Basic questions about "official" app for Android

[+larryc43230]

I finally have my own smartphone (an Android Bionic), and I purchased the "official" Geocaching app for it the other day. Just a few minutes ago, I updated the app to version 2.1.1.

 

I'm usually pretty good at using applications of all sorts, but I'm a bit confused about how this app is supposed to work. Is there anywhere on-line I can go to get answers to some basic questions about the app? The Feedback forum seems to be for bug reports and suggestions; I need some basic help. And there are no real instructions that come with the app; when I go to Menu -> Help, it wants to teach me how to be a geocacher.

 

And, once again, PLEASE try to resist suggesting that I just use some other app instead. I already have, and have been playing with, Neongeo, GeoBeagle, and c:geo. I'm trying to give the official app a chance.

 

--Larry

[+JL_HSTRE]

Maybe this video or a similar one would help you?

[+larryc43230]

Maybe this video or a similar one would help you?

Thanks for posting that video, I hadn't seen it before. However, I'd pretty much figured out the app to the depth covered by the tutorial. I guess I need to ask a couple of more specific questions.

 

The first time I used the app, "out of the box," I logged in to GC.com. Since then, it knows who I am and knows that I'm a premium member. Sitting at home, I press "Find Nearby Caches." The app dutifully lists the nearest 20 caches. The list includes several caches on my Ignore List. That's a nuisance, but I guess I can live with that.

 

For each cache, it lists the distance of the cache "from here" and the distance of the cache "from search location." The two distances are sometimes the same, and sometimes are up to half a mile different.

 

I've never entered a "search location". Where is this other search location coming from? In case it makes any difference, I have GPS and all the other location services turned on, and the other geocaching and location-based apps have no problem knowing pretty much precisely where I am.

 

The order of the caches in the list has me mystified. Here are the distances in miles to the first 10 caches I see sitting here at home (using the "from here" distance): 0.79, 1.08, 1.26, 1.09, 1.13 1.21, 1.53, 1.32, 1.34, 2. The caches are obviously not in distance order. They're not in order of GC number or cache name, cache type, or premium vs. non-premium status.

 

Looking over the list of caches, I note that the farthest cache "from here" is 2.24 miles away.

 

Going to the end of the list, I press "More...". Studying these next 20 caches, the closest "from here" is 3.41 miles away, and the farthest is 5.55 miles away. Once again, there's no order to this list that I can figure out.

 

More importantly, there are a bunch of caches missing! On September 30, a local cacher had about 30 new caches published, named "Boo #1" through "Boo #31". These are traditional caches, non-premium, and are not on my Ignore List (as if that made any difference). These caches are between 3.3 and 6.2 miles "from here" (from where I'm sitting at home). Not one of these caches ever appears in the list. I've extended the list out to 100 and more, and these caches never show up.

 

Is this normal behavior? If so, what do I not understand? If not, have I discovered a bug of some sort?

 

--Larry

Edited October 15, 2011 by larryc43230

[+larryc43230]

To follow up on my own post, the other geocaching apps I'm trying out show all of these missing caches. It's only the "official" geocaching app that doesn't seem to know they exist.

 

--Larry

[+mamoreb]

Not sure I can help a lot... I have been trying to like the official app too, but I got myself a real GPS instead.

 

I can explain the two distances that are displayed: "Distance from here" is the distance from the position you are currently at. "Distance from search location" is the distance from the centerpoint of the place you have searched for. I.e. if you search for New York, the app is fed a coordinate somewhere close to the middle of New York. A cache at the building next to this coordinate will appear as close to the search location, a cache in the outskirts of New York will appear as far from the search location.

 

My main suggestion concerning missing caches is to check if all filters are off (advanced search). I don't know what I could do to reproduce this problem.

[+larryc43230]

First, thanks for the input, it's appreciated.

 

"Distance from search location" is the distance from the centerpoint of the place you have searched for.

