Release Notes (Website: Progressive release, new Search/Map) - September 14, 2018

[+2wheels4cache]

First of all, thanks for letting us opt out of the new map!  

 

The new system loaded automatically when I turned on the laptop this morning and I was surprised to see it covered only a short distance, no caches found, so I had to zoom out to get anything listed.   

 

But there was a problem right away.  Clicking on a mark on the map  gives NO information at all!  

If the new format is supposed to help geocachers find caches, one would expect some information.   How would one know whether they wanted to go to that location?

 

Another concern I have is that it does not give option to open things in another tab, so have to click to get the ratings and then click to get the description, puzzle, or instructions, maybe click more to get browser page, then click multiple times to get back to the map.   It would sure be easier and faster to open a new tab per geocache, not losing the map to look at the details.

 

List of what is shown on the map covers up about a third of the map, so those items are in fact not shown

 

Again, the new system does not meet my most important needs, so I am glad to opt out of it.

 

 

[+Run Amok]

Yes, thanks I figured that out after I wrote it. There is a big issue with it though. It doesn't suppress their hides, so you think you have a list you can go find together and then half of them are owned by the other person. 

[+lefisher]

Two problems that I would like help with: (1) I cannot find the Openstreetmap on this new map.  I use it all the time as it shows more tracks than the geocaching.com one.  How do I get back to it? (2) Where have my PQs gone in the left hand window?  I traverse the world via PQs.  

[+NYPaddleCacher]

On 11/11/2018 at 2:53 PM, PlasmaWave said:

NO. It works. Keyword is "Hamburg":

 

HHL - Hans ... you are searching for "Hamburg", so yes it finds any caches containing a word within the cache name starting with "Hamburg". You try the same search but enter "burg" ... only caches STARTING with a word beginning with "burg" will be displayed (probably find none). The problem is their search cannot find partial words like any normal search engine.

 

Typically, when creating a search index,  the text that can be searched is tokenized into words.  Hamburg is tokenized as a word, but "burg" is not.  I haven't tried it but if the search supports pattern matching *burg should return results with a partial match.  

[+PlasmaWave]

4 minutes ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

 

Typically, when creating a search index,  the text that can be searched is tokenized into words.  Hamburg is tokenized as a word, but "burg" is not.  I haven't tried it but if the search supports pattern matching *burg should return results with a partial match.  

 

I use "Looking4Cache Pro" app on an iPhone7 ... this app works perfectly giving partial word matches. I have around 170 owned caches - including a series of 30 called "Prestwold Amble #xx" plus a few individual caches with 'Wold' (standalone word) or 'wold' (partial word) as part of the cache name. If I enter "wold" in the search box, it returns the complete 30 series of "Prestwold Amble #..." plus the standalone caches with 'Wold' or 'wold' as a full word or partial work.

 

I would have hoped for geocaching.com's new map search to be as good as my third party app. Perhaps I'm expecting too much from GCHQ .....

[+searcherdog]

The last two comments appeared as I was trying to find a particular partially know geocache name so I had a look.

Searching for either wold or *wold  produced the screen below.

Searching for Prestwold picks up 40 caches.

[+igator210]

I tried. I really did. But after a month I've opted out of the new search map. Its just to clunky to work with. And I rather work with a list and then map them if I so desire. Combining them into one action just got to frustrating to deal with.

One of the worst things was applying new filters. To many clicks going back and forth and hitting apply each time I wanted a change. The search map should be intuitive enough that if I changed a filter it would apply it in real time. Much like the view map when I toggle cache types on and off.

This is the first new feature I've opted out of.

[+Rikitan]

50 minutes ago, igator210 said:

One of the worst things was applying new filters. To many clicks going back and forth and hitting apply each time I wanted a change. The search map should be intuitive enough that if I changed a filter it would apply it in real time. Much like the view map when I toggle cache types on and off.

 

Tip:

You can bookmark the map in the moment, when you have your most frequent filters applied. The link remains static & saved. You can give it a custom name.

This way you can have as many maps bookmarked, as you need. Next time, you can open saved map right away, without need to reapply same filters again. 

You can also share the link with your map view.

 

 

But I agree with your point .. there are quite a lot of unecessary clicks to be done to switch to filters panel back & forth.

 

 

Edited November 21, 2018 by Rikitan
more details added

[+Gillala]

