Jump to content

New Nearest Cache Page (Observations)


Recommended Posts

I liked it the old way better. Atleaset from searching from my coords on my cache page. Speed? Who cares about speed? I have broadband. The only thing I want back is the map to show what I have found and not found. That was do back in late May; now it's late June. I also agree that my cache page searches need to have the check box mark for caches I own. Better yet, separate the caches like they use to be, founds on the bottom. Or even totally better; find the old back-up tapes and reinstall the old system. Don't fix what is not broken. They do that where I work all the time and it hinders customer service. I should know as that is the department that I work in and all "improvements" ever do is slow down service. I see not real speed increases with what we have now compared to what there was before. What we had before was much better for the eyes. Maybe you should offer different webpages for different user connection speeds like other sites. Text only for dial-up and grapic intensive for people with broadband, dsl, or T lines. I do that for one of the sites I operate.



Link to comment

Jeremy, you said to keep an eye out for odd behavior. Well, after I saw the new format I sort of crossed my eyes and went to pour a stiff scotch. That is pretty odd behavior! But I know that we can overcome. If we can cope with things like insurance changes and tax changes and computor upgrades that boggle our old minds, we can surely adjust to this new system...after all, you're a genius, and we consider ourselves fortunate to be a part of this neat web site!!

Link to comment

I often use the "from my home coordinates" link on "my cache" page and scan the results for caches I haven't found. The distinction between found and unfound caches is now a bit too subtle for me. How about using row colors to distinguish them; something like this?

Link to comment

Actually, I've found one possible reason for the "none of the links work" complaint. If you have a browser that doesn't do Javascript or that doesn't have it enabled, this seems to be the behaviour you will get.


I haven't yet figured out if there's a fallback for those without Javascript.

Link to comment

Looks great to me Jeremy....but. As I live right on the edge of the St. Lawrence River I only(for now) cache in Ontario and would like to see an addition to the search <by State/country> section. When I use it all it shows is the newest caches in Ontario but from all over Ontario. Could you add to it so you can narrow it right down to...


State/Country>>>State/Province>>>Postal Code


This would be a big help and maybe the last part for Postal Code could be optional.


Overall, the whole thing looks great


"Blood is thicker than water.......Unless the water is frozen!"

Link to comment

I'll admit I haven't read through the whole thread, but the very first thing that popped into my head when I saw the new page was: color!


Suppose the text color for unfound caches were like it is now, but ones you've found were green, ones you've hidden were blue, and unavailable ones were red. It would make it oh-so easy to see your status on each cache at a glance, instead of looking over to see if there's an X next to it or not.


[on edit] I see George M above had the same idea as me, but with an even better implementation. I really think this would be a great idea.

Link to comment


[on edit] I see George M above had the same idea as me, but with an even better implementation. I really think this would be a great idea.


I agree here, about the bands of color, those [x]'s kind of suck.

It appears the 'new' system logged me off, and that's why I didnt have any [x] or the checkbox to exclude found caches on the new search page.


Speed definitley seems better. I have a broadband connection, but it was always the geocaching server that was swamped and failed to respond during busy hours.

Link to comment

Like the new look to the nearest page.


When might the state map page be updated. It says on that page that it will be near the end of May. Is it nearing? Is it going to have the capability to show caches found or the capability to not show caches found?




Smile! It adds to your face value.


[This message was edited by Ex135navigator on June 15, 2003 at 07:13 PM.]

Link to comment

EDIT: Solution to the log in/out and log caches found in my new post below...




Upon further testing/experimentation, I've found the following...


OLD: The pages showing me as logged in versus not is irrespective of whether Java is enabled (no surprise).


OLD: I cannot log OUT, nor log in. Therefore I cannot post logs (or enable watching) since the listings and cache pages think I'm logged out while all others already believe I'm in.


Separately, although I agree "fixing" what functioned flawlessly is illogical and unproductive, I'd at least ask that the standard behaviour match the old listing (not including my found or placed caches in listings) without having to enable Javascript and/or click a bunch of stuff and wait for new pages!


There's obviously no apparent speed increase on dial-up (although I can appreciate less Server overhead usage).


I can obviously overlook the new inconveniences but would like to be able to log caches again!






PS: I'm afraid I'm currently count myself among those that would prefer to return to the previous version.


[This message was edited by RJFerret on June 15, 2003 at 07:27 PM.]

Link to comment

OK, I solved the can't log in or log caches problem...


I quit the browser, manually deleted the cookie file, reloaded and then logged in. This logged me in EVERYWHERE now.


The new pages still lack the functionality of the old in my opinion.


Hope this helps,



Link to comment

The new cache listings are ok but is there anyway to make it so the caches you haven't found are listed on top, caches you have found are listed in the middle, and caches that you own are listed on the bottom again? Now Instead of just looking at top of the cache listing for caches I haven't found I have to scan through the entire thing and hope I don't miss one.

