Disappointed in Groundspeak

[+Redfist]

I've been trying to not post here, but I can't help it. I don't have an iPhone or an iPad. I do have a smart phone running android.

 

I *do* have an iPhone and although I don't own an iPad (I can't believe that the Riffster has one and I don't) I have used one and loaded up the GS app on it and it worked we'll. The OP argues that running the iOS app on an iPad doesn't take advantage of the larger screen real estate and other features available on the iPad. If GS is going to produce a version of the Geocaching app optimized for the iPad, why not develop one for tablets like the Samsung Galaxy, Motorola Xoom, Blackberry Playbook, or one of the 40 something other tablet devices on the market (most of which are Droid based)? The answer is simple. Groundspeak has a finite amount of developer resources, thus it prioritize projects and allocates programmer resources to those that will give the most bang for the buck. Finalizing a public API might be one of the best examples (that others have mentioned in this thread) as it could conceivably allow third party developers to write tablet based applications that are usable by geocachers that might prefer an alternative to the Apple kool-aid.

 

As a software developer that has written a few enterprise scale applications I am aware of the hardware/OS dependencies that sometimes have to be dealt with. At some point one has to balance how much development effort something is going to take to address an issue that only benefits a fraction of a percent of the total number of users, especially when there is a viable work around.

This post is a bit inaccurate. Who cares that there are 40 variants of Android tablets. It's not like Groundspeak has to write 40 different versions of their app. Just one. And if they make their Apple version universal, that's two. I don't know if Android phone and tablet OSes are universal, so maybe three. Oh, and do they make Windows 7 versions?

 

I didn't say that were 40 variants of the Android tablets (though it *is* the most common O/S). I actually do a bit of work with mobile technologies, and in fact, one of my official responsibilities is to evaluate emerging technologies and specifically the role of mobile devices and tablets will play in the future in the enterprise in which I work. From my research I have identified 40 something different tablet models. Only one of them runs iOS (Apple). HP and Research in Motion (Blackberry) run their own proprietary Operating System (Web-OS and Blackberry Tablet O/S). There are a few different tablets running Windows 7 and the majority of tablets are running some version of Android. If Groundspeak were to develop only one version of their app for tablet PCs it would probably make more sense to develop one for Android based devices.

 

Even if every tablet on the market ran the same O/S the number of geocachers that use tablets for geocaching is probably a small fraction of 1%, and with a finite amount of developer resources it just doesn't make any sense to allocate resources for a project that only benefits an extremely small number of it's users, when there are plenty of other projects that need development time.

 

And in case the kool-aid comment was an attempt at a slam, I don't drink it either. The iPad is my only Apple device and I really dislike their walled garden.

 

It wasn't intended as a slam. There are quite a few people that think Apple can do know wrong but there is certainly a growing number of people that recognize that there are some viable alternatives, and as a commercial enterprise Groundspeak is likely watching trends in market share before committing resources to new software development. In Q3 of 2010 the iPad held 96% of the market share for tablet devices. In Q4 that dropped to 75%. During the same period Android based devices when from 2.3% to 22%. If GS chooses to develop a tablet based version of the application it might actually make more sense to develop for Android based devices before working on an iPad version.

 

Or given the recent announcements by Microsoft around the tablet space, wait for Windows vNext.

[+Redfist]

If GS chooses to develop a tablet based version of the application it might actually make more sense to develop for Android based devices before working on an iPad version.

I don't follow why it makes sense to target 22% of the market vs. 75%. And remember, this is coming from a non-Apple fanboi.

 

Because sucessful companies don't target where the market is now, they target where the market is going to ensure they're not left behind.

[+IndyJones1023]

If GS chooses to develop a tablet based version of the application it might actually make more sense to develop for Android based devices before working on an iPad version.

I don't follow why it makes sense to target 22% of the market vs. 75%. And remember, this is coming from a non-Apple fanboi.

 

Because sucessful companies don't target where the market is now, they target where the market is going to ensure they're not left behind.

As much as I'm not a kool aid drinker, I wouldn't count Apple out. And I wouldn't pin anything on MS, either. My brother works for them and I've seen his tablet. They just don't get it. At least not yet.

[+Redfist]

If GS chooses to develop a tablet based version of the application it might actually make more sense to develop for Android based devices before working on an iPad version.

I don't follow why it makes sense to target 22% of the market vs. 75%. And remember, this is coming from a non-Apple fanboi.

 

Because sucessful companies don't target where the market is now, they target where the market is going to ensure they're not left behind.

As much as I'm not a kool aid drinker, I wouldn't count Apple out. And I wouldn't pin anything on MS, either. My brother works for them and I've seen his tablet. They just don't get it. At least not yet.

 

Agreed about Apple. They are definitely NOT out, but they ARE currently trending down. No-one can predict the future, so trends tend to guide decisions.

 

WRT MS, I really doubt you've seen a Win vNext tablet (your brother would be fired for sharing that at this point). Win7 isn't a great tablet experience without a lot of custom shell/app work. What MS released about Win vNext looks promisng in the tablet space.

Edited June 14, 2011 by Redfist

[+Too Tall John]

Frankly, Facebook integration seems rather immaterial at your level of usage...it isn't exactly a lifechanger.

