Good bye c:geo

[+dbeetle]

I myself found a new excitement for our sport when I got my smart phone and started useing C-Geo .. Its ... I have an hour to kill, on the fly, no papawerwork, no laptop and able to log them too! .. its all about just go and have fun, this I will surley miss. I have not used the Groundspeak "app" but all the reviews SUCK!! y would I even try to make that work and have to pay too! F THAT ... My intrest is lost because of this, I may still geocache every now and then, on the free side only.

 

I WILL NOT RENEW MY MEMBERSHIP BECAUSE OF THIS!!

 

MI-Cacher

[+dbeetle]

I agree... c:geo has added life to caching. For people who travel or even just people with a little bit of time on your hands, c:geo is the ticket. Unless an app becomes available that has the same feature as c:geo, I will NOT be renewing my membership. Once you have gone c:geo, there is no going back.

[Master Shifu]

So will Groundspeak eventually allow "screen scraping" and "live maps" for their own application?

No, they won't, because it won't be necessary. All of the overhead involved in dumping out a screen full of html will be gone since the API should provide direct access to the data that underlies those screens in the first place. It becomes the client's job to manage presentation of that data, not GC's web site. Helps to understand how this stuff is architected before diving in...

 

Sounds like the update is just what were looking for then. If that's the case and it makes thing super easy for 3 party app developers to give us all the options were looking for then we should be seeing some nice geocaching app's popping up in the market

As I said before, it helps...

 

Just how well featured either GS or any 3rd party developer's application CAN be is going to be limited by what hooks are provided into the data base. The more information that is made available, the more features one can build into an application. As has been noted, C:GEO had features that the GS application did not. This could be a matter of the authors of the GC application just not being creative enough, or it could be that even the GC developers have not yet had access to the database in a sufficiently thorough way to create the features that C:GEO created from scraping the data from individual pages at gc.com. We don't have any real visibility to that out here.

 

I don't know much about this kind of stuff (I know I know... it shows).... but it seems to me that since c:geo's app is open source and the maker has already posted the code\files (https://github.com/carnero/c-geo) then GS could theoretically just steal and edit it to make their app's futures similar to that of c:geo (mainly the data scraping).

[+ecanderson]

I don't know much about this kind of stuff (I know I know... it shows).... but it seems to me that since c:geo's app is open source and the maker has already posted the code\files (https://github.com/carnero/c-geo) then GS could theoretically just steal and edit it to make their app's futures similar to that of c:geo (mainly the data scraping).

I'm not 100% clear about that sentence, but rest assured, GC doesn't want their application calling up hundreds of web pages and scraping the data to present in their application, either. There's nothing about the 'scraping' that is desirable from their end. Whether GC is able to duplicate all of the features of C:GEO will in part be a function of whether their own API gives them direct access to enough information to do so without scraping pages. It's not the act of 'scraping' that costs the GC website anything - it's the act of calling up all of the pages to get the data to scrape in the first place.

 

The API provides a more direct and very abbreviated (and possibly not even human readable) version of the requisite data without the enormous overhead of producing a pretty HTML page for you to look at along with it.

Edited June 28, 2011 by ecanderson

[jholly]

So will Groundspeak eventually allow "screen scraping" and "live maps" for their own application?

No, they won't, because it won't be necessary. All of the overhead involved in dumping out a screen full of html will be gone since the API should provide direct access to the data that underlies those screens in the first place. It becomes the client's job to manage presentation of that data, not GC's web site. Helps to understand how this stuff is architected before diving in...

 

Sounds like the update is just what were looking for then. If that's the case and it makes thing super easy for 3 party app developers to give us all the options were looking for then we should be seeing some nice geocaching app's popping up in the market

As I said before, it helps...

 

Just how well featured either GS or any 3rd party developer's application CAN be is going to be limited by what hooks are provided into the data base. The more information that is made available, the more features one can build into an application. As has been noted, C:GEO had features that the GS application did not. This could be a matter of the authors of the GC application just not being creative enough, or it could be that even the GC developers have not yet had access to the database in a sufficiently thorough way to create the features that C:GEO created from scraping the data from individual pages at gc.com. We don't have any real visibility to that out here.

 

I don't know much about this kind of stuff (I know I know... it shows).... but it seems to me that since c:geo's app is open source and the maker has already posted the code\files (https://github.com/carnero/c-geo) then GS could theoretically just steal and edit it to make their app's futures similar to that of c:geo (mainly the data scraping).

