Jump to content

New search design and layout


Zop

Recommended Posts

While I appreciate some of the new features included with the new search tool, and would like to use them once all of the bugs are ironed out, I just cannot fathom why the page is set up the way it is visually.

 

I just did a basic search by typing in a GC code and was pleased that that is working today but why are the results laid out the way they are?

 

The search window with the map underlay along with the header on the page take up more than 1/2 of the screen using a relatively standard screen resolution.

 

In the space where one would normally see 9 records, we are now only able to view 3 unless we scroll. Why the drastic reduction in efficiency and waste of space?

 

Also, why are the icons so massive?

 

Resolution: 1280 X 1024

 

capture.jpg

 

Wouldn't it make more sense to reduce the amount of wasted space taken up by the search field? Seems to me that that could easily be dropped down to a single column under the header so the search results could be maximized for better display.

 

Being a Premium member, I can't test this but I have been asked to also point out that the new Advanced search tool is now PMO? So non PMO's are not allowed to search beyond 30mi?

Edited by Zop
Link to comment

I was going to say "design fad", but...

 

Just gave it a try for the first time, on the phone because I had a hunch. Ayep, it seems to be designed for phones. (It even manages to avoid a horizontal scrollbar in portrait mode. Check it out on the big old computer by making the window narrow; pretty cool.)

 

It's becoming a phone game whether we like it or not - says the guy who now caches with a phone.

 

But I'll agree: font too big.

Link to comment

While I appreciate some of the new features included with the new search tool, and would like to use them once all of the bugs are ironed out, I just cannot fathom why the page is set up the way it is visually.

 

I just did a basic search by typing in a GC code and was pleased that that is working today but why are the results laid out the way they are?

 

The search window with the map underlay along with the header on the page take up more than 1/2 of the screen using a relatively standard screen resolution.

 

In the space where one would normally see 9 records, we are now only able to view 3 unless we scroll. Why the drastic reduction in efficiency and waste of space?

 

Also, why are the icons so massive?

 

capture.jpg

 

Wouldn't it make more sense to reduce the amount of wasted space taken up by the search field? Seems to me that that could easily be dropped down to a single column under the header so the search results could be maximized for better display.

 

Amen!!! The new function is awkward and a pain to use. If it must be changed, give us an option to use the original, efficient function.

Edited by Keystone
potty language removed by moderator
Link to comment

Here are the major issues as I see it. I know you will get the tool working at some point but aesthetically, it's horrible.

 

For this argument, I have my monitor set to 1600 X 1200 DPI on a Dell 20" Diag LCD, Internet Explorer v11, showing only address bar and menu toolbar. Total height of that is 3/4"

 

1) The page header (Dark Green with Geocaching logo, title and logged in user info: 1"

2) Page toolbar (lighter green bar below header):5/16"

 

Total space dedicated to header and toolbar 1 & 5/16" Not a real problem - no change from previous site.

 

3) Search field element containing title, search field, Filter button and text field for # results and Map These Results: 3.5"

 

Search field contains little to no information yet is given nearly twice the real estate as the header and toolbar combined.

Can easily be reduced by 60% by eliminating wasted space and providing only the needed three rows.

 

4) Search results field, top row with column ids: 1/2"

 

Search results field top row can easily be reduced by 50%

 

5) Search results body. Displays only 5.5 records, using 5.5" of space.

 

6) Icons are 9/16" high if found, 1/2" if unfound. This is a grotesque waste of space considering previous icons were 1/8"

 

7) Rows are now ~1/2" high to make up for the over sized icons? with a wasted full height row between records.

This waste of space can easily be reduced by opting for a more reasonably sized icon, and reducing the separator row heights to no more than 1/8" or 3/16".

 

Why not resolve this all by just adding the new features to the old search tool for us computer users and give the new look to those with tablets and phones?

The technology is readily available for a dynamic website to detect the difference between browsers, devices and resolution/screen size.

