Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 26
OpinioNate

Geocaching.com site update Feb 14th, 2012

Recommended Posts

Groundspeak has received a lot of feedback from the geocaching community regarding the recent changes to our maps, including recent improvements to our Pocket Query/Map integration. We understand that the change in maps was not ideal for many customers who were used to seeing Google maps on geocaching.com.

 

Please understand that we are committed to delivering exceptional functionality, including high quality maps. We are continuing to analyze available options for mapping while also actively working with MapQuest to improve the current functionality and service.

 

Thanks Sandy! It was good meeting you in Wichita, KS.

Share this post


Link to post

You do not need to copy and paste the cords. Just click on Google maps in the list on the left side of the web page. It is the third in the list.

 

Actually this map is better than the GC.Com versions that were abandoned since the pointer shows the exact spot rather than covering the exact area.

Share this post


Link to post

You do not need to copy and paste the cords. Just click on Google maps in the list on the left side of the web page. It is the third in the list.

 

Actually this map is better than the GC.Com versions that were abandoned since the pointer shows the exact spot rather than covering the exact area.

That's not what they're referring to. On every single cache page, just above the logs, there's a bunch of links under the heading "For online maps...". See below:

j78bol.jpg

There's both Google (3rd link) and Bing (6th link), and each will open in a new window with the coordinates pre-entered. No copy-and-pasting required.

Share this post


Link to post

If been following this thread from its beginning and it amazes me the length some people will go to so that their negativity can be put on display.

 

Im not sure how the rest of the caching community plans their cache outings. But I for one dont need to use the google maps on Groundspeak to see what I need.

 

I, being a premium member have the ability to download a pocket query to another program and manipulate the entire contents of that query into Google maps and then look for routes I will take.

 

If non-premium members dont want to pay for a premium membership, then they should have to deal with what they paid for.

 

I'd like to know what percentage of caches found on the average weekend are the type where a detailed map is needed to find them. Sure there are those cachers who require details to know how to get to certain caches. However to me there seems to be alot of caches placed along side of streets, in parks or in the middle of cities. Do we really need google maps to view those types of caches.

 

Bottom line, you get what you pay for or what you decide to pay for. What portion of the geocaching experience would $30 a year be. No matter what epuipment you use to enjoy the hobby, the GS premium membership would be a very small cost in comparision. AND as a benifit IF more people decided to pony up the $30, who knows, then maybe GS could afford to use Google maps.

 

As far as those who think that the GS employees are getting fat from the monies that Groundspeak generates, are you kidding me? I've never seen their headquarters or met any of them, but I would tend to believe that the long hours and the amoung of personnel required to keep the site up and running isnt making ANYONE rich.

 

Lackeys, you guys do a fantastic job!! It would be a shame if the naysayers brought this hobby down. Keep up the good work.

Share this post


Link to post

Its all gone tits up...

 

Slow.

 

Frustrating.

 

And totally unfathomable.

 

Why do I need to down load 548 items...

 

548-items-in-the-end.jpg

 

to result in this page that I required...

 

and take 4 minutes to do it?

 

main-window.jpg

 

Get rid - ask me my opinion - I might pay up rather than put up with this.

 

You've really put a spanner in the works of what was a really good activity.

I highly recommend Google Earth. There are many ways to display Geocaches in Google Earth, using both GSAK and the official Geocaching.com KML file, and you can add other functions, such as the ability to show cache exclusion zones.

Share this post


Link to post

Groundspeak has received a lot of feedback from the geocaching community regarding the recent changes to our maps, including recent improvements to our Pocket Query/Map integration. We understand that the change in maps was not ideal for many customers who were used to seeing Google maps on geocaching.com.

 

Please understand that we are committed to delivering exceptional functionality, including high quality maps. We are continuing to analyze available options for mapping while also actively working with MapQuest to improve the current functionality and service.

