Release Notes (Website: new Search/Map) - January 17, 2019

[+geopuzzelaar]

After trying the new map, I have a few things that are missing or should be changed.  The new map has a lot of potential, but is still too rough to be considered an improvement.

 

Things that I like:

• The filters are really useful and a great addition to the map
• The new send-to-garmin feature is a nice comeback
• The cache overview is a great addition

Things that could be improved:

• Searching the map takes too many clicks, because of the 'search this area' button. I agree with the rest of the topic that this should be done automatically, or this should be offered as an option
  • For the same reason, there should be no reason for a 'search this world' button.
• The filters require too many clicks compared to the old situation. It would be a lot better if it could apply the changes automatically to the map, similar to the old map.
• The filter view should the default view instead of the list with caches, with the option to switch back to the list. The map is not a replacement for the search feature, so the filters make more sense to me as default.
• The cache overview should also show the coordinates of the cache, the CO and the date placed. For example event caches do not show the date of the event.
• There should be an option to map pocket queries, this was definitely my most used feature from the old map
• There should also be an option to create a PQ out of the the filtered results
• As said before by others, there are some issues in firefox when selecting a cache limit of 1000. The map will not load and instead show a white screen
• The Cache Status and Corrected coordinates filters have some counter-intuitive behavior, which confused me at first use. When no option is selected, it behaves like all options are selected. But when one box is selected, only that filter is shown. This is especially confusing as the type selection does not have this behavior, where if no box is selected nothing will be shown. My suggestion is to change this to the same behavior as the type selection, with a toggle to select or deselect all fields.
• The log geocache and more info buttons should open in a new tab
• Too much whitespace in the list view, filter view and cache overview!

Edited January 22, 2019 by geopuzzelaar

[+thomfre]

10 minutes ago, The A-Team said:

This is something I had thought about, but forgot to mention in my list of issues. In the new map, one needs to shift their focus completely away from where they clicked to see the result of their click. This might be acceptable when you're only clicking on a few and/or you know what you're looking for, but it's very user-unfriendly if you're browsing and clicking on a bunch of caches.

 

Personally, given the demonstrated shortcomings with trying to squeeze all the necessary information into the sidebar (hint: it can't be done), I'd prefer to see the list in the sidebar stay as-is, and for cache clicks to open a popup within the map area like the old map does rather than display in the sidebar. This popup could maybe be made slightly larger to accommodate a modified set of data compared to before (but still include things like type, D/T, owner, placed date, FPs, etc.), but still rely on users opening up the listing page to get all the relevant details like the description, attributes, and logs in the necessary context like they do now on the old map. This way, you still have the list in the sidebar for sorting and quick scanning, clicking on a cache in the map area doesn't require a shift of focus and gives a better summary of the clicked cache, and we don't have a limited set of data from cache listings displayed out-of-context in the sidebar. A side-benefit is that there's less data transfer required, because the data required for the popup will be much less than what's displayed in the sidebar, which is good for both users and HQ.

Yes! Besides the general slowness and lack of ability to handle more than 1000 caches, this is the hardest thing on the new map for me. I love high screen resolutions, and the new map force me to use the mouse (and shift focus) a lot more. This is making the new map hard and strenuous to use.

 

I have temporary solved it by making my own cache popup in a user script. But that shouldn't be necessary...

[+cache_n_out]

Love that I can switch between geocache map, google street, and google satellite with 1 click.   Need OSM opencycle maps though.

 

Be sweet if you can get google street view on there too (even if you aren't showing caches).  I like I what to go here - where do I park?

[+tazclimber]

Quote

Tried several caches. NO blue banner on any of them. How d I get it to try it?

 

[+K13]

3 hours ago, thomfre said:

Please don't take away the most valuable feature you have.

 

If only I could upvote this part 1000 times!  The 'Old Map' must remain!

[+TimmetjeTim]

3 hours ago, thomfre said:

https://www.geocaching.com/blog/2019/01/one-map-endless-inspiration/

 

Dear Groundspeak,

 

This must be the worst sentence I have read in a very long while. Everyone I talk to fears losing the old map, and many of us depend on that map to plan our geocaching outings. It's fast. It's (almost) dependable. It shows way more than 1000 caches. It works with several different map tiles. This has nothing to do with not liking change. This has to do with not wanting to lose one of the best features of geocaching.com.