So, as others, I gave it a try, but I finally decided to opt out. The opt-out feedback form was too small, so I'll write more details here. Here my thoughts :
- the new map is MUCH slower than the old one
- The filters are a pain to use. They should apply automatically. The multiple checkboxes are not clear. What if I check "enabled" and "disabled" at the same time ? And it's still very limited. I'd like to show all my caches withOUT corrected coordinates (to know which mysteries I haven't solved yet). I want to filter by distance, by found date...
- When I do a search, I want the result as a complete list (as it is now, with filterable columns over found/placed date, terrain, difficulty, distance...). I may want to map the result, sure. But not always ! Just add a link "map the results", but don't force a direct redirection to the map ! Moreover it's a waste of data. No problem with WiFi, which we don't always have... Please let the result of a search remain a list !
- The 500 caches limit is a little small in my dense cache area
- I miss the PQ. I want to still be able to map the results of my PQs !
- the caches quick overview is still raw. For example, who's the owner (the people who actually create caches and without whom there'd be no game) ? ...
- It's buggy (no more icons for my owned caches. More infos doesn't open the cache page in a new tab. Going back from a cache page, all previously applied filters are forgotten. The search box keeps forgetting what I previously wrote... The caches behind the filter panel are actually found ! The scale map disappeared !!! And different other bugs...)
- The maps choice has drastically dropped. While I don't use it, I see other users complaining about that
- And I might forget some other things
Most of it has already been written in the thread of the forum. All in all, while the new map looks good, except the quick cache view with the latest logs, it's no real improvement over the old one, it's slow and buggy. And the whole scenario from the search page directly to the map is really not fluid. Please reconsider !
Sadly, the new map is now 2 months old and there seems to be no improvement. Users' feedback seems to be mostly ignored. Developers' feedback is mostly inexistent. The last 2-weeks sprint is now 1 month old. Does anyone even read this thread ? Does anyone still work on this project ? Do the developers actually use their map ? Do someone actually test them before they go live ? It unfortunately looks like ever since this agile development started, projects have been started, updated once or twice, then been put back to the backlog to start a new story. And everything finally stays in beta-status and nothing gets finished. What a pity

[+PlasmaWave]

On 11/20/2018 at 1:43 PM, searcherdog said:

The last two comments appeared as I was trying to find a particular partially know geocache name so I had a look.

Searching for either wold or *wold  produced the screen below.

Searching for Prestwold picks up 40 caches.

 

Further to Searchdog's example I set a similar map area then applied a 'Filter' to "cache name" search: (1) a complete word (2) start of a word within the cache name and (3) end of a word within the cache name (i.e. partial word search):

 

(1) Filter by word "Prestwold" = 40 caches found

(2) Filter by partial word "Prest" = 46 caches found

(3) Filter by partial word "wold" = 6 caches found

 

Difference in number between (1) and (2) is understandable as some caches in the area include the word "Prestonbrook" for example - it is the partial word which is not at the beginning that is the issue

 

 

[+Pontiac_CZ]

26 minutes ago, Gillala said:

 The multiple checkboxes are not clear. What if I check "enabled" and "disabled" at the same time ?

Yep, that's what I thought as well - they behave as radio buttons but look like checkboxes. I considered this confusing when I saw it for the first time.

 

EDIT: oh, I have just noticed that I am able to untick both checkboxes so that this setting is not filtered by. That would likely be difficult to achieve with a radio button so now I sort of understand these radio-like checkboxes.

Edited November 22, 2018 by Pontiac_CZ
appending

[+barefootjeff]

1 minute ago, Pontiac_CZ said:

26 minutes ago, Gillala said:

 The multiple checkboxes are not clear. What if I check "enabled" and "disabled" at the same time ?

Yep, that's what I thought as well - they behave as radio buttons but look like checkboxes. I considered this confusing when I saw it for the first time.

 

Yes, you can't select both Enabled and Disabled, as selecting one immediately deselects the other. What's also confusing is that the Enabled checkbox doesn't seem to do anything at all - whether it's selected or not, only enabled caches are displayed. Disabled caches are only shown if Disabled is selected, but then it only shows disabled caches. There doesn't seem to be any combination which will show both.

[+PlasmaWave]

Amen to all that Gillala said - particularly about whether anyone reads and/or considers users (customers!) comments. Doesn't feel like it TBH!

 

NEW BUG (to me) - "HOME" location is lost if map 'centre' is moved when using Windows 10 desktop PC

 

On the first screen I select "Home" and "GO" (no filters involved) ... result:

 

(1) Home location is correctly displayed on the map, together with local caches (owned caches NOT differentiated though, except on Google Mpa)

(2) Move the map a short distance (couple of miles), then click the very useful "home" button ...

(3) "Home" has now moved around 20 miles south of correct home co-ords and remains at this 'new'location even if 'home' button repeatadly clicked

(4) To restore true "Home" location, I need to start again and re-select "Home" by clicking in main search box!

 

 

This BUG seems to have appeared recently - fairly sure the home button worked ok initially. Appears because I'm using a Win 10 LAN Desktop PC without Wi-Fi, GCHQ are picking up some random location after the initial search!

 

 

UPDATE 23/11/2018: Investigating the above issue further, appears that Windows 10 Desktop PCs using LAN connection (i.e. no gps or wi-fi available) defaults your PC's "Location" to that of your ISP/IP location (reading forums, my 20 miles error from true 'home' is modest!). Appears folks have been complaining for years that MS provide no facility to manually set location across all apps/browsers. I found a way to set correct home default location in MS-Maps, that then works fine using Edge browser - GC new map search running on Edge then correctly centers (i.e. same as 'Home') when you click main search box "Your Location" or the 'Home' button on right of map. However, I do not really want to use Edge regularly so guess until MS provide the option to manually set the PC's location, each time the map is moved you have to select "Home" in the main search box rather than clicking the 'home' button on the map. Different interpretations of 'home' are bit confusing.

Edited November 23, 2018 by PlasmaWave
Update

[+NYPaddleCacher]

On 11/20/2018 at 8:02 AM, PlasmaWave said:

 

I use "Looking4Cache Pro" app on an iPhone7 ... this app works perfectly giving partial word matches. I have around 170 owned caches - including a series of 30 called "Prestwold Amble #xx" plus a few individual caches with 'Wold' (standalone word) or 'wold' (partial word) as part of the cache name. If I enter "wold" in the search box, it returns the complete 30 series of "Prestwold Amble #..." plus the standalone caches with 'Wold' or 'wold' as a full word or partial work.

