Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 8
Derb522002

The new search function

Recommended Posts

This new search has some cool features but man is it lacking in others.

Searching for events is a hassle. You better know what 30 mile radius it is in.

Also I like to bring up the map and not be restricted to the 30 mile circle of caches. Even the phone app has a feature where you can repopulate the screen if you "drag" the map to a different area. I know different people cache differently but I like to see the big picture on my map. If I am on a 100 mile road trip I sure as heck don't want to have to pull up 3 or 4 different 30 mile circles so I can see every cache. I live in Oklahoma and things are pretty well spread out. #0 mile circles are going to be hard to deal with when you are jusr persusing the map for fun or for trip planning. I know you can do a route but some of my routes are not quite a straight line! :)

 

Amen to that, I live here in Muskogee and my search of 30 mies is not good at all. If I want to do a trip to OKC is worthless spending all the time doing this search. I hope they fixed it soon or when May Rolls around I won't be renewing my Membership.

 

joytoy1963

Share this post


Link to post

This new set up is really BAD!!! PLEASE change it back to the way it was so much simpler to locate caches and events. No way to find a list of caches Hidden By or Found by. This change is NO good for Geocaching.

 

When my membership runs out I doubt I will renew if this does not get fixed

Edited by horseshoechamp

Share this post


Link to post

This new search has some cool features but man is it lacking in others.

Searching for events is a hassle. You better know what 30 mile radius it is in.

Also I like to bring up the map and not be restricted to the 30 mile circle of caches. Even the phone app has a feature where you can repopulate the screen if you "drag" the map to a different area. I know different people cache differently but I like to see the big picture on my map. If I am on a 100 mile road trip I sure as heck don't want to have to pull up 3 or 4 different 30 mile circles so I can see every cache. I live in Oklahoma and things are pretty well spread out. #0 mile circles are going to be hard to deal with when you are jusr persusing the map for fun or for trip planning. I know you can do a route but some of my routes are not quite a straight line! :)

 

Amen to that, I live here in Muskogee and my search of 30 mies is not good at all. If I want to do a trip to OKC is worthless spending all the time doing this search. I hope they fixed it soon or when May Rolls around I won't be renewing my Membership.

 

joytoy1963

I am puzzled. Why would you not use a pocket query for this? You can create as many as you need and run them when you want. If you are using them to plan a trip, just don't choose a day to run and they don't count in your daily quota.

Share this post


Link to post

New search format is CRAP! I spent several minutes trying to find a cache page with no success. Bring back the old format please or I too may be cancelling my premium membership! :-(

Share this post


Link to post
So is there any way to search now with a specific address?
Sure. Just select Play > Find a Cache, then enter the address into the search field. You'll get results something like this:

 

https://www.geocaching.com/play/search/@37.42281,-122.08509?origin=1600+Amphitheatre+Parkway,+Mountain+View,+CA+94043

That is only for city and zip. I want it to be specific down to the address. When I tried using it like you suggested it said "We couldn't recognize that location. Please try again."
That sounds like a problem with your specific address and/or the geocoding service(s) Groundspeak uses. The example I gave above DOES include a full address.

 

It took five different addresses to finally get it to recognize a specific address including my own! Terrible stats.

Share this post


Link to post

At first I liked the new search function. I could search for caches that me and friends have not found. However, when I go to search for a specific GC code, I get an error message stating that it could not understand that location even though in the search box it states that you can search by "City, state, coordinates, GC code..." and yet it can not find a specific GC code I search for. It looks like there are still some bugs that need to be worked out of the program.

Share this post


Link to post
So is there any way to search now with a specific address?
Sure. Just select Play > Find a Cache, then enter the address into the search field. You'll get results something like this:

 

https://www.geocaching.com/play/search/@37.42281,-122.08509?origin=1600+Amphitheatre+Parkway,+Mountain+View,+CA+94043

That is only for city and zip. I want it to be specific down to the address. When I tried using it like you suggested it said "We couldn't recognize that location. Please try again."
That sounds like a problem with your specific address and/or the geocoding service(s) Groundspeak uses. The example I gave above DOES include a full address.

 

It took five different addresses to finally get it to recognize a specific address including my own! Terrible stats.

 

 

 

don't feel bad my own home town is 375 miles west of where it really is according to the search

Share this post


Link to post
So is there any way to search now with a specific address?
Sure. Just select Play > Find a Cache, then enter the address into the search field. You'll get results something like this:

 

https://www.geocachi...+View,+CA+94043

That is only for city and zip. I want it to be specific down to the address. When I tried using it like you suggested it said "We couldn't recognize that location. Please try again."
That sounds like a problem with your specific address and/or the geocoding service(s) Groundspeak uses. The example I gave above DOES include a full address.

 

It took five different addresses to finally get it to recognize a specific address including my own! Terrible stats.

 

don't feel bad my own home town is 375 miles west of where it really is according to the search

 

That's because that's the location to which your IP resolves. If you want a quick way to search from your home coordinates, you can enter "home" into the search field (provided you have your home coordinates set for your account).

Share this post


Link to post
So is there any way to search now with a specific address?
Sure. Just select Play > Find a Cache, then enter the address into the search field. You'll get results something like this:

 

https://www.geocachi...+View,+CA+94043

That is only for city and zip. I want it to be specific down to the address. When I tried using it like you suggested it said "We couldn't recognize that location. Please try again."
That sounds like a problem with your specific address and/or the geocoding service(s) Groundspeak uses. The example I gave above DOES include a full address.

