Jump to content

New Search Screen


commander overlord
Followers 4

Recommended Posts

The new search options are far less friendly in finding caches outside a thirty mile radius. If I want to find a local I'll just use my phone. I never use the cache search option on site unless looking for caches for challenges or oldest in a state or many other reasons. It was a great resource in finding every cache that was ever placed. The new search option is mainly for new cachers benefit. Ignoring the needs of more experienced cachers. My question is how do I find a list of the 25 oldest caches in state. And why when I search just for caches by state I only get the 1000 caches in the geographical center of the state.

Link to comment

My question is how do I find a list of the 25 oldest caches in state.

 

Enter the state (for example: "michigan") in the search page.

 

When the results come up, click on the column on the far-right: "placed on".

 

https://www.geocaching.com/play/search/@43.6212,-84.68243?origin=Michigan&sort=PlaceDate&asc=True

 

That seemed pretty easy and quick to me.

 

 

B.

Edited by Pup Patrol
Link to comment

Enter the state (for example: "michigan") in the search page.

 

When the results come up, click on the column on the far-right: "placed on".

 

https://www.geocaching.com/play/search/@43.6212,-84.68243?origin=Michigan&sort=PlaceDate&asc=True

 

That seemed pretty easy and quick to me.

Be sure to enter the state on the Filters page (in the "Search Only In..." box) and NOT on the Main search page.

 

And be sure to click on the "Placed On" column twice. The first click sorts by the most recently placed caches. The second click sorts by the oldest caches.

 

It's pretty quick and easy once you get used to it, but it's not very intuitive at all when you first encounter the search page.

Link to comment
Be sure to enter the state on the Filters page (in the "Search Only In..." box) and NOT on the Main search page.

Yup, I only realized this was an option by reading about it in the forums. For searching across an entire state, leave the main location box empty and fill in the "Search Only In..." box in the filters section.

 

For example, here's a list of the oldest caches in Michigan:

https://www.geocaching.com/play/search?r=23&sort=PlaceDate&asc=True

Link to comment

Enter the state (for example: "michigan") in the search page.

 

When the results come up, click on the column on the far-right: "placed on".

 

https://www.geocaching.com/play/search/@43.6212,-84.68243?origin=Michigan&sort=PlaceDate&asc=True'>https://www.geocaching.com/play/search/@43.6212,-84.68243?origin=Michigan&sort=PlaceDate&asc=True

 

That seemed pretty easy and quick to me.

Be sure to enter the state on the Filters page (in the "Search Only In..." box) and NOT on the Main search page.

 

I don't know, but this worked for me:

 

https://www.geocaching.com/play/search (that's the main search page, no?)

 

in the big white box, I typed "Michigan" (right there where it says "City, state, coordinates, GC code...)

 

got taken to this page:

 

https://www.geocaching.com/play/search/@43.6212,-84.68243?origin=Michigan

 

Oh, yeah, had to click "placed on" twice to re-sort it to be oldest first.

 

Like I said, quick and easy. Two clicks total, after entering the state.

 

I never used the "search only in" thing, sorry.

 

 

B.

Link to comment
Be sure to enter the state on the Filters page (in the "Search Only In..." box) and NOT on the Main search page.

Yup, I only realized this was an option by reading about it in the forums. For searching across an entire state, leave the main location box empty and fill in the "Search Only In..." box in the filters section.

 

For example, here's a list of the oldest caches in Michigan:

https://www.geocaching.com/play/search?r=23&sort=PlaceDate&asc=True

 

Interesting.

 

Michigan was placing caches back in 1900? :unsure:

 

I have never understood why GS allows cache owners to muck about with the "placed" date.

 

If the OP wants only legitimately "old" caches, he's going to have to pay attention to the published date. :ph34r:

 

 

B.

Edited by Pup Patrol
Link to comment

No it's not easy, you first have to put in the state on the filter page, not on the first page that says search. Ignore that and go to filter? Normally you do a search first then add a filter. Then go to the second page and enter where. And you have to hit enter on your device, that will add United States / Michigan. If you just enter Michigan It doesn't take you any where. I think on the home page of the find a cache page there should be instructions on how to navigate the site. instead of trail and error

Link to comment

Okay, my way was bad.

 

Tried the "search only in" and that resulted in better list of old caches, except for that one with the fake "1900" date.

 

Thanks, guys.

 

Sorry, OP.

 

Now can someone answer the OP's other question (I'm interested in the answer, too)

 

And why when I search just for caches by state I only get the 1000 caches in the geographical center of the state.

 

 

B.

Link to comment

I don't know, but this worked for me:

 

https://www.geocaching.com/play/search (that's the main search page, no?)

 

in the big white box, I typed "Michigan" (right there where it says "City, state, coordinates, GC code...)

 

got taken to this page:

 

https://www.geocaching.com/play/search/@43.6212,-84.68243?origin=Michigan

 

Oh, yeah, had to click "placed on" twice to re-sort it to be oldest first.

