pack with the Vantage Point maps included, when I downloaded directly from GC to the unit, it would display "internal error" and shut down. Magellan and GC agreed that there was a problem in the writer, I had to create a GPX file on GC and transfer it to Vantage Point. This seemed to solve the problem, then the unit started shutting down again. Others say that this model is problematic also, I just quit using it.

Link to comment
John E Cache

John E Cache

Posted
Posted

5. Some of those people decide that it's not worth $30/yr to continue premium membership. They complain to GPS manufacturer that they paid for a feature they can't use.

That's where your logic fails. I just don't see this happening in numbers big enough to spur a company to create a website that's going to be a red entry on their account books for a long time to come. If you can buy a high-end GPS, you can probably afford the 57 cents a week for a membership.

Good point. Don't forget GS is a direct competitor, now, with GS selling apps for phones. The phone GPSs must be killing Garmin and Navteq.
Link to comment
gelfling6

+gelfling6

Posted
Posted

5. Some of those people decide that it's not worth $30/yr to continue premium membership. They complain to GPS manufacturer that they paid for a feature they can't use.

That's where your logic fails. I just don't see this happening in numbers big enough to spur a company to create a website that's going to be a red entry on their account books for a long time to come. If you can buy a high-end GPS, you can probably afford the 57 cents a week for a membership.

Good point. Don't forget GS is a direct competitor, now, with GS selling apps for phones. The phone GPSs must be killing Garmin and Navteq.

 

Which gives the GPS manufacturers reason to go the same route as the phone manufacturers..

 

Wasn't there a Garmin-Phone? I seem to remember a Palm based phone, with a built in GPS & Map program which Garmin was pushing.. What happened to it?

 

(checking search engine) I seem to remember a phone before the NuViFone.. It was a bare minimum Palm based phone, no web access, no camera. But even reviews of the NuviFone are pretty dismal..

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Followers 6
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...