I have not looked at the source so I'm not sure what, if any copyright is involved, but generally it is hard for one to steal open source code. What might be illegal is using the open source code in a commercial application. But why would GS want to make a screen scraping application that violates their TOU and the sell it or give it away? That makes no sense.

[+Col. Bucky]

I agree... c:geo has added life to caching. For people who travel or even just people with a little bit of time on your hands, c:geo is the ticket. Unless an app becomes available that has the same feature as c:geo, I will NOT be renewing my membership. Once you have gone c:geo, there is no going back.

This is the post I agree with the most. Once you've used c:geo, it's hard to look at another application. I'm a premium member, I bought the GS application and I will still use c:geo until it doesn't function. I'm really, REALLY surprised that GS didn't come up with something like this to begin with. Hopefully, things will get brighter once the API is released. I was just really fascinated driving through KY last week and seeing caches pop up on the screen as I was driving down the road. THAT'S what people want! Seriously, if I'm going to go to the trouble of doing a PQ, then I'm going to tether my phone to my laptop and run it through Clyde-god's GSAK program first before sending it to my Oregon for caching. Phone apps are meant to be quick and easy. c:geo is definitely quick and very easy to use.

[+ecanderson]

But why would GS want to make a screen scraping application ...

I didn't follow that, either.

[Master Shifu]

I don't know much about this kind of stuff (I know I know... it shows).... but it seems to me that since c:geo's app is open source and the maker has already posted the code\files (https://github.com/carnero/c-geo) then GS could theoretically just steal and edit it to make their app's futures similar to that of c:geo (mainly the data scraping).

I'm not 100% clear about that sentence, but rest assured, GC doesn't want their application calling up hundreds of web pages and scraping the data to present in their application, either. There's nothing about the 'scraping' that is desirable from their end. Whether GC is able to duplicate all of the features of C:GEO will in part be a function of whether their own API gives them direct access to enough information to do so without scraping pages. It's not the act of 'scraping' that costs the GC website anything - it's the act of calling up all of the pages to get the data to scrape in the first place.

 

The API provides a more direct and very abbreviated (and possibly not even human readable) version of the requisite data without the enormous overhead of producing a pretty HTML page for you to look at along with it.

 

So c:geo's scraping function is just a work around for not having the ability or rights to directly access groundspeaks database to acquire the info needed for all the extra options & info it provides over the other geocaching apps that aren't breaking the TOU?

[+ecanderson]

So c:geo's scraping function is just a work around for not having the ability or rights to directly access groundspeaks database to acquire the info needed for all the extra options & info it provides over the other geocaching apps that aren't breaking the TOU?

Darned near, but you've got the basic understanding.

 

On the C:GEO side: Without using the API, C:GEO would necessarily have to use scraping for ALL of the data it needs, not just the extras. It would be his only interface. Sounds as though perhaps he was offered access - I wasn't there - but declined for the time being. Perhaps it wasn't complete enough to allow him to do as much as he'd already done with his application, and he really didn't want to step backwards? Who knows?

 

On the CG application side: The question is whether 1) GC's application had good enough access to data via their own earlier version of the unpublished API, but was just a lesser application, or 2) whether even it didn't have enough access to the needed data to produce all of the features due to a somewhat "thin" API. I doubt any of us will ever know which was the case.

[John E Cache]

So c:geo's scraping function is just a work around for not having the ability or rights to directly access groundspeaks database to acquire the info needed for all the extra options & info it provides over the other geocaching apps that aren't breaking the TOU?

Darned near, but you've got the basic understanding.

 

On the C:GEO side: Without using the API, C:GEO would necessarily have to use scraping for ALL of the data it needs, not just the extras. It would be his only interface. Sounds as though perhaps he was offered access - I wasn't there - but declined for the time being. Perhaps it wasn't complete enough to allow him to do as much as he'd already done with his application, and he really didn't want to step backwards? Who knows?

 

On the CG application side: The question is whether 1) GC's application had good enough access to data via their own earlier version of the unpublished API, but was just a lesser application, or 2) whether even it didn't have enough access to the needed data to produce all of the features due to a somewhat "thin" API. I doubt any of us will ever know which was the case.

Just curious, you keep using the term "screen scraping" and I have no clue what you mean. Could you use more modern terms, please. I last used screen scraping 30+ years ago when the screen memory contained ASCII data.. What screen are you referring to? Are you saying there is character recognition of the screen pixels to get data?