 

Like I said, quick and easy. Two clicks total, after entering the state.

 

I never used the "search only in" thing, sorry.

When I do it that way, I only get 227 results returned, all within 10 miles of the center of Michigan. The oldest cache in those results was placed on April 15, 2004.

 

When I do it the "correct" way, I get the 1,000 oldest caches returned hidden throughout the entire state of Michigan. Three of them were hidden prior to 2001.

 

Nope. Not very intuitive at all.

Link to comment

Now can someone answer the OP's other question (I'm interested in the answer, too)

 

And why when I search just for caches by state I only get the 1000 caches in the geographical center of the state.

The Main search page only allows searches within specified distances of a particular location. The default distance is 10 miles/16 km. The maximum distance is 30 miles/50 km. Since it always uses a particular location, it uses the "center" of the state, city, postal code, etc.

Link to comment

I don't know, but this worked for me:

 

https://www.geocaching.com/play/search (that's the main search page, no?)

 

in the big white box, I typed "Michigan" (right there where it says "City, state, coordinates, GC code...)

 

got taken to this page:

 

https://www.geocaching.com/play/search/@43.6212,-84.68243?origin=Michigan

 

Oh, yeah, had to click "placed on" twice to re-sort it to be oldest first.

 

Like I said, quick and easy. Two clicks total, after entering the state.

 

I never used the "search only in" thing, sorry.

When I do it that way, I only get 227 results returned, all within 10 miles of the center of Michigan. The oldest cache in those results was placed on April 15, 2004.

 

When I do it the "correct" way, I get the 1,000 oldest caches returned hidden throughout the entire state of Michigan. Three of them were hidden prior to 2001.

 

Nope. Not very intuitive at all.

 

Missed reading all of my post of 12:23, eh? B)

 

 

B.

Edited by Pup Patrol
Link to comment

A lot of the features I used on the old search screen are gone. Please bring back: newest caches in area, find a cache by hider's name.

Newest caches within a 30 mile area is possible by sorting on the "Placed On" column. Use the "Search Only In..." filter combined with "Placed On" column sorting for wider areas.

 

Hopefully, that 30 mile limit and additional search criteria (and transfer results to device/GPX file/list) will arrive with Version 2.

 

A minor improvement would include adding appropriate links to the Home Coordinates image, Current Location image, and Top-Rated Geocaches image on the Main search page. That's pretty basic website design.

Link to comment

I don't know, but this worked for me:

 

https://www.geocaching.com/play/search (that's the main search page, no?)

 

in the big white box, I typed "Michigan" (right there where it says "City, state, coordinates, GC code...)

 

got taken to this page:

 

https://www.geocachi...origin=Michigan

 

Oh, yeah, had to click "placed on" twice to re-sort it to be oldest first.

 

Like I said, quick and easy. Two clicks total, after entering the state.

 

I never used the "search only in" thing, sorry.

When I do it that way, I only get 227 results returned, all within 10 miles of the center of Michigan. The oldest cache in those results was placed on April 15, 2004.

 

When I do it the "correct" way, I get the 1,000 oldest caches returned hidden throughout the entire state of Michigan. Three of them were hidden prior to 2001.

 

Nope. Not very intuitive at all.

 

No, it's not intuitive but it's easily explained.

 

Entering something in the main search box geocodes (resolves it to a set of lat/long coordinates) a place name and results are within a 10 mile radius (which can be increased to a maximum of 30 miles) of that location.

 

Entering a location in the "Search only in" filter (and leaving the main search box empty) will return a list of caches within that region. The region is defined by the border line of the country, state/province.

 

 

Link to comment

FYI -- "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 those that 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

 

A lot of the features I used on the old search screen are gone. Please bring back: newest caches in area, find a cache by hider's name.

Newest caches within a 30 mile area is possible by sorting on the "Placed On" column. Use the "Search Only In..." filter combined with "Placed On" column sorting for wider areas.

Just wanted to clarify that sorting (newest/oldest, last found, favorites, etc) can be done within any set of search results by clicking on the column name. The 30 mile limit does not have to be used to get sortable results.

 

Searching based on hider can be done using the filters (not available for Basic Members). This link =meljo&r=2"]www.geocaching.com/play/search?owner[0]=meljo&r=2 should show all caches in the state of Alaska hidden by meljo. Simply click on "Change Filters" in the Results page from this link to see what filters were used (Search Only In and Hidden By). The filters can be changed, and then updated results generated, by clicking "Update Search".

Link to comment

but no guarantees how long this page will remain running: http://www.geocaching.com/seek/nearest.aspx?country_id=0

 

Apparently they plan to terminate it, but I wonder what then will happen to the search links on the cache pages.

It would be very unhappy if they replaced the nearest search on cache pages by the new quite restricted search and only provided results within 30 miles (and with no option to exclude finds and owned caches for basic members).

 

Just wanted to clarify that sorting (newest/oldest, last found, favorites, etc) can be done within any set of search results by clicking on the column name. The 30 mile limit does not have to be used to get sortable results.