 

It took five different addresses to finally get it to recognize a specific address including my own! Terrible stats.

 

don't feel bad my own home town is 375 miles west of where it really is according to the search

 

That's because that's the location to which your IP resolves. If you want a quick way to search from your home coordinates, you can enter "home" into the search field (provided you have your home coordinates set for your account).

 

Once again, not intuitive. Hover over the little arrow within the search box and it says "use my location". How is a user supposed to know that means "not really your location, but the location of your IP"? Nowhere does it say typing in in "home" is recommended.

Share this post


Link to post

At first I liked the new search function. I could search for caches that me and friends have not found. However, when I go to search for a specific GC code, I get an error message stating that it could not understand that location even though in the search box it states that you can search by "City, state, coordinates, GC code..." and yet it can not find a specific GC code I search for. It looks like there are still some bugs that need to be worked out of the program.

 

Have you cleared any other filters when you're entering a GC code. I've tried quite a few and they've all worked. If you can reproduce the problem posting the specific GC code you're using would help.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

That's because that's the location to which your IP resolves. If you want a quick way to search from your home coordinates, you can enter "home" into the search field (provided you have your home coordinates set for your account).

 

Once again, not intuitive. Hover over the little arrow within the search box and it says "use my location". How is a user supposed to know that means "not really your location, but the location of your IP"? Nowhere does it say typing in in "home" is recommended.

 

That's because it presumes you're using am obile browser - that will report your device's GPS location. Desktop browsers, unless your computer has an accurate GPS reader, will attempt to locate you as best it can based on your IP address.

It was one of the first issues we reported in sneak-peek previews, but hasn't been addressed for desktop users. Entering "Home" is the (hidden) workaround. There's no way to accurately get your current (computer) GPS location unless you manually enter your GPS coordinates.

Edited by thebruce0

Share this post


Link to post

That's because that's the location to which your IP resolves. If you want a quick way to search from your home coordinates, you can enter "home" into the search field (provided you have your home coordinates set for your account).

 

Once again, not intuitive. Hover over the little arrow within the search box and it says "use my location". How is a user supposed to know that means "not really your location, but the location of your IP"? Nowhere does it say typing in in "home" is recommended.

 

That's because it presumes you're using am obile browser - that will report your device's GPS location. Desktop browsers, unless your computer has an accurate GPS reader, will attempt to locate you as best it can based on your IP address.

It was one of the first issues we reported in sneak-peek previews, but hasn't been addressed for desktop users. Entering "Home" is the (hidden) workaround. There's no way to accurately get your current (computer) GPS location unless you manually enter your GPS coordinates.

 

EXACTLY! My point is that a heck of a lot of us (as evidenced by the small sampling in these forums) need more hand holding, and there is plenty of wasted space on that page that could be used to offer some guidance.

 

I know nobody will care, but I already have one foot out the door because the website is slowly being emasculated by the smartphone emphasis.

Edited by cheech gang

Share this post


Link to post

That's because that's the location to which your IP resolves. If you want a quick way to search from your home coordinates, you can enter "home" into the search field (provided you have your home coordinates set for your account).

 

Once again, not intuitive. Hover over the little arrow within the search box and it says "use my location". How is a user supposed to know that means "not really your location, but the location of your IP"? Nowhere does it say typing in in "home" is recommended.

 

That's because it presumes you're using am obile browser - that will report your device's GPS location. Desktop browsers, unless your computer has an accurate GPS reader, will attempt to locate you as best it can based on your IP address.

It was one of the first issues we reported in sneak-peek previews, but hasn't been addressed for desktop users. Entering "Home" is the (hidden) workaround. There's no way to accurately get your current (computer) GPS location unless you manually enter your GPS coordinates.

 

I was just going to respond that the Advanced Search FAQ would indicate that one can type "Home" in the search box and it would use your home coordinates, but I just looked and didn't see any mention of it.

 

A question that should be Asked/Answered in the FAQ should be "What should I type in the Search form?" with an explanation as to what one can enter, and what the system will do for various entries. One of the biggest points of confusion with the new search interface is an understanding that entering something in the search box produces a set of lat/long coordinates (if it can). That arrow icon at the far right of the search box is an alternative method for setting those lat/long coordinates but parsing "current location" might be useful as well. I've used a few different mobile navigation apps that recognize "current location" so it's probably something that mobile app users might expect to be able to do.

 

Without seeing the code, I can only speculate, but I don't think that it presumes someone is using a mobile browser. Instead, it's probably using the geolocation API (available in many browsers that support HTML5). The geolocation API will take advantage of a integrated GPS when it's available to the browser but will fall back to using a location based on ones IP address. The accuracy for resolving ones actual location when using an IP address could be way off but for me, not only does is resolve to a location in the building where I'm sitting it's but it appears to be within 100 feet.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

i would love to use the search function to find a cache but i can't even find a cache I know exists. every search comes up with the same "Oh no, a DNF" response. Not impressed.

 

 

The main search box is for entering your location information (that's why it shows City, State, GC code...). If you type Mingo into the the search form it's going to resolve Mingo as a location, not as the name of a cache. As it turns out, there is a town called Mingo in West Virginia so I see caches there instead of the Mingo near Mingo, Kansas.

 

In order to search for a cache by name you need to use the "Geocache name contains.." filter *and* either a location specified in the form or select a location from the "Search only in" filter.