But there's the problem: I've never searched anywhere other than from where I was sitting when I first launched the app. In other words, I've never pointed the app to any other search location, and that's the cause of my mystification. Something else I'm mystified about:

 

Still sitting at home (I haven't even launched the app when away from home yet), I launch the app and press "Find Nearby Caches". I get a list of the closest caches to my home, as expected (other than the fact that some caches are missing from the list...). On this occasion, the distance "from here" and the distance "from search location" are different by about 0.5 miles.

 

I exit the app, wait maybe 10 minutes, then launch the app and hit "Find Nearby Caches" again (I'm still sitting in the same chair here at home). This time, all the distances "from here" are exactly the same as the distances "from search location". It appears to be a completely random effect.

 

My main suggestion concerning missing caches is to check if all filters are off (advanced search).

All filters are off. I've never set any of the filters. When I spotted the problem, I double-checked, and none of the filters are set.

 

--Larry

 

Edited to add an additional data point. I just redid the experiment. The first time I searched for caches, the two distances matched exactly. The second time I searched, all the distances were off by between 0.01 and 0.03 miles. The discrepancy is insignificant in this case, but why any discrepancy?

Edited October 19, 2011 by larryc43230

[+mpilchfamily]

Check the app settings and see what your MY Location is set to. If its set to My Home Location then it may be based on your general location that the phone recognizes as home. Which can bounce around quite a bit as you have seen. If its set to your GPSr's current location then there will be no change. Stick with the Distance from here number and you'll be good. Thats the one that will tell you how far you currently are from the cache and change as you move anyway.

[+larryc43230]

Check the app settings and see what your MY Location is set to. If its set to My Home Location then it may be based on your general location that the phone recognizes as home.

Are you referring to the Settings in the Geocaching app? The only settings I see are Search Filters (set to Advanced and Hide Finds); Units (set to Miles/Ft); Database Location (set to SD Card); and a button to "Search for GPX files on the SD Card". I don't see any place to set "MY Location" in the app.

 

If you're referring to the text-entry area at the top of the main screen that currently reads, in gray, "Current Location", I've never entered anything in that field.

 

--Larry

[+larryc43230]

Stick with the Distance from here number and you'll be good.

As long as there's this unexplained discrepancy, which can be as much as half a mile, and (especially) as long as 30+ caches within 6.2 miles of my home don't show up in the cache list when there's no reason they shouldn't, I simply can't trust this app.

 

As a reminder to those who haven't read one of the first posts in this thread: "More importantly, there are a bunch of caches missing! On September 30, a local cacher had about 30 new caches published, named "Boo #1" through "Boo #31". These are traditional caches, non-premium, and are not on my Ignore List (as if that made any difference). These caches are between 3.3 and 6.2 miles "from here" (from where I'm sitting at home). Not one of these caches ever appears in the list. I've extended the list out to 100 and more, and these caches never show up."

 

--Larry

[+The Real Boudica.]

I don't have a solution I am afraid, but I also find the caches list in a random order and it never shows the 20 nearest me either in an expanding radius, just a random 20 near by each time I hit more. So I will be intersted to hear a solution. The only benefit I can see with the app over others is that it is much quicker at accessing the cache information presumably because it is directly linked to the site. In a poor signal area this is great but otherwise I don't really use it as it is also very laggy when your on the hunt at updating your position.

[+mamoreb]

Hi,

 

I tried reproducing what you are describing. I used the official app to search near my location, and I compared the result to the website's list of caches close to my home coordinates.

 

Here's what I see in the app:

* The two distances displayed are exactly the same.

* The order of the caches seems semi-random. That is, the 20 closest caches on the website are the 20 caches shown first in the app. But some of them have swapped places.

* Of the 20 first caches on the website (which I trust), I see 19 in the app. The one that I don't see, is disabled.

[+larryc43230]

Repeated tests from here at home continue to show random discrepancies between the "from here" and "from search location" distance. About half the time, the distances match exactly; at other times, they differ anywhere from meaningless small distances to about half a mile on average.

 

I've been looking more closely at the issue of missing caches. I compared the list I see in the app with the list on the Web site. As mamoreb mentioned, in any given set of 20 caches, there's only an approximate order in terms of distance, so it was a bit of a challenge to try to make direct comparisons.