 

Geez.. I needed more coffee. Not Columns, ROWS. My bad.

Edited by Zop
Link to comment

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.

Link to comment

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

Link to comment

 

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

 

Thanks for this but nowhere in the FAQ is there any mention of why the terrible formatting and excessive waste of space.

Why are we long time paying customers being treated like we don't matter?

 

I understand that the youth are glued to their pocket toys but why are we to suffer due to their fads? Please don't sacrifice what was a viable site for those of us who still use computers and GPSr's for the passing fad iphone crowd. Don't they use the app in the first place?

Link to comment

While I appreciate some of the new features included with the new search tool, and would like to use them once all of the bugs are ironed out, I just cannot fathom why the page is set up the way it is visually.

 

I just did a basic search by typing in a GC code and was pleased that that is working today but why are the results laid out the way they are?

 

The search window with the map underlay along with the header on the page take up more than 1/2 of the screen using a relatively standard screen resolution.

 

In the space where one would normally see 9 records, we are now only able to view 3 unless we scroll. Why the drastic reduction in efficiency and waste of space?

 

Also, why are the icons so massive?

 

Resolution: 1280 X 1024

 

capture.jpg

 

Wouldn't it make more sense to reduce the amount of wasted space taken up by the search field? Seems to me that that could easily be dropped down to a single column under the header so the search results could be maximized for better display.

 

Being a Premium member, I can't test this but I have been asked to also point out that the new Advanced search tool is now PMO? So non PMO's are not allowed to search beyond 30mi?

 

Bump - Let's keep this on topic please. There is another thread for complaining about the lack of functionality.

Link to comment

Here are the major issues as I see it. I know you will get the tool working at some point but aesthetically, it's horrible.

 

For this argument, I have my monitor set to 1600 X 1200 DPI on a Dell 20" Diag LCD, Internet Explorer v11, showing only address bar and menu toolbar. Total height of that is 3/4"

 

1) The page header (Dark Green with Geocaching logo, title and logged in user info: 1"

2) Page toolbar (lighter green bar below header):5/16"

 

Total space dedicated to header and toolbar 1 & 5/16" Not a real problem - no change from previous site.

 

3) Search field element containing title, search field, Filter button and text field for # results and Map These Results: 3.5"

 

Search field contains little to no information yet is given nearly twice the real estate as the header and toolbar combined.

Can easily be reduced by 60% by eliminating wasted space and providing only the needed three rows.

 

4) Search results field, top row with column ids: 1/2"

 

Search results field top row can easily be reduced by 50%

 

5) Search results body. Displays only 5.5 records, using 5.5" of space.

 

6) Icons are 9/16" high if found, 1/2" if unfound. This is a grotesque waste of space considering previous icons were 1/8"

 

7) Rows are now ~1/2" high to make up for the over sized icons? with a wasted full height row between records.

This waste of space can easily be reduced by opting for a more reasonably sized icon, and reducing the separator row heights to no more than 1/8" or 3/16".

 

Why not resolve this all by just adding the new features to the old search tool for us computer users and give the new look to those with tablets and phones?

The technology is readily available for a dynamic website to detect the difference between browsers, devices and resolution/screen size.

 

Geez.. I needed more coffee. Not Columns, ROWS. My bad.

Bump this too as the Lacky's are completely ignoring the initial question.

Link to comment

Absolutely do NOT like the new map page.

When I go on a long trip, I like to follow along on the map to pick out a few caches for my trip.

 

The new map page limits you to only 30 miles!

 

I normally scroll along my map and pick just a few for the trip so I don't lengthen my trip too long but can catch a few caches per county or state or whatever my preference is.

Unable to do that now.

 

unhappy cacher. :(

Link to comment

If you're using the map page to search for caches, there is no need to use the new search page. Under the 'Play' menu, click on 'View Geocache Map'. That will take you to the map page centered on your home coordinates. It shows all the caches and can be scrolled as much as you need.

Link to comment
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...