 

First, this feature is only available to PMs while previously every cacher could look at the oldest caches in a region/state (I sometimes like to look at the old caches in my region out of nostalgia - I happened to be around at that time when the first caches have been hidden).

Second, even for PMs there is no fast way of say navigating to all the caches that were hidden around 2004 in a certain region. With the old search this could be done with much less clicking and scrolling. (No, I have no interest in challenge caches.)

 

The new search tool has taken away from basic members everything that is of use. They offer filters with respect to the cache type within the 30 miles radius which I do not care about (why should I? I want to look for whatever caches are available). Being able to search in a larger radius and above all to filter out my finds (not on the map about which I again do not care about at all) is the most basic search needed for everyday caching.

Link to comment

Just wanted to clarify that sorting (newest/oldest, last found, favorites, etc) can be done within any set of search results by clicking on the column name. The 30 mile limit does not have to be used to get sortable results.

 

First, this feature is only available to PMs while previously every cacher could look at the oldest caches in a region/state (I sometimes like to look at the old caches in my region out of nostalgia - I happened to be around at that time when the first caches have been hidden).

Second, even for PMs there is no fast way of say navigating to all the caches that were hidden around 2004 in a certain region. With the old search this could be done with much less clicking and scrolling. (No, I have no interest in challenge caches.)

 

The new search tool has taken away from basic members everything that is of use. They offer filters with respect to the cache type within the 30 miles radius which I do not care about (why should I? I want to look for whatever caches are available). Being able to search in a larger radius and above all to filter out my finds (not on the map about which I again do not care about at all) is the most basic search needed for everyday caching.

True. My bad. I mentioned the PM-only aspect in the paragraph related to searching for hiders, but didn't mention it in the paragraph about the 30-mile limit. The two cachers I quoted have PM benefits, and so mentioning Basic Member restrictions wasn't top-of-mind when I was drafting my reply to their posts.

 

I agree that it would be great for some of the PM-only fiters to be available to Basic Members, particularly the "found/owned" status and an expanded search radius beyond 30 miles. I'd think even the D/T/Size options would be nice for Basic Members as well. We'll see what happens.

Link to comment

I agree that it would be great for some of the PM-only fiters to be available to Basic Members, particularly the "found/owned" status and an expanded search radius beyond 30 miles. I'd think even the D/T/Size options would be nice for Basic Members as well. We'll see what happens.

 

First let me start with saying that my post was not intended to criticize your post. The cachers who nee help with the new system rely on helpful persons like you.

 

As the quote above is concerned:

Of course there are options that might be nice to have, but they have not been there in the old search either and I do not regard them as basic for what Groundspeak refers to the everday needs than being able to filter out found caches and being able to produce search results outside of 30 miles (e.g. by using a country/state filter).

 

It's perfectly ok if PMs get access to many more options. It's just that I think that the way the new search is set up it not any longer provides the most essential basics (in contrast to what Groundspeak claims on the FAQ page of their new search tool.) I really still wonder if any of them has tried to use it with basic member rights only. The fact that they now offer cache type filters for basic members, but removed the much more basic features, makes me wonder whether they have any idea what features are essential than relying only on the

search tool.

 

Somehow it would have seen more logical to me if they had added the new options to the PQ system only available to PMs.

 

Most of those who used the old search often and not only occasionaly and really relied on it were either basic members or low tech PMs who appreciated the simple style of the old search. Right now setting up a PQ is easier and more intuitive than using the new search tool and that's I guess not what it ought to be.

Link to comment

Second, even for PMs there is no fast way of say navigating to all the caches that were hidden around 2004 in a certain region. With the old search this could be done with much less clicking and scrolling. (No, I have no interest in challenge caches.)

 

It's really not all that different from the way it was before. The primary difference is the default sort order when you first see results in a region. For the new search, for a region based search, the default sort order is relative to ones location. It takes one click on the "placed by" column to change the sort order, then it works the same as it did before. For the old search, the default sort order was "placed by" *and* you could not sort the results relative to your home location.

 

The new search tool has taken away from basic members everything that is of use.

 

To me, this isn't as much about the new search tool as it is that GS seems to be redrawing the line between a basic and premium member. It's becoming closer to the difference one sees between the free mobile app in the paid version. In that case, the free version is for those that only want a taste of what the the game is about to see if it's worth spending the money to get the full functionality. Similarly, a basic membership now only provides enough functionality for someone to see if it's worth spending the money for a premium membership. The ability to get a list of caches within 30 miles of ones home (or some selected) location, especially if one has the luxury of living in a cache dense location, is enough for someone to determine if it's worth the $30 a year to play the game with all the features available.

 

 

Link to comment

Second, even for PMs there is no fast way of say navigating to all the caches that were hidden around 2004 in a certain region. With the old search this could be done with much less clicking and scrolling. (No, I have no interest in challenge caches.)