 

I can confirm this much: Within a 10-mile radius of where I'm sitting (in my home), a total of 27 active caches never appear in the lists provided by the official app. With the exception of one cache (a multi 3.2 miles from here), the missing caches are all in the same series, "Boo #1" through "Boo #30". They are all hidden between 3.3 and 6.3 miles from here.

 

Details (I have the app set to hide my finds):

 

Boo #1 through Boo #18: active caches missing from the list

Boo #19: Found by me

Boo #20 through Boo #26: active caches missing from the list

Boo #27: Found by me

Boo #28: active cache missing from the list

Boo #29 and Boo #30: Found by me

 

All of these caches were published on either October 2 or October 3, 2011, and have "Hidden" dates of between September 30 and October 2, 2011.

 

Boo #31: This cache, 5.9 miles from here, is the anomaly. It does appear in the list. And it was originally published on May 30, 2011.

 

In case it makes any difference, all of the caches in the "Boo" series were originally published using completely different names. The cache owner apparently decided to make the caches a series after the fact, and added "Boo #nn" at the beginning of each cache name.

 

As for that one missing multi, it doesn't seem to fit any pattern. Its name is "The Other Side", and was published in 2010.

 

I have no idea whether any of this might help in troubleshooting, but that's what I'm seeing.And it's not encouraging.

 

--Larry

 

Edited to remove references to "premium caches". Some of the caches are actually premium caches. Then again, I have a premium membership, so that shouldn't make any difference. And there are lots of premium caches in the lists the app shows me, so it isn't hiding premium caches.

Edited October 19, 2011 by larryc43230

[+mamoreb]

Hmmm... The problem shouldn't be related to #, as several of the caches I'm seeing have #s in the names.

 

Can we try something else?

* When you use advanced search for the name "Boo #18", does the cache show up? It does with me.

* When you use regular search, type in GC354KE and search by GC code, does the cache show up? It does with me.

* When you use regular search, type in Emporium Square Ohio and search by location, does the cache show up? It does with me.

[+larryc43230]

* When you use advanced search for the name "Boo #18", does the cache show up? It does with me.

Yes. It's listed at a distance of 4.58 miles from my current location (at home).

 

When I now return to the main screen, blank out the search field, and search for all caches from my Current Location (at home), Boo #18 still doesn't appear in the list after extending the list to around 10 miles.

 

* When you use regular search, type in GC354KE and search by GC code, does the cache show up? It does with me.

Yes, same result as above.

 

* When you use regular search, type in Emporium Square Ohio and search by location, does the cache show up? It does with me.

Yes; in fact, 17 of the 26 missing caches in the "Boo" series show up in the list that results. However, the other 9 still never appear (I expanded the list to show a total of 100 caches, the farthest of which was 7.49 miles from the search location, which more than encompasses the other missing caches). The caches still missing from this list are Boo #1 through Boo #9.

 

Just for fun, I went into Advanced Search and searched by Geocache Name for "Boo #". Twenty (20) of the 26 missing caches appear in this list. Boo #1 through Boo #6 are the caches still missing from this list.

 

--Larry

 

Edited for silly typos, and to add the Geocache Name search.

Edited October 19, 2011 by larryc43230

[+goosefraba1]

I think that the problem is..... when you first start up the app, the GPSr is still trying to settle on your location. Once you press the search nearest caches button, the app brings up the caches closest to the original search location. Meanwhile, the GPSr is constantly trying to get a better fix on your location. So, say that originally the app thinks that you are at the Sears Tower. It finds the caches nearest to the Sears Tower. While it is doing that, the signal picks up a more accurate reading that you are actually 1 mile South from the Sears Tower. The Sears Tower then becomes the "Search Location", while 1 mile South of the Sears Tower becomes "from here". This is all based from my previous experience with the official app on my old iPhone (RIP.... you served your purpose old chap).

 

This could also be why the distances of the caches are not in perfect ascending order.

