Startingpage redirection?

[+widdi]

Hello

 

I've read about the change of the starting page of www.geocaching.com.

So I tested it - ok.... I'm one of the 'test candidates'. I get a redirection to the new useless search page.

 

So I have to give you the feedback about your idea.

 

- my startpage, when visiting geocaching.com is my account page: /my/default.aspx

- if I want to search geocaches, I use pocket queries or the old and very useful searching page /seek/

[+palmetto]

I expect that staff knows that there are users who do not enter the site at Geocaching.com, but go instead directly to some bookmarked page public/private profile, PQ, map, whatever.

 

Those people will hardly notice this change, and may not see it at all.

 

It will impact those (more novice?) users who come to Geocaching.com. Those are the folks they're trying to track, "The intent of the test is to determine if users will benefit from having the Search page exposed during their first logged-in interaction."

[cezanne]

, "The intent of the test is to determine if users will benefit from having the Search page exposed during their first logged-in interaction."

 

If they really mean only the first log in to gc.com and not what happens first after login, they would have better off by just offering the new variant to new users and not diving the cachers into two halves,

 

Regardless of how the first page looks like, the new search has its weaknesses and is not intuitive and also much worse than the old search for basic members.

If it were for easyness of use and intuitiveness, they rather should move the old search to the start page than the new one if they do anything at all.

[+Touchstone]

Hello

 

I've read about the change of the starting page of www.geocaching.com.

So I tested it - ok.... I'm one of the 'test candidates'. I get a redirection to the new useless search page.

 

So I have to give you the feedback about your idea.

 

- my startpage, when visiting geocaching.com is my account page: /my/default.aspx

- if I want to search geocaches, I use pocket queries or the old and very useful searching page /seek/

I'm not sure how your "first" interaction on a new website usually goes, but for me, I usually don't jump right in and start messing with my account details, so it doesn't make sense to me when a website forces me to go through my account settings from the get go, if I'm not I'm even going to use the website.

 

For a first time user, I think that going directly to the search page (old or new) makes perfect sense. I remember the first time I logged in to GC, and the first question I had was, how many caches are in my area? That's all that seemed relevant to me at the time. Trying to view this from a new user perspective, the new search seems more intuitive to me. One box to fill and click search will answer my question. The old search has a number of choices, which to a new user, might seem a bit overkill.

 

Rather than dwelling on which search page is better or not, I think the important question to ask is, which methodology is going to get people out from in front of their computer and find a cache. That seems to be the intended audience to me.

[cezanne]

Hello

 

I've read about the change of the starting page of www.geocaching.com.

So I tested it - ok.... I'm one of the 'test candidates'. I get a redirection to the new useless search page.

 

So I have to give you the feedback about your idea.

 

- my startpage, when visiting geocaching.com is my account page: /my/default.aspx

- if I want to search geocaches, I use pocket queries or the old and very useful searching page /seek/

I'm not sure how your "first" interaction on a new website usually goes, but for me, I usually don't jump right in and start messing with my account details, so it doesn't make sense to me when a website forces me to go through my account settings from the get go, if I'm not I'm even going to use the website.

 

widdi is not a first time user - so why does Groundspeak such users end up to be part of the experiment? If they do, they should not wonder about receiving comments like the above. It's the reaction of an experienced user to the fact he is part of the experiement.

 

For a first time user, I think that going directly to the search page (old or new) makes perfect sense. I remember the first time I logged in to GC, and the first question I had was, how many caches are in my area? That's all that seemed relevant to me at the time. Trying to view this from a new user perspective, the new search seems more intuitive to me. One box to fill and click search will answer my question. The old search has a number of choices, which to a new user, might seem a bit overkill.

 

That will certainly depend on the personality of the user and the user's background. When I was a first time user, I researched caches in other areas and not mine and very few caches were around. I would have given up with the new search interface. The old one appeals much more to a first time user with my mindset and background. Having several search fields which are self explanatory reminds me more of search system (like in libraries, book stores, and other data bases) than the new system which would me put off.

 

 

Rather than dwelling on which search page is better or not, I think the important question to ask is, which methodology is going to get people out from in front of their computer and find a cache. That seems to be the intended audience to me.