It's really not all that different from the way it was before. The primary difference is the default sort order when you first see results in a region. For the new search, for a region based search, the default sort order is relative to ones location. It takes one click on the "placed by" column to change the sort order, then it works the same as it did before. For the old search, the default sort order was "placed by" *and* you could not sort the results relative to your home location.

I think cezanne is refering to the fact that the new search will display a maximum of 1,000 caches in a particular country/state via the "Search Only In..." filter. If that region has lots of other caches, then you might not be able to view all the caches that were placed in, say, 2004.

 

And if you use only the "Search Only In..." filter to do this search, then neither the old nor the new search results can be sorted relative to their distance from a particular location.

Link to comment

Second, even for PMs there is no fast way of say navigating to all the caches that were hidden around 2004 in a certain region. With the old search this could be done with much less clicking and scrolling. (No, I have no interest in challenge caches.)

It's really not all that different from the way it was before. The primary difference is the default sort order when you first see results in a region. For the new search, for a region based search, the default sort order is relative to ones location. It takes one click on the "placed by" column to change the sort order, then it works the same as it did before. For the old search, the default sort order was "placed by" *and* you could not sort the results relative to your home location.

I think cezanne is refering to the fact that the new search will display a maximum of 1,000 caches in a particular country/state via the "Search Only In..." filter. If that region has lots of other caches, then you might not be able to view all the caches that were placed in, say, 2004.

 

You're right. The maximum number of caches limit of 1000 caches would make it difficult to see caches placed in 2004. On the other hand, I can only think of a couple of use cases why someone might want to do that; one would be to satisfy some academic interest for when caches were placed in a specific area, or to look for caches to complete some challenge. I would consider both of those cases to be lower priority to go into the primary search mechanism, especially since pocket queries could easily be used to search for caches placed in 2004.

 

 

And if you use only the "Search Only In..." filter to do this search, then neither the old nor the new search results can be sorted relative to their distance from a particular location.

 

The results from a query using only the "Search Only In" filter *does* sort relative to the distance from ones home location (but not some other specified location such as ones current location). In fact, that is the default sort order. The old search effectively had a "Search Only In" filter, but was implement using the "Search by Country" or "Search by State/Province" select list, and the default sort order was newest to oldest and there was no option to sort the results relative to a location. I had suggested that simply changing the default sort order to the placed by date, for a location non-specific search would make it behave a little closer to what the old search by country/state search worked, with the added benefit that, with a single click we could view results based on the distance to our home location.

 

 

Link to comment

OK, I haven't been caching much this year so I haven't played around much with the new search. I just tried to do a search for an event that I know is coming up but I don't remember where. So I filtered for "Events"...got no results because there are no events scheduled within 30 miles of me. Well, duh, I know it's more than 30 miles from me but now I can't find it. I guess we're only supposed to attend events within 30 miles now.

 

News flash....some of us who live in rural area have to travel more than 30 miles to do any caching if we've already cleared out everything that nearby. In this case, I'd have to already know WHERE the event is located on order to find it to find out WHERE the event is located! This makes no sense whatsoever.

 

I'm going to sit down at the computer tonight and play around with this new search function, but if it's going to be this user unfriendly I may seriously consider canceling my Premium membership. Good job, Groundspeak, cater to the free app players and piss on the paying members. :(

Link to comment

OK, I haven't been caching much this year so I haven't played around much with the new search. I just tried to do a search for an event that I know is coming up but I don't remember where. So I filtered for "Events"...got no results because there are no events scheduled within 30 miles of me. Well, duh, I know it's more than 30 miles from me but now I can't find it. I guess we're only supposed to attend events within 30 miles now.

 

News flash....some of us who live in rural area have to travel more than 30 miles to do any caching if we've already cleared out everything that nearby. In this case, I'd have to already know WHERE the event is located on order to find it to find out WHERE the event is located! This makes no sense whatsoever.

 

I'm going to sit down at the computer tonight and play around with this new search function, but if it's going to be this user unfriendly I may seriously consider canceling my Premium membership. Good job, Groundspeak, cater to the free app players and piss on the paying members. :(

You don't have to cancel. OK, you can if you like :ph34r:, but you can see caches such as Events within 100 miles, using the old search. I posted here, then noticed there are almost identically titled threads all over the Fora. :ph34r:

 

Anyway, one simple thing (assuming you can edit a web URL and save a Favorite in the web browser), is to enter a Lan/Lon as your home location, and enter a distance, in a URL like this:

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=100

 

The Lat & Long are easy to enter, just type the numbers into the corresponding spots in the URL. For one's own PC at home, that might be a great URL to save as "Geocaching", so there's no need to "Search", just to see the familiar "home location" cache list.

 

Now you can sort for recently placed caches, and Events are listed right at the top when sorting for recent caches (I prefer to go to the Events List here in the Forum, but they are also in the cache list). As I mentioned in the other post, I don't know if there are plans to eliminate that old-fashioned search grid. I hope not.

Edited by kunarion
Link to comment

The new search tool has taken away from basic members everything that is of use.

