Jump to content

Groundspeak Support?


Mickey and Goofy

Recommended Posts

I'm wondering about Groundspeaks support with Wherigo and Android App.

 

First Wherigo:

When Wherigo first started it was to be the next big thing in geocaching. Wherigo's web site options and the Builder have not been toutched sense 2008! What's up with this Wherigo is a nice option to geocaching and only getting bigger with the smart phones. It's just too bad that Groundspeak, Garmin and Magellan cant get their acts together, Garmin and Magellan don't support Wherigo any more in their GPS's. We'll just have to start Caching with our smart phones like a lot of others are doing. I'm sad about the NO Support with Wherigo from Groundspeak, Garmin and Magellan to keep Wherigo going. It will just have to be up to the Wherigo smart phone apps.

 

Next the Android App:

We just purchased a Tablet for Caching while traveling. We purchased Groundspeaks "Android App" from Groundspeak for around $10.00, What a big disappointment! We hit the forums and found a free app that is 5 times better doing a lot more than Groundspeaks app! What is up with this? It just don't make Groundspeak's supporters like Me and others too happy.

 

I just don't know why Groundspeak don't even try to keep Wherigo and their app's up to date even a little. It just seems to me that Groundspeak get's their head into something then their thoughts go off to something else leaving things half done and un-supported. Come on Groundspeak your web site is Great and the Caching Rules are Good and Safe, now it's time to get down to supporting what you have hid under the rug. You could sell a lot of Android Apps is they were anywhere as good as the free ones. Wherigo ....... Come on 2008?

Link to comment

Groundspeak does update their apps pretty frequently. Scanning through the Release Notes forum, I see the following updates for the Android app in the last year:

2.0.3

2.0.4

2.0.5

2.0.6

2.1

2.1.1

2.2

2.3

2.3.1

 

I wouldn't call that "not keeping their app's up to date even a little". In fact, of the 3 apps (Android, iPhone, and Windows Phone), the Android one has been updated the most in the last year.

 

If you're unhappy with the Android app, tell Groundspeak what's wrong with it. I believe the iPhone app was the first one to come out, and over time it has evolved into an excellent app. With enough feedback and suggestions, there's no reason why the other apps can't become the same.

Link to comment

Keep the updates going and just maybe the Android App will be as good as C:GEO for free.

All I know is that I purchased Groundspeaks app and downloaded C:GEO and there is a bid difference with C:GEO

doing a lot more and better. NOW with this said I Like Groundspeak but with Wherigo a real letdown for me it

just seems that they could keep up with things a little better. With the Android app difference made closer

Groundspeak could sell more and not have to worry about any competition.

Link to comment

I hate to tell you this but that App violates the Terms of Service agreement and should not be used.

 

And Groundspeak has done what to stop people from using it?

AFAIK, as much as they possibly can, including making changes to the site to remove functionality that app is exploiting.

 

And that is where Groundspeak is going the wrong way! They should just make their app better and they wouldn't have to fuss

and waist their time changing their site configs. That's like Microsoft trying to shut down Firefox some people are always going

to use Firefox.

 

Anyway I have purchased Groundspeaks Android App and have it installed and running and do not like it as much as the free one. Without getting things confused I'm just stating that Groundspeak needs a big update to their app and if they make it better I most likely if needed re-purchase it again. SO they should quit waisting time and money "making changes to the site to remove functionality" and work on the app and I'll purchase it again. Enough Said!

 

Now what do you have to say about Wherigo?

Edited by Mickey and Goofy
Link to comment

To use another Bones quote : "It's life Jim, but not as we know it" ;)

 

Perhaps not very popular in the mainstream, I'm sure there's a few of us around that enjoy playing them and see potential in it. Even as it stands, without further development, it is still usable. I am currently tinkering with the various available tools to see what can be done and see great potential, even if it's just for my kids to play. Kinda like homebrew games :)

 

Russ

Link to comment

I hate to tell you this but that App violates the Terms of Service agreement and should not be used.

 

And Groundspeak has done what to stop people from using it?

AFAIK, as much as they possibly can, including making changes to the site to remove functionality that app is exploiting.

 

And that is where Groundspeak is going the wrong way! They should just make their app better and they wouldn't have to fuss

and waist their time changing their site configs. That's like Microsoft trying to shut down Firefox some people are always going

to use Firefox.