[+Chrysalides]

Just curious, you keep using the term "screen scraping" and I have no clue what you mean. Could you use more modern terms, please. I last used screen scraping 30+ years ago when the screen memory contained ASCII data.. What screen are you referring to? Are you saying there is character recognition of the screen pixels to get data?

Web scraping

 

"Screen scraping" is what Groundspeak used to call it. I can't find the reference anymore in their KB. Like "bad form", sometimes these terms have a life of their own.

[+insx]

Georg has a live map, including google satellite view. Georg is a great app, I don't know why it gets overlooked (maybe because it costs a few euros/pounds/dollars). Of course, you have to have a premium membership to get PQs.

[+Chrysalides]

Georg has a live map, including google satellite view.

I think what people refer to as Live Map means pulling caches in on demand from geocaching.com and displaying it. GeOrg appears to load from a GPX file only. However, it does look like something I can use.

Edited June 28, 2011 by Chrysalides

[+webmicha]

From my point of view, the available geocaching apps work in different ways and therefor apples are compered with oranges.

 

c:geo stands for live geocaching while you can aquire cachelistings from anywhere you have an internet connection. Besides that, it can also deal with PQs like most other apps do. The disadvantage of PQs is, that they are static and from the point of creation on they contains "old" data. That's the way GPSrs work too and how a lot of cachehunters have learned it for years. It means you have to do a lot of prerequisites before starting a gc tour. Caching with a smartphone is completely different because you are always connected to the internet (under normal circumstances) and of course you have always access to all available information. From that perspective, the availabilty of live data enables you also live feedback, live logging etc. and results in a real-time experience that wasn't possible before.

 

What I understand is that the API provided by GS was not able to fulfil the requirements of such an app so far and the developer used another way to gather the information the app needs to fit users interest. At the end, c:geo is the most installed, most used and best rated geocaching app for Android so far and all stakeholders in this conflict should be think about how to find a solution that respect users needs and wishes

Edited June 28, 2011 by webmicha

[+insx]

I always download a PQ in advance if I can. The internet connection on my phone has never been 100% reliable.

Edited June 28, 2011 by insx

[+insx]

What is the difference between c:geo's live map and GC's 'show on map'?

[+webmicha]

What is the difference between c:geo's live map and GC's 'show on map'?

on the live map you can see all caches depending on the map scale you set while you are moving (e. g. by car). "Show on map" means to display the caches from a list (e. g. nearest 20 around the place you made the request) on a map. That's quite easy

[+currykev]

3 years ago I bought an iPhone. The #1 reason was to allow me to use the gc.com app to grab caches on the fly.

It was so hit and miss that I gave up. I bought an Android phone next using said free app. No trouble since.

Shame if c:geo disappears. I'll find something else that works I'm sure. Not a $10 sub par one at that.

[+albertw]

I don't know much about this kind of stuff (I know I know... it shows).... but it seems to me that since c:geo's app is open source and the maker has already posted the code\files (https://github.com/carnero/c-geo) then GS could theoretically just steal and edit it to make their app's futures similar to that of c:geo (mainly the data scraping).

I'm not 100% clear about that sentence, but rest assured, GC doesn't want their application calling up hundreds of web pages and scraping the data to present in their application, either. There's nothing about the 'scraping' that is desirable from their end. Whether GC is able to duplicate all of the features of C:GEO will in part be a function of whether their own API gives them direct access to enough information to do so without scraping pages. It's not the act of 'scraping' that costs the GC website anything - it's the act of calling up all of the pages to get the data to scrape in the first place.

 

The API provides a more direct and very abbreviated (and possibly not even human readable) version of the requisite data without the enormous overhead of producing a pretty HTML page for you to look at along with it.

 

And if Groundspeak were serious about promoting the growth of the game (and therefore their premium memberships) then they would make a single API that gives everyone the data they need but require authentication for premium members to get additional data. The reason that people have tools the parse the web pages is because Groundspeak have never provided an API. Not having an API was excusable initially, but to still not have it publicly available now is very telling about attitudes at Groundspeak since I doubt the reason is technical inability; the strain on the servers would actually go down if there was an API people could use. This is particularly a pity when all the content that makes geocaching popular and Groundspeak profitable is created by the userbase.