 

The major flaw I see with this release is that they've changed how searching works without explaining how the search is supposed to work. A lot of the complaints about things not working, do, in fact work. Once you understand how it's supposed to work it makes more sense but they didn't provide any support to help users understand how it's supposed to work.

 

What about those of us who aren't premium members? We can't simply use the "Geocache name contains..." filter anymore, which is very useful for finding a series of caches such as "Cache Across America...", or local series posted and maintained by more than one individual who we may, or may not know. If we don't know the GC code for every cache in the series, finding all of them on the website adds another challenge that may discourage, or prevent us from completing a series.

 

A great deal of the functionality of the website just went from "available for everyone" to "available, but only if you give us money." Instead of forcing members of the community to pay for functionality in order to play the game that we all enjoy so Groundspeak can increase revenue, they could sell advertisements, or add more benefits for premium memberships. Hell, if they really wanted to up the ante, why not create another tier of membership (Elite, platinum, or whatever), the same way the airlines do with their frequent flier programs. Selling advertisements or adding additional benefits for paid members would encourage more people to upgrade without risking the loss of members and hurting their business in the process.

 

Removing functionality that people have come to know, enjoy, and that the game depends on to work, is the fastest way to alienate the community. Anytime a business does this, regardless of the industry, it damages their reputation and in many cases, the business ends up turning off the lights, and shutting their doors forever.

Share this post


Link to post

Worldwide is not available, but you can do it for a given country/region. Can you explain why you would need to do a worldwide search in order to find a cache?

 

What about if members wanted to create a series called "Cache Across The World"? As with the "Cache Across America..." series, searching by "Cache Across" would provide a list of all caches in the series.

 

There are any number of possible series names that could begin with the same two words. Since this is a "Global" game, the political boundaries that divide the globe do not restrict collaboration with citizens of other countries to create a global series that the current search engine (which I no longer have access to, by the way) does not support.

 

Doing a global search for all caches in the world should be an option. Restricting search criteria limits the ability of the players to enjoy the game.

Share this post


Link to post

Worldwide is not available, but you can do it for a given country/region. Can you explain why you would need to do a worldwide search in order to find a cache?

 

What about if members wanted to create a series called "Cache Across The World"? As with the "Cache Across America..." series, searching by "Cache Across" would provide a list of all caches in the series.

 

There are any number of possible series names that could begin with the same two words. Since this is a "Global" game, the political boundaries that divide the globe do not restrict collaboration with citizens of other countries to create a global series that the current search engine (which I no longer have access to, by the way) does not support.

 

Doing a global search for all caches in the world should be an option. Restricting search criteria limits the ability of the players to enjoy the game.

 

Being able to do a global search for all caches might be a desirable goal for some but it would come at a price. GS has to weigh the benefits of being able to do so verses the performance implications and so far, the use cases have been pretty specific corner cases and typically can be done if the user spends a little more effort than just typing a string in a search box.

 

If I was going to create a Cache Across the World series, each cache listing would have a link to all of the caches in the series and a public bookmark. For the past few months I've been working on solving a global series of puzzle caches, where being able to search for a specific string might help, but I don't think that the ability to easily do it should so should supersede the basic purpose of a geocaching search engine.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

That's because that's the location to which your IP resolves. If you want a quick way to search from your home coordinates, you can enter "home" into the search field (provided you have your home coordinates set for your account).

 

Once again, not intuitive. Hover over the little arrow within the search box and it says "use my location". How is a user supposed to know that means "not really your location, but the location of your IP"? Nowhere does it say typing in in "home" is recommended.

 

That's because it presumes you're using am obile browser - that will report your device's GPS location. Desktop browsers, unless your computer has an accurate GPS reader, will attempt to locate you as best it can based on your IP address.

It was one of the first issues we reported in sneak-peek previews, but hasn't been addressed for desktop users. Entering "Home" is the (hidden) workaround. There's no way to accurately get your current (computer) GPS location unless you manually enter your GPS coordinates.

 

 

cell phone shows it being 375 miles off, its not just the "isp"

Share this post


Link to post

That's because it presumes you're using am obile browser - that will report your device's GPS location. Desktop browsers, unless your computer has an accurate GPS reader, will attempt to locate you as best it can based on your IP address.

It was one of the first issues we reported in sneak-peek previews, but hasn't been addressed for desktop users. Entering "Home" is the (hidden) workaround. There's no way to accurately get your current (computer) GPS location unless you manually enter your GPS coordinates.

cell phone shows it being 375 miles off, its not just the "isp"

If your phone has GPS capability, and your browser supports HTML5, and you've given it rights to access your location, then the website use your GPS location. Otherwise it should attempt to locate you by IP. It'll be one or the other. If you get 375 miles, then pretty much either it doesn't have access to your GPS, or you don't have GPS.

 

That's because it presumes you're using am obile browser - that will report your device's GPS location. Desktop browsers, unless your computer has an accurate GPS reader, will attempt to locate you as best it can based on your IP address.

It was one of the first issues we reported in sneak-peek previews, but hasn't been addressed for desktop users. Entering "Home" is the (hidden) workaround. There's no way to accurately get your current (computer) GPS location unless you manually enter your GPS coordinates.

 

That arrow icon at the far right of the search box is an alternative method for setting those lat/long coordinates but parsing "current location" might be useful as well. I've used a few different mobile navigation apps that recognize "current location" so it's probably something that mobile app users might expect to be able to do.