 

Anyway I have purchased Groundspeaks Android App and have it installed and running and do not like it as much as the free one. Without getting things confused I'm just stating that Groundspeak needs a big update to their app and if they make it better I most likely if needed re-purchase it again. SO they should quit waisting time and money "making changes to the site to remove functionality" and work on the app and I'll purchase it again. Enough Said!

 

Now what do you have to say about Wherigo?

 

Oh c'mon, let me say more. Besides, the "it's dead Jim" pictures say it all, don't they? Sure, there are a lot of people in the forums who roll with one sentence "C:Geo violates the TOU answer". But there are many who think that's ridiculous, and continue to use it, when Groundpeak isn't trying to "break it" with a site update. That would be pretty funny, they should start adding items to the update notices "Added this to break c:geo" "Removed this to break c:geo". :lol: There are some old-timers like myself who have always thought Groundspeak has maintained an iron-fisted grip over our cache data. Insert the joke here that Groundspeak is the only company on the internet who have used the term "site scraping" since 1998. :huh:

 

It's only with the Droid, and only with C:geo where some people think a free non-official app is better, and there is controversy. I can tell you all 3rd party geocaching apps for the WindowsPhone are pretty much worthless. I know of no 3rd party Iphone apps that anyone has ever raved about, or caused any major competition for the official app. So I guess just do what The A-Team said earlier (Tell Groundspeak what they can do to make their app better):

 

If you're unhappy with the Android app, tell Groundspeak what's wrong with it. I believe the iPhone app was the first one to come out, and over time it has evolved into an excellent app. With enough feedback and suggestions, there's no reason why the other apps can't become the same.

Edited by Mr.Yuck
Link to comment

c:geo is open source. There is nothing stopping GS from just taking their code, throwing a different gui on it and adding api capabilities. If they did that I would be buying it no questions asked. Although given the android app's history it would have more bugs than yo mama's kitchen. :P

Link to comment

c:geo is open source. There is nothing stopping GS from just taking their code, throwing a different gui on it and adding api capabilities. If they did that I would be buying it no questions asked. Although given the android app's history it would have more bugs than yo mama's kitchen. :P

 

We went caching last week for three days with friends at MWGB in Ohio and they both used c:geo with no problems at all. One used it to find caches.....I agree with the above quote partly.

Link to comment

c:geo is open source. There is nothing stopping GS from just taking their code, throwing a different gui on it and adding api capabilities.

Really, you can do that? Just take some open source code, throw your name on it and make some changes, then call it your own closed-source app? I'll have to remember that.

 

Remember, the whole reason why c:geo can't use the API is precisely because it is open source. You'll notice that there aren't any open source apps with API access. Accessing the API requires an access key, which would be completely visible with an open source app. Naturally, they want to control who has access to the API to prevent misuse, so they don't want just anyone to have this access key. Any app that has API access will have to be closed-source.

Link to comment

c:geo is open source. There is nothing stopping GS from just taking their code, throwing a different gui on it and adding api capabilities.

Really, you can do that? Just take some open source code, throw your name on it and make some changes, then call it your own closed-source app? I'll have to remember that.

 

Remember, the whole reason why c:geo can't use the API is precisely because it is open source. You'll notice that there aren't any open source apps with API access. Accessing the API requires an access key, which would be completely visible with an open source app. Naturally, they want to control who has access to the API to prevent misuse, so they don't want just anyone to have this access key. Any app that has API access will have to be closed-source.

 

You can do whatever you want with the code. Staying legal while doing it is another story. The idea was to have c:geo's functionality and stability in an oficial app. If the android version of the official app had live map I'd buy it.

Link to comment

android is a linux based os ... linux for the most part is open source... there are free versions, and tweaked not free versions. if i run an open source firmware on my phone are you saying i'm not allowed to cache ... or something much more long winded?

You didn't quote who you're addressing this towards, so it's hard to tell what context this should be read in. Anyway, the firmware your phone is running has no effect on your ability to geocache. If you're referring to c:geo, the reason it's illegal is because it violates the Groundspeak Mobile Apps Terms of Use. The reason why they've chosen to violate those Terms of Use is because they are open source, as I described in more detail above.