Geocaching itself is rather immaterial. Doesn't mean we can't suggest improvements.

Okay. How does this improve Geocaching?

All these people saying Facebook integration is harmful are just speculating. It's their opinion. Whereas I think implementing newer features is an improvement.

An improvement to Geocaching how? Explain to me how being able to tell all my FB friends that I found cache X makes caching better for me. Explain how it makes caching better for you. How is this an improvement to Geocaching.

So far you've only been able to express how this is an improvement to your social networking- by shortening the steps required to post on Facebook that you have, indeedy-doodley, found another cache.

Why do I have to keep repeating myself? Are my posts being deleted, or are people forgetting what they read? As I've said previously, it can be a way to meet up with friends who are also caching, it can be a way to meet new cachers in the area, it can be a way to connect with distant caching friends ("hey, I found that one last summer when I was there!")

 

The possibilities are pretty wide open. The negatives are "I wouldn't use it so no one else should."

First, to the inner quote that I highlighted: So, people who don't think your ideas are speculating, whereas you aren't? Hate to be the one to tell you, but you are definitely speculating, just as much as anyone else. Aside from your speculation that your idea is an improvement is your insulting speculation that anyone who doesn't like this idea is a backwards, out of date, bumpkin.

 

Now, on to your most recent post: People have posted real negatives to your idea, and you boil them down to "I wouldn't use it so no one else should"? Really? And you accuse others of wearing blinders?

[+IndyJones1023]

How original.

[+OldLog]

Being an Old fart I have all I can handle with my IPOD touch app right now but am not opposed to those with more tech needs. So if it is cost effective for Groundspeak I see no reason all should not go forward. For those opposed remember just because it is there does not mean you have to use it. Diff strokes as they say.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Being an Old fart I have all I can handle with my IPOD touch app right now but am not opposed to those with more tech needs. So if it is cost effective for Groundspeak I see no reason all should not go forward. For those opposed remember just because it is there does not mean you have to use it. Diff strokes as they say.

 

Just because something can be done doesn't mean that it should be done.

[+Too Tall John]

Calling it Spambook sort of nullifies your opinion on the matter.

Calling people backward, out of touch children nullifies your opinion on the matter. Also, calling a website Spambook doesn't break the guidelines here in the forums, while calling people names does.

How original.

Most truisms aren't original.

[+Too Tall John]

Being an Old fart I have all I can handle with my IPOD touch app right now but am not opposed to those with more tech needs. So if it is cost effective for Groundspeak I see no reason all should not go forward. For those opposed remember just because it is there does not mean you have to use it. Diff strokes as they say.

Just because something can be done doesn't mean that it should be done.

Has someone been reading my sig line?

[+sbell111]

Being an Old fart I have all I can handle with my IPOD touch app right now but am not opposed to those with more tech needs. So if it is cost effective for Groundspeak I see no reason all should not go forward. For those opposed remember just because it is there does not mean you have to use it. Diff strokes as they say.

 

Just because something can be done doesn't mean that it should be done.

Just because you don't favor something doesn't mean that it shouldn't be done.

[+Castle Mischief]

Being an Old fart I have all I can handle with my IPOD touch app right now but am not opposed to those with more tech needs. So if it is cost effective for Groundspeak I see no reason all should not go forward. For those opposed remember just because it is there does not mean you have to use it. Diff strokes as they say.

 

Just because something can be done doesn't mean that it should be done.

Just because you don't favor something doesn't mean that it shouldn't be done.

 

So what's your opinion on the topic then?

[+sbell111]

Being an Old fart I have all I can handle with my IPOD touch app right now but am not opposed to those with more tech needs. So if it is cost effective for Groundspeak I see no reason all should not go forward. For those opposed remember just because it is there does not mean you have to use it. Diff strokes as they say.

 

Just because something can be done doesn't mean that it should be done.

Just because you don't favor something doesn't mean that it shouldn't be done.

 

So what's your opinion on the topic then?

1. Given that the iphone version of the app works on the ipod, I see no reason for GS to rush an ipad-specific version to market. If they choose to put one out there, I have no problem with that.
   
2. I don't find the "I won't use facebook integration and I don't want anyone else to, either" to be a compelling argument against the option. I might or might not use it and in the past have suggested some sort of foursquare-like facebook integration. I think this would be cool and those that don't could turn it off at both ends.
   
3. People who believe that gc.com is lacking in some features are free to both mention it on the forums and stop paying for premium membership.
   

[+NYPaddleCacher]

Being an Old fart I have all I can handle with my IPOD touch app right now but am not opposed to those with more tech needs. So if it is cost effective for Groundspeak I see no reason all should not go forward. For those opposed remember just because it is there does not mean you have to use it. Diff strokes as they say.

 

Just because something can be done doesn't mean that it should be done.

Just because you don't favor something doesn't mean that it shouldn't be done.

 

Just because I gave my opinion on why I think GS shouldn't spend time developing an app optimized for the iPad, doesn't mean that I might actually like a geocaching app optimized for an iPad if they created one. In fact, I never actually *did* say whether or not I would like a GS created Geocaching app on the iPad. Of course, since I don't own an iPad, whether or not I would favor such an app is irrelevant.

[+StarBrand]

Anybody is free to express their own opinion on this forum but that should not automatically mean that anybody else should accept it and like it.