What a complete and total waste of time. Having tried to work with Mapquest in the past on a prior project, and experiencing the exact same problems you are experiencing (disappearing tiles at zoomed levels, tiles disappearing that were there moments ago at the same zoom level) it's pretty apparent that Mapquest has no intention of ever improving their system. My experience was 5+ years ago, and not a single improvement has been made to date.

Share this post


Link to post

You do not need to copy and paste the cords. Just click on Google maps in the list on the left side of the web page. It is the third in the list.

 

Actually this map is better than the GC.Com versions that were abandoned since the pointer shows the exact spot rather than covering the exact area.

That's not what they're referring to. On every single cache page, just above the logs, there's a bunch of links under the heading "For online maps...". See below:

j78bol.jpg

There's both Google (3rd link) and Bing (6th link), and each will open in a new window with the coordinates pre-entered. No copy-and-pasting required.

 

Yes thats where I am too. Third link under "for Online Maps"... I get a red stick pin instead of a cache box icon... much better for seeing the exact spot of the hide.

Share this post


Link to post

Yes thats where I am too. Third link under "for Online Maps"... I get a red stick pin instead of a cache box icon... much better for seeing the exact spot of the hide.

Whoops, sorry. I must have misread your post.

Share this post


Link to post

Please can someone tell me whether there is a way to add the scale back in? In unfamiliar areas it is really helpful to be able to see distances.

 

Yoohoo :-)

 

I don't think it is possible at the moment, ...

 

OK ignore that, and try this:

 

Geocaching.com - Image map scale

 

Works for me :rolleyes:

 

THANK YOU! You are my current Favorite Person.

Share this post


Link to post

Please can someone tell me whether there is a way to add the scale back in? In unfamiliar areas it is really helpful to be able to see distances.

 

Yoohoo :-)

 

I don't think it is possible at the moment, ...

 

OK ignore that, and try this:

 

Geocaching.com - Image map scale

 

Works for me :rolleyes:

Excellent! Now just waiting for a miles/feet option (said to be in the works).

Share this post


Link to post

1) I understand the dropping of Google maps. SHAME ON THEM for charging for 0.35 %. Unfortunate for them, it will come back and bite them. Not sure exactly how or in what form, but decisions like these often have cascading consequences

 

2) The new maps are too "bulky". The layout just isn't right. I wish I could explain more, but "bulky" is the best word I can come up with.

Share this post


Link to post

Hello,

 

I just want to ask something :

 

Wathever the map 'brand' but do you find normal there is no scale on the actual maps ?

I find that really annoying because I have no clue on the distance when i'm searching map for caches.

 

Is it planed to add a scale?

Share this post


Link to post

Anyone else notice that, when you click the geocaching.com map link for a particular cache, that cache is no longer centered on the map when it comes up? Seems like it's off to the left now. I guess that'd put it in the center of the screen itself, but the map used to center around the cache, didn't it?

Share this post


Link to post

Has anyone else seen a sharp decline in the number of published caches since the St. Valentine’s Day Massacre? It seems to me that we have here. I’m just wondering if others are seeing the same thing.

 

Nope. Lots of new caches in RI.

Share this post


Link to post

just lower the value of a membership.

 

Don't understand that statement. You still get everything extra that the PM covered.

Share this post


Link to post

You do not need to copy and paste the cords. Just click on Google maps in the list on the left side of the web page. It is the third in the list.

 

Or the Bing maps link. I actually prefer the Bing Maps bird's eye view to the Google aerial views. They tend to be closer in, and the oblique vice overhead angle allow for better pinpointing. And in my area, the Bing maps were taken in the fall, so everything is not just green everywhere.

Share this post


Link to post

Anyone else notice that, when you click the geocaching.com map link for a particular cache, that cache is no longer centered on the map when it comes up? Seems like it's off to the left now. I guess that'd put it in the center of the screen itself, but the map used to center around the cache, didn't it?

It really is centered on the map, but the left side menu cover up 1/3 of the map. The left side is semi-transparent and you can see map features behind the left side. If you retract that side you see the full map.