 

Without seeing the code, I can only speculate, but I don't think that it presumes someone is using a mobile browser. Instead, it's probably using the geolocation API (available in many browsers that support HTML5). The geolocation API will take advantage of a integrated GPS when it's available to the browser but will fall back to using a location based on ones IP address. The accuracy for resolving ones actual location when using an IP address could be way off but for me, not only does is resolve to a location in the building where I'm sitting it's but it appears to be within 100 feet.

 

Yes, again, the location icon in the right will have the browser attempt to access the GPS data from the mobile device browser if it's available, otherwise it'll attempt to locate by IP address (or other alternative non-gps means where available).

http://dev.w3.org/geo/api/spec-source.html#introduction

 

It's not a guaranteed accurate location, and certainly not accurate for desktop users.

Share this post


Link to post

Maybe they should ask Clyde for help

For the most part, I just load the whole area I need with the API, and let Clyde do the heavy lifting when it comes to searching -- and many other functions that have been requested of gc.com. Rather than waiting for things that may never come (or like Search, come in a way that isn't quite what one would wish), I have the utility at hand already. Apart from a rare look at a cache overseas, I haven't used the gc.com search facility in a very long time.

Share this post


Link to post

As someone else succinctly commented......

 

NEW SEARCH SYSTEM SUCKS!

 

I entered a cache number and got a list of 140 caches, NONE OF WHICH WAS THE ONE I ASKED FOR.

Share this post


Link to post

This new "Find a Cache" search tool setup is a terrible, horrible, no good, & very bad thing.

 

For one thing, Archived caches don't show up even when I give it the cache's GC#!

 

The new tool also won't display ALL of the newest caches in my state like it used to do, which was especially handy for looking over upcoming events all at once. Now I have to give it several strategically-selected zones to display and then more or less mentally compile a list. Either that, or print them out, because this new tool lacks the larger search radius that the old version had. It's ridiculous!

 

And don't even get me started on the new oversized icons, oddball spacing/graphics, and missing data/options. Seriously guys, there is NOTHING I find to be 'better' at all! A few things are 'just as good' and everything else is worse. Please, scrap this new setup and return to the previous model. It's changes like this that are really making it seem like the tail is wagging the dog!!

Share this post


Link to post

For one thing, Archived caches don't show up even when I give it the cache's GC#!

 

I was about to say you are mistaken. Two days ago I typed in one of my own archived caches and it came up. I tried it again just now and it didn't work.

Share this post


Link to post

I cannot remember the last time I posted here in the forums, but I have never felt as strongly about something as I do about this unmitigated disaster. I've been a cacher going on 11 years. I've been teaching caching at a camp for 6 years and I am horrified to think that the hundreds of kids I've taught are going to be unable to find events and caches with this mess of a search function. How can I teach it if I cannot even find things myself?

 

I teach dozens of kids how to cache at a small camp every summer. They come to us from all over an area at least 3 states and at least 300 or so miles apart. When we are done caching, I will pull up the website and we will look for caches near their homes. I try to find events near them as well, as Michigan is a very active event state. I have not been able to do this despite multiple frustrating and useless attempts.

 

I have been experimenting with this new search function and it is nearly useless.

 

I also spend a lot of time traveling to other parts of the state to see caching friends from all over. I tried to find out where some events might be held on days coming up....not knowing where they are being held. And after a dozen failed attempts at finding even one event, I gave up.

 

Please, pleas fix this mess!!!!

 

I HATE it.

 

Add me to the list of those who will seriously consider not renewing my premium membership.

Please, for all that is good and kind to all the users out here...restore what we had, or at least redo the mess that's been created here.

Share this post


Link to post
For one thing, Archived caches don't show up even when I give it the cache's GC#!
The main input field for the new Find a Cache page does one thing: It specifies the center of the search radius. That is the only thing it does. It does that with ANYTHING that you enter into it.

 

If you want to do anything else, then leave the main input field blank and click on the Add Filters button below the main input field.

 

But in the case of archived caches, even that won't work. The new Find a Cache page is designed to find caches that you can go out and find. Archived caches do not fit that model.

 

You can enter a GC code (even the GC code of an archived cache) into the search form on the www.geocaching.com welcome page. But I find it easier to type "coord.info/GCxxxxx" into my browser's address bar.

 

The new tool also won't display ALL of the newest caches in my state like it used to do, which was especially handy for looking over upcoming events all at once. Now I have to give it several strategically-selected zones to display and then more or less mentally compile a list. Either that, or print them out, because this new tool lacks the larger search radius that the old version had. It's ridiculous!
Again, you need to leave the main input field blank and click on the Add Filters button below the main input field. Then enter a state name in the "Search Only In..." field, and you'll search the whole state, rather than just a 30mi radius.

 

And be sure to check out the A Guide to Searching on Geocaching.com thread.

Share this post


Link to post

At first I liked the new search function. I could search for caches that me and friends have not found. However, when I go to search for a specific GC code, I get an error message stating that it could not understand that location even though in the search box it states that you can search by "City, state, coordinates, GC code..." and yet it can not find a specific GC code I search for. It looks like there are still some bugs that need to be worked out of the program.

 

Have you cleared any other filters when you're entering a GC code. I've tried quite a few and they've all worked. If you can reproduce the problem posting the specific GC code you're using would help.

 

I just tried the search again and it worked, showing all my finds even with no filters.

Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post

I also spend a lot of time traveling to other parts of the state to see caching friends from all over. I tried to find out where some events might be held on days coming up....not knowing where they are being held. And after a dozen failed attempts at finding even one event, I gave up.

 

"The A-Team" assembled information from various forum posts and webpages to create a detailed guide to using the 'new' search. You can find a link to that guide in this post.

 

For your immediate needs, then you can try these:

 

  • Searching for caches near a camper's home. Easiest is to go the homepage and put their zipcode or city in the box on the right (under "1 Search for Nearby Geocaches"). Or, you can go the main search page and enter their zipcode or city in the search box, then click on the magnifying glass to run the search.
     
  • Search all cache types in Michigan that have not been found by Nurse Nanna: =Nurse+Nanna&r=23"]www.geocaching.com/play/search?nfb[0]=Nurse+Nanna&r=23
     
  • Search all Event caches in Michigan: www.geocaching.com/play/search?types=6&r=23
     
  • The search results can be viewed on a map by clicking on "Map These Results" on the Results page. The link is in the lower right corner of the mountains image across the top of the page.
     
  • Either of these results can be sorted oldest/newest by clicking on the "Placed On" column name. Click once to sort newest to oldest, and again to sort oldest to newest. Clicking on the various column names will sort the results by that column.

If these give you results, then you can click "Change Filters" in the Results page and made adjustments to the filters, then click "Update Search".

If these links don't work, then I'd suggest closing your web browser and re-opening...then trying again. Maybe your browser is somehow saving the search parameters you entered before. I'd be interested to hear if these searches don't work for you, because they should work for you as a PM.

 

If all else fails, you could try using the old Advanced Search, but no guarantees how long this page will remain running: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?country_id=0

 

Hope that helps.

Share this post


Link to post

Please, please fix this mess!!!!

 

 

I think that is a good summary from another poster so...

 

Can any of the Lackeys please speak to the larger issues here!

Guiding each person through their problems helps on the micro scale, but unless we are all getting our own lackey, it can't help everyone. Did you notice that *no one * in this thread has come on to say they preferred the changes made?

 

1. What is this website change designed to accomplish?

If it is designed to increase functionality you have failed. Its just not intuitive enough out of the box. And the "feel" of it, isn't fun, or gamelike at all, which is also an issue.

 

2. Why did you decide to make such a major change?

 

3.Do you focus group major changes like this on us, the cachers? I have wondered this for years now! Yes, I know you beta tested it us with links, that is not the same thing at all.

In person, you Lackeys seem intelligent, friendly and helpful, but as Groundspeak, I sometimes get the mean parent vibe off you. This is the way it is, like it or leave it, because we said so, We are the Great and Powerful Oz.

 

Finally my personal complaint is there is a "Not Found By" filter, but no "Found By" filter. I have to use "Hidden By" then go to the person's profile, then click on "geocaches found" to get a list. Should be a 1 click filter to get a list of caches found by someone!

Share this post


Link to post

I am not a lackey but I think I understand the new search engine pretty well as well as the rationale behind it.

Please, please fix this mess!!!!

 

 

I think that is a good summary from another poster so...

 

Can any of the Lackeys please speak to the larger issues here!

Guiding each person through their problems helps on the micro scale, but unless we are all getting our own lackey, it can't help everyone. Did you notice that *no one * in this thread has come on to say they preferred the changes made?

 

There are a lot of concurrent threads related to the new search engine, and, yes there are some aspect to it that many have considered to be an improvement. There are quite few things that one can do with the new search engine that were not possible with the old.

 

 

1. What is this website change designed to accomplish?

If it is designed to increase functionality you have failed. Its just not intuitive enough out of the box. And the "feel" of it, isn't fun, or gamelike at all, which is also an issue.

 

2. Why did you decide to make such a major change?

 

There are quite a few people that have been posting in this forum section that have suggested that the search engine was long overdue for an overhaul. The ability to only search for cache names with start with a letter sequence was something that I considered to be a major flaw.

 

The ability to see every cache listing in a state is nice, but without the ability to see where they are relative to my home location I don't find that to be especially useful. Now I can view caches within a regions *and* see where they are relative to my location

 

Several of the features that are part of the new search interface are things that users have specifically asked for (i.e. show me a list of caches for which I have used the "correct coordinates" feature).

 

 

3.Do you focus group major changes like this on us, the cachers? I have wondered this for years now! Yes, I know you beta tested it us with links, that is not the same thing at all.

In person, you Lackeys seem intelligent, friendly and helpful, but as Groundspeak, I sometimes get the mean parent vibe off you. This is the way it is, like it or leave it, because we said so, We are the Great and Powerful Oz.

 

I really don't know how you wanted this question to be interpreted but it comes across as pretty insulting to Groundspeak.

 

There were a lot of people involved in the "beta test" (which they promoted as a sneak peak) and it was open to *every* premium member. This was the first time that I've seen GS show us a pre-release on the scale that they did, give us a month an a half to comment on it, and then actually implement some of the suggestions. For me, this has been a huge improvement on the transparency with GS and it's users.

 

 

Finally my personal complaint is there is a "Not Found By" filter, but no "Found By" filter. I have to use "Hidden By" then go to the person's profile, then click on "geocaches found" to get a list. Should be a 1 click filter to get a list of caches found by someone!

 

I've seen several mention that before and I suspect that it was mostly an omission that will likely be fixed with an update soon.