 

Facebook is the latest in a string of similar websites that some people flock towards and it tends to deeply polarize opinion either for or against. I know it has certainly altered the perception and the very definition of what a friend is or is not.

 

I am personally highly annoyed by the constant barrage of emails I get inviting me "like" things/companies and "friend" people. I don't even have an account!! Brilliant idea and marketing but I am so turned off by the 'buzz' it creates that when I see it intrude upon yet another component of my life, I react negatively to it.

[+wimseyguy]

I should qualify that I do not usually use my iPad for caching. Lugging a delicate, $850 device around nipple deep in a gator infested swamp seems like a recipe for disaster.

 

Fixed it for ya!

 

And back OT to give a serious answer, one of my reviewer friends posts the GC#'s of every new cache as he publishes them on FB. I'm almost ready to block him totally because I find that behavior so annoying there. But other than that one particular item, I really like the guy and his other posts. So I have just learned to ignore them, much as I do some avatars in here.

[+BuckeyeClan]

Anybody is free to express their own opinion on this forum but that should not automatically mean that anybody else should accept it and like it.

 

Facebook is the latest in a string of similar websites that some people flock towards and it tends to deeply polarize opinion either for or against. I know it has certainly altered the perception and the very definition of what a friend is or is not.

 

I am personally highly annoyed by the constant barrage of emails I get inviting me "like" things/companies and "friend" people. I don't even have an account!! Brilliant idea and marketing but I am so turned off by the 'buzz' it creates that when I see it intrude upon yet another component of my life, I react negatively to it.

 

The perception of whom? Nobody that I personally know on facebook has any confusion of the difference between a friend and a "friend". Funny though, sometimes becoming fb "friends" can actually lead to becoming friends. It seems to me that the biggest misperceptions are from people who don't use or understand facebook.

 

I don't really understand why you are receiving a barrage of emails inviting you to like things or friend people. I don't get any at all--unless my spam filter is blocking it. Do these requests come from individuals that you know? That suggests to me that they don't understand the tool they are using, or else you need to make your facebook dislike known to them.

 

As to the actual topic of this thread--I just don't think either issue deserves the angst that has been generated. An ipad app might be nice for some, but I doubt it's a priority right now. And adding a "post to facebook status" option to the existing apps doesn't seem like a horrible thing to me. If you aren't interested in it, turn it off, problem solved. I think the concern about "all the people you send your logs to will be annoyed and have a negative view of geocaching" is overblown. Every time a new game pops up in my newsfeed because somebody started playing it, I hide it--2 clicks, easy-peasy. I barely even notice who it is that actually played the game. Anybody annoyed by seeing logs will probably do the same; I doubt they'd get all overheated about it, just hide it, easy-peasy. And any cacher that would actually post every log from some power trail is probably already over-posting on facebook anyway, and has probably already been hidden by most of his/her "friends"!

[+Castle Mischief]

I don't find the "I won't use facebook integration and I don't want anyone else to, either" to be a compelling argument against the option. I might or might not use it and in the past have suggested some sort of foursquare-like facebook integration. I think this would be cool and those that don't could turn it off at both ends.

 

Expanding on this, do you have any opinion regarding priority of this in the dev queue versus the priority of tools and improvements to the site that are more directly related to finding geocaches?

[+Gitchee-Gummee]

Part of this problem (as I see it) with Fakebook, are things such as "virtual" logging of trackables and they end up getting locked down -- through no fault of the owner. Some other dork pastes the number or otherwise lists it, unstoppable at that point.

 

Similar circumstances with caches -- spoiler photos; telling "friends" (most everyone on Fakebook, one way or another) where to go find it; ---should I continue?

 

Both sites are social, but I fail to see them as socially compatible. Mixing or linking the two just presents problems for cachers, cache owners and traveler owners. Now, if it were possible that it were the other way around......

 

We (both) have FB accounts, she uses hers a lot, I use mine rarely. I guess I don't need to know who far__d yesterday, or who couldn't sleep last night -- and the "I've got such a headache" posts.

 

You wanna be a Fakebooker, be a Fakebooker; you wanna be a cacher, be a geocacher.

 

my 2¢..... and I'm stickin' to it!

[+StarBrand]

...

I don't really understand why you are receiving a barrage of emails inviting you to like things or friend people. I don't get any at all--unless my spam filter is blocking it. Do these requests come from individuals that you know? That suggests to me that they don't understand the tool they are using, or else you need to make your facebook dislike known to them.

...

I do not have a Facebook account. Most of these folks that email me are just the casual folks I run across in my life (church members, work associates, business contacts, local organizations, etc). They get my email address (from me or one of my websites or off my business card - even off of my Geocaches) and suddenly start asking me to 'friend' them so I can see photos/stories/art - whatever. Others are folks I knew in the past or went to school with - suddenly they feel compelled to communicate with me after a few decades - and they demand I use Facebook to do that.

 

My wife is really into using coupons whenever an where she can. Suddenly you need to signup on a list and 'friend' or 'like' them via Facebook to get any coupons or information from them (companies, websites, etc)

 

Even the local boy scout program suddenly wants everybody to abandon the friendly website we have used for years so that we can coordinate everything via a facebook page. Suddenly I can't find anything and it is littered and cluttered with comments and photos that just do not belong because somebody thinks that Facebook should be used for everybody and everything.