Share this post


Link to post

Anyone else notice that, when you click the geocaching.com map link for a particular cache, that cache is no longer centered on the map when it comes up? Seems like it's off to the left now. I guess that'd put it in the center of the screen itself, but the map used to center around the cache, didn't it?

Yeah, I noticed this. It seems to be centered on the screen now, not the map as displayed. Kind of annoying.

Share this post


Link to post

I haven't read through the entire 14pages of posts so I apologize if this has already bean asked, but how many of the 2mil google map hits are done by premium members? If google map access was limited to just premium members, how far over would Groundspeak go over the limit of 25,000 per day?

*numbers that are not known are pull out of thin air

If have of Groundspeak hits are from premium members than lets say if access was restricted to just them, Groundspeak would have 1mil* hits per day. That's still 975,000 over the limit. Google charges $4 per every 1000 hits if you don't have a license which would mean Groundspeak would be charged ~$975 per day or $355,875 per year.

Now I know Groundspeak advertises that they have 5mil geocachers, but I also know that the amount of premium members is not going to be anywhere near that. Lets say there are 100,000* premium cachers. This would mean each premium cacher would be responsible for ~$3.56 of google map caches per year.

Would users be willing to eat that cost if Groundspeak passed it on?

Can Groundspeak further reduce the number of hits by premium members by reducing the number of times a google map shows up on various locations on the website?

Also, can Groundspeak get an even better deal from google if they negotiate a license?

Google doesnt advertise the price of a license, but there is a good chance that given the amount of hits Groundspeak sends to google, they could probably get a better rate than the $4 per 1000hit standard. Also, with a license comes a whole list of sweet perks and features that would be a beneficial addition to geocaching.com (and maybe even other gs websites).

 

All questions I'm sure Groundspeak has probably gonna over and analyzed and I may be way out of line due to pulling numbers out of thin air.

I just hope Groundspeak really puts a TON of thought into serving their premium users best and reconsiders adding google maps.

Share this post


Link to post

In my opinion chances for Google maps returning as a free or as an extra cost option is some where between zero and ain't going to happen. And while we are dreaming about Google maps as an extra cost option for premium members I have to ask why limit it to premium members? The maps where never a premium perk so why make them a perk now? Don't you think regular members would like the option also? I'm sure Groundspeak did inquire about better terms. I take it the offered terms were a bit more than free. Groundspeak is not only the only website that is or has migrated from Google. Must be a reason.

Share this post


Link to post

That's still 975,000 over the limit. Google charges $4 per every 1000 hits if you don't have a license which would mean Groundspeak would be charged ~$975 per day or $355,875 per year.

You made a mistake at this point. You forgot to multiply by $4, which means your end result should be 4 times higher.

Share this post


Link to post

In my opinion chances for Google maps returning as a free or as an extra cost option is some where between zero and ain't going to happen. And while we are dreaming about Google maps as an extra cost option for premium members I have to ask why limit it to premium members? The maps where never a premium perk so why make them a perk now? Don't you think regular members would like the option also? I'm sure Groundspeak did inquire about better terms. I take it the offered terms were a bit more than free. Groundspeak is not only the only website that is or has migrated from Google. Must be a reason.

+1 to every single statement.

Share this post


Link to post

And while we are dreaming about Google maps as an extra cost option for premium members I have to ask why limit it to premium members? The maps where never a premium perk so why make them a perk now? Don't you think regular members would like the option also?

I am sure that regular members would like the Google Maps back, too, but since that is not an option (Groundspeak cannot afford it), people are suggesting alternatives. It does not seem fair to raise the price of Premium Membership to cover the cost of Google, and then turn around and give these expensive maps to people who do not pay for them. Regular members would be free to upgrade to Premium if they wanted the maps.

Share this post


Link to post

And while we are dreaming about Google maps as an extra cost option for premium members I have to ask why limit it to premium members? The maps where never a premium perk so why make them a perk now? Don't you think regular members would like the option also?