 

There are certainly some major intuitiveness issues and there are several things I could just complain about but I've chose to try to help GS make what they've released better and help those that are having difficulty with what we've got now in the interim.

 

As someone that was actively involved in the "beta test" there were a couple of things that I couldn't have predicted because we were basically just looking at the functionality. I had even asked about how the new advanced search was going to be integrated with the rest of the system (e.g. the ability to download, integration with maps, etc) and didn't expect that it was going to be released without a lot of that integration. I also don't that anyone that was involved with the sneak peak and providing feedback could have predicted that basic members would see something so much different than what premium members were seeing. In hindsight, GS should have opened up the sneak peak to basic members but they seemed to be promoting the fact that premium members where offered a sneak peak as a premium member benefit.

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

I don't think it is likely that you are going to be able to search by found by except in a very limited geographic area. The information is easily available in a list on the members profile page. The not found by makes it possible to plan a caching trip with a friends targeting caches no one has found. Found by does not have similar utility.

Share this post


Link to post

Groundspeak -- why are you restricting filtering to premium users, thereby creating a poor user experience for non-premium members?

 

***ENHANCE the features and add extras for premium members, but don't make the user experience poor for others.

 

Second thing -- pretend the new search feature is awesome like it's supposed to be. Why is there a *worse search box on the homepage, while the hopefully more usable new one is buried in a dropdown menu that doesn't even have "search" in the label?

 

I'm still glad I have the geocaching.com resource, and appreciate the work that folks put into it.

Share this post


Link to post

I had heard through FB that the search had changed, so I hopped over and took a look. This is an early April Fool's joke, right?

 

That said, I do not see the reason that the entire system was rearranged and made much more difficult to use while, at the same time, reducing the number of accurate results. I, fortunately, have Pocket Queries set up for all of the searches I normally need. I then direct link to the 'Preview This Query' page, so I haven't visited the home page of GC.com in some time. Thankfully, I'm not a new user. If I were, the new search would probably turn me off entirely from Geocaching instead of just being an annoyance. I'm not committing Geocide over this, but I can see that others just might.

Share this post


Link to post

I do not like the new search for the site. I like it when all the events would come up and the new caches came up. Now if you cant remember an event you wont be able to find it. I dont know if I will continue my premium membership if they don't change it back :mad:

 

I completely agree! I've been a member since 2007 and have had no problems using the old search site. Now, 8 years and many caches/events later, I can't find events in neighboring states easily, much less in my own state! As for finding a cache on the site, forget it -- no longer are the caches listed from newest to oldest as they used to be. Please, Please, Please bring back the old search site!!!!

Share this post


Link to post

I do not like the new search for the site. I like it when all the events would come up and the new caches came up. Now if you cant remember an event you wont be able to find it. I dont know if I will continue my premium membership if they don't change it back :mad:

 

I completely agree! I've been a member since 2007 and have had no problems using the old search site. Now, 8 years and many caches/events later, I can't find events in neighboring states easily, much less in my own state! As for finding a cache on the site, forget it -- no longer are the caches listed from newest to oldest as they used to be. Please, Please, Please bring back the old search site!!!!

 

"The A-Team" assembled information from various forum posts and webpages to create a detailed guide to using the 'new' search. You can find a link to that guide in this post.

 

For finding events:

 

  • Search of all Event caches in Delaware: www.geocaching.com/play/search?types=6&r=9
     
  • The results list can be sorted oldest/newest by clicking on the "Placed On" column name. Click once to sort newest to oldest, and again to sort oldest to newest. Clicking on the various column names will sort the results by that column.
     
  • The search results can be viewed on a map by clicking "Map These Results" on the Results page. The link is in the lower right corner of the mountains image that spans the top of the page.
     
  • If this gives you results, then you can click "Change Filters" in the Results page and made adjustments to the filters (like selecting a different state), then click "Update Search".

If you prefer, you can use the old Advanced Search, but no guarantees how long this page will remain running: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?country_id=0

 

Hope that helps.

Share this post


Link to post

I am very disappointed with the new features, while it has some good ones it also have more bad ones. one thing I do miss is new ones in the State I do base my time on events around the state With the New featured 30 miles max is not going to make it. if something don't give up soon I might not renew my membership. Please fix it or go back to the way it was before.

 

Be sure to read the Advanced Search FAQ. It answers a lot of the questions people are having.

 

The search you want to do is easy with the new system once you learn it. Here is a link for all of the caches in OK sorted by most recent first: https://www.geocaching.com/play/search?r=37&sort=PlaceDate&asc=False

 

 

we shouldn't have to learn a new system ..... K.I.S.S.

 

 

the old system worked great for how long? it was user friendly and it was clean and much easier to look at graphical wise

Share this post


Link to post

That's because it presumes you're using am obile browser - that will report your device's GPS location. Desktop browsers, unless your computer has an accurate GPS reader, will attempt to locate you as best it can based on your IP address.

Wait, people use geocaching.com from a desktop? I thought this was just a mobile game!

Share this post


Link to post

I also spend a lot of time traveling to other parts of the state to see caching friends from all over. I tried to find out where some events might be held on days coming up....not knowing where they are being held. And after a dozen failed attempts at finding even one event, I gave up.

 

"The A-Team" assembled information from various forum posts and webpages to create a detailed guide to using the 'new' search. You can find a link to that guide in this post.