 

edit to add.... if you are sitting under your roof, the accuracy of where you are is definitely going to jump around a lot.

Edited October 20, 2011 by goosefraba1

[+larryc43230]

I think that the problem is..... when you first start up the app, the GPSr is still trying to settle on your location. Once you press the search nearest caches button, the app brings up the caches closest to the original search location. Meanwhile, the GPSr is constantly trying to get a better fix on your location. So, say that originally the app thinks that you are at the Sears Tower. It finds the caches nearest to the Sears Tower. While it is doing that, the signal picks up a more accurate reading that you are actually 1 mile South from the Sears Tower. The Sears Tower then becomes the "Search Location", while 1 mile South of the Sears Tower becomes "from here". This is all based from my previous experience with the official app on my old iPhone (RIP.... you served your purpose old chap).

 

This could also be why the distances of the caches are not in perfect ascending order.

 

edit to add.... if you are sitting under your roof, the accuracy of where you are is definitely going to jump around a lot.

This might be a reasonable explanation, except that in the case of the tests I've been making, the phone has already been on for hours, tethered to my PC with a USB cable. Any GPS stabilization should have been finished a long time before I launched the app.

 

And I've been assuming all along that the GPS signal inside my condo isn't as good as it is outside. But wouldn't that affect both the "from here" and "from search location" equally? Why would those two measurements be different for any one cache? Also, I've seen discrepancies of as much as half a mile. If the GPS reading is that jumpy, even inside a one-floor condo, I'll never be able to rely on it for accurate readings. That would be an indictment of the phone, not the app, of course.

 

--Larry

[+goosefraba1]

I think that the problem is..... when you first start up the app, the GPSr is still trying to settle on your location. Once you press the search nearest caches button, the app brings up the caches closest to the original search location. Meanwhile, the GPSr is constantly trying to get a better fix on your location. So, say that originally the app thinks that you are at the Sears Tower. It finds the caches nearest to the Sears Tower. While it is doing that, the signal picks up a more accurate reading that you are actually 1 mile South from the Sears Tower. The Sears Tower then becomes the "Search Location", while 1 mile South of the Sears Tower becomes "from here". This is all based from my previous experience with the official app on my old iPhone (RIP.... you served your purpose old chap).

 

This could also be why the distances of the caches are not in perfect ascending order.

 

edit to add.... if you are sitting under your roof, the accuracy of where you are is definitely going to jump around a lot.

This might be a reasonable explanation, except that in the case of the tests I've been making, the phone has already been on for hours, tethered to my PC with a USB cable. Any GPS stabilization should have been finished a long time before I launched the app.

 

And I've been assuming all along that the GPS signal inside my condo isn't as good as it is outside. But wouldn't that affect both the "from here" and "from search location" equally? Why would those two measurements be different for any one cache? Also, I've seen discrepancies of as much as half a mile. If the GPS reading is that jumpy, even inside a one-floor condo, I'll never be able to rely on it for accurate readings. That would be an indictment of the phone, not the app, of course.

 

--Larry

 

My best explanation would be that the GPSr chip doesn't actually turn on until the program is started and used. So, regardless of how long the device itself has been on, the GPS is activated by the program. This measure is to conserve battery. I think the settings can be changed in order to keep the GPS signal on full time. You will know when the signal is on or not by the bullseye sign at the very top of your toolbar. Only when this bullseye is up there will the GPS be active.

 

Hope that helps.

 

Not to change subject, but I wonder what the difference is in the other programs that do not behave this way?

[+larryc43230]

My best explanation would be that the GPSr chip doesn't actually turn on until the program is started and used. So, regardless of how long the device itself has been on, the GPS is activated by the program. This measure is to conserve battery. I think the settings can be changed in order to keep the GPS signal on full time. You will know when the signal is on or not by the bullseye sign at the very top of your toolbar. Only when this bullseye is up there will the GPS be active.