Link to comment

i think this is getting off-topic ... but ...

 

The reason why they've chosen to violate those Terms of Use is because they are open source

 

i was under the impression that the reason it's considered against gs tos is because it scrapes info from pages ... while i have very little understanding of what this means, i think it may have something to do with multiple query threads slowing down the servers ... but i'm sure i'm wrong, or at least a little inaccurate.

 

what i interpret you are trying to say is the fact that they share their programming (ala non-compete) with anyone who wants to use it, tweak it, improve it ... makes it illegal? ... apply that thought to automobiles and you outlaw racing.

 

i don't see how sharing technology with anyone who can improve on it can be illegal ... but i do understand how slowing down a server by forcing multiple requests could violate terms of service. ... gs could use an opensource program and add their own features to it and then charge for the program ... i.e. "android" from "linux".

Link to comment

what i interpret you are trying to say is the fact that they share their programming (ala non-compete) with anyone who wants to use it, tweak it, improve it ... makes it illegal? ...

You only quoted part of my post. To sum it all up:

1. c:geo violates the Terms of Use because they scrape the site.

2. They scrape the site because Groundspeak hasn't allowed them to use the API.

3. Groundspeak hasn't allowed them to use the API because they're open source, and the private API key would no longer be private.

Therefore, indirectly, the fact that c:geo is open source is one of the contributing factors. I'm certainly not saying that being open source = illegal. There are many advantages to being open source. Unfortunately, in the case of an app wanting to use the Groundspeak API, being open source is more of a detriment and will severely restrict them.

Link to comment

What I find a bit strange is that, whilst c:geo is indeed an open source project, I would have thought it could use the API as long as the key was never distributed. It would obviously need to be included in the compiled, released on Google Play, ready to download to your device application. <_<

 

If the API key was ever released or distributed, then surely Groundspeak could then block it.

 

This would enable other developers, if they wished to take the c:geo source, to apply for their own API key to do their own development.

 

I think that GS not allowing c:geo to use the API on open source grounds is a disingenuous argument. There could always be ways to make it work.

 

Mind you, I think that for cachers to use an application that employs the API they have to be Premium Members. c:geo caters to the masses...

 

Truth may be that c:geo is, and almost always has been, far too good an application (especially pre API) and far and away superior to anything that GS has produced.

 

Now that I've thrown a match on the petroleum soaked geo-pile, I think I'll back slowly away... :ph34r:

Link to comment

this ofshoot is hijacking this thread.

 

i quoted only part of what you said because that's all you said on this specific subject... "it's illegal" ... which isn't entirely true because google /and/or/ the cell carriers wouldn't allow the app on (through) their network(s) if it was.

 

the only thing that would be "illegal", would be if cgeo used stolen or cracked gs code in their product which would allow other programmers to strip the code from the program via "open source". ... i believe the only thing that makes it violate the tos is the scraping... which still has yet to be explained.

 

how do any of the other free programs do it then?

 

can this hijack be separated ?

Link to comment

can this hijack be separated ?

It probably should, but I think it has almost run its course anyway.

I used the term "illegal" only because I couldn't think of a better word at the time. Obviously, c:geo hasn't broken any criminal laws. A better word would be "unapproved", in that Groundspeak does not approve of or endorse c:geo.

 

how do any of the other free programs do it then?

They aren't open source, so they don't have the same problems with the private API key.

 

To address CamBendy, I believe Groundspeak did work with the developers of c:geo to come up with a solution, but they weren't able to come up with a workable solution. To be honest, I might not work very hard with developers that are willing to violate terms of use if they don't get their way.

Link to comment

I think that GS not allowing c:geo to use the API on open source grounds is a disingenuous argument.

 

Groundspeak does not approve of or endorse c:geo.

 

i think both of these are understatements. ... i have, somewhere around one of the threads i threw fuel on (maybe even started i don't remember) first hand seen a moderator "badmouth" the developers of cgeo (or someone to that effect) ... it seemed personal . i do not know more than that. that being said ... if we can use it to promote, play, use, and participate with their product they should stop the whining ... HOWEVER! ... (before someone flips out on me) ... steps should be taken to compromise a suitable noncompete between the two of them.

 

how do any of the other free programs do it then?

 

this ... i meant ... how do other programs get info from gs without scraping the site?