I am sure that regular members would like the Google Maps back, too, but since that is not an option (Groundspeak cannot afford it), people are suggesting alternatives. It does not seem fair to raise the price of Premium Membership to cover the cost of Google, and then turn around and give these expensive maps to people who do not pay for them. Regular members would be free to upgrade to Premium if they wanted the maps.

You missed the point entirely. The maps were *never* a premium perk. If your going around dreaming about Google maps, why make them a premium perk now? You can have regular member, premium member and then the optional map membership for who ever wants it. And I really don't care to pay more for my premium membership just so you can have Google maps. Forget the higher priced premium membership to bring Google maps back.

Share this post


Link to post

And while we are dreaming about Google maps as an extra cost option for premium members I have to ask why limit it to premium members? The maps where never a premium perk so why make them a perk now? Don't you think regular members would like the option also?

I am sure that regular members would like the Google Maps back, too, but since that is not an option (Groundspeak cannot afford it), people are suggesting alternatives. It does not seem fair to raise the price of Premium Membership to cover the cost of Google, and then turn around and give these expensive maps to people who do not pay for them. Regular members would be free to upgrade to Premium if they wanted the maps.

You missed the point entirely. The maps were *never* a premium perk. If your going around dreaming about Google maps, why make them a premium perk now? You can have regular member, premium member and then the optional map membership for who ever wants it. And I really don't care to pay more for my premium membership just so you can have Google maps. Forget the higher priced premium membership to bring Google maps back.

You missed the point entirely. Most of the "premium perks" were not premium perks at some point in time. I am sure there are premium members who do not use some of the perks and wish they could pick and choose which to pay for, but currently Premium Membership is not a la carte. If Groundspeak wanted to make it a three tier system (e.g., Regular Member, Premium Member, and Super Premium with Google), then that would be a viable solution.

Share this post


Link to post

And while we are dreaming about Google maps as an extra cost option for premium members I have to ask why limit it to premium members? The maps where never a premium perk so why make them a perk now? Don't you think regular members would like the option also?

I am sure that regular members would like the Google Maps back, too, but since that is not an option (Groundspeak cannot afford it), people are suggesting alternatives. It does not seem fair to raise the price of Premium Membership to cover the cost of Google, and then turn around and give these expensive maps to people who do not pay for them. Regular members would be free to upgrade to Premium if they wanted the maps.

You missed the point entirely. The maps were *never* a premium perk. If your going around dreaming about Google maps, why make them a premium perk now? You can have regular member, premium member and then the optional map membership for who ever wants it. And I really don't care to pay more for my premium membership just so you can have Google maps. Forget the higher priced premium membership to bring Google maps back.

You missed the point entirely. Most of the "premium perks" were not premium perks at some point in time. I am sure there are premium members who do not use some of the perks and wish they could pick and choose which to pay for, but currently Premium Membership is not a la carte. If Groundspeak wanted to make it a three tier system (e.g., Regular Member, Premium Member, and Super Premium with Google), then that would be a viable solution.

Just about all the premium perks were premium perks out of the box. So don't go making paying more money for a Google map a premium perk because it is not. Just make it a Google map option regardless of membership level and you got it right. Now all you got to do is convince GS to offer it. Which I seriously doubt they will.

Share this post


Link to post

I don't know if this has already been requested, but can we please get the yellow dot icon that indicate a premium member cache back on the map. If I'm looking at the map from a distance away, and I see a cache, I click on it thinking that it is a cache that I can get until the balloon pops up and I realize that it is a premium cache. Makes it difficult to eyeball the map and plan an excursion based on cache density. Thank you. --Dulce-Joy

Share this post


Link to post

I don't know if this has already been requested, but can we please get the yellow dot icon that indicate a premium member cache back on the map. If I'm looking at the map from a distance away, and I see a cache, I click on it thinking that it is a cache that I can get until the balloon pops up and I realize that it is a premium cache. Makes it difficult to eyeball the map and plan an excursion based on cache density. Thank you. --Dulce-Joy

 

You can zoom in one level and look for circles or squares.

Share this post


Link to post

Leaflet, the map framework, just released a scale control which is being implemented in the next release.