 

I would have hoped for geocaching.com's new map search to be as good as my third party app. Perhaps I'm expecting too much from GCHQ .....

 

If you're getting more cache results when searching for "wold" from the app then on the site that tells me that the app may be searching a different index.  For example, it may be downloading the cache data for caches on a map or a list of caches (your owned caches) then indexing that data into a search index in the app.  

[+Team DEMP]

How is it that still:

• Sort by Distance is still not an option on the main list of caches after a search?
• Filtering options such as Not Found and Not Owned (negative options  ) aren't sticky and need to be set on every search?

Who's managing the priority of what is going in a sprint? Might be better to go deep vs wide in areas that are core to the user experience of find a cache/hide a cache!  

 

Edited November 22, 2018 by Team DEMP

[+PlasmaWave]

5 hours ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

 

If you're getting more cache results when searching for "wold" from the app then on the site that tells me that the app may be searching a different index.  For example, it may be downloading the cache data for caches on a map or a list of caches (your owned caches) then indexing that data into a search index in the app.  

 

L4C found the correct number of caches within the particular folder of the app being searched ... I was just using that as an example. See my second example, which just talks about the new GC map feature - that post is more precise and relevant.

 

The cache name search within the new map "filter" definitely does NOT carry out partial searches within words in the cache name - it is only looking at/from the beginning of each word (finds partials only from the start of words). My L4C app example was to show third party apps can manage partial searches within words, so why can the official website not be equally as cleaver!

[+GeoMonkeyTiger!]

I've been using the new Search tool for about 6 weeks or so now.  I am trying my best to get used to this.

 

I said it in an earlier post, but the dynamically changing map is a bit tough.  If I get a list the way I want it, I don't want to move the map a bit and have it all change.  

I'm also confused on the way results are displayed.  

I searched for a specific cache -- GCP34D.  When I enter that GC code on the search page I access from the pull down menu at the top, it will bring up the cache.  However, if I enter it on the search page on the "map page", the top result is NOT that cache-- it's another one nearby (I assume it was first on the list because it had more favorite points than the one I was looking for).  I included a screenshot.  As an FYI, the GC code clears out of the search box the instant I click on anything, but I can tell you that I entered the GC code in the search box and these were the results.

At a minimum, I should be able to enter a GC code and have the cache I enter come up.  It certainly is what I expect.  It's cumbersome to have to go back to the main page search each time I want to enter a GC code.  In a dream world, there would be a place where you could just enter a GC code and go to the cache page-- no intermediary step.  If I'm typing in a GC code, chances are pretty good I want to see that cache page-- not a map, not a list-- just the cache page.  But, at a minimum, if I type a GC code in the search box, it needs to be the first one on the list.

Thanks for considering this issue.  

[+The Avenue Two]

We have now opted out of the new maps for the last time.

They are so poor compared to the existing set up, in map details, and search facilities, that they are virtually useless!

They should be confined to the bin, and everything left as it is.

Not that HQ seem to take notice of comments, or probably never read them !!

[+MartyBartfast]

The new search is missing :

• the option to select caches with a personal cache note.
• The ability to specify a maximum distance from the search centre, although I suppose that is achieved in some manner by zooming the map.

both of which I use often.

 

By combining the search results and the map into one you've necessarily had to compress the search results listing to fit into the sidebar, this makes it much more difficult to see the details (D/T/Size etc) for a list of caches at a glance.

We've also lost the ability to sort by D/T/Size/Last Found/distance from search centre.

 

Again I use both of these often.

[+MartyBartfast]

The map only has the option for "Geocaching", "Google Road" or "Google Satellite" maps, all the other map styles available on the main map are missing - I use the leaflet maps and OpenStreetMap normally.

 

[+MartyBartfast]

The display of caches when zooming out seems bizarre to me. Once I zoom out beyond level 12 the map starts dropping caches from the centre of my zoom area, such that in the example below I've zoomed out to level 7, centered on Southern England, and the map is now only showing caches in Belgium,Holland!

 

 

 

[+MartyBartfast]

When I chose to opt out I wasn't presented with a feedback form, it's only by reading replies in this thread that I discovered there was such a thing.
If the feedback form isn't working then there may be many people who have been unable to give their reasons for opting out, hence giving TPTB a false sense that everything in the garden is rosy !

 

 

[+R&BSerras]

You need some old map filters, such as:
-Hide placed by me
-Of a particular player
-From a county / state / country

[+thebruce0]

There may be a fundamental conceptual confusion to the method the map displays results. If the search returns a maximum amount of results based on a regional boundary (distance from centerpoint or map edge) and can be sorted, then as the boundary of possible results changes - or the sort order changes when only a subset of possible results are returned (like hitting the max of 1000), the actual returned results will be consistently changing.

 

eg: Top 100 Favourited caches within 50 km of center. If there are 500 caches within 50km, you'll get the top 100 in that area.  Move the map, or increase the boundary, and the results may change very quickly, and so when mapped, caches that previously were displayed may now get hidden if newly available caches qualify for the top 100.