 

To me, this isn't as much about the new search tool as it is that GS seems to be redrawing the line between a basic and premium member. It's becoming closer to the difference one sees between the free mobile app in the paid version. In that case, the free version is for those that only want a taste of what the the game is about to see if it's worth spending the money to get the full functionality. Similarly, a basic membership now only provides enough functionality for someone to see if it's worth spending the money for a premium membership. The ability to get a list of caches within 30 miles of ones home (or some selected) location, especially if one has the luxury of living in a cache dense location, is enough for someone to determine if it's worth the $30 a year to play the game with all the features available.

Oh, I was assuming that there must be some technical reason - such as reducing load on the database backend or servers or something like that.

 

I could see the logic of that maybe. They had some problems last weekend with volume of traffic for example. It would make sense to do something with the search functions if that were an ongoing problem.

 

If it is about reducing the functionality to persuade me to pay money then that would be an interesting decision.

Link to comment

OK, I haven't been caching much this year so I haven't played around much with the new search. I just tried to do a search for an event that I know is coming up but I don't remember where. So I filtered for "Events"...got no results because there are no events scheduled within 30 miles of me. Well, duh, I know it's more than 30 miles from me but now I can't find it. I guess we're only supposed to attend events within 30 miles now.

 

News flash....some of us who live in rural area have to travel more than 30 miles to do any caching if we've already cleared out everything that nearby. In this case, I'd have to already know WHERE the event is located on order to find it to find out WHERE the event is located! This makes no sense whatsoever.

 

I'm going to sit down at the computer tonight and play around with this new search function, but if it's going to be this user unfriendly I may seriously consider canceling my Premium membership. Good job, Groundspeak, cater to the free app players and piss on the paying members. :(

A Project GC map compare search for the US filtered by cache type for Event caches brings up a list of 1545 events located on a map and as a list underneath.

 

I did try out the new search last night - generally I use the maps. I doubt I'll be using it again when there are third party products which have much better functionality and, frankly, usability.

Link to comment

I for one will be cancelling my membership. I live in SC, and every 2 years we drive to california to visit family. This year we are driving to washington to take a cruise to alaska. How am I suppose to search for oldest and/or most favorite caches in each state I will be driving through. I like to plan my caches in advance, not search on the fly. PQs don't work either as you are limited to 1000 caches per search, I know my state has close to 10k caches. I want to sort them. WTF. this new feature is garbage. period.

Link to comment

Second, even for PMs there is no fast way of say navigating to all the caches that were hidden around 2004 in a certain region. With the old search this could be done with much less clicking and scrolling. (No, I have no interest in challenge caches.)

 

It's really not all that different from the way it was before. The primary difference is the default sort order when you first see results in a region. For the new search, for a region based search, the default sort order is relative to ones location. It takes one click on the "placed by" column to change the sort order, then it works the same as it did before. For the old search, the default sort order was "placed by" *and* you could not sort the results relative to your home location.

 

The old search command for all caches in a region/country delivered all such caches and not only 1000.

There was neither a sorting with respect to placed by nor with respect to the home location (would not make sense anyway for a country search). The new search can provide the newest 1000 caches easily and the 1000 oldest, but if I want to browse through all caches hidden in 2004 (not among the 1000 oldest) it would not be as easy as it was with the old search.

 

 

To me, this isn't as much about the new search tool as it is that GS seems to be redrawing the line between a basic and premium member. It's becoming closer to the difference one sees between the free mobile app in the paid version. In that case, the free version is for those that only want a taste of what the the game is about to see if it's worth spending the money to get the full functionality.

 

If that's true, it contradicts what Jeremy promised many years ago about that the basic game will stay free and it also contradicts the claim on the faq page that the search for the premium members goes beyond the everyday use which is offered to basic members.

 

They should also have decided on that earlier. It would have changed the development of the site considerably and they would have got much less caches. That's a matter of principle for many.

 

Similarly, a basic membership now only provides enough functionality for someone to see if it's worth spending the money for a premium membership. The ability to get a list of caches within 30 miles of ones home (or some selected) location, especially if one has the luxury of living in a cache dense location, is enough for someone to determine if it's worth the $30 a year to play the game with all the features available.

 

They then would probably should introduce a further level of membership for those who want PQs, favourites, ignore lists, bookmarks and all that stuff and not only a working basic online search.

Link to comment

As I mentioned in the other post, I don't know if there are plans to eliminate that old-fashioned search grid. I hope not.

 

Unfortunately it appears that they have such plans - the faq mentions the old search will be available only for a while (it is not specified there for how long). This makes me worry that they also plan to change how the nearest search commands on the cache pages work (this would fit into their plan to do a redesign of the cache listings). A lot of effort and money seems to go in things at least I have not the slightest interest into.

Link to comment

I for one will be cancelling my membership. I live in SC, and every 2 years we drive to california to visit family. This year we are driving to washington to take a cruise to alaska. How am I suppose to search for oldest and/or most favorite caches in each state I will be driving through. I like to plan my caches in advance, not search on the fly. PQs don't work either as you are limited to 1000 caches per search, I know my state has close to 10k caches. I want to sort them. WTF. this new feature is garbage. period.