[+BuckeyeClan]

...

I don't really understand why you are receiving a barrage of emails inviting you to like things or friend people. I don't get any at all--unless my spam filter is blocking it. Do these requests come from individuals that you know? That suggests to me that they don't understand the tool they are using, or else you need to make your facebook dislike known to them.

...

I do not have a Facebook account. Most of these folks that email me are just the casual folks I run across in my life (church members, work associates, business contacts, local organizations, etc). They get my email address (from me or one of my websites or off my business card - even off of my Geocaches) and suddenly start asking me to 'friend' them so I can see photos/stories/art - whatever. Others are folks I knew in the past or went to school with - suddenly they feel compelled to communicate with me after a few decades - and they demand I use Facebook to do that.

 

My wife is really into using coupons whenever an where she can. Suddenly you need to signup on a list and 'friend' or 'like' them via Facebook to get any coupons or information from them (companies, websites, etc)

 

Even the local boy scout program suddenly wants everybody to abandon the friendly website we have used for years so that we can coordinate everything via a facebook page. Suddenly I can't find anything and it is littered and cluttered with comments and photos that just do not belong because somebody thinks that Facebook should be used for everybody and everything.

 

Ahh, I think I get what's happening. People sign up for facebook, and allow the program to search their e-mail address book for friends. Or they post pictures, and then click the "share with somebody not on facebook" option. Really, that's not a problem with facebook per se, but a problem with how your casual acquaintances use facebook. Of course companies are going to facebook to try to get people with coupons--it's free advertising for them when somebody "likes" their product. And facebook pages are free, and easy to set up.

 

At this point I'm getting off topic, so any further facebook-specific discussion should probably happen in the thread in OT. But with regards to geocaching, the geocaching.com facebook page has over 129,000 people that "like" it. Status updates made there tend to get a lot of comments and "likes". There are A LOT of cachers that are also facebookers. That some will want to combine the two in some small way shouldn't be a surprise. While I don't think it should be a priority, I'm fairly certain that the sky won't fall if posting a log to facebook becomes available in the gc.com apps.

[+softball29]

I've read through most of this thread and though there is arguing and speculating about Facebook, updating apps, APIs, drinking kool aid and others... there's really one thing I can't wrap my noodle around.

 

People use iPad's to geocache? Really?

 

For park and grabs? Maybe. But for like a 4-mile hike in the woods? Are you going to read while you hike? Maybe work on some documents?

 

I have the caching app on my Droid but only use it when needed. I still believe in the old fashioned GPS. I can't imagine paying so much for an iPad and worrying I could slip on some mossy rocks and watch the screen shatter over a few more rocks.

[+BlueDeuce]

Honest question here. Why do we need a phone app to interface with Facebook and not the standard webpage logging?

[jholly]

Honest question here. Why do we need a phone app to interface with Facebook and not the standard webpage logging?

Teachers use geocaching.com in their classrooms as part of the curriculum. Many school districts have a strict no facebook policy. Anything that loads anything facebook gets dropped into the blacklist. If you even have a facebook like on the webpage it is the death of the website. We went around that block last year.

[+BlueDeuce]

Honest question here. Why do we need a phone app to interface with Facebook and not the standard webpage logging?

Teachers use geocaching.com in their classrooms as part of the curriculum. Many school districts have a strict no facebook policy. Anything that loads anything facebook gets dropped into the blacklist. If you even have a facebook like on the webpage it is the death of the website. We went around that block last year.

 

Ah yes, thank you. Forgive me when I ask again.

[+BuckeyeClan]

Honest question here. Why do we need a phone app to interface with Facebook and not the standard webpage logging?

Teachers use geocaching.com in their classrooms as part of the curriculum. Many school districts have a strict no facebook policy. Anything that loads anything facebook gets dropped into the blacklist. If you even have a facebook like on the webpage it is the death of the website. We went around that block last year.

 

In the context of this thread, because that's what the OP requested. In general, I dunno. But adding it to the phone app would probably cause less of a stir than adding it to the webpage.

 

As far as the like button getting the webpage blocked from classrooms (and lets be honest, a bunch of people's work computers)--what the OP is requesting here is different than what happened last year. This discussion is about posting the cacher's actual log text to facebook. I don't know nuthin' 'bout programming and such, but I would imagine that works differently than sticking a "like" button on every cache page.

[jholly]

Honest question here. Why do we need a phone app to interface with Facebook and not the standard webpage logging?

Teachers use geocaching.com in their classrooms as part of the curriculum. Many school districts have a strict no facebook policy. Anything that loads anything facebook gets dropped into the blacklist. If you even have a facebook like on the webpage it is the death of the website. We went around that block last year.

 

In the context of this thread, because that's what the OP requested. In general, I dunno. But adding it to the phone app would probably cause less of a stir than adding it to the webpage.

 

As far as the like button getting the webpage blocked from classrooms (and lets be honest, a bunch of people's work computers)--what the OP is requesting here is different than what happened last year. This discussion is about posting the cacher's actual log text to facebook. I don't know nuthin' 'bout programming and such, but I would imagine that works differently than sticking a "like" button on every cache page.

