What is wrong with c:geo?

[Keystone]

I stand with you regarding the "hater" comments and do not understand why they are used.

That problem has been addressed and will not be a problem anymore. If someone sees posts like those in the future, use the "report this post" tool.

 

Some facts that are being left out is the original developer contacted GS several times. The only response he ever received was that the icons were at issue which he changed to comply. When he inquired about the API after it was announced, he got no response.

That is not my understanding of the facts regarding an active but ultimately unproductive dialogue.

 

The thing to do would have been to have come out and state that software not endorsed (i.e. on a list somewhere) by GC would not be allowed to be discussed on GC forums or logs. Problem ends. What happened was GS took no official position early on, yet actively edited or deleted references to c:geo. As people are want to do, they started coming up with scenarios why this was happening and the infamous "against the ToU" argument was born.

 

...In my opinion, if c:geo is truly in violation of the ToU, GS should take direct and immediate action against them directly and not let it be fought out here in the forums. i.e. state why and then delete threads like this immediately.

It's always hard to censor discussions of something. We tried that and it didn't work well, since it upset customers. Ultimately Groundspeak decided that it was better to allow discussion of c:geo in its forums than to hide posts or close threads. That change in forum moderation policy should NOT be interpreted as any sort of admission/recognition that c:geo complies with the Terms of Use.

[+baloo&bd]

Yeah, Baloo threw out some big names, and I myself threw out Twitter. Just because they're well known, I suppose. I'm sure there a many like-sized examples out there of websites with open API.

 

Clarification: Baloo didn't throw out any big words, those were carnero's words being quoted.

 

Clarification: By big names, Mr. Yuck meant you mentioned Facebook, Twitter, and Google as far as API's, and Ekitt10 took issue with said big names being compared to Geocaching.com.

 

No, I did not! I never mentioned Twitter, Facebook or Google in any way or fashion.

[+nikcap]

Lets see here, if I can word this post without a warning or forum ban. What Groundspeak did wrong? I would say the iron-fisted grip they have on our cache data, caches placed by us, the community. Now I know their all a pimple on the Butt of the 1,000 Lb. Gorilla, but all the alternative Geocaching websites tout themselves as being open with the cache data. Garmin has an open API, although I could care less, and will never use the site.

 

 

FWIW, the fact that my cache data entered at Geocaching.com stays here as I posted it and isn't replicated elsewhere, in god knows what form or incarnation says a lot of the integrity of Groundspeak. If I wanted my cache pages presented on or via other sites or services I'd figure how to do it thank you.

 

To touch on something else from the c:geo "manifesto", I'm I the only one that odd that c:geo developer was taking exception to how gc.com was representing their webpages?

 

Isn't that exactly the reason to building an open API for your partners?

 

Yeah, Baloo threw out some big names, and I myself threw out Twitter. Just because they're well known, I suppose. I'm sure there a many like-sized examples out there of websites with open API.

 

Clarification: Baloo didn't throw out any big words, those were carnero's words being quoted.

 

Clarification: By big names, Mr. Yuck meant you mentioned Facebook, Twitter, and Google as far as API's, and Ekitt10 took issue with said big names being compared to Geocaching.com.

 

No, I did not! I never mentioned Twitter, Facebook or Google in any way or fashion.

 

Clarification: I realized that Baloo simply quoted what carnero stated. I just think it's a little unrealistic to believe that Groundspeak has the man power to be on the cutting edge of technology like the big boys.

[Mr.Yuck]

Yeah, Baloo threw out some big names, and I myself threw out Twitter. Just because they're well known, I suppose. I'm sure there a many like-sized examples out there of websites with open API.

 

Clarification: Baloo didn't throw out any big words, those were carnero's words being quoted.

 

Clarification: By big names, Mr. Yuck meant you mentioned Facebook, Twitter, and Google as far as API's, and Ekitt10 took issue with said big names being compared to Geocaching.com.

 

No, I did not! I never mentioned Twitter, Facebook or Google in any way or fashion.

 

Oh gosh. My bad. OK, I'm outta here.

[+kpanko]

why did the c:geo maps "break" after gc.com move from Google to OSM. If c:geo was using their own method of accessing Google maps, it shouldn't have mattered what gc.com did.

Yes, that seems reasonable. I never used c:geo so I don't really know that much.

 

My understanding is that it uses the HTML from the geocaching website to get its data, and when the site gets updated, the HTML can be changed in ways that confuse the program. That is why an API is preferred -- it will not change when the site does.

[+thebruce0]

why did the c:geo maps "break" after gc.com move from Google to OSM. If c:geo was using their own method of accessing Google maps, it shouldn't have mattered what gc.com did.

Yes, that seems reasonable. I never used c:geo so I don't really know that much.

 

My understanding is that it uses the HTML from the geocaching website to get its data, and when the site gets updated, the HTML can be changed in ways that confuse the program. That is why an API is preferred -- it will not change when the site does.

 

Or use the tools provided to create a 3rd party app that doesn't require an API.

 

Like PQs.

Or the (necessary) work of manually entering waypoints if you don't have PQs.

Everything else is, well, your own app.

 

Once again, Geosphere is a splendid example of a 3rd party app which is (IMO) far better than the official one, and it doesn't even use the API (yet). A custom, unique interface, well programmed, and all it uses are GPX/LOC files and PQs.

IMO, c:geo has no excuse for being the kind of app it is, or employing the methods it has/did.

I've never used it, so I can't compare its usability to Geosphere or the official app, but from what I hear it's a great app. That's wonderful. Now, just use gc.com as Groundspeak intended 3rd parties to use it (closed API or provided features), and the drama will go away.

 

But anyway...

 

(eta: to demonstrate, geosphere has an in-app browser. It doesn't scrape the pages, it loads them in full, then traps specific requests - you click the GPX or LOC button, and it downloads it into the database; same as if you were to download it on your PC and load it into your GPS. Same with pocket queries - click the PQ link on the website in the in-app browser and all the data is loaded into its internal database)

Edited March 5, 2012 by thebruce0