Jump to content

using you smart phone to cache


Contra1971
Followers 5

Recommended Posts

i would never hide a cache using my phone.

Thank you! Thank you! Thank you!

 

Smart phones are amazing tools for on the fly caching, as they allow you to see what caches are in your immediate area without having to download a PQ. The latest batch have actual GPS hardware installed, as opposed to the earlier editions which claimed to have "built in GPS", yet in reality had nothing more than software which triangulated cell tower data, so accuracy has improved to the point where they are fine for casual, urban hunting. If you are a P&G junkie, you'll probably never have a need for anything else.

 

The only real problems I see with smart phones are precision and durability.

 

The GPSr antenna in today's smart phones is a patch antenna roughly equivalent in signal absorption to the ones found in the old time yellow eTrex. They are pretty dependent upon clear sky and a favorable satellite constellation. So long as you have both, the antenna will absorb enough signal to make the displayed results manageable. Back in the day, there were many caches hidden with the old yellow eTrex, but considering the availability of more precise tools, I would not recommend using one now. I would not hesitate to hunt for an urban cache using an old yellow eTrex, if that was all I had, but if I had to step into an environment with heavy tree cover, I would acknowledge the fact that my accuracy was greatly reduced, making my hunt that much harder.

 

As for durability, there really is no comparison. Even in the strongest aftermarket case, a smart phone will not take any where near the rough handling that a basic handheld would shrug off. To date I have driven over my 60CSx with my truck, and crashed my motorcycle with it mounted on the handlebar. Both my 60 and my Oregon 300 have left the roof of various vehicles to go bouncing down the blacktop at speeds between 30 and 45 MPH. all three of my handhelds are repeatedly immersed, as I am fairly clumsy, and I always have at least one of them with me in my kayak. Other than some cosmetic damage, they all work fine. I've seen smart phones reduced to overpriced paperweights from simply being dropped.

 

On a related note, I would like to stress to folks who use smart phones and those who use dedicated handhelds, that the so called "accuracy" displayed by the device is a mostly meaningless number. It is generated by various algorithms, depending on the device and the software update, and is there mostly as a feel good addition, designed to give warm fuzzies to the person holding the device. Feel free to giggle at the guys out in the field comparing a smart phone to a handheld, arguing about accuracy, pointing to the displayed EPE (Estimated Position Error) numbers. B)

 

I hid a cache with my smartphone, and people have said the coords were right on. I know my phone isn't the most accurate, but I don't think they're as bad as people think they are.

 

Cell phones that use antennas to triangulate location are not accutate in the slightest. That's probably what gives smartphones a bad reputation in general.

 

All phones use an antenna. Same with GPSs. Some just work better than others.

Some phones use cell towers to triangulate where they are, and some use GPS satellites. That's the difference.

 

Both still require an antenna. Makes your statement "...phones that use antennas to triangulate.." pointless. They all use antennas. Some are triangulating off cell towers and others off satellites. Some even use information from both systems. But all use antennas.

Link to comment

We got a cacher here that hide their caches via Iphone and its always always off. I am talking about way way off. Someone with a better unit always have to send him a better coordinates. :unsure: I wish there is guideline line that if your only GPS is a Iphone, u cant hide any caches.

 

Oh man, you didn't just go there, did you? :P I hope TL&Min etc... realizes I was just messing around. However, I do remember an official Groundspeak stance that they didn't consider the Iphone app accurate enough to HIDE caches. But that was when it first came out. Anyone remember this, or know the linky if it still exists?

 

The first generation iPhone did not have an actual GPS in it. So it is not suitable for Geocaching. (The 3G added a GPS, the 3GS I believe added the electronic compass.)

Link to comment

As far a inaccurate coordinates with a dedicated GPS goes I can see it happening depending on the age of the GPS. My new 62ST is crazy accurate and when I go to older caches, ones created with older GPSs, I often find the cache 5 to 10 meters off. This happens especially in highly wooded areas.

 

I don't see a need to complain since though since I don't have the opinion that any cache need to be exactly spot on the list coordinates.

Link to comment

I went caching with my friend the other day, and we each had an android phone. We also had an old garmin GPSr with us. The most accurate device was my buddy's motorola droid, then my HTC G2, then the old garmin GPS 72.

 

The garmin seemed to only be accurate down to about 20 feet, and it took several minutes to lock onto the satellites. If there were trees overhead, forget it. It was terrible, and we put it away. The phones were much better than that particular unit.