Somehow you need to send the information to facebook, probably via an API. This exchange would probably earn the webpage a black star. But I'm no expert in things facebook.

[+IndyJones1023]

Honest question here. Why do we need a phone app to interface with Facebook and not the standard webpage logging?

Teachers use geocaching.com in their classrooms as part of the curriculum. Many school districts have a strict no facebook policy. Anything that loads anything facebook gets dropped into the blacklist. If you even have a facebook like on the webpage it is the death of the website. We went around that block last year.

 

In the context of this thread, because that's what the OP requested. In general, I dunno. But adding it to the phone app would probably cause less of a stir than adding it to the webpage.

 

As far as the like button getting the webpage blocked from classrooms (and lets be honest, a bunch of people's work computers)--what the OP is requesting here is different than what happened last year. This discussion is about posting the cacher's actual log text to facebook. I don't know nuthin' 'bout programming and such, but I would imagine that works differently than sticking a "like" button on every cache page.

Somehow you need to send the information to facebook, probably via an API. This exchange would probably earn the webpage a black star. But I'm no expert in things facebook.

And as we keep pointing out, my request has nothing to do with the web site.

[+Too Tall John]

Somehow you need to send the information to facebook, probably via an API. This exchange would probably earn the webpage a black star. But I'm no expert in things facebook.

And as we keep pointing out, my request has nothing to do with the web site.

It has everything to do with the website! I believe jholly's referring to the effect geocachers suddenly spamming* their friends with "I Found This Cache" posts. It would result in people thinking of geocaching in the same way I think of Farmville, Mafia Wars, FrontierVille, and the like. Another bunch of annoying notifications. There's your black star. Nothing to do with coding the website, everything to do with perception of the website.

 

*Yes, I said spamming. Any notification where a potential reaction is "Block This" could be considered spam. What you present as a solution is actually an indication of the problem

If there were Facebook integration into the geocaching app, you could block just that app. That way you'd still see their posts about eating toast in the morning and disagreeing with the Idol results and not have to see their geocaching finds.

Edited June 16, 2011 by Too Tall John

[jholly]

Honest question here. Why do we need a phone app to interface with Facebook and not the standard webpage logging?

Teachers use geocaching.com in their classrooms as part of the curriculum. Many school districts have a strict no facebook policy. Anything that loads anything facebook gets dropped into the blacklist. If you even have a facebook like on the webpage it is the death of the website. We went around that block last year.

 

In the context of this thread, because that's what the OP requested. In general, I dunno. But adding it to the phone app would probably cause less of a stir than adding it to the webpage.

 

As far as the like button getting the webpage blocked from classrooms (and lets be honest, a bunch of people's work computers)--what the OP is requesting here is different than what happened last year. This discussion is about posting the cacher's actual log text to facebook. I don't know nuthin' 'bout programming and such, but I would imagine that works differently than sticking a "like" button on every cache page.

Somehow you need to send the information to facebook, probably via an API. This exchange would probably earn the webpage a black star. But I'm no expert in things facebook.

And as we keep pointing out, my request has nothing to do with the web site.

Yes, I understand you have a major jihad on getting facebook stuff on a phone. You can turn any geocaching smartphone app you want into simply a mirror to facebook for all I care. But Buckeye Clan asked a question about the *WEBSITE* not your smartphone. You got that, *WEBSITE* not smartphone. Jeez, man, quit hyperventilating about your stupid smartphone app that does not have facebook integration. The more you flog this poor horse the less support your going to get. As Archie would say, "Stifle".

[+BuckeyeClan]

Somehow you need to send the information to facebook, probably via an API. This exchange would probably earn the webpage a black star. But I'm no expert in things facebook.

And as we keep pointing out, my request has nothing to do with the web site.

It has everything to do with the website! I believe jholly's referring to the effect geocachers suddenly spamming* their friends with "I Found This Cache" posts. It would result in people thinking of geocaching in the same way I think of Farmville, Mafia Wars, FrontierVille, and the like. Another bunch of annoying notifications. There's your black star. Nothing to do with coding the website, everything to do with perception of the website.

 

 

As I said before, I think that fear is way overblown. Why are people who don't even use facebook so totally convinced that they know how most people on facebook are going to react? I would hope (if the option existed) that cachers would have some common sense about what they post to facebook. And if they didn't, well, then their friends would hide the app--two clicks, easy peasy--and think no more of it. I highly doubt there will suddenly be a mass of facebookers seething with rage over the cluttering of their newsfeed by this horrid geocaching app. Look, boring/annoying status updates and apps are part of facebook; anybody who uses facebook knows that and accepts that annoyance; it's part of taking the bad with the good.

 

Actually, the more that I think about it, if it's the opinion of non-caching facebookers that you are concerned about, you should be clamoring for a geocaching.com app to post with and AS SOON AS POSSIBLE!!! (Stay with me here, I do have a point! ) From what I've read here in the forums, it's possible to auto-post your logs to twitter. It's also possible to auto-post your twitter feed to facebook. So logically, all the cachers that are intent on "spamming" their friends on facebook will go that route. Well, that's going to annoy their facebook friends wayyyyy more than a geocaching app would, because then you would have to hide *all* twitter feeds, and not just a little ol' geocaching app.