Link to comment

I like the color columns idea posited above.

Failing this I like the old way of having found/disbled caches at the bootom so I don't have to hunt & search throught the list looking for x's on one side & green dates on the other. Fainling this, how abou making unfound cache titles appear in BOLD?


Wherever you go, there you are!

Link to comment

This should be rather easy to implement and would make the search (at least for me) 100X's better.

When you click on New Search how about being able to search for "All Geocaches" "By Home Coordinate" and then we can click the "Exclude hidden/found items. I would love to be able to search for the ones I haven't found but it's a pain to have to enter in my home coordinates every time I want to do it.

Link to comment

OK, I've spend WAY too much time on this tonight...


The other way to get to the page is from the "advanced search" link of the Home page, NOT the Seek page (illogical I know...) (The 'New Search' link requires Javascript and simply returns 'True' on my browser!)


A suggestion: Rather than the drop-box to select the caches you want to list, how about a bunch of checkboxes similar to the Exlude my caches hidden/found to eliminate the types you don't want.


Since the most popular is to eliminate the Virtuals/Locationless, that way one or two clicks takes care of it (and includes all "regular" caches [trad, unknown/puzzle, multi, micro, etc.]).


(At the very least I'd make the link to search "nearest caches" from "my cache" page exclude my hidden/found caches automatically!)






PS: In the original premise, computers were expected to reduce work--NOT create more!

Link to comment

I too would like to see the caches grouped as before - not found, found, mine.


Also, how can I bring up the old alphabetical list of locationless caches? I've been working on my own database of this type of cache, and was relying on the alphabetized list.

Link to comment

Try "advanced search" on the front page. That will get you there. It allows you to filter caches you have found and caches you own. It is so far the most advanced page for search options.


Yes, mapping is coming shortly. The new mapserver was installed over the weekend and we will be working on it for the next week. Hopefully we can get it done in less than 2 weeks. If you still wish to visualize the current maps you can do so from each cache page, or from doing a state search on the front page of the site.


Searching by origin is the best way to do searches, period. If you're searching by state after you've found your first cache (other than curiosity of new caches) then I don't know what to say.


We will be providing a "home coordinates" search option that will pre-enter your coordinates on the search page. Since we can't intutively figure out whether you want your finds hidden or not, by default it will show all the caches.


Just some qualifications, The link is "hide and seek a cache", not "Seek a cache," so logically it would be both a "hide" and "seek" a cache page, not one or the other.


We will no longer be sorting caches by found, not found, etc. I do like the idea of color coding the ones that are found, owned, etc., however, and will look into that option.


Locationless caches will return to their normal (or abnormal) listing.


If you want more detailed searches, use the Pocket Queries. That's what they were created for. The nearest cache page was not designed to be all things to all people.


frog.gif Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location™

Link to comment

Originally posted by Jeremy (Admin):

Originally posted by beejay&esskay:

When I search for all caches found by me, I am only shown 16. My status page shows 28 found. Something not right here.


Yeah. You searched for only traditional caches. You have 16 traditional caches found.


frog.gif Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location


Right, sorry to have taken your time with this invalid complaint.

Link to comment

Originally posted by Jeremy:If you get logged out on the nearest cache page, click the login link and log back in. We're working as fast as we can to make all the pages work in dot net so you'll have to bear with the transition. At least the site is running faster.


frog.gif Jeremy Irish

Groundspeak - The Language of Location


On the nearest cache page, it says I'm not logged in. When I click on the login link, it takes me to my page where it says I'm logged in.


But then when I return, it says I'm not logged in. I guess I'll try logging out specifically and then back in to see if that makes a difference.


[Added after checking...]

Well, logout on the page doesn't change my status to logged out, so I don't have any way to log out and log back in. I guess I'll see how things behave tomorrow.

Link to comment

The only thing that really bugs me about the new stuff is this: Once on a cache page I would click "all nearby caches" in order to quickly discern any other caches near that one that I have yet to find. It seems in order for me to do that now without seeing which caches I have found, I have to go into advanced search everytime, put in the coords for the cache and click the box to exclude my found caches. Soooo.... any way to make that "omit found/hidden caches" option stick until turned off? Just my two cents since this seems to really slow things down for hunting groups of caches.



"Look at the bones!"

Link to comment

Everything looks great.


Possible enhancements I see:

  • multiple choice listbox or checkboxes for cache type

  • providing George M's colored rows for found/unfound/disabled

  • search default(s) under a user's prefs on the My Cache Page (check box for exclude hidden/found, can't think of any other defaults)

I preferred being able to enter my zip and it show me the closest unfounds from the main page. I can still get there but now it takes me a couple more clicks to get there.