I don't see where you can't do exactly what you want. Enter nothing on the first page when starting the search, just click "add filters". Enter the state name you want in the "search only in..." box. Then click the heading you want to sort on - "favorites" will get you the 1000 caches with the highest fav points, double click "placed on" to get the 1000 oldest caches. Use other filters to not see your finds, or types of caches you're not interested in, etc..

Link to comment

I for one will be cancelling my membership. I live in SC, and every 2 years we drive to california to visit family. This year we are driving to washington to take a cruise to alaska. How am I suppose to search for oldest and/or most favorite caches in each state I will be driving through. I like to plan my caches in advance, not search on the fly. PQs don't work either as you are limited to 1000 caches per search, I know my state has close to 10k caches. I want to sort them. WTF. this new feature is garbage. period.

I don't see where you can't do exactly what you want. Enter nothing on the first page when starting the search, just click "add filters". Enter the state name you want in the "search only in..." box. Then click the heading you want to sort on - "favorites" will get you the 1000 caches with the highest fav points, double click "placed on" to get the 1000 oldest caches. Use other filters to not see your finds, or types of caches you're not interested in, etc..

 

I jumped the gun with this comment. I figured it out. Just liked how it was. It was easier to me.

Link to comment

Second, even for PMs there is no fast way of say navigating to all the caches that were hidden around 2004 in a certain region. With the old search this could be done with much less clicking and scrolling. (No, I have no interest in challenge caches.)

 

It's really not all that different from the way it was before. The primary difference is the default sort order when you first see results in a region. For the new search, for a region based search, the default sort order is relative to ones location. It takes one click on the "placed by" column to change the sort order, then it works the same as it did before. For the old search, the default sort order was "placed by" *and* you could not sort the results relative to your home location.

 

The old search command for all caches in a region/country delivered all such caches and not only 1000.

There was neither a sorting with respect to placed by nor with respect to the home location (would not make sense anyway for a country search). The new search can provide the newest 1000 caches easily and the 1000 oldest, but if I want to browse through all caches hidden in 2004 (not among the 1000 oldest) it would not be as easy as it was with the old search.

 

Why would someone *want* to browse through a list of caches placed in 2004, other than as an academic interest or to satisfy some challenge cache? If someone wants to see a list of caches within a specific placed date range that's easy to do with a pocket query and you don't have to scroll through a list of thousands of caches, as the PQ will only return caches within that date range.

 

Link to comment

I for one will be cancelling my membership. I live in SC, and every 2 years we drive to california to visit family. This year we are driving to washington to take a cruise to alaska. How am I suppose to search for oldest and/or most favorite caches in each state I will be driving through. I like to plan my caches in advance, not search on the fly. PQs don't work either as you are limited to 1000 caches per search, I know my state has close to 10k caches. I want to sort them. WTF. this new feature is garbage. period.

I don't see where you can't do exactly what you want. Enter nothing on the first page when starting the search, just click "add filters". Enter the state name you want in the "search only in..." box. Then click the heading you want to sort on - "favorites" will get you the 1000 caches with the highest fav points, double click "placed on" to get the 1000 oldest caches. Use other filters to not see your finds, or types of caches you're not interested in, etc..

 

It still will only return caches within 30 miles of whatever location I specify (current location, my home location, etc.) Seriously, when I go caching I have to travel more than 30 miles from whatever starting point I specify...we're not particularly cache-dense around here. This situation seriously sucks! Groundspeak, I and many others have been quick to defend you when some new ill-conceived policy or feature makes its way into the game. But now it appears that you clearly want everyone to play the game on their smartphone with the Geocaching app and the hell with the functionality of the website. When I'm planning a caching outing I need to see further than 30 miles from my starting point!

 

Now, if someone knows a workaround I'd like to hear it, but ultimately if I'm forced to use a workaround or use some other website or program to accomplish what I used to be able to do from the website with the previous search function, I'm not going to be a happy camper! You shouldn't have to use a workaround to accomplish a very basic function! "Show me all the events currently listed in Louisiana" (which would never be more than a handful)...Nope, can't do that, here's all the events within 30 miles of your home location, which is exactly ZERO! What good is that doing me?

 

Groundspeak, if you're listening, and if you care (which I suspect you don't or you wouldn't have implemented this in the first place), admit it was a bad move and change it, like you did with that ridiculous "Challenges" fiasco.

Link to comment

I don't know, but this worked for me:

 

https://www.geocaching.com/play/search (that's the main search page, no?)

 

in the big white box, I typed "Michigan" (right there where it says "City, state, coordinates, GC code...)

 

got taken to this page:

 

https://www.geocachi...origin=Michigan

 

Oh, yeah, had to click "placed on" twice to re-sort it to be oldest first.

 

Like I said, quick and easy. Two clicks total, after entering the state.

 

I never used the "search only in" thing, sorry.