Link to comment

I found my first 70-odd caches with my iPhone and only later got a GPS- they work fine, but I definitely prefer my GPS and tend to use the phone more as a "look up caches when I'm in a random area" type thing.

 

I also hid my first ever cache with the phone I confess but that was after asking some local cachers about it and making it clear on the cache page what the situation was, so the FTF gave me accurate coordinates (they were "only" 50 feet off I think).

Link to comment

 

Is anyone willing to let me borrow their iPhone to see how it handles similar conditions?

 

While I agree that my cellphone is less durable than your 60CSx, I am indeed willing to let you attach it to your handlebars while you wreck another motorcycle.

Well, technically, it would be the same motorcycle, not another one. Kawasaki KLR-650. It's been through quite a lot. I expect it will go through a lot more before it finally gives up the ghost. I'll be riding it on the ATV trails in the Ocala National Forest over the next month or so. Based on my past history riding in that area, I expect to have an up close and personal encounter with at least one pine tree in the next month. Probably more than one, as I'm really not a very good rider in off road conditions.

 

I got my first motorcycle when I was 10 years old so I only road in off road conditions for 6 years before I could get a license and ride on the street. When I was first learning to ride my father gave me a bit of advice that I still follow to this day. He said, "If you're not falling, you're not learning". Although I don't have a motorcycle now, I interpret that advice as "challenge yourself, and don't be afraid of failure or if you don't fail sometimes you're not trying hard enough."

Link to comment

To be perfectly honest, I have no desire to use a dedicated GPSr device. My Blackberry Storm2 gets me 99% of the time right on target...closer than both of my friends GPSr devices. They're extremely impressed with the CacheSense app I use and how it's totally paperless and fully integrated with geocaching.com. The ONLY single caveat I have to admit is the lack of battery life of the phone when using the GPS feature :(. Fortunately, a car charger has extended my cache hunting life many times :P .

 

Oh, just thought of a 2nd caveat...weather and durability. If it's raining, I cover the phone with a baggie....and I've been VERY careful not to drop it either. So outside of those two things, I'm OK with just using my phone for my caching :D

Link to comment

A properly calibrated smartphone with a decent receiver can do wonders when looking for caches. I've done several side by side comparisons between my HTC Incredible and my eXplorist 500 and have concluded that the phone is every bit as accurate as the eXplorist.

 

Like everything, you need to know how to use the tools at our disposal.

Link to comment

My HTC took some water damage the other day. We were out caching and got into a serious downpour. We were dressed in waterproof rain suits and the phone was tucked away into one of the suit's pockets. I never took it out until we were back in the car, and it seemed dry and fine when I took it out. However, about an hour later, the display showed significant signs of water having entered into it. No idea how it happened, it must have been only minute amounts of water that it got in contact with. My ages old Canon pocket camera fared a similar fate long time ago, the display never recovered from the damage (even though the camera itself still worked), so I was pretty sure that the phone was toast.

 

Luckily and unexpectedly the damage somehow managed to dry out over the next few days and it's all back to normal now. I'm not gonna tempt fate again though.

Link to comment

A properly calibrated smartphone with a decent receiver can do wonders when looking for caches. I've done several side by side comparisons between my HTC Incredible and my eXplorist 500 and have concluded that the phone is every bit as accurate as the eXplorist.

 

Like everything, you need to know how to use the tools at our disposal.

 

:laughing: That's against a Maggie. Try compairing it to a real GPS. :anitongue:

 

Honestly though, I've not done anything I'd call scientific but don't see those kind of results.

Link to comment

A properly calibrated smartphone with a decent receiver can do wonders when looking for caches. I've done several side by side comparisons between my HTC Incredible and my eXplorist 500 and have concluded that the phone is every bit as accurate as the eXplorist.

 

Like everything, you need to know how to use the tools at our disposal.

 

:laughing: That's against a Maggie. Try compairing it to a real GPS. :anitongue:

 

Honestly though, I've not done anything I'd call scientific but don't see those kind of results.

 

I've done quite well with it AND they haven't turned against Groundspeak. LOL

Link to comment

So far I have owned a:

Garmin Yellow

Garmin iQue 3600

Garmin GPSMAP 60CSx

Magellan Meridian Gold

Magellan Meridian Platinum

Blackberry Curve 8310

Motorola ATRIX 4G Android

Garmin GPSMAP 62ST

 

Found hundreds with each one, except the Blackberry and the ATRIX 4G phones, both are so inaccurate and slow I got sick of using them to cache after 30 or so finds each. Replaced the Blackberry with the ATRIX, and then replaced both of them with the 62ST.