 

For your immediate needs, then you can try these:

 

  • Searching for caches near a camper's home. Easiest is to go the homepage and put their zipcode or city in the box on the right (under "1 Search for Nearby Geocaches"). Or, you can go the main search page and enter their zipcode or city in the search box, then click on the magnifying glass to run the search.
     
  • Search all cache types in Michigan that have not been found by Nurse Nanna: =Nurse+Nanna&r=23"]www.geocaching.com/play/search?nfb[0]=Nurse+Nanna&r=23
     
  • Search all Event caches in Michigan: www.geocaching.com/play/search?types=6&r=23
     
  • The search results can be viewed on a map by clicking on "Map These Results" on the Results page. The link is in the lower right corner of the mountains image across the top of the page.
     
  • Either of these results can be sorted oldest/newest by clicking on the "Placed On" column name. Click once to sort newest to oldest, and again to sort oldest to newest. Clicking on the various column names will sort the results by that column.

If these give you results, then you can click "Change Filters" in the Results page and made adjustments to the filters, then click "Update Search".

If these links don't work, then I'd suggest closing your web browser and re-opening...then trying again. Maybe your browser is somehow saving the search parameters you entered before. I'd be interested to hear if these searches don't work for you, because they should work for you as a PM.

 

If all else fails, you could try using the old Advanced Search, but no guarantees how long this page will remain running: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?country_id=0

 

Hope that helps.

 

Thank you noncentric! I have copied and saved this to use for my camp kids. I appreciate the time you took to help me out.

Share this post


Link to post

I have to agree with all the other cachers that don't like the new way the search is presented. I was going through my GPS and finding the codes that are disabled or achieved. the new search doesn't say if a code is achieved like the old search used to. It just tells me that a nearby code is so many feet/miles away but doesn't say anything about the code I entered. used to at least take me to the page and then I can see what happened. Now I can't find any info on the old code or at least not with any way as easy as the old method used to be. The old way was comfortable and easy enough, what the heck froggie!

Share this post


Link to post

Why should users have to go to the forums and look through numerous threads to see the workarounds provided from a few intuitive users? Why isn't there a set of step-by-step instructions for using this new feature, displayed prominently on the search page?

Share this post


Link to post

Bring this back:

 

cc7f0f7a-8370-47c5-8f3f-02866b8f0b4c_l.png

 

I can not find the latest or the oldest Geocaches in a State.

 

It's still there:

For the world:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?state_id=1

For Alabama:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?state_id=2

And for Wyoming:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?state_id=51

 

state_id is alphabetic, Alabama=1, Alaska=2 up to Wyoming=51

I don't use "Search" much, just PQs for fancier stuff. But I have a specially formatted URL of "Geocaching" saved as a Favorite in my web browser, since instead of the "welcome page", I prefer to go directly to the cache grid similar to the above, and have always gotten that by using this format of URL:

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?lat_ns=1&lat_h=33&lat_mmss=27.304&long_ew=-1&long_h=084&long_mmss=24.916&dist=30

 

Using whatever Lat/Lon coordinates you wish as your "home location", produces that same old familiar cache grid, and it's simple to sort that by Last Found, Placed (so Events are shown), all the usual stuff. You can see how to enter coordinates into that URL. It ends with "&dist=30" for a 30 mile search radius. That defaulted to "100", and I just now changed it since "30" is all I need for a "home page Favorite". I was not experiencing any "Search Page Blues", since my page is completely unaffected. Uh... that "old grid" is not going away, right? The new results page really does eat up the screen's real estate. :ph34r:

Edited by kunarion

Share this post


Link to post

i would love to use the search function to find a cache but i can't even find a cache I know exists. every search comes up with the same "Oh no, a DNF" response. Not impressed.

I have to agree, I tried to look up a cache that I knew existed but even when I entered a current cache that was current a big DNF so lets get back to the search that worked!

Share this post


Link to post

Although I do not use it very often, I do like the new search option. I like the interface. I like the filter options. Over all, I do think it is an improvement to the website.

 

Truth be told I probably will not be using it very much simple because I like to pull up the map and search for caches in my area or the area I am currently located. With the GPSr that I use, it is a simple click on a cache, then click to send to the GPSr, then out the door we go.

 

Keep up the good work.

Share this post


Link to post

When searching for all the caches in a specific state try using this in the web browser:

 

Pennsylvania

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?state_id=39

 

Maryland

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?state_id=21

 

New Jersey

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?state_id=31

 

Delaware

http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?state_id=9

 

You can still see the newest the oldest caches.

Share this post


Link to post

As explained above, you can leave the main search field blank, click the "Add Filters" button, and then enter "United States: Texas" in the "Search Only In..." field. That will get you the list of caches in Texas.

It sounds like 80% of the complaints could be solved by making this the default behavior if "texas" is specified in the main search field, especially since what it currently does in that case isn't useful and makes no sense because "texas" does not indicate a specific location.

Share this post


Link to post

As explained above, you can leave the main search field blank, click the "Add Filters" button, and then enter "United States: Texas" in the "Search Only In..." field. That will get you the list of caches in Texas.

It sounds like 80% of the complaints could be solved by making this the default behavior if "texas" is specified in the main search field, especially since what it currently does in that case isn't useful and makes no sense because "texas" does not indicate a specific location.

 

Actually, it does. Texas is just a string that it passes to a geocoding service, which will return lat/long coordinates for the "center point" of Texas. The form will recognize a string starting with a GC number, specific coordinates, or "Home" but after that it's going to treat anything else as a "place name" that it' going to send to a geocoding service. If the geocoding service can resolve a string to a set of lat/long coordinates then it will be consider to be a location.