 

So to avoid giving geocaching a black eye among facebook users, it is IMPERATIVE that we have a geocaching app to post status updates with, or Geocaching As We Know It will cease to exist!

[+IndyJones1023]

Yes, I understand you have a major jihad on getting facebook stuff on a phone. You can turn any geocaching smartphone app you want into simply a mirror to facebook for all I care. But Buckeye Clan asked a question about the *WEBSITE* not your smartphone. You got that, *WEBSITE* not smartphone. Jeez, man, quit hyperventilating about your stupid smartphone app that does not have facebook integration. The more you flog this poor horse the less support your going to get. As Archie would say, "Stifle".

Flagrant inaccuracies like this are a real problem online.

 

I have no "major jihad" for anything. And Buckeye didn't ask anything about the website. Here's what he or she said:

 

In the context of this thread, because that's what the OP requested. In general, I dunno. But adding it to the phone app would probably cause less of a stir than adding it to the webpage.

 

As far as the like button getting the webpage blocked from classrooms (and lets be honest, a bunch of people's work computers)--what the OP is requesting here is different than what happened last year. This discussion is about posting the cacher's actual log text to facebook. I don't know nuthin' 'bout programming and such, but I would imagine that works differently than sticking a "like" button on every cache page.

 

You'll note that Buckeye asked no questions and was speaking about the app.

 

I know people are trying to paint the conversation in ways that make them look smart, superior, and better than me. We get it, you're awesome. But the fact is that slanting the conversation your way makes you look bad.

 

I'm just trying to keep it honest. I realize nothing will come about due to this thread. So no worries. At this point it's just a beat down. There's no horse involved, but keep pounding on me if you're having fun.

[+Too Tall John]

As I said before, I think that fear is way overblown. Why are people who don't even use facebook so totally convinced that they know how most people on facebook are going to react?

Ah, but I do use Facebook, I just don't want to use it in that way because I find games, etc that people spam me with quickly get ignored. Assuming that anyone arguing against this doesn't use Facebook is a flaw in your argument.

I would hope (if the option existed) that cachers would have some common sense about what they post to facebook. And if they didn't, well, then their friends would hide the app--two clicks, easy peasy--and think no more of it. I highly doubt there will suddenly be a mass of facebookers seething with rage over the cluttering of their newsfeed by this horrid geocaching app. Look, boring/annoying status updates and apps are part of facebook; anybody who uses facebook knows that and accepts that annoyance; it's part of taking the bad with the good.

One of the original "pros" for the idea was "Free Advertizing for GC.com!" Working under the idea that friends would hide the app because of the boring/annoying status updates (underlined words yours, not mine) seems contrary to that original "pro." So, what were the rest of the "pros"?

Actually, the more that I think about it, if it's the opinion of non-caching facebookers that you are concerned about, you should be clamoring for a geocaching.com app to post with and AS SOON AS POSSIBLE!!! (Stay with me here, I do have a point! ) From what I've read here in the forums, it's possible to auto-post your logs to twitter. It's also possible to auto-post your twitter feed to facebook. So logically, all the cachers that are intent on "spamming" their friends on facebook will go that route. Well, that's going to annoy their facebook friends wayyyyy more than a geocaching app would, because then you would have to hide *all* twitter feeds, and not just a little ol' geocaching app.

 

So to avoid giving geocaching a black eye among facebook users, it is IMPERATIVE that we have a geocaching app to post status updates with, or Geocaching As We Know It will cease to exist!

That flies in the face of logic, and I think you know it.

[mresoteric]

Honest question here. Why do we need a phone app to interface with Facebook and not the standard webpage logging?

Teachers use geocaching.com in their classrooms as part of the curriculum. Many school districts have a strict no facebook policy. Anything that loads anything facebook gets dropped into the blacklist. If you even have a facebook like on the webpage it is the death of the website. We went around that block last year.

 

In the context of this thread, because that's what the OP requested. In general, I dunno. But adding it to the phone app would probably cause less of a stir than adding it to the webpage.

 

As far as the like button getting the webpage blocked from classrooms (and lets be honest, a bunch of people's work computers)--what the OP is requesting here is different than what happened last year. This discussion is about posting the cacher's actual log text to facebook. I don't know nuthin' 'bout programming and such, but I would imagine that works differently than sticking a "like" button on every cache page.

Somehow you need to send the information to facebook, probably via an API. This exchange would probably earn the webpage a black star. But I'm no expert in things facebook.

And as we keep pointing out, my request has nothing to do with the web site.

Yes, I understand you have a major jihad on getting facebook stuff on a phone. You can turn any geocaching smartphone app you want into simply a mirror to facebook for all I care. But Buckeye Clan asked a question about the *WEBSITE* not your smartphone. You got that, *WEBSITE* not smartphone. Jeez, man, quit hyperventilating about your stupid smartphone app that does not have facebook integration. The more you flog this poor horse the less support your going to get. As Archie would say, "Stifle".

 

As the OP, isn't it Indy's prerogative to make attempts to bring this thread back on topic which is, after all, about the phone app?

[+Castle Mischief]

As I said before, I think that fear is way overblown. Why are people who don't even use facebook so totally convinced that they know how most people on facebook are going to react?