 

Groundspeak needs to take a serious look at itself here. Having been out of the game for a while its surprising to see the age profile of users seems to have gotten older. This game should be full of kids now that they all have GPS's on their phones; but effectively needing to pay $30 for membership plus $10 for an official app (thats is not as good as the free c:geo), plus not letting the geekier ones innovate with an API to program against is not a good thing for the game.

 

I had stopped geogaching for a couple of years and only got back into it thanks to getting an android and c:geo. c:geo is the reason that I decided to take out a premium membership again. I doubt I'm alone and providing an open way for users and members to access data should be part of the Groundspeak business plan and is the single simplest thing the company can do to expand and to expand the game. Sadly since attitudes in Groundspeak don't seem to have changed much from when I was last geocaching I don't think I'll be renewing that membership again unless things open up.

[+Lizard!]

Shame if c:geo disappears. I'll find something else that works I'm sure.

Try GeOrg, the best geocaching app ever (IMHO), I dont use anything else. It doesn't have a live map (since it would be "illegal"), but you can load PQs or single GPX-files.

[+insx]

That's quite easy

 

It is if you're familiar with the program. I haven't used it since the early days.

[+insx]

Try GeOrg, the best geocaching app ever (IMHO), I dont use anything else. It doesn't have a live map (since it would be "illegal"), but you can load PQs or single GPX-files.

 

Yes, and if we ever get Georg with API access, it could be the perfect app.

[+T4TH]

The reason I went with an Android phone is primarily due to c:geo. Since this news of c:geo ending, I will no longer renew my premium membership and pay G$ for a substandard product. What does that premium membership afford me? I've read these posts that G$ is a small company, yet if they partnered and collaborated with high-end people/organizations (Google, c:geo, etc.), then everyone is happy. This puts me in mind of Steve Jobs of Apple and his refusal to implement Flash into Mac products. PQ are a total waste of time - as useless as a rotary phone. At what point in time is G$ wandering around in?

 

As for those who have used c:geo and have complaints that they couldn't navigate menu around the software - did you take some time to actually learn it and play with it? Or maybe you were using that rotary phone in the field. Every aspect of c:geo is well thought out and works excellent. It is pure brilliance. I would GLADLY pay a yearly amount - the same as I paid for G$ membership, to use c:geo. It is worth every bit of that amount and more. When I think of how much I spend geocaching every year with travel bugs, geocoins, gas for driving to the caches, eating at restaurants in different areas that geocaching brought me to - why wouldn't I pay for an app that make geocaching an absolute joy? Good luck finding an app remotely as good as c:geo.

 

But now, G$ is like the spoiled kid on the street who owns the football - and if he isn't catered to, then he's going to take his football and go home. The rest of us suffer.

 

Groundspeak - instead of working WITH carnero, you'd rather take your game away from people who truly enjoy playing it. Shame on you. Argue for your limitations, and sure enough, they're yours.

 

I looked forward to geocaching with my family. It's sad to see yet another family oriented activity ruined by ignorance, greed and childish behavior.

 

Oh, and what perfect timing to pull the plug on an amazing app, than at the time of GeoWoodstock.

[+ArtieD]

PQ are a total waste of time - as useless as a rotary phone.

 

Since when? Believe it or not, there are many of us who use a dedicated GPSr for geocaching and PQ's are a great feature.

 

All I see from your post is another person acting like a petulant child that didn't get their way and is now collecting his toys and going home. Need a hankie?

[+T4TH]

PQ are a total waste of time - as useless as a rotary phone.

 

Since when? Believe it or not, there are many of us who use a dedicated GPSr for geocaching and PQ's are a great feature.

 

All I see from your post is another person acting like a petulant child that didn't get their way and is now collecting his toys and going home. Need a hankie?

 

Is it me who didn't get their way or Groundspeak?

 

Tell you what "Arthur", I could come back with a million and one attacks on you as a person, but it won't solve anything. If you are unable to discuss the issue without referring to others as a petulant child, then I have nothing further to discuss with you. I stated my opinion about the situation, not you. Your post clearly indicates your inability to discuss a topic without resorting to immature taunts.

 

And, I've got your hankie right here.

[+ArtieD]

PQ are a total waste of time - as useless as a rotary phone.

 

Since when? Believe it or not, there are many of us who use a dedicated GPSr for geocaching and PQ's are a great feature.

 

All I see from your post is another person acting like a petulant child that didn't get their way and is now collecting his toys and going home. Need a hankie?