 

The new map is great for mapping PQs, searches and lists. But it's nowhere near being able to replace the old map.

 

Please don't take away the most valuable feature you have.

 

In the same post under "What’s next?":

Quote

Once we’re confident the community is happy with the new map experience, we will work towards retiring the old map.

 

I'm sure the new map will be handled like the updated dashboard and profile pages, Groundspeak has not removed the old versions yet as they are still working on improving the updated versions. From what I can tell, the old map will only be removed after all the current functionality has been ported to the new map. I think this was also mentioned in the Inside HQ podcast, I definitely recommend listening to it if you want to hear more about the map.

 

The new map has a lot of potential, I am using it on a daily basis and it's snappy and has a lot of functionality already. It is still missing some stuff right now (which is totally logical for a beta), but that will undoubtedly be added in a future update. To be realistic, we can’t just have the same map there forever. I'm excited about the development and can't wait for the next update!

[+K13]

You say it's snappy.  Others say its sluggish.

 

It is slow for me, and those panels on the side are almost as annoying as the fact that a new page doesn't open when I click on a cache. Those are two of my (and a great many others) biggest issues with this new experience.

[+Michaelcycle]

As I mentioned in my response when I opted out of the new map the deletion of the "search by personal cache note" feature is a major mistake. That is where I note challenges that I qualify for or the things I have yet to do to meet a challenge. It is where I store partial solutions or ideas on mystery caches. It is where I put information I have gleaned from reading prior finders logs. There is no other convenient way to keep this information attached to each cache and I often plan puzzle solving evenings and geocaching trips around this data. 

As it IS a feature of the old search map why get rid of it???

[+Isebar]

I know the following lines will be considered heresy by  some...

For all those, who are not satisfied with the map and other options Groundspeak supplies, there is a Tampermonkey script (yes, I'm aware of problems and issues related to scripts)

"GC little Helper", which might be wortth looking into. It also gives you additional very useful functions for every day use for geocachers, which the official pages lack.

It has been developed by a few German geocachers. see https://geoclub.de/forum/viewtopic.php?f=117&t=80208 for those who read German.

 

Happy Caching to all of you

 

Edited January 23, 2019 by Isebar
double signature

[+Ruko2010]

Bug: German translation of the Map Button floats out of its Limits:

 

One other Question. If the search hits the cache limit, how are the caches selected that are displayed?

- 1000 from Center?

- 1000 sorted by the current sort filter (i.e. if sorting is by favorites, will the 1000 highest ranked caches in the search area shown)?

[+thomfre]

6 hours ago, TimmetjeTim said:

I'm sure the new map will be handled like the updated dashboard and profile pages, Groundspeak has not removed the old versions yet as they are still working on improving the updated versions. From what I can tell, the old map will only be removed after all the current functionality has been ported to the new map.

My fear is that they will handle it like the BBCode vs Markdown in logs. When HQ think they have added all we need, they'll retire the old map.

 

The old map use a rather ingenious trick to be able to show all caches (kudos to the original architect, designers and developers!). There's no way the new map can mimic that functionality, without copying over and using the same trick (which would improve the new map a lot).

 

Quote

I think this was also mentioned in the Inside HQ podcast, I definitely recommend listening to it if you want to hear more about the map.

Yes it was. I've listened to that episode, and wanted to believe so hard that HQ could change their mind about retiring the old map. I still hope, but fear the worst.

 

Quote

The new map has a lot of potential, I am using it on a daily basis and it's snappy and has a lot of functionality already.

 

The new map is slow, and very hard to use. Especially when moving around. Having to click "Search this area" makes it so hard, that I made a user script to click it for me.

Quote

 It is still missing some stuff right now (which is totally logical for a beta), but that will undoubtedly be added in a future update.