 

The best, hands-down, in every area, was my 60CSx. I wish I had it back. I usually cache with others, often with groups, and developed something of a reputation to be the first amongst us to find the cache. The 60CSx is that good.

 

The next best is my current 62ST. Tolerable, but I wish I'd bought a used 60CSx instead.

 

Anyone wanna trade a used 60CSx for a Blackberry Curve 8310? If you like caching with a cell phone this should be right up your alley!

Edited by TheAlabamaRambler
Link to comment

I am part of both worlds here. My first unit was a Magellan Explorist. I still use it when we are kayaking, or it is raining, or a super steep incline. It is nothing special... gets me from point A to point B (like my first car.... a 1988 Ford Festiva). It isn't sexy, doesn't have the bells and whistles, but it is rugged. The accuracy is off by about 10 feet on a good day.

 

I eventually got the iPhone 3g. 2 years ago I was like "Wow!" The Groundspeak app served its purpose. I no longer had to decide which caches I was going out for. I just cached on the fly. The iPhone was equipped with otterbox ruggedness, but I was afraid of dropping it because it was also my contact to the outside world. The accuracy was normally off by about 20 feet on a good day.

 

Last week my contract was up... so I switched providers and got the Motorola Bionic equipped with the otterbox defender series. I have only used it once.... here are my likes and dislikes so far:

 

Likes- Superbly, amazingly, blindingly quick at loading everything.

Compass is right on.

The case protects against almost anything..... except water.

Giant screen.... 4.3 inches

Paperless caching.

Crumb trail..... this is something my old Magellan has, but the iPhone did not.

Open Sourcing.

From what I can tell, this is as accurate or more accurate than the Magellan.

Battery life is decent from everyday use.... still haven't put it though the all-day caching test, though.

Shows number of satellites connected to.

 

Dislikes- Not waterproof..... in a perfect world this phone would be waterproof.

Again the giant screen is beautiful.... but that would make it much easier to get bashed.

Still not a high end GPSr chip.

Edited by goosefraba1
Link to comment

To be perfectly honest, I have no desire to use a dedicated GPSr device. My Blackberry Storm2 gets me 99% of the time right on target...closer than both of my friends GPSr devices. They're extremely impressed with the CacheSense app I use and how it's totally paperless and fully integrated with geocaching.com. The ONLY single caveat I have to admit is the lack of battery life of the phone when using the GPS feature :(. Fortunately, a car charger has extended my cache hunting life many times :P .

 

Oh, just thought of a 2nd caveat...weather and durability. If it's raining, I cover the phone with a baggie....and I've been VERY careful not to drop it either. So outside of those two things, I'm OK with just using my phone for my caching :D

 

Have you looked into a Mophie cover for your phone? Not sure if they make them for Blackberry but it's a cover that contains a battery which recharges your phones battery. With an iPhone I can squeeze about 6-7 extra hours out of it with the Mophie case on it.

MULLY

Link to comment

In general, from my point of view, the simple comparison between smartphones and dedicated GPS-devices very soon runs short.

There are 3 major components, antenna, chip and software.

 

Back in the old days I had an Garmin II+ with an external antenna. The antenna gave me about 10-15 percent increase in signal strength.

This did not always count. The increase really kicked in if the overall perception was good enough that the satellites' count went up, too.

Accuracy depends on the number of satellites in view.

In other words: the satellites above you give you the position, the satellites down at the horizon give you accuracy.

What matters is the count, not the signals' strength, but obviously there is a connection.

 

The most important fact of the chips is the number off channels. The old Garmin has 12 channels, meaning that under no circumstances

more than the signals of 12 different satellites can be used for calculations. Kind of a limitation, I guess.

Now we have chips with a 100+ channels and now maybe a lack of satellites...

By comparison power consumption is only a minor issue.

 

And then software. Smartphones by now have quite an advantage. In urban areas the cell-tower triangulation, and yes, this is not about the antenna,

it is software, combined with Wifi-spots (Apple collects them on its own) gives you almost an immediate position, while the GPS-part is doing, well,

its GPS-stuff, acquiring signals and so on.

On an everyday base this is just fine.

 

But smart-phones are not dedicated GPS-receivers, hence we have to deal with compromises.