 

Or, change the sort order (say by placed date), and suddenly the random selection of 100 caches shown on the map in a 50km radius becomes a completely different selection of caches.

 

This visual representation of result data is fundamentally different than the mechanics of the original map. And that's not overly clear the way map is currently set up, which can very easily be confusing to many people - but not due to a bug, per se.

 

This is why the list view of search results (especially if capped at a maximum result set view of less than all potential matches) is of utmost importance as a manner of searching, while browsing a map just as a general user experience, is much harder to incorporate as a visual representation of those capped results, and best kept as a limitless filter view (like the current map).

[+dprovan]

I'm still using the new map. I do agree with a lot of the complaints, but so far the glitches haven't gotten in my way too much, and I do see some advantages that I want to see if I can get used to. (It helps that I've only ever used the google maps, so I don't have a problem with the other map layers being missing.)

 

One thing that's starting to annoy me, though, is that right click on a cache icon brings up a menu that doesn't include "open cache in another tab". I'd accept that as just a missing thing, except that the menu does offer the option of blindly logging the cache, encouraging finders to bypass the cache description. As if people don't already focus too much on the +1 and ignore what makes each cache unique.

[+barefootjeff]

18 minutes ago, dprovan said:

I'm still using the new map. I do agree with a lot of the complaints, but so far the glitches haven't gotten in my way too much, and I do see some advantages that I want to see if I can get used to. (It helps that I've only ever used the google maps, so I don't have a problem with the other map layers being missing.)

 

One thing that's starting to annoy me, though, is that right click on a cache icon brings up a menu that doesn't include "open cache in another tab". I'd accept that as just a missing thing, except that the menu does offer the option of blindly logging the cache, encouraging finders to bypass the cache description. As if people don't already focus too much on the +1 and ignore what makes each cache unique.

 

Just about everything with this new search tool seems to discourage people from looking at the full cache page. Everywhere we're told to log the cache, download the GPX file or add it to a list, the Description/Hint panel leaves out the attributes, waypoints and Short Description content, but if you click on the More Info button to go to the cache page, it wipes away any filters that were being used and leaves the map zoomed in to maximum on top of that cache.

[+MaxB on the River]

I was a beta tester for the new maps and I told HQ that there were major issues with the search criteria - particularly events.  I realize that I use my computer for planning my geocaching and not any phone app.  In the old criteria after you got your list, you could sort events by date.  That way you could plan for a future date or even find out what was available today and how far away.  This method doesn't allow you to do that, you have to open each event to determine the date - and show past event dates that haven't been archived.  And they aren't even listed by closest to home. 

You could also sort the list by favorite points, etc.

Today when I have trie to use the map, it doesn't even give the normal geocaching map with streets, I have to go in and change to Google maps to even see names of cities or places.

 

This may be nice for phone apps, but it is very inconvenient for those of us who use our computers to plan our geocaching activities.  I will opt out, but will be very irrigated if I have to do this on a regular basis , like is the case when logging a cache.

[+GeoMonkeyTiger!]

I continue to try to use this new search functionality. I would like present some more questions/concerns...

 

1. Maybe this is just an issue for me, but I live in the U.S., in the state of Georgia.  I often do searches for the state (For example, I want to see all the unfound Earthcaches or Wherigos).  In the main search box (The one you get when you click "Play", then "search") if I type Georgia, there is one that shows as "Georgia, United States - Regional Search" (See "Georgia Old").  When I enter "Georgia" in the new search box from the map, there are two "Georgia's" listed without further details (See "Georgia New).  One is my home state.  The other is near Russia (and doesn't have near the caches that the U.S. State has).  I never know which is which?  Can details be added?
2. For states that don't have that issue (Like South Carolina), the interface seems to work intermittently.  If I type "South Carolina", it zooms in so far that no caches show up.  If I zoom out, then I get more caches, but they don't stop at the South Carolina border.  Other times I make that entry, I get only South Carolina caches.  I'm not sure what is happening, if it is an error on my part or a bug in the process.
3. Speaking of searching by location, every time I search by a location, the zoom is so far in that no caches are displayed.  I ALWAYS have to zoom out to find things.  This includes searching my "Home" location and I have a cache less than a mile from my house.  
4. There seems to be a real lack of detail on the new maps?  I left the default one ("Geocaching") and it doesn't even show street names (except for some of the most major highways).  The "Map1" picture shows the "old" map highlighted on an area.  Even zoomed out further, you can see many street names.  
5. And forget street names?  You can't see streets.  If you look at the screenshots I've added for "Zoom Old" vs. "Zoom New".  You can see the highlighted cache ("COUNT of Monte Cristo") on the Old map is right off a road (the posted coordinates are at the entrance to the park).  ON the New map, there are no roads or the park visible at all?
6. Also, on the maps, what happened to all the great trail maps (one of the best things I've seen on the geocaching website and app)?  If you look at some of my caches on the "Trail Map Old" screen and compare them to the "Trail Map New" screen, you can see the difference in trails.  These are critical if I'm home trying to plan a cache trip....
7. It is very confusing that there is no distinction on the map between caches I own vs. other people's caches. In both Map2 and Trail Map Old, those are my caches highlighted/zoomed and there's no easy way to tell (especially without even street names). If I switch to Google maps, the icons change to the old "Star" to indicate they are mine.
8. Other people have mentioned this, but the filters reset too easily.  When I have filters on, if I click on a cache and then attempt to go back, the filters seem to clear much too often.  For example, I had a filter for "Earthcaches Only".  When I clicked on an Earthcache for more details and then returned to the map, all caches were displaying.
9. It's great that you've added the ability to collapse the side-bar menu.  However, mine seems to collapse randomly, and at times I don't want it to....
10. Limiting the cache lists to 500 and defaulting to those with the most favorite points is VERY confusing.  I live near Atlanta and we have significant cache density here.  According to the "old" search function, I have 568 caches within 10 miles of my home.  So this means in the current view, 68 caches within a 10 mile radius of home won't be displayed.  Which ones?  I guess the ones with fewer favorite points.  I can make some changes, but this is VERY cumbersome.  It would be preferable if the map displayed all of the caches and then only listed 500.  