I'm not arguing against that. What I see as a problem, is the complete lack of acknowledgement of numerous issues that's been talked about since this new map was first mentioned in a release note here. Issues that greatly reduce the usability, but that should have been very easy to fix (I know they are, because I've also fixed some of them with my user script).

 

But this is also a problem with how the new map works, compared to the old. The old use a separate tile layer for the caches, making loading and displaying them really smooth and fast. The new map works in a totally different way, which won't allow the display of many caches. The map is the single most important resource on geocaching.com to me, and the old map here is the only resource where I can view caches all over the world - in one view. That's not possible in the new map, unless HQ change their mind and implement the old tile layer (please, HQ, please!).

 

I do not want to lose functionality I use on a daily basis, and functionality that can't be found elsewhere.

 

On top of this, moving all information to the sidebar makes the map a lot harder to use for me. As mentioned both by myself and others before, it require a focus shift every time a cache is clicked. And I have to use the mouse a lot more (which is not good).

 

Quote

To be realistic, we can’t just have the same map there forever. I'm excited about the development and can't wait for the next update!

 

To be realistic, we can have the same map. The new map is still based on a combination of Leaflet and Google Maps - two JavaScript mapping libraries. The exact same libraries that run on the old map. The Google map tiles are the exact same. And the vector tiles, that many people struggle with (because it's considerably slower for everyone with older hardware), can very easily be loaded in Leaflet on the old map as well.

[+thomfre]

1 hour ago, Isebar said:

For all those, who are not satisfied with the map and other options Groundspeak supplies, there is a Tampermonkey script (yes, I'm aware of problems and issues related to scripts)

"GC little Helper", which might be wortth looking into. It also gives you additional very useful functions for every day use for geocachers, which the official pages lack.

It has been developed by a few German geocachers. see https://geoclub.de/forum/viewtopic.php?f=117&t=80208 for those who read German.

 

As far as I can see, GClH doesn't support the new map...

[+Ruko2010]

19 minutes ago, thomfre said:

As far as I can see, GClH doesn't support the new map...

Hi thomfre, you are right we don't support the new map at the moment, because it was in an alpha state until this post. We would not invest work in something that may change or never be deployed. We are now aware, that the map is coming and we are currently collecting features, what we should implement in the new map. You can be part of it, if you want: https://github.com/2Abendsegler/GClh/issues

 

[+PlasmaWave]

The original thread ("Release Notes (Website: Progressive release, new Search/Map) - September 14, 2018") contained all the issues raised so far in this new thread PLUS a whole lot more.

 

Three questions:

1. Did GCHQ keep a note of issues / concerns / requests raised in the old thread and continuing to do so in this new thread?

2. Why was the old thread closed? Hopefully not an attempt to sidestep cachers genuine concerns!

3. The same issues come up over and over again, therefore must be legitimate concerns - it would be really helpful and reassuring if users had access to a list of items the developers are working through based on feedback. No one expects instant fixes but we need to know that concerns will be addressed eventually.

 

As there is little feedback here from GCHQ, we have no idea whether or not our feedback is being taken into consideration by the developers.

[+terratin]

Hmm.. the filters are nice. But I never use the search function but only the map. The search function adds unnecessary steps and if I only want to look into finding a cache in my home zone it's far too annoying to go via 'search'. Thus this functionality in the original map would be great. Here I'd never use it. 

 

edit: I just looked at Cyprus. A small island with apparently over 1000 caches. So how do I get to see them all? It looks like I'd need to select coordinates somewhere in the eastern part to see any caches there (I know there's a cache in the eastern-most tip) for them to show up, which is not really userfriendly

Edited January 23, 2019 by terratin

[+thomfre]

7 minutes ago, PlasmaWave said:

2. Why was the old thread closed? Hopefully not an attempt to sidestep cachers genuine concerns!

 

As there is little feedback here from GCHQ, we have no idea whether or not our feedback is being taken into consideration by the developers.

This is normal in the release notes forum. Old release notes are usually closed when new are opened for the same feature. I guess it's to keep discussion in one place, which makes a lot of sense.

 

It's also very normal for HQ to be very quiet in here. But they say they monitor the feedback, so I hope they do. And I hope they take actions based on it.