 

If they just interested into first time users, why do they then divide the users (or rather the logins, not even the users - as I user can be logged in gc.com several times in parallel) into two halves randomly?

[+Viajero Perdido]

I've always wondered why the starting page isn't the MAP. It's the site's best feature by far*.

 

http://coord.info/map

 

(* Even with long-unfixed bugs and some clumsiness.)

[+palmetto]

For the map to work, you must have set home coords in your account.

I suspect that many users have not done this, and would be turned off if forced to do so.

 

I just tried it from my "no home coords" account. It comes with a pop up box offering to let me set home location, and assuming a location based upon my ISP address. The pop up can be dismissed ("not now"). The default location is Seattle WA.

[+Touchstone]

widdi is not a first time user - so why does Groundspeak such users end up to be part of the experiment?

 

I agree. Perhaps the OP was an unwise choice for the study, since the experiment requires an experienced User to detach themselves from preconceived notions about the website.

 

That will certainly depend on the personality of the user and the user's background.

 

Another valid observation. Rather than a generic landing page, perhaps the first encounter with the website should be a Myer-Briggs profile evaluation, in order to optimize the user experience, with the added bonus of screening out potential mischief makers.

Edited February 24, 2016 by Touchstone

[+Viajero Perdido]

If they added a simple search box to the map page (please!), including that little bulls-eye icon that seems to mean "right here", then I think it'd make a fine home page.

 

Why, it'd look just like the caching app I use in my phone. Maybe like all the caching apps, I dunno. The caching apps I've seen are all about the map, plus cool stuff shown on top of it. Why should web be different?

 

Imagine if google.com/maps took you to a search page, instead of directly to a map.

[cezanne]

 

Imagine if google.com/maps took you to a search page, instead of directly to a map.

 

That's two very different things for me. I use google maps if I need a map.

I hardly ever use the geocaching map. When I search for caches I do not want to see a map.

 

I definitely want to have a database like search form as the old search provides and the nearby cache search. That's the type of approach that best fits my mindset and background.

I prefer text to icons (in every setting of life, not just geocaching) and I prefer the keyboard to the mouse and I have never used a smartphone. I do not like to work with visual information and prefer abstract information conveyed by text by far. Of course that's also one of the reasons why none of the changes that happened on the web site over the last years appeal to me and many annoy me. It could take months until I at least feel a little less irritated by some visual changes that affect me immensely.

Edited February 24, 2016 by cezanne

[+lodgebarn]

OK so I am a user with a fair few caches found and I get a front screen. I click on Find a Great Geocache near you and it comes up with the caches in all the UK ordered by FP most if which by some odd coincidence I have found. This has always been the worst of the new search the default filter should be AND NOT FOUND BY ME. Also there is no consideration to how far away they might be 154.3 miles, 235.4 miles etc. I'll just rush out now might get there by the 29th.

 

Next I click on newest caches near me 88 miles, 302.5 Miles, 141.2 miles need I continue this is TOTALLY USELESS TO ANYBODY.

Edited February 26, 2016 by lodgebarn

[Keystone]

.... this is TOTALLY USELESS TO ANYBODY.

Except, perhaps, to those who click on the "Distance" column to sort the new caches or the favorited caches by their distance from home coordinates.

[+dprovan]

widdi is not a first time user - so why does Groundspeak such users end up to be part of the experiment?

I agree. Perhaps the OP was an unwise choice for the study, since the experiment requires an experienced User to detach themselves from preconceived notions about the website.

Actually, since the OP has explained why he will be entirely unaffected, I think he provides a valuable data point.

 

Now that I've somehow gotten kicked off the redirection list, I can compare the two pages, and the difference doesn't seem to be much more than which search is presented.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

.... this is TOTALLY USELESS TO ANYBODY.

Except, perhaps, to those who click on the "Distance" column to sort the new caches or the favorited caches by their distance from home coordinates.

 

And that's why I've thought that the community would be better served by, rather than create some canned queries that will return the "best caches near me", to create some screen casts which demonstrate how to return a list of "best caches near me".