When I do it that way, I only get 227 results returned, all within 10 miles of the center of Michigan. The oldest cache in those results was placed on April 15, 2004.

 

When I do it the "correct" way, I get the 1,000 oldest caches returned hidden throughout the entire state of Michigan. Three of them were hidden prior to 2001.

 

Nope. Not very intuitive at all.

 

No, it's not intuitive but it's easily explained.

 

Entering something in the main search box geocodes (resolves it to a set of lat/long coordinates) a place name and results are within a 10 mile radius (which can be increased to a maximum of 30 miles) of that location.

 

Entering a location in the "Search only in" filter (and leaving the main search box empty) will return a list of caches within that region. The region is defined by the border line of the country, state/province.

 

Yes. It is not intuitive. No. It is not easily explained. Three or four new steps that are difficult to understand (perhaps a Ouija board might help?)

Link to comment

I may not the best person to comment on this because I never used the old advance search much. Ive always used pqs for many of things others apparently used the advanced search for. For example I have a saved pg for unfound caches in 50 miles which is farther than I would drive to attend an event but does include both MA and NH. I have a pq for all the caches hidden in the US which were placed in 2000-2001. I never run them. Just preview them to get the information I need.

 

It is not however difficult to find events in any state using the new search. Leave the search box on the first page blank. Then uncheck all cache types except events and in the search within box add the state you are interested in.

 

What I like best about the new search is that I can do some things with it that I couldn't do before like finding caches that neither I nor my companions have found or the most favored caches that are not too far from the motel where I spent the night.

Edited by Team Taran
Link to comment
It still will only return caches within 30 miles of whatever location I specify (current location, my home location, etc.) (...)

 

Now, if someone knows a workaround I'd like to hear it, but ultimately if I'm forced to use a workaround or use some other website or program to accomplish what I used to be able to do from the website with the previous search function, I'm not going to be a happy camper! You shouldn't have to use a workaround to accomplish a very basic function! "Show me all the events currently listed in Louisiana" (which would never be more than a handful)...Nope, can't do that, here's all the events within 30 miles of your home location, which is exactly ZERO!

As noted earlier in the thread, don't fill in a location in the main search box. Leave it empty. Enter Louisiana in the "Search Only In..." box on the filters page.

 

Here's all events currently listed in Louisiana (which are enabled and have not been found by Chief301):

=Chief301&r=19&e=1&sort=PlaceDate&asc=True#"]Link

 

(Edited to fix URL encoding issue)

Edited by derektiffany
Link to comment

As I mentioned in the other post, I don't know if there are plans to eliminate that old-fashioned search grid. I hope not.

 

Unfortunately it appears that they have such plans - the faq mentions the old search will be available only for a while (it is not specified there for how long).

That is bad news. Someday I'll log in, and my "home page" will be broken.

 

Does the new layout look terrific on a smartphone? I'm guessing that's the reason for it.

Link to comment

Try this to find the oldest caches in a state:

 

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

 

Hope that this helps others with the new look, by being able to view the old look!

Link to comment

Why would someone *want* to browse through a list of caches placed in 2004, other than as an academic interest or to satisfy some challenge cache?

 

First, it was just an example. Second, I do not believe that such searches cause a heavy load on the servers. Some of the big API clients and actions like the Pi Day souvenirs are what really causes issues with the server loads.

 

I do not buy any arguments that the switch to the new search happened to reduce the load on the servers.

 

 

If someone wants to see a list of caches within a specific placed date range that's easy to do with a pocket query and you don't have to scroll through a list of thousands of caches, as the PQ will only return caches within that date range.

 

It is not necessary to scroll through thousands of caches with the old system (you can hope over many result pages without looking at them). Moreover, the date range might not always be that clear when one wants to demonstrate e.g. to newer cachers how geocaching has changed.

Link to comment

Why would someone *want* to browse through a list of caches placed in 2004, other than as an academic interest or to satisfy some challenge cache?

 

First, it was just an example.

 

 

Yes, I know it was just an example. There have been other examples such as someone wanting to know how many caches there are in a specific state, wanting to see the newest caches that are part of a series so that they could rack up a bunch of FTFs, as well as others. The point is, as I see it, the primary purpose of the search engine is to discover caches listings for caches that one might want to go out and find, and generally that means caches within some reasonable proximity to a specific location.

Examples such as seeing a list of caches placed in 2004 are exceptions. The number of people that are going to want to use the search engine to satisfy these exceptions is small compared to the number of people that are going to want to use it for it's primary purpose. The new search engine has a lot of issues, and frankly I would rather see GS focus on addressing issue that have the biggest impact rather than make sure it will handle every exception.

 

Second, I do not believe that such searches cause a heavy load on the servers. Some of the big API clients and actions like the Pi Day souvenirs are what really causes issues with the server loads.

Do you have any evidence to support this claim?

 

I do not buy any arguments that the switch to the new search happened to reduce the load on the servers.