Ah, but I do use Facebook, I just don't want to use it in that way because I find games, etc that people spam me with quickly get ignored. Assuming that anyone arguing against this doesn't use Facebook is a flaw in your argument.

 

Just adding that, as I have said, I too use Facebook. Frequently. I also use Twitter all day long. Being able to send my find log or a message that says that I have found another cache has no positive effect on my actual caching.

[+Too Tall John]

I know people are trying to paint the conversation in ways that make them look smart, superior, and better than me. We get it, you're awesome. But the fact is that slanting the conversation your way makes you look bad.

Hmm... Who's been painting the conversation? You've called and/or implied that people in this thread are:

• Children ignoring logic
• Obtuse
• Belligerent Denizens
• Speculating (while you're just offering an opinion??)
• Narrow minded and "insultory"
• Stalkers (does it make me a stalker for going back and reading your posts?)
• Stubborn (and to the point that would be detrimental to others & ourselves!)
• Curmudgeons (My personal favorite!)

I'd bring up a certain pair of stovetop denizens, but you'd be compelled to remind me how it was unoriginal again. Oh, I forgot to add that one to the list.

 

As I read through your posts, I did notice one thing. You seem to think that this app wouldn't be a problem because you don't log that many caches. You even go so far as accusing people of "over inflating" the numbers. You've failed to take into consideration the fact that every person who has this new app you're asking for will suddenly have to option to spam Facebook. So, nobody's inflating anything, you're just assuming that you'll be the only one using the feature. Pretty egocentric to not think about the impact on others, eh?

 

Oh, sorry, you can add that one to my list of brush strokes.

[+IndyJones1023]

As I read through your posts, I did notice one thing. You seem to think that this app wouldn't be a problem because you don't log that many caches. You even go so far as accusing people of "over inflating" the numbers. You've failed to take into consideration the fact that every person who has this new app you're asking for will suddenly have to option to spam Facebook. So, nobody's inflating anything, you're just assuming that you'll be the only one using the feature. Pretty egocentric to not think about the impact on others, eh?

 

Oh, sorry, you can add that one to my list of brush strokes.

I don't recall the over inflation claim offhand, but I didn't fail to take into consideration others using the app. At the time, I was talking about my numbers. Of course (if it were to happen) others would use the feature and not just me.

 

But if you need to color the conversation in that direction to make me seem like an egocentric person, then have at it.

[+Too Tall John]

I don't recall the over inflation claim offhand, but I didn't fail to take into consideration others using the app. At the time, I was talking about my numbers. Of course (if it were to happen) others would use the feature and not just me.

And people keep trying to inflate numbers to make their opinions valid. I'm not finding 100 caches a day and sending them out to 3000 people.

Even if you did find 100 caches/day and send them to 3000 people, that's a fraction of what will happen if your idea goes live. If this hits the market, hundreds of people will send out dozens of cache finds a day to hundreds of friends. May not sound as impressive as your strawman numbers, but do the math: 250 cachers * 20 caches * 200 friends = 1 million spammings. Did you really take into consideration how this app would be used?

But if you need to color the conversation in that direction to make me seem like an egocentric person, then have at it.

Just be careful, or you'll paint yourself into a corner. Edited June 16, 2011 by Too Tall John

[+IndyJones1023]

Even if you did find 100 caches/day and send them to 3000 people, that's a fraction of what will happen if your idea goes live. If this hits the market, hundreds of people will send out dozens of cache finds a day to hundreds of friends. May not sound as impressive as your strawman numbers, but do the math: 250 cachers * 20 caches * 200 friends = 1 million spammings. Did you really take into consideration how this app would be used?

But if you need to color the conversation in that direction to make me seem like an egocentric person, then have at it.

Just be careful, or you'll paint yourself into a corner.

The numbers do get high when you use them that way. But that makes it sound like someone will be getting 1 million spam messages, when in reality (using your numbers) 1 person will get 20 messages. It's not as though everyone on Facebook will get hundreds of spams a day. A person who has a caching friend will get a few to several to maybe a few dozen messages when that person goes caching.

 

A few adjustments are in order, as well. Facebook messages aren't spam. These are messages from your friends whom you've decided to let message you. And if you find their messaging annoying, you can block the app or the person. Also, you make it seem as if every cacher finds dozens of caches every day. Is that realistic? I've been told I'm on the low end of cachers, but I doubt people go out and find several caches every day. And if they do dedicate a day to a cache run, I'd guess it's only on weekends, and probably 1 weekend a month.

 

So the numbers you toss about are skewing the perception a bit.

[+tozainamboku]

As far as the like button getting the webpage blocked from classrooms (and lets be honest, a bunch of people's work computers)--what the OP is requesting here is different than what happened last year. This discussion is about posting the cacher's actual log text to facebook. I don't know nuthin' 'bout programming and such, but I would imagine that works differently than sticking a "like" button on every cache page.

Somehow you need to send the information to facebook, probably via an API. This exchange would probably earn the webpage a black star. But I'm no expert in things facebook.

My understanding is that the 'button' is an iframe - meaning a small area on the web page is displaying content from Facebook and not from the site of the parent page (Geocaching.com). Work sites that block facebook generally would simply block the area that the button used and you would see a red X there. But in some cases it seem it would cause the whole paged (including the Geocaching.com stuff) to fail to load.