 

One of the biggest issues with the new search is that many people can't figure out the best way to construct a query to give them the results that they want. When they ask for help here, often the response is a link to a query that will produce the results they are looking for but they (and others trying to do something similar) still might not understand how to construct a query that produces that link.

 

 

[+lodgebarn]

.... this is TOTALLY USELESS TO ANYBODY.

Except, perhaps, to those who click on the "Distance" column to sort the new caches or the favorited caches by their distance from home coordinates.

Then you pretty much lose the favourite aspect, all I am saying is that the defaults really don't work when the overall area is the whole of the UK. Now just maybe if I get the top favourite unfound caches within 20 miles of my location we might be on to something.

 

I am totally convinced that the initial search should filter out my found caches without me having to visit advanced filter to give it any chance of being useful. If you think others may like to see their found caches first then please make it an option.

 

The idea surely is to present the user quickly with as much useful information as possible without having to click lots of buttons.

Edited February 26, 2016 by lodgebarn

[+gjhimages]

The new search might be good to see what is in your area, but give me back a search box to just find one cache. Here is a scenario, A friend gives me a this GC code: GCGV0P and states that you just have to see this cache. I now have to place it in the search box to look 500+ geocaches to find just one? Also it takes me now 2 clicks to finally get to the web page. as before it only took me 1 click. Some of you will say "that is only two, why are you complaining?" But my friend has sent me 30 different geocaches and now it takes me so much longer to find those caches. So the fastest way is to use my phone. Hello it now only takes 1 clicks my phone!!! Also If friend gives you a website like "https://www.geocaching.com",'>https://www.geocaching.com", stating that this is a cool website. After you click enter, you now get 500 websites in dealing with geocaching, now which one should I click? Wouldn't to be nice to be able to just place in the browser "https://www.geocaching.com" and you go directly to the web page? Oh yes, after the first time, the history will automatically know where to go.

 

It appears that geocaching.com is taking us backwards in searching.

 

PLEASE give us a link to the "old" method with the search box for GC code or coordinates. PLEASE.

Edited February 27, 2016 by gjhimages

[Keystone]

After typing "GCGV0P" into the new search box, I only had to click once to go directly to the cache listing. Watch for the dropdown box that lets you select between going to the listing, or giving a search results list centered on that listing.

[+BooDogMama]

That will certainly depend on the personality of the user and the user's background.

 

Another valid observation. Rather than a generic landing page, perhaps the first encounter with the website should be a Myer-Briggs profile evaluation, in order to optimize the user experience, with the added bonus of screening out potential mischief makers.

 

Now that's an idea!!!

[+Mudfrog]

After typing "GCGV0P" into the new search box, I only had to click once to go directly to the cache listing. Watch for the dropdown box that lets you select between going to the listing, or giving a search results list centered on that listing.

I realize this is how things work now. What i don't understand is, why? If i input a specific GC, then doesn't it seems logical that i'm wanting to go straight to that specific GC? I don't want a dropdown box to come up, i just want to click go and end up on the cache page. Once i'm at the cache page, then if i want, i can click on one of the links on the page to find nearest caches to it. Heck, there's even a link for nearest unfound by me caches.

 

That being said, if the dropdown is to be continued, then a third option should be listed. That being for a list of nearest unfound by me caches.

[+NYPaddleCacher]

After typing "GCGV0P" into the new search box, I only had to click once to go directly to the cache listing. Watch for the dropdown box that lets you select between going to the listing, or giving a search results list centered on that listing.

I realize this is how things work now. What i don't understand is, why? If i input a specific GC, then doesn't it seems logical that i'm wanting to go straight to that specific GC? I don't want a dropdown box to come up, i just want to click go and end up on the cache page. Once i'm at the cache page, then if i want, i can click on one of the links on the page to find nearest caches to it. Heck, there's even a link for nearest unfound by me caches.

 

I frequently use the GC code for a cache to use as a center point for other caches nearby rather than to look at that specific cache so for me, having the drop down which gives me the option makes more sense.

 

Whether or not one wants to see unfound or owned caches is likely a personal preference which would apply to search results whether from a new search, old search or a view on the map. It seems to me that being able to set that preference in one place and use it for all search requests makes sense as long as one is able to toggle that preference at any time.