 

I don't buy the argument that GS switched to a new search to reduce the load on the servers either. I have also never seen anyone make the argument that they switch to a new search to reduce the load on the servers.

 

I was one of, if not the first to state that the 30mi/50km proximity limit was inadequate. That was on the first day that the sneak peak of the new advanced search was available to be seen by PMs. I think that GS is well aware what people think about the limit and the issue is exacerbated by the intuitiveness of the interface and that entering something in the main search box will impose the 30mi limit. However, call me an optimist, but I don't think that the limit they chose for the first release is set in stone.

I've not only suggested raising the limit (but not making it unlimited) but have made specific suggestions on how they might consider doing it. Say what you will about the new search engine, but from what I've seen the performance is pretty good. Imagine the reception the new interface would have received if had all the functionality we're seeing *and* it was slow.

 

If someone wants to see a list of caches within a specific placed date range that's easy to do with a pocket query and you don't have to scroll through a list of thousands of caches, as the PQ will only return caches within that date range.

 

It is not necessary to scroll through thousands of caches with the old system (you can hope over many result pages without looking at them). Moreover, the date range might not always be that clear when one wants to demonstrate e.g. to newer cachers how geocaching has changed.

 

Yes, I know one can jump from page to page. With a PQ, I could select a date range of 2003 to 2005 and if the result set was too large, I could narrow the date range. Maybe a date range slider would be a nice addition, but considering the fact that there is good solution now, and there are plenty of other issues to deal with, it just doesn't make sense to make it a high priority because it's something a few people might want.

 

 

Link to comment

With a PQ, I could select a date range of 2003 to 2005 and if the result set was too large, I could narrow the date range. Maybe a date range slider would be a nice addition, but considering the fact that there is good solution now, and there are plenty of other issues to deal with, it just doesn't make sense to make it a high priority because it's something a few people might want.

 

The old search tool is still there and always has been there.

 

I guess the number of people who are happy with the new search (including the look of the output) and really use it as their main tool of searching is quite small.

 

The few extra things that are offered by the new search could have added to the PQ system in a much more cost effective manner.

Edited by cezanne
Link to comment

An interesting lack in the new search is that you can not search by GC code. With the new PI Day souvenirs giving a GC number that can't be looked up on the site... :blink:

 

There are a couple ways to search by GC code, although neither is particularly intuitive.

 

(1) On the GC.com homepage, you can enter the GC code in the search box.

PiDayGC1.png

 

(2) On the Search homepage, you can enter the GC code in the main search box.

PiDayGC2.png

 

Hope that helps.

Link to comment
It still will only return caches within 30 miles of whatever location I specify (current location, my home location, etc.) (...)

 

Now, if someone knows a workaround I'd like to hear it, but ultimately if I'm forced to use a workaround or use some other website or program to accomplish what I used to be able to do from the website with the previous search function, I'm not going to be a happy camper! You shouldn't have to use a workaround to accomplish a very basic function! "Show me all the events currently listed in Louisiana" (which would never be more than a handful)...Nope, can't do that, here's all the events within 30 miles of your home location, which is exactly ZERO!

As noted earlier in the thread, don't fill in a location in the main search box. Leave it empty. Enter Louisiana in the "Search Only In..." box on the filters page.

 

Here's all events currently listed in Louisiana (which are enabled and have not been found by Chief301):

=Chief301&r=19&e=1&sort=PlaceDate&asc=True#"]Link

 

(Edited to fix URL encoding issue)

 

OK, I must be missing something....I leave the location blank in the main search box....I enter "Louisiana" in the "Search Only In" box. I get 0 results. What am I missing, how did you do that?

 

EDIT TO ADD: Oh, OK, I get it now....I was just typing in "Louisiana" in the box. This time when I started typing "Louisiana" I clicked on "United States: Louisiana" that appeared in the drop down menu and THAT worked. OK, I feel a little better now....

Edited by Chief301
Link to comment
Oh, OK, I get it now....I was just typing in "Louisiana" in the box. This time when I started typing "Louisiana" I clicked on "United States: Louisiana" that appeared in the drop down menu and THAT worked.

Where did you see a "drop down menu"? I've been kind of avoiding the whole "new search" thing, but El Predicto predicts I'll need to start learning how to use it. Is someone still compiling info on how to do common functions that were once in the old search box? Maybe make the info a Sticky.

Link to comment
Oh, OK, I get it now....I was just typing in "Louisiana" in the box. This time when I started typing "Louisiana" I clicked on "United States: Louisiana" that appeared in the drop down menu and THAT worked.

Where did you see a "drop down menu"? I've been kind of avoiding the whole "new search" thing, but El Predicto predicts I'll need to start learning how to use it. Is someone still compiling info on how to do common functions that were once in the old search box? Maybe make the info a Sticky.

The drop-down menu appears once you start typing a location in the "Search Only In..." box. This image might help:

GS_dropdown_menu.png

 

Is someone still compiling info on how to do common functions that were once in the old search box? Maybe make the info a Sticky.

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

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...
Followers 4
×
×
  • Create New...