 

and ... for that matter ... if the program interfaces through an individual's account ... isn't it just doing what they would do via the website anyway? ... if i zoom waay out on the map to look at caches doesn't that alone cause some insane bottleneck somewhere?

 

someone somewhere please explain this scraping thing.

Link to comment

oh hey ... on the original topic ...

 

wherigos are an excellent way to create self guided tours ... and places like national parks, or outdoor museums could totally exploit this type of thing. it could be used for commercial routing ... or route 66 tours ... etc . many possibilities there.

 

if g.s. was interested in expanding their customer base further (they wouldn't even have to require non members to sign up to use a cartridge) they would so be all over this like a insurance salesman on a teenager trying to licence (not sell, that would be a bad idea) it to the parks department(s). doing something like that would force the electronics companies to pick it back up too.

Link to comment

I'm Back and have been reading everything and find it interesting about the apps.

 

Now on Wherigo: I'm a Wherigo Cartridge builder and have made a bunch Two more just last week. I agree Wherigo has so many posssible uses Game Play, Vertuals, Tour Guids and much more. I have made cartridges for all of these listed uses and they get hit or should I say "Used" by cachers all the time. Am I partial to Wherigos I have to say yes, just because I like making them and can see no end to the possible uses. This is what irritates me I have talked to Garmin and megellen reps at severial Maga Bashes to hear that it's Groundspeaks problem. AND I have talked to several Lachies and they tell me just the opposite and it's on the table. I say way down in the end of the table! Darn it, the apps and Wherigo must need a mediator to help solve a problem that would benefit everyone, and I mean not only GPS makers and Groundspeak but us cachers "Everyone".

 

Now I'm back to reading the replys.......... Happy Cachin'.

Link to comment

how do other programs get info from gs without scraping the site?

They use the official Groundspeak API to access the Geocaching database. Groundspeak developed this system where the app sends a request to the server requesting some information (like "Send me the description for GCXXXX"), which the server then sends back. The benefit of doing it this way is that it avoids all the extra HTML that comes with loading up a web page. Have you ever looked at the source code of a cache listing page? There's a lot of extra text there that the app doesn't need, so why have the server send out all this extraneous information?

 

By using the API, the server only needs to send a fraction of the data as it would if the app just loaded up the web page and got the information from there. The problem is that c:geo does the latter: it loads up the entire webpage, then pulls the cache information out of that (this is the "scraping"). That's a lot of extra and unnecessary data the servers have to send, which increases costs and hardware requirements. Also, if Groundspeak decided to tweak the formatting of the web page, the information may now be in a slightly different spot, and the app will probably fail to correctly "scrape" it out. This has broken c:geo a few times now. Since the API gets the data straight from the Geocaching database, it avoids this problem and is more reliable.

 

I just did some reading, and it turns out the private API key isn't the only stumbling block. It sounds like the developers of c:geo don't like the restrictions Groundspeak puts on the API for basic members, and that even if they did work out a way to access the API, they likely would still scrape the site.

Link to comment

I just did some reading, and it turns out the private API key isn't the only stumbling block. It sounds like the developers of c:geo don't like the restrictions Groundspeak puts on the API for basic members, and that even if they did work out a way to access the API, they likely would still scrape the site.

That is exactly what Jeremy has implied. Groundspeak did offer the API to the original author and he refused because using the API would require membership. The current authors have also refused to use the API for the same reason.

Link to comment

I just did some reading, and it turns out the private API key isn't the only stumbling block. It sounds like the developers of c:geo don't like the restrictions Groundspeak puts on the API for basic members, and that even if they did work out a way to access the API, they likely would still scrape the site.

 

is that restriction just on the app, or on basic members in general? ... seems like that page is saying this is a restriction of the app.

 

and ... i tell you what ... i've seen the app work it loads faster than the web page... how can that be if it's basically doing twice the work?

Link to comment

is that restriction just on the app, or on basic members in general? ... seems like that page is saying this is a restriction of the app.

It's a restriction on basic members using any software or mobile app that uses the API.

 

i've seen the app work it loads faster than the web page... how can that be if it's basically doing twice the work?

Sorry, I couldn't tell you. I don't even own an Android device, so I've never seen c:geo in action.

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...
×
×
  • Create New...