Link to comment

Well, i havent played with the new page much yet, but it looks good functionally...icon_smile.gif


Like most everybody has already mentioned, I think aesthetcally it could use some improvement, but thats to be expected with first revisions of things like this... icon_smile.gif


The main thing that puts me off is the red cache-name links.

Sorry, but red text gives me a head-ache. I have always hated red ink pens!... icon_razz.gif

I would also like to see the names in Bold, like they used to be.

The "X"& "O" for found/hidden caches is OK, but could you make those bold also?


Other than that, THANX! for the update! icon_biggrin.gif







Link to comment

Hmmm...Honestly, I didn't see a need to change anything. Did people ask for changes?


Faster? Not unless I am missing something. The old format listed caches I have found, on the bottom. Now in order to discern them, I have to do a second search to filter them out. That second search takes a bit of time to do (and I have cable modem!) I don't like the fact I have to do the second search. Why can they not just be listed on the same page like the old format?


Faster? Not if I have to do two searches now, when I only used to do one. Jeremy, I can certainly appreciate all the work that went into this, but I really don't see why there was a need for change. It seemed to work fine before.


Step away from the tupperware!

Link to comment

I like the new look and feel, and there is much information available very quickly at a glance. The only thing that I miss (and this has been mentioned before) is having found caches and not found caches broken out into separate lists with not found caches first. While I could probably learn to live without that feature, I found that having all the NOT FOUNDS grouped on the page in the FIRST position was extremely useful.


I eagerly await additional enhancements.

Link to comment

There are a dozen or so posts saying "I liked it better the old way." Well, fine... let the site crash and burn like it has the past couple of weekends. Do you not understand? This update was moved quickly into production to keep the website from dying under its own weight. The nearest caches page, with all the customizing for caches you've found, hidden, etc., was the biggest single drain on the hamsters that power the server, according to TPTB.


I am sure that some tweaking can occur to address legitimate comments. But "change it back to the way it used to be" is not a legitimate comment.


I'm very happy on my slow dialup connection to see a site that loads quickly, with some neat new search features. I look forward to future improvements as the new geocaching.com is rolled out.



Some mornings, it just doesn't pay to chew through the leather straps. - Emo Phillips

Link to comment

Jeremy, overall I think the changes are good. I would agree with the above comment about the red links, really don't like them. The only other suggestion would be in the Last Found column to have the actual dates rather than 10 months ago, 23 days ago...



Link to comment

Sorry to post again, but I feel this is a somewhat different topic. After using the new format I've realized you basically turned the nearest caches into a simplified Pocket Queries. The additional step of putting in my zip code and clicking the little box makes me more and more frustrated every time I have to do it. The website has kinda taken a turn away from casual user to elitist techno cacher who has no need to find the caches close to him cause he's already found them. And yes, the colors and layout is pretty much as unappealing as it could get. Guess you can only go up from here.



"Look at the bones!"

Link to comment

If I do a search for "all geocaches" and check the box marked "exclude hidden/found items from results" the the results page has all empty brackets in the lefthandmost column [ ]. Seems like a waste of space, I can't seem to mark anything here.


When I first heard the nearest searches were being revamped, this is what I imagined as ideal:

The same nearest search as before, with a checkbox to ignore certain individual caches, and perhaps a selection to ignore certain types of caches.


For my caching needs, that would have done it. I think that all of the time spent on the new nearest searches was not wasted though, I think it would suppliment what I described above just nicely.


The new searches are now almost like pocket queries in their ability to separate traditionals, multis, events, etc. I would have liked to see micros in there as a choice as well. I realize micros are traditionals, however.

Link to comment

A negative opinion... icon_frown.gif


I have to agree the new page is much faster, but I find it MUCH worse than before in overall usability, almost to the point of useless for me at least.


Let me explain...


The previous page format was nicely formatted, breaking things up into a number of categories(not found, found, hidden, dead) that made scrolling through the pages very efficient from the user's perspective. Just look at the top of the page for the not-found items, and hit next-page to move along in order of distance from your home coordinates. I thought it was a nice interface, very efficient for the user to navigate.


I think the new look'n'feel is simply horrible. The new page mixes everything all up, and provides no way to filter out things to get the noise gone and the 'to-do list' only visible. The 'x' marks in the left hand column to show found are simply visually horrible, they're nowhere near distinct enough. The caches I've hidden are all intermingled with the ones I've found, or not-found, and appear (falsely) as non-founds.


Intermingling everything was not a usability improvement in my opinion, no matter how fast the data is returned to the browser.


Now before the flames begin, yes I know about (and use) the custom queries and like them a lot....but the issue here is the web usability. It took a big step backward, the changes pretty much made the web interface unusable in my opinion. The current 'one big list of stuff' is not navigable in my opinion.