Your explanation, that what I'm seeing is caused by GPS being activated, might explain why the distance to caches might be a bit off at first (similar to the state of my Oregon 550t when I first turn it on), but what does that have to do with the discrepancy between the distance "from here" and the distance "from Search Location"? What Search Location? If I haven't indicated any other location to search from, where is this location it seems to think I want distances from, other than anywhere from a few hundred feet to half a mile away, in an apparently random direction?

 

I guess this inspires a follow-up question: Is anyone else who uses the Geocaching app seeing these discrepancies? I seem to be the only one who's mentioned this so far, which is one reason I asked the question in the first place.

 

Not to change subject, but I wonder what the difference is in the other programs that do not behave this way?

I'm not at all sure that the other applications display this information. For the three others I've been playing with, there's only one distance displayed, which is the distance from either my current location or from the place on the map I'm searching from.

 

And as far as I can tell, none of this nitpicking (relatively speaking) has anything to do with the much more important issue I brought up: Why doesn't the app show me all caches near my location? Why is it systematically omitting perfectly good caches from the list? I don't want to see a random selection, I want to be able to choose from all the caches in the area that I might want to visit. It's not that I feel the need to look for each and every cache within a certain area, I just want a complete list to choose from. If I visit a new area and ask the app for a list of caches, and the list doesn't include that cache I'd really love to look for, I'm going to be mightily irritated when I find out. If that issue can't be resolved, it's a real deal breaker, and I won't be able to trust the app.

 

--Larry

[+larryc43230]

I've spent a good part of my morning doing further testing, this time with other Android geocaching apps. The apps I tested were Neongeo and a controversial app that will remained unnamed. I also have GeoBeagle, but as far as I can determine that app simply takes me to the GC Web site and displays a search list based on my current location.

 

I can summarize the result very simply: These other two apps display a complete list of caches in my area, with none mysteriously missing. This list includes all 26 "Boo" series caches that the official app refuses to list, and "The Other Side", the nearby multi that the GC app also misses.

 

Any suggestions would be most appreciated.

 

--Larry

[+goosefraba1]

I was experiencing that same "lost caches" bit on my iPhone with the official app... I have no explanation for that one. All that I know is what "should be" and what "is" are two different things.

[+larryc43230]

I was experiencing that same "lost caches" bit on my iPhone with the official app... I have no explanation for that one. All that I know is what "should be" and what "is" are two different things.

If that's also the case with this Android app, I'll stick to pocket queries and/or one of the other apps.

 

--Larry

[+baloo&bd]

While the problem with the missing caches is the issue of this thread, a bigger issue is that there seems to be no where to turn for support. The OP has posted issues in feedback as well as here and no one from GS or the development team seem to have time to acknowledge the issues. We all do our best here to help, but none of us can do anything when a bug is identified or a problem device.

 

The app is not free and, even though contrary to popular opinion it is reasonably priced, it is frustrating when you try to get support and that pushes users to alternatives. Those alternatives start to gain loyalty from the users and it is hard to win them back. I think many of these things would be non-issues with better communication.

[+larryc43230]

While the problem with the missing caches is the issue of this thread, a bigger issue is that there seems to be no where to turn for support. The OP has posted issues in feedback as well as here and no one from GS or the development team seem to have time to acknowledge the issues. We all do our best here to help, but none of us can do anything when a bug is identified or a problem device.

 

The app is not free and, even though contrary to popular opinion it is reasonably priced, it is frustrating when you try to get support and that pushes users to alternatives. Those alternatives start to gain loyalty from the users and it is hard to win them back. I think many of these things would be non-issues with better communication.

+1

 

My frustration level increases the longer I wait for at least an acknowledgment that someone who can make a difference has taken note of my posts, here and/or in the feedback forum (whether or not they even admit there's an issue). I posted in this forum thinking that other users might have seen these issues and come up with workarounds (or convinced me that what I'm seeing is a feature as opposed to a bug). I appreciate the suggestions that others have made so far, but the fact remains that what I've found appears to be a rather serious bug, one that at this point would cause me to recommend that potential buyers look elsewhere.

 

I'm still hoping that someone from Groundspeak will convince me otherwise.