 

Finally, I hope you will answer a question I asked before.  Is this new "Search" function meant to replace only the old search function?  Or is it meant to replace the old search function AND the map?  On the current web page, they are two different links ("Map" and "Search").  It's not clear to me if this is mean to replace both.  That has some impact on comments...

 

Thank you for your considerations.

 

[+MNTA]

Anyone figure out a way to display (preferably list) found caches that have been archived.  

[+thebruce0]

MNTA - not outside your MyFinds PQ, or showing only your own finds on the map, iirc. Or perhaps PGC. The standard searches only show active (or disabled) listings.  It would be quite a task to also search for matches amongst the 18 years of archived listings in any particular location.

[brendanjw]

Hi all,

 

I’m reading through the forum and and wanted to jump in to explain what we are currently working on.  In addition to working through performance issues (we are always looking at ways to make it snappier and faster) and fixing bugs, we have the identified the following big-ish pieces that remain.

 

• Multi-select list view  - This provides a way to select specific caches from the maps’s list view, and add them to list

• List and Map - This is probably the most requested change in the forum. We plan to decouple the search results list from the map, so that from the initial search on the home page, you will have the option to view the search results on a list or on the map (this is similar to how the current map/search works)

• Search World - Editing and optimizing the zoom level so that we honor searches that require a zoom level to show the entire world.

• Radius - Adding a radial search option.  The use case is “search X miles from this location” where this location is where you are currently located.

• Filters and Sort - Continuing to add filters and sorting options that exist on the old map, our goal is full parity.

 

We’ll have an update coming shortly, and I’ll provide detailed release notes regarding the features and bugs fixes when we do.

 

Also, just an acknowledgment that some of these items listed above require more than a sprint’s worth of work.

 

Best,

Brendan

 

[+dprovan]

3 hours ago, brendanjw said:

List and Map - This is probably the most requested change in the forum. We plan to decouple the search results list from the map, so that from the initial search on the home page, you will have the option to view the search results on a list or on the map (this is similar to how the current map/search works)

With all the criticism -- thanks for taking it so well! -- I want to mention that one of the reasons I like this new map and am still using it is that it is so nice for a search to jump right to the map since that's almost always what I want. I'm hoping I still have that feature even as you react to people that miss the list. I do sometimes want the list, and I understand the people that miss it, but given a choice between the old approach -- only a list first and then having to take a second step to put the results on the map -- and the new approach of a map with a somewhat limited list on the side, I like the new approach better. In other words, for me, at least, the solution to the request to have the old list results would be a button in the map view that let's them jump to the old list view, i.e., the reverse of what we had to do before this new search.

[+thebruce0]

Personally, if I want the map view, I'll start on the map page via my bookmark. If I want the result list view, I'll start with the list search page.

Now IF either view is an option, I'd prefer to have a button for either result view (or a form toggle?).  I don't think that a search page with no visible map (yet) should auto-push to the map page, but making a one-click option to view the results on a map is certainly desireable.

[+GeoMonkeyTiger!]

24 minutes ago, dprovan said:

With all the criticism -- thanks for taking it so well! -- I want to mention that one of the reasons I like this new map and am still using it is that it is so nice for a search to jump right to the map since that's almost always what I want. I'm hoping I still have that feature even as you react to people that miss the list. I do sometimes want the list, and I understand the people that miss it, but given a choice between the old approach -- only a list first and then having to take a second step to put the results on the map -- and the new approach of a map with a somewhat limited list on the side, I like the new approach better. In other words, for me, at least, the solution to the request to have the old list results would be a button in the map view that let's them jump to the old list view, i.e., the reverse of what we had to do before this new search.

I'm not necessarily opposed to the map, and don't even mind jumping straight to it.  My biggest issues with the map are

1. Lack of ability to effectively sort results by more than Favorites, and age (Note: Brendan's note mentions the team is looking to fix that).
2. The dynamic-ness of it.  When I run a list, well, I want that list to be "the" list.  In the current world, every time I move the map, the list changes.  This makes things VERY confusing and hard to work with.  

If the current map/list had better sorting options and was static (or static/dynamic could be toggled), I think it would actually be awesome!  Like you, I often find myself quickly clicking on "Map View" to get a sense of where things are!

[+dprovan]

1 hour ago, thebruce0 said:

Personally, if I want the map view, I'll start on the map page via my bookmark. If I want the result list view, I'll start with the list search page.