 

Many sites have steered away from the 'Like' button and just use a Share on Facebook button, which is a simple link. These are generally not blocked until you click the button.

 

For automatically sharing on Facebook you don't even need to have anything on the cache pages. Make a user option to share on Facebook, like the current option to share on Twitter, then when you post a field note using SMS TextMarks or using the geocaching smartphone app, it can automatically share on Facebook.

 

With regard to flooding your friends Facebook pages with posts everytime you find a cache, I think the OP is suggesting that it not be automatic. Instead he would like a button or checkbox in the phone app to share specific logs on Facebook. No doubt some people will share every log, and they would soon annoy their Facebook friends. But most Facebook users eventually learn to be judicious in what they share on Facebook.

[+IndyJones1023]

With regard to flooding your friends Facebook pages with posts everytime you find a cache, I think the OP is suggesting that it not be automatic. Instead he would like a button or checkbox in the phone app to share specific logs on Facebook. No doubt some people will share every log, and they would soon annoy their Facebook friends. But most Facebook users eventually learn to be judicious in what they share on Facebook.

Good point. This is something that I was thinking and now realize I failed to spell out (because you all can read my mind, right?). I (and hopefully other potential users) wouldn't post every find. However, on trips or to special caches I might commemorate them with a FB post.

[Clan Riffster]

Facebook messages aren't spam.

You seem to be hung up on this belief, even though it's been demonstrated repeatedly that it is incorrect. While it's not particularly unusual for folks to get so wrapped up in a belief system that they lose sight of simple logic, at this point, it's a belief that you should probably keep to yourself, as the constant repetition makes you sound like an extremist. It brings to mind one of those guys who prowls big cities wearing signs proclaiming "The End Is Near".

 

For many folks, Facebook, specifically the oh so annoying messages generated within, are spam.

 

Many employers define it as spam, blocking it from their servers.

 

It clearly fits at least one, (probably more), of the quoted definition of spam.

 

You don't think it's spam. We get that. Can we move on now?

[+IndyJones1023]

Facebook messages aren't spam.

You seem to be hung up on this belief, even though it's been demonstrated repeatedly that it is incorrect.

There has been no such demonstration.

[+sbell111]

I don't find the "I won't use facebook integration and I don't want anyone else to, either" to be a compelling argument against the option. I might or might not use it and in the past have suggested some sort of foursquare-like facebook integration. I think this would be cool and those that don't could turn it off at both ends.

 

Expanding on this, do you have any opinion regarding priority of this in the dev queue versus the priority of tools and improvements to the site that are more directly related to finding geocaches?

Prioritization of Groundspeak projects is not something that I concern myself with. It should be noted that facebook integration would be directly related to finding caches since it could announce same on one's facebook page.

[+sbell111]

Facebook messages aren't spam.

You seem to be hung up on this belief, even though it's been demonstrated repeatedly that it is incorrect.

There has been no such demonstration.

Agreed. With facebook, you have given specific people the priveledge of posting messages to your feed. If you don't want them to do so, you simply:

1) don't 'friend' them,

2) block their messages,

3) block messages from a specific app, or

4) defriend them.

Edited June 16, 2011 by sbell111

[+IndyJones1023]

Spam is commercial in nature, such as "best v1agr4 on the net!!!1!" and "like us for free offers!" Messages from people you've set up as your friends on FB are not spam. Simple, really.

[+GeoGeeBee]

Spam is commercial in nature, such as "best v1agr4 on the net!!!1!" and "like us for free offers!" Messages from people you've set up as your friends on FB are not spam. Simple, really.

You don't get to decide what is spam and what is not. Not all spam is commercial in nature.

 

Here's wikipedia's definition:

"Spam is the use of electronic messaging systems (including most broadcast media, digital delivery systems) to send unsolicited bulk messages indiscriminately."

 

If one of my friends starts sending a constant stream of "Found" logs, those are bulk messages. They are not solicited. They are sent indiscriminately. They are, in short, spam.

[+IndyJones1023]

If you want to get technical (instead of using a user-editable document), doesn't the CAN-SPAM act say that to be considered spam the messages "must be sent to a unique electronic mail address?” I don't think posting to a Facebook account falls under that.

[+Redfist]

Spam is commercial in nature, such as "best v1agr4 on the net!!!1!" and "like us for free offers!" Messages from people you've set up as your friends on FB are not spam. Simple, really.

You don't get to decide what is spam and what is not. Not all spam is commercial in nature.

 

Here's wikipedia's definition:

"Spam is the use of electronic messaging systems (including most broadcast media, digital delivery systems) to send unsolicited bulk messages indiscriminately."

 

If one of my friends starts sending a constant stream of "Found" logs, those are bulk messages. They are not solicited. They are sent indiscriminately. They are, in short, spam.

 

+1

[+IndyJones1023]

Also, I don't think such messages can be considered spam since you've approved that person to communicate with you. I may not want an email from my friend about helping him move, but it's not spam. It's kind of like giving your email address to Subway to enter a contest. You can expect to receive more emails from them, but they're not spam, because you approved it. You have to unsubscribe from their system after the fact.

 

Just like blocking an app or user on Facebook.