 

--Larry

[+goosefraba1]

While the problem with the missing caches is the issue of this thread, a bigger issue is that there seems to be no where to turn for support. The OP has posted issues in feedback as well as here and no one from GS or the development team seem to have time to acknowledge the issues. We all do our best here to help, but none of us can do anything when a bug is identified or a problem device.

 

The app is not free and, even though contrary to popular opinion it is reasonably priced, it is frustrating when you try to get support and that pushes users to alternatives. Those alternatives start to gain loyalty from the users and it is hard to win them back. I think many of these things would be non-issues with better communication.

+1

 

My frustration level increases the longer I wait for at least an acknowledgment that someone who can make a difference has taken note of my posts, here and/or in the feedback forum (whether or not they even admit there's an issue). I posted in this forum thinking that other users might have seen these issues and come up with workarounds (or convinced me that what I'm seeing is a feature as opposed to a bug). I appreciate the suggestions that others have made so far, but the fact remains that what I've found appears to be a rather serious bug, one that at this point would cause me to recommend that potential buyers look elsewhere.

 

I'm still hoping that someone from Groundspeak will convince me otherwise.

 

--Larry

 

+2

 

I agree.

[+mamoreb]

I also agree. I have stopped using the app for geocaching, but I have kept it to look up TBs.

 

Last night I tested the theory that was presented, concerning current location "jumping around" when the GPSr is switched on. I turned the GPSr on, and searched for the closest caches. Then searched again and again, with a stable GPS fix. Turned GPS off, repeated procedure.

 

The order of the geocache display changes every time. In fact I always get the same 20 caches, and the two closest caches are always listed first, but after that, it is rather random. I couldn't notice any difference between the searches made immediately after power on, and the searched made on a stable GPS fix.

 

larryc43230, you didn't mention if you used the "sort" function. If we assume that caches are listed in a random order - more random than we expect, it is possible that your missing caches are on page xxx. Did you try menu -> sort -> distance?

[+larryc43230]

larryc43230, you didn't mention if you used the "sort" function. If we assume that caches are listed in a random order - more random than we expect, it is possible that your missing caches are on page xxx. Did you try menu -> sort -> distance?

Based on your suggestion, I've run one additional test, as follows.

 

For those just tuning in, searches using the "Find Nearby Caches" function on the Android Geocaching app omit a total of 27 caches in my immediate area which should be included in the search results list. The missing caches, with one exception, are in a series, all of which begin with "Boo #". These missing caches are all between 3.3 and 6.3 miles from my home, which is the location I've used for all the tests. The one anomaly has been "Boo #31", 5.9 miles from my location, which does appear in the list.

 

I just reran the test, with a couple of changes. This time, I had the app fetch a total of 240 caches. After fetching all 240 caches, I selected Menu -> Sort List, and sorted by Distance. I now had a list of nearby caches that extended out to 10.33 miles from my location.

 

The missing 26 caches in the "Boo #" series, and the multi that won't appear, "The Other Side", are still missing. They are nowhere in the list, despite the fact that there are plenty of other caches in the 3.3-to-6.3-mile range in the list, and despite the fact that I extended the search out to more than 10 miles. The oddball, "Boo #31", still shows up in the list.

 

--Larry

[+larryc43230]

I hate to have to bump my own thread, but I haven't received any acknowledgment from Groundspeak that they've even read either this thread or the one I posted in the Feedback forum regarding this glitch. It's now been about two weeks since I installed the Geocaching app (Android version) and reported the bug, and a good number of caches still don't show up in the "Find Nearby Caches" list. See my previous posts in the thread for details.

 

I'll give this about another week, then officially abandon the app altogether and go with an alternative. At this point, I simply can't trust this app to provide me with the information I need to go caching.

 

In the meantime, any suggestions regarding how to get Groundspeak's attention, or how to get around the glitch, are appreciated.

 

--Larry

[+Semper Questio]

Have you tried THIS

 

Or you could send an email to contact (at) geocaching.com

[+larryc43230]

Have you tried THIS

Yes. No response yet.

 

Or you could send an email to contact (at) geocaching.com

That address strikes me as awfully "generic". I'll try it as a last resort, I suppose.