[+2taylorsaus]

What am I missing? Both my husband and I on 2 different laptops and 2 different browsers do not see a blue banner to even try the new map??

[+Jack Dalton]

Thanks for this new map, really good work!

 

The only thing that I'm missing is that I can only filter by maximum favorite points - but favorite % are missing. To me, favorite-% are more important. Maybe you can add this to the filters?

 

Thanks and greets from Switzerland.

[+searcherdog]

4 hours ago, Isebar said:

I know the following lines will be considered heresy by  some...

If I can not get what I want / need / would like from the new search & map format then I would look elsewhere whether it is heresy or not.

 

2 hours ago, Ruko2010 said:

We are now aware, that the map is coming and we are currently collecting features, what we should implement in the new map. 

I did not know about this but will be investigating the current version and following progress of the new one.

Thank you both.

[+Glen Falcon Terrors]

7 hours ago, Michaelcycle said:

As I mentioned in my response when I opted out of the new map the deletion of the "search by personal cache note" feature is a major mistake. That is where I note challenges that I qualify for or the things I have yet to do to meet a challenge. It is where I store partial solutions or ideas on mystery caches. It is where I put information I have gleaned from reading prior finders logs. There is no other convenient way to keep this information attached to each cache and I often plan puzzle solving evenings and geocaching trips around this data. 

As it IS a feature of the old search map why get rid of it???

 

Generally I like the new map and have been using it.

 

Whole heartedly agree with Michaelcycles comments above.

 

Also I have an issue with the 'Sort by' option - the drop down list does not open and I am limited to Distance (Near-Far) only.

 

Is there still the option to search areas by radius? If so, where is it?

 

Thanks

[+tomturtle]

Please keep the old map.  Limiting the number of caches that can appear on the map to 1000 is a step backwards.  If there are caches on the map that I am looking at, I want to see them all.  I also don't care for combining filters with maps.  If I am looking for certain types of caches, once I find one, I still want to see the other caches that are around it.

[+Optimist on the run]

Sorry, but I'll be sticking with the old map, unless there's an change to keep the OSM default map.

[+Bazonka]

My initial thoughts...

 

I want to be able to see all caches on the map, not just those that are in my search filter (although the option to be able to do this is a good idea).

No OpenStreetMap!

Seems slower than before.

 

I will absolutely be continuing to use the old map unless this is improved.

[+vutter]

I tried the new map for a second time, but the results where the same.

All that appeared was a blank page, and no possibility to go back to the old map.

Running on Safari Version 9.1.3 (9537.86.7.8) on MacOS X 10.9.5

So I keep using the old map.

 

P.S. By using Firefox I was able to view the new map and found a link to return to the old map.

Switching between old map and new map should always be available!

Edited January 23, 2019 by vutter
typos

[+thebruce0]

REMINDER: Because there are two directions to approach mapping, and the community is split (even apparent in these comments), a single resource can't appease both.

 

The old map is a BROWSE map - it has minimal filter options, and thus can display the entire selection of worldwide caches as a tile layer, and once the zoom is close enough it can add an additional dynamic parameter that shows things like Found state, disabled, etc because the result set will be smaller, limited to the window dimensions.  It's fast, simple, but that map doesn't have the flexibility of complex search filters - which is why we had the separate search page and result list with the option to map the results. Which brings us to the other end of the spectrum:

 

The new map is a SEARCH plotter - it has advanced search filters from the very beginning, and thus cannot display the entire selection of worldwide caches as a dynamic tile layer.  Just as when completing a search you would "map the results", or view a PQ or Bookmarklist query on the map, this map view starts with the idea that you are first searching for a specific set of parameters, the results of which are shown on the map. That necessarily means that there will be a maximum.  It also means that the map view will be confusing when doing things like sorting results when there's a maximum number results return. If only 500 of 6000 caches are displayed, then depending on the sort, only the top 500 will show, and that will change when you change the sort. That is especially confusing when searching from a center point, or within a region boundary.  One second a cache is there, and another it's not, even though it does match the filter parameters.