I guess I don't know what you mean by "list search page". I'm just using the search on the main geocaching.com page, and I'd rather that went to a map, at least if I'm not given a choice about where it goes first. Is that the page you're talking about, and, if so, can I win the argument by just calling that the "map search page"?

 

Anyway, I thought I made it clear it was a matter of opinion. Although, to be honest, I'm not really sure what people find so precious about the list in general. Sure, if I'm looking for a specific cache, then seeing only 10 or 20 caches is useful, but normally when I'm searching, I'm expecting hundreds of caches to match what I'm looking for because I'm almost always asking some variation of the question, "What's in this area?"

 

1 hour ago, GeoMonkeyTiger! said:

I'm not necessarily opposed to the map, and don't even mind jumping straight to it.  My biggest issues with the map are...

As I tried to stress, I like the new map based search results more, but I agree there are also problems with it.

 

1 hour ago, GeoMonkeyTiger! said:

The dynamic-ness of it.  When I run a list, well, I want that list to be "the" list.  In the current world, every time I move the map, the list changes.  This makes things VERY confusing and hard to work with.

I think this is a valid point, but I can't help but think about all the past complaints about the old map because it had exactly this feature that you find missing in this map: people used to complain because they'd do a search, then go to the map to look at it, but it turned out the map they jumped to was outside the control of the search. I'm not saying the old way was right, I'm just pointing out that there are many ways to look at what a map's displaying.

[+thebruce0]

14 minutes ago, dprovan said:

1 hour ago, thebruce0 said:

Personally, if I want the map view, I'll start on the map page via my bookmark. If I want the result list view, I'll start with the list search page.

I guess I don't know what you mean by "list search page". I'm just using the search on the main geocaching.com page, and I'd rather that went to a map, at least if I'm not given a choice about where it goes first. Is that the page you're talking about, and, if so, can I win the argument by just calling that the "map search page"?

I didn't think this was an argument.

Yes, by "list search page" I mean the search page that produces the list.

 

15 minutes ago, dprovan said:

Anyway, I thought I made it clear it was a matter of opinion.

Was I not clear that I wasn't saying you were wrong? I did say "personally". Your opinion is absolutely valid, as I hope mine was.

 

16 minutes ago, dprovan said:

Although, to be honest, I'm not really sure what people find so precious about the list in general. Sure, if I'm looking for a specific cache, then seeing only 10 or 20 caches is useful, but normally when I'm searching, I'm expecting hundreds of caches to match what I'm looking for because I'm almost always asking some variation of the question, "What's in this area?"

Not every search is "What's in this area". Sometimes I don't care about visual location, and just want to see the first few matches. The list view also provides a much more structured output of more data that may be more interesting to me than the pin on the map.  As in my examples in my previous post, if it's one or the other, then I'd prefer to go to the map search page, or the list search page, and I'd love if the list search page continued to include the option to view the list results plotted on the map (map this view).

 

I don't think that a search form that implies non-graphical/map representation of data should immediately jump to a map view (unless expressly disclaimed), but having say either a "Map results" button along with a "List results" button, or just a single "Search" button with a checkbox toggle for plotting on the map, I think would be the best compromise between result display formats and usability.  Neither concept has to assume that it is the preferred view.  The fact I generally prefer a list doesn't trump the fact that you may prefer the map, nor vice versa. So, why not a UI that reflects that?

[+Magic Traveler's]

Like others have already said ( I would like to reinforce their comments).

 

I use the feature on the 'old maps page' where you can access the small bar at the bottom left of the map to carry out various functions. These included - Enable location info tool - Hide caches - Enable route tool - Go to home location - Configure geocaching map enhancements.

 

Also, the small distance bar allows you to gauge distance fairly accurately. 

 

Teh enable location tool is the most useful to me as it allows me to plot a car parking place near to GZ where the CO has chosen not to provide one

[+hal-an-tow]

3 hours ago, Magic Traveler's said:

Like others have already said ( I would like to reinforce their comments).

 

I use the feature on the 'old maps page' where you can access the small bar at the bottom left of the map to carry out various functions. These included - Enable location info tool - Hide caches - Enable route tool - Go to home location - Configure geocaching map enhancements.

 

Also, the small distance bar allows you to gauge distance fairly accurately. 

 

Teh enable location tool is the most useful to me as it allows me to plot a car parking place near to GZ where the CO has chosen not to provide one

 

That feature is not a Groundspeak product but an excellent greasemonkey script add on . See here and here . It has not been updated for a while and only appears to work intermittently (sometimes a dozen refreshes of the map before it shows for me) but the effort to get it to show is worthwhile as the tools it adds are far more useful than the grouundspeak map alone when planning a walk. I have no idea if it works at all with the new map.

 

On 11/28/2018 at 7:50 AM, MNTA said:

Anyone figure out a way to display (preferably list) found caches that have been archived.  

 Yep,  easy. Use GSAK, download a my finds PQ. Search for found, archived.

 

I find the Groundspeak search ineffective and the map (without GME) slow glitchy and uninformative, If I want to find a cache by name it is faster and less annoying to use google, if I want to map caches I use GSAK(dual display/map nearest leaflet) which shows me cache names, status and old style cache icons with pointers instead of blobs. And it does it fast .