 

--Larry

[+larryc43230]

Further testing last night and this morning:

 

Something has changed, presumably on the back end, since there is no new version of the app on my smart phone.

 

To summarize the situation before today, a total of 27 active geocaches have consistently been missing from the results list when I do a "Find Nearby Caches" search from my home location. Of these, 26 are in the same series, the names of which all begin with "Boo #". The other cache known to be missing is a multi called "The Other Side".

 

There may be other caches missing from the list, since I haven't done a complete cross-check between the list in the app and search results on the Web site. It's enough to know that the app is not giving me all the results I should be seeing.

 

Yesterday, I did some further testing. In all previous tests, I had set the Search Filter to "Advanced", which is supposed to show "all types of geocaches." This time, I changed that setting from "Advanced" to "Basic", which shows only Traditional caches. When I searched for caches this time, three of the missing caches suddenly appeared in the list. I was called away at that point, so, unfortunately, I didn't make note of which three were added. The upshot was that changing that setting from "include everything" to "include only one type of cache" gave me more results, not fewer. OK....

 

This morning, I changed that setting back to "Advanced" and redid the original test: I searched for all caches within 10 miles of my home location (all of the missing caches are within 6.2 miles of my current location). The results had changed overnight, for the first time since I started all this testing a couple of weeks ago.

 

As of this morning, only 9 caches are missing from the results list, as follows:

 

Boo #7 through Boo #10

Boo #22, Boo #25, Boo #26, and Boo #28

The Other Side

 

All the other caches in the 31-cache series either appear in the list or have already been found by me. The bottom line is that 18 of the missing caches have now suddenly begun appearing in the search results list.

 

All this makes me wonder whether they're fiddling around with this at the back end....

 

--Larry

[Geo-Magician]

Larry,

 

my post will unfortunately not help you with your main issue but for the mismatched distances (0.1 up to 1 mile differences in the "from here" and ... list) it might help to realize that despite all advertising the phone is no GPSR.

 

The GPS chip in the phone might be identical to that in a GPSR but the fine tuning for the phone is not optimized for GPS position accuracy (this takes to long and is to costly during the rapid development cycle of mobile phones). There is GPS reception with the phone and it is often quite good but under deteriorating conditions the GPS chip in the phone will have trouble to find the exact position.

 

In your situation (sitting in a chair) the GPS signal will most likely be bounced of nearby walls into your window, will be weakened passing through your roof, will be shadowed off completely by metal structures, ... Worst of all, the phone might totally loose GPS coverage and resort to GSM tracking ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mobile_phone_tracking ). This will result in distance inaccuracies up to a mile. Some phones/Apps will make you aware of this, some won't.

 

My guess is that the difference in the distances results from inaccurate GPS position fixes maybe even mixed with GSM tracking. This gets better when the phone has stable GPS conditions and worsens when the GPS conditions deteriorate. You will have different results every time you re-run the test (plus the mysterious inputs from the app).

 

Here is a nice comparison of GPSR

http://www.kowoma.de/gps/geraetetests/iOS/precision_wbt202.jpg

and mobile phone GPS

http://www.kowoma.de/gps/geraetetests/iOS/precision_iPhone.jpg

accuracy.

 

All this does not explain your real trouble and I have witnessed your experience over and over again geocaching with a fried who uses the app. We normally end up with me (GPSR and pocket query) providing the GC-code for the cache and he punches it in manually. I assume most people who use the app are not aware of this problem because they never compare the GC website with the caches provided through the app.

 

Good luck with your quest to get this sorted out .

[+larryc43230]

Larry,

 

my post will unfortunately not help you with your main issue but for the mismatched distances (0.1 up to 1 mile differences in the "from here" and ... list) it might help to realize that despite all advertising the phone is no GPSR ...

I 'm all too aware that the GPSr built into the typical smart phone isn't comparable to that in a dedicated unit, especially under difficult conditions such as heavy tree cover (which is my favorite environment to be geocaching ). This is why I still rely on my Oregon 550t for serious caching. I wanted the smart phone and a geocaching app mostly as a data source, since my 550t can't access live data on the GC Web site.