Link to comment

I use a BlackBerry Storm2 using CacheSense and have no desire to change. It routinely puts me right on the mark, better than any of my geocaching friends iPhones. They've since changed and now use dedicated GPS units (but still use their iPhones to log finds and/or access additional cache info), but my BB is still on equal par with them as far as GPS accuracy goes. And since my BB is a smart phone, it's totally paperless as I can find, log, plan, edit, route etc., do everything via the phone.

 

The only caveat is battery drain when using the GPS...it's pretty high. But to address that, I plan on getting a larger extended battery for the phone for about $20, to nearly double my energy storage. Oh..and I have to be careful not to drop it or get it wet. Outside of those things, I'm satisfied just using a phone.

Link to comment

I started using my iPhone 3g with the official app, and didn't have too many problems, until I went to find a cache that was in a wooded area. I eventually found it, came home, and ordered an Etrex H straight away.

Once my money situation gets better, I would love to buy a dedicated GPSr that combines the paperless features of the iPhone with the accuracy of the Extrex H.

The mapping on the iPhone can be off sometimes, but using common sense, I usually do OK, but the battery is awful.

With the Etrex H, I seem to get to GZ a lot quicker, and if I am going anywhere near trees, the iPhone stays in my pocket. My only problem with the Etrex H is sitting down before I go caching and inputting all the co-ordinates by hand, then having to write down hints and other useful info before setting off.

Link to comment

Gotta chime in quick.

I'm approaching 1200 finds, entirely with iPhone 3GS (well, save group events and out caching with friends who may have handhelds). I've hidden a good number of caches and hunted only with the 3GS (under canopy, under towers, in desert, forest, urban, and rural environments; though not under waterl). No problems. My app of choice is Geosphere, and I really only use the official app for live location-based lookups in places I haven't run PQs or downloaded offline data.

 

Yes, it can be slower; yes, it could be a little less accurate compared to some handhelds. But when in group settings, I tend to fair just as well if not better with the phone in my hand than people with handhelds. Whether that's "geosense" or technological advantage one way or another, who knows, and really who cares. I still have fun, as do they (as long the geocache coordinates are accurate, whether published by a smartphone or gpsr)

 

I'll support those comments earlier that the geocacher has more influence or hindrance on coordinate accuracy and ability to locate a geocache than the accuracy or technical advantage of the device in their hand.

That said, the enormous benefit of the phone with GPS in general over a dedicated GPSr (which only promises of faster/more accuracy gps location) is enough to keep me from upgrading converting any time soon ;)

 

Though I do plan to upgrade to the 4S hopefully sometime pretty soon, which will be a HUGE boost over the 3GS for geocaching!

Link to comment

Gotta chime in quick.

I'm approaching 1200 finds, entirely with iPhone 3GS (well, save group events and out caching with friends who may have handhelds). I've hidden a good number of caches and hunted only with the 3GS (under canopy, under towers, in desert, forest, urban, and rural environments; though not under waterl). No problems. My app of choice is Geosphere, and I really only use the official app for live location-based lookups in places I haven't run PQs or downloaded offline data.

 

Yes, it can be slower; yes, it could be a little less accurate compared to some handhelds. But when in group settings, I tend to fair just as well if not better with the phone in my hand than people with handhelds. Whether that's "geosense" or technological advantage one way or another, who knows, and really who cares. I still have fun, as do they (as long the geocache coordinates are accurate, whether published by a smartphone or gpsr)

 

I'll support those comments earlier that the geocacher has more influence or hindrance on coordinate accuracy and ability to locate a geocache than the accuracy or technical advantage of the device in their hand.

That said, the enormous benefit of the phone with GPS in general over a dedicated GPSr (which only promises of faster/more accuracy gps location) is enough to keep me from upgrading converting any time soon ;)

 

Though I do plan to upgrade to the 4S hopefully sometime pretty soon, which will be a HUGE boost over the 3GS for geocaching!

 

Your iPhone wouldn't work where I cache, I know because my doesn't. You stated you won't convert but who says you have to? I own an iPhone and an Oregon 450 and each have their place where they're better than the other. It's always better to have options.

Link to comment

For me it's only an option if the value outweighs the price. And for me, it doesn't, and geocaching is certainly not a big selling point for a gps for me, given my experience while using the 3GS.

Once again, to each his own. But don't unfairly slam the smartphone, at least in a blanket statement. There are far too many factors involved, environmental and user, for a general criticism, at least insofar as geocaching is concerned.