 

Is it me who didn't get their way or Groundspeak?

 

Tell you what "Arthur", I could come back with a million and one attacks on you as a person, but it won't solve anything. If you are unable to discuss the issue without referring to others as a petulant child, then I have nothing further to discuss with you. I stated my opinion about the situation, not you. Your post clearly indicates your inability to discuss a topic without resorting to immature taunts.

 

And, I've got your hankie right here.

 

You still fail to answer the question...how are pocket queries useless?

[+T4TH]

PQ are a total waste of time - as useless as a rotary phone.

 

Since when? Believe it or not, there are many of us who use a dedicated GPSr for geocaching and PQ's are a great feature.

 

All I see from your post is another person acting like a petulant child that didn't get their way and is now collecting his toys and going home. Need a hankie?

 

Is it me who didn't get their way or Groundspeak?

 

Tell you what "Arthur", I could come back with a million and one attacks on you as a person, but it won't solve anything. If you are unable to discuss the issue without referring to others as a petulant child, then I have nothing further to discuss with you. I stated my opinion about the situation, not you. Your post clearly indicates your inability to discuss a topic without resorting to immature taunts.

 

And, I've got your hankie right here.

 

You still fail to answer the question...how are pocket queries useless?

 

In comparison to a real-time app like c:geo, PQ's don't make the cut. Rather than load a specific area, I have (or had in this case) the ability to use a live map feature and see all caches around me. If a new cache is published while out, I have the ability to be FTF as it appears on the map - which I have done. I have the convenience to open the app wherever I am at any given time and see the caches around me without any extra effort. I don't need to figure out my travel plans ahead of time - if I change my mind and head in a different area, I can see them in real time as I drive.

 

I've used PQ in the past and I found them extremely cumbersome. Too many steps, too much hassle. But that's my opinion. If they work for you, great, go for it. I'm not saying anyone is doing anything wrong by using that (what I consider outdated) method. The whole purpose of PQ's and apps are about choices. Groundspeak has taken away a choice for cachers the option of a brilliant FREE application. They would rather people spend money on substandard apps.

[+ArtieD]

Groundspeak has taken away a choice for cachers the option of a brilliant FREE application. They would rather people spend money on substandard apps.

 

As far as I can see, Groundspeak took away nothing. The developer of c:geo took it away by not continuing the development of his app (which violated the TOU, but hey, who's counting?).

Edited June 28, 2011 by Arthur & Trillian

[+webmicha]

PQ are a total waste of time - as useless as a rotary phone.

 

Since when? Believe it or not, there are many of us who use a dedicated GPSr for geocaching and PQ's are a great feature.

 

All I see from your post is another person acting like a petulant child that didn't get their way and is now collecting his toys and going home. Need a hankie?

 

Using PQs was a comfortable way to load caches for years. Btw: c:geo is also able to handle PQs as every other app, but that's not the point. Times are changing, with all the millions of smartphones which are sold in the last and coming years, user's behaviour is changing too. Now you will really get every information with just a finger tap and why should this not work for geocaching?! Every cacher should be able to go for a hunt in the way he wants. Those who are using PQs for their GPSrs or apps can do so, those who are prefering spontanous live caching should not be slowed down. I think it has to be accepted, that due to smartphone using, a new generation of cachers comes up and they have other necessities. On one hand there's an app which satisfy these demands, on the other hand this app has requirements which are not fulfilled by the service provider. Or in other words: what the service provider offers is not adequate.

[+ecanderson]

Just curious, you keep using the term "screen scraping" and I have no clue what you mean. Could you use more modern terms, please. I last used screen scraping 30+ years ago when the screen memory contained ASCII data.. What screen are you referring to? Are you saying there is character recognition of the screen pixels to get data?

Negative on the pixels. To obtain the data necessary for his application, the author was pulling up entire web pages of data at a time, extracting from those web pages the bits of data he needed, and displaying it in his own way on the 'small screen' with his application. The primary problem with this is that pulling up and extracting the data from hundreds of web pages involves the large over head of ... pulling up the hundreds of web pages. The actual data needed -- minus all of the fluff and buttons and banners and colors -- is miniscule by comparison. An API can be created to permit direct transfer of just the important bits, saving an enormous amount of overhead in server work and the bandwidth to send it.

[jholly]

<snip>

Groundspeak - instead of working WITH carnero, you'd rather take your game away from people who truly enjoy playing it. Shame on you. Argue for your limitations, and sure enough, they're yours.