Yes, I also know that I can do a custom query via the web, fighting through a bunch of popup menus to get to the data I'm looking for...I already could do that before...but now I 'must' do a custom query to get anything close to a usable set of web pages that simply show me the caches I haven't found, in order of closeness to my home coordinates. That's a major step backwards in usability for the user.


I appreciate the improvements in speed and the efforts to make life better for all, but my opinion is that the changes look like a pretty classic example of 'optimize for the sysadmin, not the user' at first glance. It's "not" a net improvement in my opinion.



Link to comment

I don't want to be a big baby, but how the hell do I access locationless caches???


I've tried the search thing here but all it gives me is the same identical page. Please explain this to someone who is basically computer illiterate. (And I might add very frustrated at the moment.)


Edited to add that with a lot of work I can pull up about 20 locationless but not the 200-300 locationless caches that exist out there.


Is it now required to use a pocket query, pda or downloadable software to use this website now? This is beyond my technological capabilities.


Thank you in advance for helping me.


[This message was edited by Tsegi Mike and Desert Viking on June 15, 2003 at 10:05 PM.]

Link to comment

I agree with much that vds said above, however I appreciate that Jeremy has expressed interest in color-coding the rows of data. I really think that with that small addition, the usability of this new design would increase tenfold. I did like the old way of having found and dead caches down at the bottom of the page, but I understand if that created additional load on the database (although at the moment, I don't quite see how it would have...anyone care to explain?). I can get used to having everything in one big-ol' list if we could get the color coding so that it's easy to distinguish found/not-found/dead at a single glance without having to look for that little X.


I would also like to see the ability to click a link at the top of any search results page that says something like "show/hide found caches" that would simply toggle the display of found caches on or off within the current search criteria, without having to re-enter that criteria all over again.


As vds said, at present, this seems to be mostly an improvement on the speed/sysadmin side of things. It still has a little ways to go before I'll be happy on the user side of things, but I'd say it's off to a good start, with a lot of good suggestions from everybody so far! icon_smile.gif



Grove City College

Link to comment

I think also that there should probably be an explanation of how the new searches work since there seems to be some confusion. You can filter out your found and hidden caches, and it's almost the same as it used to be. The only difference is you just see the "to do" list.


Maybe Markwell will put an explanation of how it works after he gets it figured out in the morning icon_smile.gif


Also, I notice that you can filter Planet APE caches. Is there any reason someone would want to? Besides being hidden in an abnormally large ammo box, are they any different from any other cache hidden in an abnormally large ammo box? If I go find one, will there still be some APE memorabilia I can trade for?

Link to comment

I don't understand all the complaining about the found caches being mixed in instead of separate at the bottom. Just make the found ones go away!


Start with this page - its accessed by clicking advanced search on the main page and I'm sure later its functionality will be integrated into the HideSeek page. You can also bookmark that page.


Once there, click Exclude hidden/found items from results and it will ONLY show caches you haven't found!! That seems like a huge improvement to me!!


Let's see you clear your first page, now!!


Lil Devil lildevil.gif

Link to comment

I would like to add a comment about something I really like about the new page. Now it is much easier to access the oldest caches placed in my state without having to wade through page after page...I can just click on page 10, then go to page 20 or the > arrow. Thank you for making that easier. The rest (except for the locationless caches) I'll learn to get used to.




Till a voice, as bad as Conscience, rang interminable changes

On one everlasting Whisper day and night repeated -- so:

"Something hidden. Go and find it. Go and look behind the Ranges --

"Something lost behind the Ranges. Lost and waiting for you. Go!"


Rudyard Kipling , The Explorer 1898

Link to comment

I think I found a bug. No -- I do this for a living, and regardless of how late it is and how tired I am, I *know* I found a bug. :-)


GC2AD was apparently not given a name when it was created, so it shows up as "Geocache" on its page. It used to appear that way in the search results, but now it shows up as "Traditional Caches".

Link to comment

We will no longer be sorting caches by found, not found, etc. I do like the idea of color coding the ones that are found, owned, etc., however, and will look into that option.


PLEASE reconsider! The sorting by found, not found, hidden, dead was the best part of the results page! It provided a todo list along with a list of accomplishments clearly separated. The color-coded rows will be a big improvement over the current [X]'s, but it pales in comparison to the old system. Again, PLEASE!



Link to comment

Hi Jeremy,


Nice job, but... There seems to be no way to bookmark the result of a search. This was the main way I entered the GC.com site.


Also my old bookmark link does not work anymore (All caches in Austriahttp://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?country_id=227&submit3=GO)


Also selecting a country on the main page and clicking GO doesn't work (it does work for states)





Short cuts make long delays.

Link to comment

Originally posted by maldar:

I liked it the old way better.



I have to agree 100% with Maldar. The old way was better.


The new search page is nearly useless.


Also, if you remain in love with using color, please remember to not use GREEN. 10% of the male population cannot distinguish red from green. Use blue instead of green.

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