Share this post


Link to post

Leaflet, the map framework, just released a scale control which is being implemented in the next release.

 

Cool. Did that come about because of a request from Groundspeak? If so, it would be great to see that they are responsive to requests and could potentially add more changes which would not likely happen with google.

 

Speaking of which ... if GS were to ever offer google maps back again, I would expect that it would have to be a pay as you go plan. I certainly wouldn't want to open my pocket book to an open ended $4/1000 hits (is that tiles?) and have no control over how much I'm going to get charged.

 

For those that really want the maps, perhaps the best thing to do is have GS charge you for a "map pack". $16 will get you 4000 map views, paid up front. After that, you lose the ability to view google maps. This puts the burden of cost on those who want it, and doesn't open up GS to unpredictable google map bills.

Share this post


Link to post

And while we are dreaming about Google maps as an extra cost option for premium members I have to ask why limit it to premium members? The maps where never a premium perk so why make them a perk now? Don't you think regular members would like the option also?

I am sure that regular members would like the Google Maps back, too, but since that is not an option (Groundspeak cannot afford it), people are suggesting alternatives. It does not seem fair to raise the price of Premium Membership to cover the cost of Google, and then turn around and give these expensive maps to people who do not pay for them. Regular members would be free to upgrade to Premium if they wanted the maps.

You missed the point entirely. The maps were *never* a premium perk. If your going around dreaming about Google maps, why make them a premium perk now? You can have regular member, premium member and then the optional map membership for who ever wants it. And I really don't care to pay more for my premium membership just so you can have Google maps. Forget the higher priced premium membership to bring Google maps back.

Yes they weren't premium perks. And now there are still maps for all, just not Google maps. So everyone still has maps and the playing field is still level although not as good as before. I don't think Google maps will be back unless Google changes their stance so comparing today to yesterday specifically on the Google map issue is kind of moot IMO. I think making 'better' maps available as a PMO perk with some additional charge is worth investigating. I don't know what they are doing out in Seattle and they aren't sharing much but I feel certain they are investigating any viable option and have more facts than we do at this point. It would be nice to know more but we often don't know what they're thinking or planning until the last minute so I'll just hold on and go for the ride. Once I installed the greasemonkey scripts, my total caching experience is unchanged as a result of the recent site update.

Share this post


Link to post

And while we are dreaming about Google maps as an extra cost option for premium members I have to ask why limit it to premium members? The maps where never a premium perk so why make them a perk now? Don't you think regular members would like the option also?

I am sure that regular members would like the Google Maps back, too, but since that is not an option (Groundspeak cannot afford it), people are suggesting alternatives. It does not seem fair to raise the price of Premium Membership to cover the cost of Google, and then turn around and give these expensive maps to people who do not pay for them. Regular members would be free to upgrade to Premium if they wanted the maps.

You missed the point entirely. The maps were *never* a premium perk. If your going around dreaming about Google maps, why make them a premium perk now? You can have regular member, premium member and then the optional map membership for who ever wants it. And I really don't care to pay more for my premium membership just so you can have Google maps. Forget the higher priced premium membership to bring Google maps back.

Yes they weren't premium perks. And now there are still maps for all, just not Google maps. So everyone still has maps and the playing field is still level although not as good as before. I don't think Google maps will be back unless Google changes their stance so comparing today to yesterday specifically on the Google map issue is kind of moot IMO. I think making 'better' maps available as a PMO perk with some additional charge is worth investigating. I don't know what they are doing out in Seattle and they aren't sharing much but I feel certain they are investigating any viable option and have more facts than we do at this point. It would be nice to know more but we often don't know what they're thinking or planning until the last minute so I'll just hold on and go for the ride. Once I installed the greasemonkey scripts, my total caching experience is unchanged as a result of the recent site update.

 

Maybe there WILL be maps for all.. but at this time there are still no usable aerial photos for MAC users that show multiple caches on one page. Even if they would completely load every tile the quality is so poor that it would not be worth the effort.