 

I was simply puzzled (still am, actually) as to what the Geocaching app is using as my Search Location when I haven't specified one, and which is sometimes up to half a mile from my Current Location (indicated as "Here" in the display). This was never a major issue for me, it just causes me to wonder what the app is doing, and why.

 

In other words, I would expect the distance measurement to vary from one moment to the next, given the vagaries of a smart phone GPSr; I just can't get my head around that difference between the two displayed distances.

 

All this does not explain your real trouble and I have witnessed your experience over and over again geocaching with a fried who uses the app. We normally end up with me (GPSR and pocket query) providing the GC-code for the cache and he punches it in manually. I assume most people who use the app are not aware of this problem because they never compare the GC website with the caches provided through the app.

It's good to know that I'm not the only one who has suffered from this issue. I've been feeling a bit like a voice in the wilderness, since no one else seems to have noticed this.

 

To be honest, I might not have discovered this if I hadn't decided to play with the app from the comfort of my home. I've been finding caches in this general area since I started more than five years ago. A while ago, just for fun, I used GSAK to determine that I've found a total of 725 caches within a 10-mile radius of where I live, 394 of which are still active. I'm fairly familiar with what caches I should expect to find in a list of nearby hides, and the fact that 26 caches, all in the same series, were missing from the list was hard not to notice.

 

Good luck with your quest to get this sorted out .

Thanks for the information, and for the encouragement!

 

--Larry

[Sandy]

We apologize for lack of response, and I understand that you had posted in the Feedback site too.

A colleague on the engineering team is investigating this matter for you.

In the meantime, please do send an email to contact@Groundspeak.com, so that we can correspond with you on the specifics of your issue. Write Attention: Sandy in the subject line, and I will get this to my colleague.

[+larryc43230]

We apologize for lack of response, and I understand that you had posted in the Feedback site too.

A colleague on the engineering team is investigating this matter for you.

In the meantime, please do send an email to contact@Groundspeak.com, so that we can correspond with you on the specifics of your issue. Write Attention: Sandy in the subject line, and I will get this to my colleague.

Message sent; thanks!

 

--Larry

[+larryc43230]

UPDATE: Earlier today, Groundspeak confirmed that there is a bug in the Android version of the program that causes some caches to not appear in a list of search results. They are working on a fix for the next software release.

 

--Larry

[+mamoreb]

Great news! Good job on getting the necessary attention, Larry. I have left my cases on the feedback site alone, but I will check in from time to time to see if the app has become usable.

[+larryc43230]

As of this morning, only 9 caches are missing from the results list, as follows:

 

Boo #7 through Boo #10

Boo #22, Boo #25, Boo #26, and Boo #28

The Other Side

 

All the other caches in the 31-cache series either appear in the list or have already been found by me. The bottom line is that 18 of the missing caches have now suddenly begun appearing in the search results list.

 

All this makes me wonder whether they're fiddling around with this at the back end....

 

--Larry

I just updated the Geocaching app to version 2.2, and immediately checked to see whether the missing caches in my area show up in the Search list.

 

I am happy to report that all of the caches that were missing from the list (see above for the details) are now appearing correctly in the Search results.

 

Looks good so far, at least as far as this issue is concerned!

 

--Larry

[+vds]

I just updated the Geocaching app to version 2.2, and immediately checked to see whether the missing caches in my area show up in the Search list.

 

I am happy to report that all of the caches that were missing from the list (see above for the details) are now appearing correctly in the Search results.

 

Nice to see a new release.

 

Personally I got tired of waiting and switched to Neongeo ($4.00 or so) and never looked back. It is simply amazing and revolutionizes how you search for caches. Also, it actually 'ignores' your ignore list, has a personalized signature to automate appending to your logs, realtime maps vs. caches. Just a fabulous app with a developer who almost immediately answers any question or reports of perceived bugs. Definitely worth a look as (in my opinion) a far superior app and interface.