Jeremy's facebook post talking about c:geo....

He is well aware that the application violates our site's TOU, but instead of us trying to shut down his application we reached out... and offered him early access to our new API, the same version being used by our Android and WP7 applications now. We just haven't allowed our partners to use the production version until we can ensure that it is scalable.

 

I can only assume he is tired of programming an application he offers for free, and we're a convenient excuse, however disingenuous, for him to quit supporting it.

It does sound like GS tried to work with him but he refused. So instead of bashing GS maybe a bit of bashing on the c:geo would be appropriate.

[Master Shifu]

I don’t really care who makes the app or how much it cost.... if an app is out there that has spontaneous live caching, that will be the app I will use, period. If ones don’t exist in the future I think it will slow the progress of the game and turn many people off to it. Once you get your method down, your going to want to stick to it. There is no reason for technology to move backwards or be stunted in any way. Software should run as good and have has many options as the hardware allows it to. A new breed of players has emerged and they know what they want…. I don’t see a reason not to give them what they want and what they are used to.

 

Some people prefer to use a standard GPS unite which they are accustomed to, and that’s fine. They should be allowed to cache in the way they are used to. Some people prefer to use an android phone and have spontaneous live caching, I believe that is also fine and they should be allowed to do so.

 

If c:geo doesn’t want to continue to update their produce to allow spontaneous live caching (which is fine and is their choice), this should be seen as a “golden egg” for Groundspeak to make their app function in this way…. They will make a lot of money in the process. If they give the people what they want, their app will them become the standard geocaching app (which it should be).

 

The only reason I haven’t purchased the GS app is because it’s lacking this ability. I have no issue with purchasing an app that gives me what I want. I do it for my computer, so why would I not do it for me phone?

[+webmicha]

It does sound like GS tried to work with him but he refused. So instead of bashing GS maybe a bit of bashing on the c:geo would be appropriate.

 

Bashing isn't helful.

 

The discussion here just shows that there is a gap between offer and demand.

[+deercreekth]

I haven't used c:geo in awhile. The first time I picked up an Android phone in a store, I searched the Market for geocaching and it was the first result (this was before the official app was released). The Live Map feature and arrows that pointed toward the cache location in search results were the two big features I preferred. I wonder if the Live Map is possible with the soon to be semi-public API, or if there are query limits that could interfere with it.

[+Don_J]

<snip>

Groundspeak - instead of working WITH carnero, you'd rather take your game away from people who truly enjoy playing it. Shame on you. Argue for your limitations, and sure enough, they're yours.

Jeremy's facebook post talking about c:geo....

He is well aware that the application violates our site's TOU, but instead of us trying to shut down his application we reached out... and offered him early access to our new API, the same version being used by our Android and WP7 applications now. We just haven't allowed our partners to use the production version until we can ensure that it is scalable.

 

I can only assume he is tired of programming an application he offers for free, and we're a convenient excuse, however disingenuous, for him to quit supporting it.

It does sound like GS tried to work with him but he refused. So instead of bashing GS maybe a bit of bashing on the c:geo would be appropriate.

 

This is what I keep coming back to. It seems to me that nothing changed at Groundspeak. It looks like the app developer simply decided that the app is no longer worth his time.

 

It's amazing that the mass premium membership-ocide is approaching Jim Jones territory, while the blame for the loss of the app lies squarely on the app developers shoulders.

 

To all you quitters, how many donated money to C:geo's developer. According to this forum topic, one. Perhaps if more people had supported the program instead of simply taken a free ride, the author might be more inclined to take Groundspeak's offer to work with him.

[jholly]

It does sound like GS tried to work with him but he refused. So instead of bashing GS maybe a bit of bashing on the c:geo would be appropriate.

 

Bashing isn't helful.

 

The discussion here just shows that there is a gap between offer and demand.

Folks like to bash GS for not supporting c:geo. It is not GS that is the problem, it is c:geo, but folks can't quite grasp that concept.

 

The gap between offer and demand is GS offered access to the API to c:geo and c:geo demanded to be allowed to continue to scrape the site. It seems we are getting real close to the release of the API now that the iPhone API version is going through review at Apple. After some time with the iPhone app being live with the API we will probably see the release. August? one can hope.

[+chrispt]

I'd be happy if they could just get the freaking compass working along with the font size issues in their native app.