 

There is a fundamental difference in the intent and use of the new map that confuses many people because of its presentation. There may be nothing that can be done about that, or maybe there is some kind of intro or instructional guidance that can be presented to help people ease into that functional difference.

 

It's also a reason, again, why the search LIST result view should NOT be retired - that makes more natural sense for a filtered search with a capped result set. When sorted, you see results in a specific order - the sort chosen has maximum visibility. When started from a visual plotting standpoint, the sort order is completely lost and the first instinct is location, which may entirely irrelevant to the result set. It clashes.

 

 

What if (just a thought) when changing filters, more prominence is placed on the new result LIST in the sidebar than on the map? If attention is first drawn to the list, the brain will natural parse the results that way, then understand that the plotted results are secondary to the search results. The list will drive the view, rather than people expecting to see EVERY possible match automatically on the map?

 

The list view of results should never be removed; but whether it shows on its own page or combined with map will entirely depend on the user's experience and how easy it is to use. And when someone wants the list with more detail presented at once, most likely they don't want the map plotting taking up render time and clogging up the browser use. So how can these two functions coexist?

 

These are basic, and fundamentally, significantly different functions, all trying to coexist in the new map (by user desire, or developer intent):

1. Simplistic browse

2. Complex search/filtering

3. Search results map view (of Searches, PQs, and Lists)

 

And on top of that, it appears the goal is to have a user interface that will be unfiied for use on a mobile device AND on desktop.

...

To a degree, I can understand why 'open in a new tab' hasn't simply been added as the default. That's not mobile friendly. Perhaps they are struggling to design a way that works simultaneously for both mobile and desktop. Then again, I don't see why they don't add a platform checker to add that functionality only for non-mobile browsers, and some other (yet to be developed?) solution for mobile users (due to "back" possibly playing havoc with filters and map settings since the whole page is reloaded).

 

Anyway.

Point being, this is a BEAST of a website feature. And I fear HQ is trying to do far too much in one single module.

[+thomfre]

12 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

REMINDER: Because there are two directions to approach mapping, and the community is split (even apparent in these comments), a single resource can't appease both.

 

.....

 

Anyway.

Point being, this is a BEAST of a website feature. And I fear HQ is trying to do far too much in one single module.

All of this is so true! You really hit the nail on the head!

 

Forcing us to use one map to do all, is like using a flat head screwdriver as a universal screwdriver. It can be done, you can use it on Phillips screws, torx etc. But you will damage the screw and sometimes even the screwdriver. Exactly the same will happen here - you will damage the experience for your users.

 

I never use the search feature. I think the only time I've used it, was to test the galactic search you did a couple years ago. I don't need it, and I don't want to be forced to use it. But I do need the browse map to be fast, dependable, able to show me all the caches in the world at once, light on resources (I usually have 80-100+ tabs open) and nonstrenuous to use. The old map is all of that (although it has periods when it's less dependable). The new is not. And I don't think it can be either, because you are doing too much with one tool.

 

Please don't make this: 

It might look cool, but it's very hard to use...

 

The new map has a lot of improvements, that I actually can see myself enjoy using - but only when needing to map a PQ, do more advanced filters or something like that. It does not cover the needs I have for the page I use the most - the browse map (I love that term). And I don't believe it ever can. So please, don't take away the old map!

[+jswtc]

I combine caching with biking and use the current map(s) to easily find bike trails that have caches on them. The "new" map does not display bike trails nor does it display topographical information, both of which we use to plan our caching trips. Google maps may be good enough to get you from point A to point B but a poor choice for geocaching as it is way too limited and has much less detail than the other maps. Your improvements to geocaching sometimes fall short, this "improvement" is one of them. I hope Google paid you well to be the sole map provider to Geocaching.com.

[+thomfre]

1 minute ago, jswtc said:

I combine caching with biking and use the current map(s) to easily find bike trails that have caches on them. The "new" map does not display bike trails nor does it display topographical information, both of which we use to plan our caching trips. Google maps may be good enough to get you from point A to point B but a poor choice for geocaching as it is way too limited and has much less detail than the other maps. Your improvements to geocaching sometimes fall short, this "improvement" is one of them. I hope Google paid you well to be the sole map provider to Geocaching.com.