 

I simply want efficient tools to make my cache hunt planning easier, GSAK and GME are models of software developers giving cachers what they actually ask for .Without them I suspect I'd have stopped caching long ago due to frustration with the poor search and mapping on offer from GS.

 

[+MNTA]

5 hours ago, hal-an-tow said:

 

 Yep,  easy. Use GSAK, download a my finds PQ. Search for found, archived.

 

I find the Groundspeak search ineffective and the map (without GME) slow glitchy and uninformative, If I want to find a cache by name it is faster and less annoying to use google, if I want to map caches I use GSAK(dual display/map nearest leaflet) which shows me cache names, status and old style cache icons with pointers instead of blobs. And it does it fast .

 

I simply want efficient tools to make my cache hunt planning easier, GSAK and GME are models of software developers giving cachers what they actually ask for .Without them I suspect I'd have stopped caching long ago due to frustration with the poor search and mapping on offer from GS.

 

 

Unfortunately I'm a mac user and am no up for installing an emulator just to use one tool.

 

Can't wait till the list feature returns. I really miss that.

 

Ideally why can't we get some of these features directly from the main web page.

[+heartradio]

Unfortunately I can't say I'm a fan of this new map and search. I tried it for a bit and then opted out, for a few reasons. I would like to be able to access the LIST and MAP separately as before. I noticed that there were a couple of options on the new sidebar list that you couldn't sort by: placed by date, and last found date. 

As an avid walker who lives in countryside with complicated footpaths, I like to be able to use the Greasemonkey plugin so I can use Ordnance Survey maps, or at least have Open Street Maps. I'm afraid the 'Geocaching' map doesn't suffice for the routes I plan. 

[brendanjw]

Hi all!

 

I hope you are all doing well. Here’s some information regarding today’s update:

 

User-Intent Search

 

Here’s what this is, and what it means for you:

 

When you as a geocacher search by location, say for example, ‘Germany’ and after viewing the map, decide to pan the map so that now ‘Ireland’ is in the viewport of your map, we will surface a small banner image with the message to ‘Search the area’.  

 

By clicking ‘Search this area’, this will launch a new search for that new location, in this case ‘Ireland’.

Not only does this provide choice and intent to the geocacher, but it also prevents unnecessary search service requests, thereby providing a more responsive map, and a better experience for the geocacher.

 

New Map Settings:

 

We’ve added an additional setting allowing the geocacher to set the number of caches shown on the map.

When on the New Map, you can access this setting from the drop down option next to your profile image.

 

Select ‘Map settings’:

 

Here’s the new ‘Map settings’ modal view:

The default setting is 500 caches, but you can move the slider and set the number of caches that you would like to see on the map.

 

In cases when the geocacher has not set their Home Location, we’ll display this modal view (see below), allowing the player to both set the number of caches visible, as well as the geocacher’s Home Location:

 

Ability to Map Lists to the New Map:

Mapping your list from the List Hub now loads those caches onto the New Map.

In this example, I selected the ‘near my house’ list, then selected ‘Map List’.

 

And here are the results of mapping that list, now on the New Map:

 

Lastly, here’s another recap of what we the team is working on, and what you will be seeing in the coming weeks and months.

• Multi-select list view  - This provides a way to select specific caches from the map’s list view, and add them to list.

• List and Map - This is probably the most requested change in the forum. We plan to decouple the search results list from the map, so that from the initial search on the home page, you will have the option to view the search results on a list or on the map.

• Search World - Editing and optimizing the zoom level so that we honor searches that require a zoom level to show the entire world.

• Filters and Sort - Continuing to add filters and sorting options that exist on the old map, our goal is full parity.

 

Best,

Brendan

[+Max and 99]

I'm sure I'm just a little slow at understanding this...

In the past, when I panned a map to a new area the caches automatically displayed. Now I have to tell it to display them? I know I'm missing something obvious with the new map.

[+searcherdog]

3 hours ago, Max and 99 said:

I'm sure I'm just a little slow at understanding this...

In the past, when I panned a map to a new area the caches automatically displayed. Now I have to tell it to display them? I know I'm missing something obvious with the new map.

I think I am missing the obvious too!

So I select a place and get the map, then I have to tell it to search for caches. 

I pick a cache and have to click to get the side panel then click again for "more info" to get anything useful.

But this doesn't open in a separate window so I can look at a few cache pages together.

Then I have to go back to look at the next cache so I go back a page which changes to another zoom level.

So another back to return to the zoom level I want and the "search this area" box has vanished and also most of the caches which were shown before.

I have to move the map to get the box to re-appear and then search again to get the caches back onto the map.

The map is also very slow to move.

 

brendanjw states "Not only does this provide choice and intent to the geocacher, but it also prevents unnecessary search service requests, thereby providing a more responsive map, and a better experience for the geocacher."

I used to be able to find the caches I wanted within a few clicks and still have a map to view.

Now I have something like 8 clicks to see one cache and no map.

Sorry brendanjw but it's not more responsive and is certainly not a better experience for me. If I were faced with this as a new cacher I would be put off.

 

 

 

 

 

[+dprovan]

We've already talked about the fact that you can't right click on a cache icon on the map to get to an option to bring up the cache page in another tab. I just discovered that I can't get to the cache description in another tab from the cache list in the sidebar, either. It's the same deal: right click gives me a menu that includes just jumping directly to logging the cache, but no way to get to the cache page. I had to select the cache first, bring up the cache in the margin, and then go to the description from there. Then after I looked at the cache, I had to click the left arrow to go back to the list in the sidebar.