 

Use what you're comfortable with, encourage anyone and everyone to use it to the best of its ability. Don't be so quick to blame the device, whether handheld or smartphone.

Edited by thebruce0
Link to comment
But don't unfairly slam the smartphone, at least in a blanket statement.

I think that sentiment is probably key to the whole discussion. Smart phone bring a lot of good things to the table, though they do also have some inherent drawbacks. Recognizing both the good, and the bad, without any significant addition of hyperbole, keeps discussions like this one both civil and relevant.

 

The two types of statements which ignore reality are:

 

1 ) iPhones suck for geocaching.

2 ) My iPhone is as good as a dedicated handheld.

 

Neither statement is true, yet I have little doubt that examples of both can be found in this thread.

Link to comment
But don't unfairly slam the smartphone, at least in a blanket statement.

I think that sentiment is probably key to the whole discussion. Smart phone bring a lot of good things to the table, though they do also have some inherent drawbacks. Recognizing both the good, and the bad, without any significant addition of hyperbole, keeps discussions like this one both civil and relevant.

 

The two types of statements which ignore reality are:

 

1 ) iPhones suck for geocaching.

2 ) My iPhone is as good as a dedicated handheld.

 

Neither statement is true, yet I have little doubt that examples of both can be found in this thread.

 

Very nice post CR. I didn't want to "start anything" :lol: , but I am rather perplexed by the several "I use a smart phone, it works great, and I'm never going to change" posts coming from people who've never even owned, or tried caching with a dedicated GPSr.

Link to comment
I am rather perplexed by the several "I use a smart phone, it works great, and I'm never going to change" posts coming from people who've never even owned, or tried caching with a dedicated GPSr.

I guess it depends on the nature of the discussion. For those of us who are satisfied with the smartphone, telling us to convert for whatever reason is futile. There needs to be sufficient reason to.

For those who aren't caching and are wondering about whether a smartphone or a GPSr is worthwhile for caching, there needs to be more context - price point, how much they'd use it and what for, whether they use other devices for similar tasks, etc. To simply say "smartphones are bad for geocaching" or similar sentiment is purely wrong and misleading.

 

One can be perfectly happy and prolific by caching with a smartphone (a decent one), as long as one knows how to use their device properly.

One can be perfectly happy and prolific by caching with a handheld GPSr (a decent one), as long as one knows how to use their device properly.

 

The only difference, really, is a slight margin of error, generally speaking, in favour of the handheld GPS - but really only when it comes to geocaching, specifically.

Link to comment
I am rather perplexed by the several "I use a smart phone, it works great, and I'm never going to change" posts coming from people who've never even owned, or tried caching with a dedicated GPSr.

Economics, I reckon. If I started out with a phone, and it worked, for the most part, I'd be hard pressed to justify spending $500+ on a dedicated handheld.

Link to comment
I am rather perplexed by the several "I use a smart phone, it works great, and I'm never going to change" posts coming from people who've never even owned, or tried caching with a dedicated GPSr.

I guess it depends on the nature of the discussion. For those of us who are satisfied with the smartphone, telling us to convert for whatever reason is futile. There needs to be sufficient reason to.

For those who aren't caching and are wondering about whether a smartphone or a GPSr is worthwhile for caching, there needs to be more context - price point, how much they'd use it and what for, whether they use other devices for similar tasks, etc. To simply say "smartphones are bad for geocaching" or similar sentiment is purely wrong and misleading.

 

One can be perfectly happy and prolific by caching with a smartphone (a decent one), as long as one knows how to use their device properly.

One can be perfectly happy and prolific by caching with a handheld GPSr (a decent one), as long as one knows how to use their device properly.

 

The only difference, really, is a slight margin of error, generally speaking, in favour of the handheld GPS - but really only when it comes to geocaching, specifically.

 

OK, that's a good explanation, I accept that. I'm not saying I was talking about a rather militant smartphone user who posted early in the thread, but not since or anything. :) Including advice on how to hide a cache with one, when they themselves haven't. :unsure:

Link to comment

I started caching years ago using a very inexpensive GPS. It broke, and I didn't cache for a long time.

 

When I got a blackberry and was looking for free apps, I downloaded BlackStar. It worked, and it got me back into Geocaching, but I quickly realized its limitations and bought a yellow Garmin eTrex.