You can switch to OpenStreetMap by selecting the "Geocaching" map. This should also be the default on the new map.

 

...and Groundspeak probably have to pay a lot for the use of Google Maps...

[+dprovan]

18 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

REMINDER: Because there are two directions to approach mapping, and the community is split (even apparent in these comments), a single resource can't appease both.

These discussions have made this conclusion glaringly obvious to me. I'm floored to hear that GS doesn't get it. When they first released the map, some of the ideas were so novel that I thought it was obvious they had themselves come up with the idea of two different maps for two different purposes, so I'm surprised to hear them explicitly say the old map is deprecated.

 

Oh, except it's not just a difference of opinion between members of the community. I'm squarely on both sides. Sometimes I'm browsing, and sometimes I'm searching, so I understand and agree with why people say the new map is bad for browsing, but I also see what GS is trying to do with the new map to improve searching. I'm intrigued by the idea of a search map, and although I don't find it terribly useful so far, I'd like to have it around to play with, and for them to continue developing. But I use the map way more for browsing, so if I have to choose between the two, I'll take the old browse oriented map.

[+platoaddict]

17 hours ago, The A-Team said:

Personally, given the demonstrated shortcomings with trying to squeeze all the necessary information into the sidebar (hint: it can't be done), I'd prefer to see the list in the sidebar stay as-is, and for cache clicks to open a popup within the map area like the old map does rather than display in the sidebar. This popup could maybe be made slightly larger to accommodate a modified set of data compared to before (but still include things like type, D/T, owner, placed date, FPs, etc.), but still rely on users opening up the listing page to get all the relevant details like the description, attributes, and logs in the necessary context like they do now on the old map.

This! 

 

I agree with a number of the issues already identified in this thread and earlier ones. I understand the desire to move to more "modern" and adaptable tools. But, we shouldn't LOSE functionality. The new map does exactly that. The solution quoted above seems to be an example of a perfect compromise: retaining characteristics and FEATURES from the old map (the popups) while updating and ADDING new features (the list).

[+hzoi]

8 minutes ago, jswtc said:

I hope Google paid you well to be the sole map provider to Geocaching.com.

 

Google maps used to be the only maps available.  It's when they raised their prices that Groundspeak pursued OSM as the default option.  That makes your post pretty ironic, and no, it's probably not the reason.

 

8 minutes ago, thomfre said:

You can switch to OpenStreetMap by selecting the "Geocaching" map. This should also be the default on the new map.

 

Not really.  The default geocaching map does draw from OSM data, but it shows far less detail.  For some reason, it's still missing things like airports.  Runways show up as streams, or holes in the trees.

[+thomfre]

1 minute ago, hzoi said:

Not really.  The default geocaching map does draw from OSM data, but it shows far less detail.  For some reason, it's still missing things like airports.  Runways show up as streams, or holes in the trees.

OSM is just data. And this is how Groundspeak have decided to render that data. The biggest issue is how infrequent it's updated.

 

But a larger choice in map tiles would be nice! And I don't see any reason why we can't have all that's available in the old map.

[+MiSiYa]

Hi, reading this week's newsletter I gave the new map another try. I see some very welcome improvements, however there is still no option to sort caches alphabetically (useful for series/power trails starting with the same words etc.) and more important there is still no filter for "has personal cache note yes/no".

Is HQ working on those features? When might they be available on the new map?

 

Best

Mi(chael)

[brendanjw]

Hi all,

 

I appreciate your comments, and feel that I can make one distinction that may put some fears to rest.  The map that I have cited that we are retiring is as @thebruce0 noted in his post earlier the search results map and not the browse map.

 

Here is an image depicting the browse map, and the reiterate, when I've discussed retiring the map, I am referring to the search results map, and not the browse map. I hope this clears things up.

 

 

[+CAVinoGal]

1 hour ago, thebruce0 said:

REMINDER: Because there are two directions to approach mapping, and the community is split (even apparent in these comments), a single resource can't appease both.