 

By the way, while I was just now playing around with this, I ran into the "Search this area" button for the first time. When Brendan explained it in his posting earlier today, I thought it made sense, but when I experienced it I discovered that it's as confusing as heck. Because I started with a larger map, I'd run into the 500 cache limit, so when I panned around and zoomed in, I saw only the handful of caches in that much smaller area that had made it into that top 500 in the much larger area I had in the original map search. My mind is not fully around the 500 cache limit and what it means to what I'm seeing in the map, but after I moved the map around, the 500 cache limit was completely out of my thoughts until I stopped to try to explain to myself why was only seeing a few of the caches I knew I should be seeing. At least the "search this area" button was there, as advertised, so I could push it and see the caches I knew I should see, but I seriously doubt I would have understood was that button did if I didn't read the forums. I know from an implementation point of view, "search this area" makes sense, but from a user's point of view, it might be better to call it something like "stop hiding caches from me" cause conceptually, that's exactly what I was asking the map to do.

[+Hynz]

10 hours ago, brendanjw said:

By clicking ‘Search this area’, this will launch a new search for that new location, in this case ‘Ireland’.

Not only does this provide choice and intent to the geocacher, but it also prevents unnecessary search service requests, thereby providing a more responsive map, and a better experience for the geocacher.

That's an improvement but I think it is essential to have a feedback if there are caches omitted in the current view because of the number restrictions.

 

Related: If I search on a large area (with omitted caches) and zoom in I must push "Search this area" again to be sure omitted caches appear on the map.

[+igator210]

13 hours ago, Max and 99 said:

I'm sure I'm just a little slow at understanding this...

In the past, when I panned a map to a new area the caches automatically displayed. Now I have to tell it to display them? I know I'm missing something obvious with the new map.

 

One of the problems is that Groundspeak has been using the term Map, when really they mean Search Map. these are two completely separate areas of the website, and by using the term generically, it is a bit confusing.

The Map still works as it always has. This is the one that has all the different cache types on the side. As you pan around the map, caches are constantly being loaded.

The new Search Map was doing the same thing, but it was a pain in the butt, since it caused you to lose what you were searching for. Plus, it was slow. The new Search Map was the one with all the filters on the side.

[+monsterbox]

17 hours ago, brendanjw said:

And here are the results of mapping that list, now on the New Map:

 

 

 

Hmm, I'm getting a different map... It's the "normal" map without the left menu. And there's only light flaw: The ruler stays where it should be with the menu being visible. Besides that it seems to work. But sorry, still preferring the normal map and the PQ view. Easier to switch as the menu that for directly is included in the map.

 

[+dprovan]

3 hours ago, igator210 said:

One of the problems is that Groundspeak has been using the term Map, when really they mean Search Map. these are two completely separate areas of the website, and by using the term generically, it is a bit confusing.

Good point, but I think it's much more fundamental that just the term they use. While I know what you're saying is true, I still have no idea what takes me to which map, and the two map types look the same with only minor variations.

 

Besides, are you sure this situation of having two different maps is permanent? I'm not sure they've said anything one way or the other, but my impression is that this is The Map and it's only a matter of time before it replaces the old map. After all, the old map had "search capabilities" with its filters and ability to map PQs, so it's easy for me to see this new map as just the next generation, not something entirely different.

[+Cunigunda]

I got the new map function a couple of days ago, but I opted out due to the following reasons (I ran out of space to write it all in the form).

 

It updates too slow. 

 

Caches are placed on wrong spot on the map after updating the map. 

 

Mystery caches that I own: I have corrected the coordinates to easily remember the hiding spot, but still they are shown by their original coordinates. However, I can only see the caches that have the final within the map that is shown on my screen. Therefore, it looks like my caches disapear when I move the map. 

 

What I want is a toggle function to turn on and off the corrected coordinates. And when I turn it off, I want to be able to see the cache on the map even though the final is outside my zooming of the map. 

Edited December 5, 2018 by Cunigunda

[+thebruce0]

26 minutes ago, dprovan said:

After all, the old map had "search capabilities" with its filters and ability to map PQs, so it's easy for me to see this new map as just the next generation, not something entirely different.

 

Yeah it's more like the old map had layering abilities you could toggle on/off while the new map has search result plotting abilities. The usage of the modes is quite different, and I don't think that's very apparent to people.

 

The old map has search result abilities too when, say previewing PQ results - that plots a select list of cache listings on the same base map - but people are aware they're now in a different 'mode'. The new map conflates these modes, so it's not clear that performing a search isn't a view of a sort of global 'layer' of all matches, but a sticky plotting of a limited list of results, necessarily meaning not every cache may be displayed.

 

Couple of suggestions that might make things more apparent:

- for radial or bounding region searches, plot a circle at the maximum radius or lines at the boundaries (sure, why not even country/state/county boundaries?)

- if there are ANY caches not shown because of the maximum returned results (eg, only showing 500 of 1234 results), stick a disclaimer/alert in the map frame brightly declaring that not all relevant caches are being shown (like the welcome/what's new tab in the corner)

Edited December 5, 2018 by thebruce0