Share this post


Link to post

Sorry for my english. I am from the Czech Republic. I would like to ask anybody who can help me. How can I get and use my TOPO map I have bought into Geocaching.com. I have tried many times and nothing happan. No map at all. I have a good map from Garmin that I normally use with Garmin BaseCamp in My computer. I would like to use it on Geo.com pages. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post

Please can someone tell me whether there is a way to add the scale back in? In unfamiliar areas it is really helpful to be able to see distances.

 

Yoohoo :-)

 

I don't think it is possible at the moment, ...

 

OK ignore that, and try this:

 

Geocaching.com - Image map scale

 

Works for me :rolleyes:

 

Great!

Share this post


Link to post

This works but can it be set to feet and miles instead of metric?

 

100 meters is 328 feet

a kilometer is about .6 miles

 

...or perhaps you can set your GPS to metric units?

 

Looks like we're going to need to be flexible. I don't see any chance of GC.com fixing this mapping mess in the short term.

Share this post


Link to post

This works but can it be set to feet and miles instead of metric?

 

100 meters is 328 feet

a kilometer is about .6 miles

 

...or perhaps you can set your GPS to metric units?

 

Looks like we're going to need to be flexible. I don't see any chance of GC.com fixing this mapping mess in the short term.

Raine mentioned that a scale has been added to the leaflet framework and will be included in the next update. He did not mention if it showed both imperial and/or metric.

Share this post


Link to post

Raine mentioned that a scale has been added to the leaflet framework and will be included in the next update. He did not mention if it showed both imperial and/or metric.

I just checked the Leaflet source code, and it has the ability to be set for either imperial or metric. Presumably Groundspeak will use your Geocaching.com account settings to determine which one to display to you.

Share this post


Link to post

Here is Flappjack99's 2 cents.

 

The new maps are about useless. Way too slow, No detail, no scale, sat view - again useless.

 

With my 30 bucks a year - Bring back all Google maps with Terrain & "my topo" for premium members.

 

Non Premium members can use the mapquest maps.

 

There you have it, don't spend it all it one place.

 

FJ99

Share this post


Link to post

Just tell me how much I will have to pay for my 'share' of Google maps. I cache mostly in very rural areas and need the aerial map view to figure the way in.

 

What I get now is useless. If Mapquest aerial worked it would fill the bill but it doesn't work at any functional level. Is there any hope for it?

 

So Groundspeak, what would I have to pay?????

Share this post


Link to post

And while we are dreaming about Google maps as an extra cost option for premium members I have to ask why limit it to premium members? The maps where never a premium perk so why make them a perk now? Don't you think regular members would like the option also?

I am sure that regular members would like the Google Maps back, too, but since that is not an option (Groundspeak cannot afford it), people are suggesting alternatives. It does not seem fair to raise the price of Premium Membership to cover the cost of Google, and then turn around and give these expensive maps to people who do not pay for them. Regular members would be free to upgrade to Premium if they wanted the maps.

You missed the point entirely. The maps were *never* a premium perk. If your going around dreaming about Google maps, why make them a premium perk now? You can have regular member, premium member and then the optional map membership for who ever wants it. And I really don't care to pay more for my premium membership just so you can have Google maps. Forget the higher priced premium membership to bring Google maps back.

Just so you know, we all know how you feel about this issue. We've read it a trizillion times. Just know that you don't speak for everybody.

Share this post


Link to post

Just want to add to the requests to return to googlemaps as an option. Maybe a tierred PM option. Lower costs to folks who don't mind poor maps and higher to those that prefer usability. I miss the ability to link to geocaches from the map pages. The number of hits to google maps would be reduced. Or maybe have some negiotiate between the two companies for a deal. The new maps have so many problems. They only tell me generally if the cache is in an area of interest. Many people have pointed out their shortcomings that I don't need to re-iterate, but I didn't see any comments about the the name pop-ups need hyperlinking as before.