[+chrispt]

Because the jumpiness and 45-90 degree error is a show stopper for me.

[cezanne]

<snip>

Groundspeak - instead of working WITH carnero, you'd rather take your game away from people who truly enjoy playing it. Shame on you. Argue for your limitations, and sure enough, they're yours.

Jeremy's facebook post talking about c:geo....

He is well aware that the application violates our site's TOU, but instead of us trying to shut down his application we reached out... and offered him early access to our new API, the same version being used by our Android and WP7 applications now. We just haven't allowed our partners to use the production version until we can ensure that it is scalable.

 

I can only assume he is tired of programming an application he offers for free, and we're a convenient excuse, however disingenuous, for him to quit supporting it.

It does sound like GS tried to work with him but he refused. So instead of bashing GS maybe a bit of bashing on the c:geo would be appropriate.

 

I do not know the details, but it would not surprise me if the API Groundspeak is offering is simply not good and smart enough for what c:geo needs.

 

I have encountered numerous examples over the years where very talented developpers came up with software and projects that outperformed what Groundspeak's team is able to provide by far.

This includes several legal projects like GSAK (think for a moment how many less PMs Groundspeak would have if GSAK did not exist) and others (for example, the Austrian geocaching statistics site that has been developed by a single guy in his rare leisure time has an intellegent search routine, something which Groundspeak still cannot offer). A single genius developper with as much enthusiasm as many private developpers have that are fanatic geocachers themselves could produce better results than the whole Groundspeak development team (of course only when he is allowed to change everything he wants to change and not if he needs to work with what's already there).

 

Moreover, Jeremy's post is not saying anything about whether the API has been offered for free.

 

Cezanne

Edited June 28, 2011 by cezanne

[+webmicha]

Folks like to bash GS for not supporting c:geo. It is not GS that is the problem, it is c:geo, but folks can't quite grasp that concept.

No, I disagree. The problem is, that a cute developer has build an app with a feuture set no other can beat. GS is not able to offer an app with nearly the half of the features and while they say they use their own API the question comes up what the API can offer to a developer? For me it seems, that the API is the lack. As I remember, carnero would rather use the API for his app if it would support the needs for his app. You can't develop against an API when there's no way to realize functions while they are not supported. For that he decided to use another way, I guess just to demonstrate what's possible. From that point of view, I can understand how frustrating it must be if you want but can't. Maybe he hasn't the patience, a single person can act much more agile than a complete team in a company. Maybe it's only a big misunderstanding, who knows?

 

The gap between offer and demand is GS offered access to the API to c:geo and c:geo demanded to be allowed to continue to scrape the site. It seems we are getting real close to the release of the API now that the iPhone API version is going through review at Apple. After some time with the iPhone app being live with the API we will probably see the release. August? one can hope.

 

I disagree again! The gap is between the market demands resulting in requirements that the API can't serve. It has nothing to do with GS' iOS app. If you compare the iPhone app (works well so far) with c:geo, you will find out that c:geo serves user's need much better. OK, Android users are in general different from iOS users due to not comparable philosophies.

 

The core question to me is if GS' API could satisfy the requirements of c:geo or not. I guess no, at least not yet. If the answer is 'not yet', when will the API be ready? If the answer is 'no', what set of fuctions will GS offer to other developers? If you think ahead the comparison with A**le is not so far away since A**le has really strong restrictions of what developers are allowed to do and what not.

Edited June 28, 2011 by webmicha

[+Chrysalides]

I disagree again! The gap is between the market demands resulting in requirements that the API can't serve.

Can c:geo do what it does through the API alone? Perhaps, I don't have access to the API so I can't say. The API, however, is not available for public use, meaning if c:geo implements it, that version of c:geo would not work for us.

[+dcigary]

I don’t really care who makes the app or how much it cost.... if an app is out there that has spontaneous live caching, that will be the app I will use, period. If ones don’t exist in the future I think it will slow the progress of the game and turn many people off to it. Once you get your method down, your going to want to stick to it. There is no reason for technology to move backwards or be stunted in any way. Software should run as good and have has many options as the hardware allows it to. A new breed of players has emerged and they know what they want…. I don’t see a reason not to give them what they want and what they are used to.

 

...(snipped for brevity)

 

 

Just a chime in, as this forum doesn't have a "Like" function. (LOL) Everything you said is exactly my feelings as well!

 

GS can't afford to technically lag behind what is possible now! Embracing, rather than controlling is the key....ride the wave, Groundspeak!