 

You may know that Texas is a U.S. State and want caches within the region but how is the search engine going to know that? Remember, this is an international game. It can't just look for U.S. States or country names and change how it searches based on that smaller subset of regions. It would have to handle every "region" in the world. What should it do if you enter Mexico, or Greece or Cuba? Those are all city names in New York as well as country names. BTW, if you enter Mexico into the search box it will uses a center point of 19.43253,-99.13321 and you'll see 232 caches within 10miles of that location.

 

As it is, although it may be confusing to some, it's predictable.

 

There is a possible way to do what you want, but it would only work if it was obvious when you got your results how it was treating string you entered in the search was being used. I don't know what GS is currently using as a geocoding service but the Geonames system is one that I have used for geocoding place names. When entering a place name it will not only return a set of lat/long coordinates but it will also return a bunch of other data, including some codes for administrative levels (the google api does something similar). The administrative level determines whether a place is a country, state/province, city/town etc. Using these codes, the search could perform a "Search Only in" filter if the administrative level is "higher" than a city/town and use the lat/long coordinates if it isn't. The main problem with this is that, to the end user, it wouldn't be predictable and they'd have to know if they wanted see caches in Greece, New York they would need to specify the city and state name.

 

The other problem is that geocoding services like this have a tiered model and that based on the number of lookups GS would be making paying for the full service may get quite expensive.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

I think the problem is that the primary function of that field, w/ or /wo instruction, is not always "Use this centerpoint". That's what it does, but from a geocaching search perspective, the natural expectation from a search field would not be "Find all the geocaches from the centerpoint of Texas", it would be "Find all the geocaches in Texas". Because of that minor defintion distinction, the field isn't intuitive.

 

Yep, it is certainly a geocoding service, and instructions can indicate that anything entered there will be converted to a centerpoint, but that would not be the natural use of that search field in the context of searching for geocaches. Now, if Groundspeak were to intercept the search query before sending it to the geocoding service, and determine what the user could mean, they could see "Texas", and do the search the user expects (or adjust the filters accordingly), and skip the geocoding.

 

But this goes back to my other suggestion - provide at least two search 'types', one being from a defined centerpoint to calculate distance and one being an "area" or a locationless search (such as within a state or country, or having a certain property).

 

Beyond that there are common searches that may only ever affect 2 or 3 filters, but those two top-level search types are combined into one field with all the adjustments in an 'optional' popup. It needs to be more intuitive.

 

Again, I hope that the silence from Groundspeak on this so far means they're working up a new solution...

Share this post


Link to post

I think the problem is that the primary function of that field, w/ or /wo instruction, is not always "Use this centerpoint". That's what it does, but from a geocaching search perspective, the natural expectation from a search field would not be "Find all the geocaches from the centerpoint of Texas", it would be "Find all the geocaches in Texas". Because of that minor defintion distinction, the field isn't intuitive.

 

I agree that it's not intuitive. However, once you understand how it works, it's predictable.

 

 

Yep, it is certainly a geocoding service, and instructions can indicate that anything entered there will be converted to a centerpoint, but that would not be the natural use of that search field in the context of searching for geocaches. Now, if Groundspeak were to intercept the search query before sending it to the geocoding service, and determine what the user could mean, they could see "Texas", and do the search the user expects (or adjust the filters accordingly), and skip the geocoding.

 

It's already intercepting the search when a user has entered a set of coordinates, a GC code, or "Home". That's fairly easy to do for just those three cases. It becomes a lot more complicated if it's going to accurately intercept any string entered to determine if it's a region. As soon as it starts trying to guess what a term *could* mean it's going to introduce the likelihood that it's going to guess wrong. As I indicated earlier, "Greece" could mean Greece, the country, or Greece, the city in New York.

 

I do a fair amount of work with vocabularies and ontologies. When searching for a term in a vocabulary there is a notion of a "best match", the "preferred term" (i.e. Greece the country may be the preferred term) and "alternate term". If a term is ambiguous, then perhaps a "Did you mean" dialog box and a list of "alternate terms" could be used to specify what the user wants rather than have the search engine guess what the user wants. Just to avoid confusion, an "alternate term" may be the same word, but with different meanings (is Georgia a country, or is it a State?)

 

For example, if I just type Rome into the search box, it gives me results from Rome, Italy. I may have wanted to see a list of caches from Rome, New York or Rome, Georgia.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post

It's already intercepting the search when a user has entered a set of coordinates, a GC code, or "Home". That's fairly easy to do for just those three cases. It becomes a lot more complicated if it's going to accurately intercept any string entered to determine if it's a region. As soon as it starts trying to guess what a term *could* mean it's going to introduce the likelihood that it's going to guess wrong. As I indicated earlier, "Greece" could mean Greece, the country, or Greece, the city in New York.

But it has that problem anyway, regardless of what I'm looking for. It seems obvious that if, in the end, it decides what I meant was the country Greece, however complicated that decision was for it to make, it should recognize that what I'm asking for has no specific coordinates so it shouldn't interpret the results as implying a specific location at some arbitrary place within the country. The fact that it might mistakenly conclude I'm asking for Greece the country when I meant Greece the city in the state of New York is entirely irrelevant: that remains a mistake no matter how the results are interpreted.

Share this post


Link to post

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...
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 8

×
×
  • Create New...