Share this post


Link to post

Today I clicked on the satellite image view and actually got a full map with no missing squares. Should I put in a bug report? :ph34r:

Share this post


Link to post

anybody else getting a consistent tiled pattern at all zoom levels

 

maps.png

 

If you are referring to the missing sections, yes, I have seen that. In my case, it was when I was switching between the various types of maps.

Share this post


Link to post

I think the aerial maps are pretty much worthless unless you have plenty of time to wait for them to load, if they even load. How much does it really cost for the Google maps, and how much would it cost to get it back for premium members?

Share this post


Link to post

I think the aerial maps are pretty much worthless unless you have plenty of time to wait for them to load, if they even load. How much does it really cost for the Google maps, and how much would it cost to get it back for premium members?

 

Companies such as foursquare and apple are dropping google as their map provider because of cost. They have much bigger pockets than Groundspeakand decided the cost didnt make sense.

 

That said, the grease monkey add on gives you google maps back for free and didn't expose Groundspeak to a terms of use violation. Why not use that?

Share this post


Link to post

To all those who adamantly defend Groundspeak’s map changes:

 

Don’t get hung up on Google Maps and don’t assume that everyone wants to use Firefox with Greasemonkey to get around the problem. All the people are asking for is the return of functional satellite/aerial maps via geocaching.com using whatever browser they choose to use. There is nothing unreasonable about that request.

Share this post


Link to post

To all those who adamantly defend Groundspeak’s map changes:

 

Don’t get hung up on Google Maps and don’t assume that everyone wants to use Firefox with Greasemonkey to get around the problem. All the people are asking for is the return of functional satellite/aerial maps via geocaching.com using whatever browser they choose to use. There is nothing unreasonable about that request.

 

Except that the Google Maps come with a hefty price tag on them and Groundspeak cannot or will not subsidize our geocaching experience at the expense of their bottom line. Those of us with Premium memberships can have PQ's sent to us daily. Using GSAK, there are macros that will import the PQ right into GSAK and then there are other macros that will export said PQ to Google Maps.

 

I know that when I'm planning a day/week/vacation of caching, its much easier to run the PQ, weed out the ones that I dont want based on whatever reason and go from there.

 

I know that there are those who want the Google map option avialable to them without becoming a Premium Member. Is 30 bucks really that much to spend? Really?

Share this post


Link to post

To all those who adamantly defend Groundspeak’s map changes:

 

Don’t get hung up on Google Maps and don’t assume that everyone wants to use Firefox with Greasemonkey to get around the problem. All the people are asking for is the return of functional satellite/aerial maps via geocaching.com using whatever browser they choose to use. There is nothing unreasonable about that request.

+1

Share this post


Link to post

To all those who adamantly defend Groundspeak’s map changes:

 

Don’t get hung up on Google Maps and don’t assume that everyone wants to use Firefox with Greasemonkey to get around the problem. All the people are asking for is the return of functional satellite/aerial maps via geocaching.com using whatever browser they choose to use. There is nothing unreasonable about that request.

 

I think many of us are not defending GS; rather, we are criticizing google. The request IS unreasonable because of the costs involved. While none of us know the exact cost other than the lackeys, all you have to do is do a google search and you'll find other companies are dropping it as well because the cost cannot be justified at this time.

 

I'd love to see GS add an a la carte option for those who want it. But it might be difficult to do since GS couldn't charge a flat rate as their costs vary (I think?) with usage. Cachers who really want this option and can't be bothered with using a better browser could pay up front, and get charged whatever GS gets charged for each map view. People who use the google maps more would get charged more.

 

The nice thing about the openstreetmap now is with companies such as Apple and FourSquare moving to it, there will be more users updating the maps and making them more useful. This doesn't help the sat/aerial views though.

 

Apple drops google maps for iphoto

Why are companies defecting from google maps

Foursquare criticized for dropping google maps

FourSquare says bye to google maps, joins openstreetmap movement

 

Obviously Apple/FourSquare are the two major names making news. Apple has enormous pockets and decided to drop it, but they have other reasons to want to break from google anyway.

Share this post


Link to post
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 26

×
×
  • Create New...