 

Now I have an Sprint/HTC Evo, an Android-based smart phone, with the official Geocaching.com app. It works so well that I rarely use the eTrex any more.

Link to comment

Since April, I have been doing almost all of my daily caching with my Android cell phone (currently a Sidekick 4G).

Generally, I've found that I prefer matching my location on a satellite map to following an arrow that often needs some time to settle down.

 

I have noticed that the handheld (Delorme) is superior to the phone in the following cases:

1. Taking coordinates for a cache hide (I tried an averaging app for the phone, but it gave me yucky results)

2. Caching in the forest (the satellite maps aren't useful if all you see are the tops of redwoods)

3. Caching where cell service is nonexistent or flaky (instant info, full logs, and satellite maps are gone)

4. Cache selection on a trip (this is because the names/difficulties show on my Delorme, while only waypoints show on my phone app)

5. Puzzle caching (the app I'm using does not handle solved puzzle coordinates well)

6. Caching in heat (the touchscreen on the phone seems to have issues in hot and/or humid conditions)

7. All-day caching (the phone battery tends to run out)

8. Long hikes (the phone battery tends to run out)

 

Although the handheld is more suitable to rugged conditions (for example, climbing up boulders), I haven't found durability to be as much of an issue as I expected it would be. I usually just zip the phone into my pack when I encounter tricky terrain.

Edited by kablooey
Link to comment

I started caching years ago using a very inexpensive GPS. It broke, and I didn't cache for a long time.

 

When I got a blackberry and was looking for free apps, I downloaded BlackStar. It worked, and it got me back into Geocaching, but I quickly realized its limitations and bought a yellow Garmin eTrex.

 

Now I have an Sprint/HTC Evo, an Android-based smart phone, with the official Geocaching.com app. It works so well that I rarely use the eTrex any more.

 

When I first started caching I bought a Garmin 72Cx though, at the time, I thought I was buying it for other purposes. After a couple of years I got an iPhone 3Gs and the official app. I found that I was using both devices; using the iPhone to find information about caches and the Garmin to navigate to GZ. Then my Garmin was stolen so I only had my smart phone for geocaching. That lasted about as long as it took for me to research what I wanted to replace the 72Cx with, order it, and receive my new Oregon 450. Now I am back to using both devices, but I'm actually finding that I'm using the smart phone more for navigating to caches, and finding them before I really need to deploy the Garmin.

Link to comment

When asked this question here is my response

 

a. Use whatever you like for finding caches.

 

b. Use something more reliable than a phone for determining coordinates for hiding a cache.

 

c. Have fun.

 

I would have agreed with all of these points when I was caching with my BlackBerry. However, my Android phone is just as reliable as my yellow eTrex.

 

I'd still use the eTrex for hiding a cache, rather than the phone. But I think the idea that ANY dedicated GPSr is better than ANY phone is outdated. Some phones are just as good as, if not better than, some GPSr's.

Link to comment

When it comes to hiding caches, it seems to me it's not as much a matter of smartphone vs dedicated GPS as whether or not you took the time and got nice averaged GPS coordinates and double checked them in different circumstances. On my smartphone I have a program that does coordinate averaging, so I could set it down at a cache location for 10 minutes or so and get averaged coordinates. The Garmin GPS I've used does not do coordinate averaging.

Link to comment

I don't have a proper GPS unit yet (maybe the old coot in the red suit will bring me one :unsure: ) so I've been using my Samsung Galaxy S Vibrant phone for now.

 

It works quite well for caches where the phone is more or less out in the open and can get a decent lock.

It's absolutely useless if you are in a wooded area.

 

I was out caching on Saturday and got very frustrated using it under moderate tree cover.

Link to comment
I use my iPhone 4 to do "spur of the moment" caching, such as waiting for somebody, etc. When I actually leave to "go geocaching", I use a regular GPSr. They are much more accurate, & you don't have to be within range of a cell tower to use!
For the record, the GPS receivers in my phones (G1 and Nexus One) have worked just fine when I was out of cell coverage. Of course, I couldn't download map tiles and I had to use saved PQ data, but the GPS functionality worked just fine.
Link to comment

Well as much as i'd like to have a dedicated gps receiver it's just not something i can afford and my motorola defy is all i have. That being said it is one of the few water resistant phones out there and has proved accurate enough for me to find what i went looking for.I will admit battery life is an issue but a portable recharger gives me extra power so until i come into some extra cash my phone will do just fine.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 5
×
×
  • Create New...