[+webmicha]

Can c:geo do what it does through the API alone? Perhaps, I don't have access to the API so I can't say. The API, however, is not available for public use, meaning if c:geo implements it, that version of c:geo would not work for us.

 

For us users it doesn't matter if the API would be public available or not. A 'closed' API which is only available for some few or only registered developers could also be a solution.

[+ChileHead]

PQ are a total waste of time - as useless as a rotary phone.

 

Since when? Believe it or not, there are many of us who use a dedicated GPSr for geocaching and PQ's are a great feature.

 

I can't imagine not having PQs. An android or iphone is fine for a casual cache or two, but both have battery life issues if you are out for hours caching. I cache in the rain, in a kayak, while xc skiing, etc ... places I really don't want to have my delicate phone out in. A rugged GPS is much better than a phone for worry free all day long caching.

 

Even in my PN-40 whose battery life sucks, it last way longer than my Droid X, and I can just swap the AA batteries when needed.

[jholly]

<snip>

Groundspeak - instead of working WITH carnero, you'd rather take your game away from people who truly enjoy playing it. Shame on you. Argue for your limitations, and sure enough, they're yours.

Jeremy's facebook post talking about c:geo....

He is well aware that the application violates our site's TOU, but instead of us trying to shut down his application we reached out... and offered him early access to our new API, the same version being used by our Android and WP7 applications now. We just haven't allowed our partners to use the production version until we can ensure that it is scalable.

 

I can only assume he is tired of programming an application he offers for free, and we're a convenient excuse, however disingenuous, for him to quit supporting it.

It does sound like GS tried to work with him but he refused. So instead of bashing GS maybe a bit of bashing on the c:geo would be appropriate.

 

I do not know the details, but it would not surprise me if the API Groundspeak is offering is simply not good and smart enough for what c:geo needs.

 

I have encountered numerous examples over the years where very talented developpers came up with software and projects that outperformed what Groundspeak's team is able to provide by far.

This includes several legal projects like GSAK (think for a moment how many less PMs Groundspeak would have if GSAK did not exist) and others (for example, the Austrian geocaching statistics site that has been developed by a single guy in his rare leisure time has an intellegent search routine, something which Groundspeak still cannot offer). A single genius developper with as much enthusiasm as many private developpers have that are fanatic geocachers themselves could produce better results than the whole Groundspeak development team (of course only when he is allowed to change everything he wants to change and not if he needs to work with what's already there).

 

Moreover, Jeremy's post is not saying anything about whether the API has been offered for free.

 

Cezanne

Bryan has stated the API will be premium member benefit. There was no mention of costs beyond the costs of premium membership. Perhaps part of the decision by c:geo's author is that if the API was used it would limit the application to premium members.

[jholly]

Can c:geo do what it does through the API alone? Perhaps, I don't have access to the API so I can't say. The API, however, is not available for public use, meaning if c:geo implements it, that version of c:geo would not work for us.

 

For us users it doesn't matter if the API would be public available or not. A 'closed' API which is only available for some few or only registered developers could also be a solution.

And if c:geo's author accepted the GS offer he would be able to field the application today. Both the Windows and droid version from GS are currently using the API and the iPhone version using the API is under going Apple review. So I suspect the c:geo version that used the API would be working today. Could the hang up be that the API is a premium member benefit?

[+dfx]

Could the hang up be that the API is a premium member benefit?

 

Can't be, because you don't need to be PM to use the official apps.

[jholly]

Could the hang up be that the API is a premium member benefit?

 

Can't be, because you don't need to be PM to use the official apps.

Didn't know that. However Bryan did say

Unlike our paid iPhone, Android and Windows Phone applications the API will require a geocaching.com account login. To begin, the API-enabled services will be available to active Premium Members - since we have promised them first access to new features.

Don't know where c:geo would sort in all that.

[+dfx]

Unlike our paid iPhone, Android and Windows Phone applications the API will require a geocaching.com account login. To begin, the API-enabled services will be available to active Premium Members - since we have promised them first access to new features.

Don't know where c:geo would sort in all that.

 

Well, that would explain why the author mentioned that 3rd party applications are to use a different version of the API than the official apps, which seemed to have been one of the things that ticked him off so much.

[Master Shifu]

so far my c:geo is still working fully... not sure what the 11am update today was or did (maybe I got the date or timezone wrong).