 

The old map is a BROWSE map 

 

The new map is a SEARCH plotter

 

There is a fundamental difference in the intent and use of the new map that confuses many people

 

It's also a reason, again, why the search LIST result view should NOT be retired - that makes more natural sense for a filtered search with a capped result set. When sorted, you see results in a specific order - the sort chosen has maximum visibility. When started from a visual plotting standpoint, the sort order is completely lost and the first instinct is location, which may entirely irrelevant to the result set. It clashes.

 

1 hour ago, thebruce0 said:

Anyway.

Point being, this is a BEAST of a website feature. And I fear HQ is trying to do far too much in one single module.

 

1 hour ago, dprovan said:

2 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

REMINDER: Because there are two directions to approach mapping, and the community is split (even apparent in these comments), a single resource can't appease both.

These discussions have made this conclusion glaringly obvious to me.

 

Oh, except it's not just a difference of opinion between members of the community. I'm squarely on both sides. Sometimes I'm browsing, and sometimes I'm searching, so I understand and agree with why people say the new map is bad for browsing, but I also see what GS is trying to do with the new map to improve searching. I'm intrigued by the idea of a search map, and although I don't find it terribly useful so far, I'd like to have it around to play with, and for them to continue developing. But I use the map way more for browsing, so if I have to choose between the two, I'll take the old browse oriented map.

 

THANK YOU, thebruce0, for putting things so succinctly - I was confused as to the differences and your well written post cleared my confusion as to the differences between the two, (I've used both the browse and the search without fully realizing the differences) and I have yet to try the new map (an all in one solution??).  But, as dprovan, I use the main map (View map on geocaching.com) primarily, nearly exclusively, for browsing - show me all the caches in my chosen area, and I will choose those I want to view more fully (in a separate tab!!).

 

On the few occasions I have used the Search map, I have been confused, trying to make it work like the Browse map and not realizing they were different maps (yes, I'm a newbie!) and now this discussion of the "New" map had me completely confused.  So thanks, again, thebruce0, for clarifying things a bit.  Now off to see if I can get a handle on the new map experience...

[+thomfre]

1 minute ago, brendanjw said:

Here is an image depicting the browse map, and the reiterate, when I've discussed retiring the map, I am referring to the search results map, and not the browse map. I hope this clears things up.

Thank you! This is by far the best news I've heard this year!

 

And it puts the new map in a whole new light, making it not nearly as bad as I first thought

 

Again, THANK YOU!

[+ratjam]

22 hours ago, Viajero Perdido said:

@ratjam, do you have old hardware?  If so, maybe check https://get.webgl.org/ to see if your hardware supports something called "WebGL".

 

Groundspeak hasn't told us yet (that I can tell), but WebGL support seems to be a requirement of the new map, and (I suspect) will become a support headache.

 

I have gone to the webgl link shown. My PC shows the rotating box.  My PC is an HP ZBook 15 with NVidia Quadro M1000M graphics card. Hardware should not be an issue.  I have since tested the maps on 4 different PCs (Win 7 & 10, old & new) using IE11. I have not been able to get the geocaching map to show on any of them. It wouldn't be so bad if it would remember my selection of Google maps. The geocaching map works for Edge, Chrome and Firefox, just not IE11.  Has anyone been able to get the geocaching map worm in IE?

[+CAVinoGal]

Oh, wait - View Map on the website main menu will still go the Browse map, unchanged?  All that's being worked on is the map that comes up when you go to Search?  I'll check that out now - I haven't used that much, but with a new understanding of why it is separate, and that it will STAY separate from the Browse map, it may work!!

[+thebruce0]

53 minutes ago, brendanjw said:

I appreciate your comments, and feel that I can make one distinction that may put some fears to rest.  The map that I have cited that we are retiring is as @thebruce0 noted in his post earlier the search results map and not the browse map.

 

Here is an image depicting the browse map, and the reiterate, when I've discussed retiring the map, I am referring to the search results map, and not the browse map. I hope this clears things up.

 

Ok so, wait, now I'm a bit confused... we have two map views - the old (browse) map, and the new (search) map.  The old map was (well still is) used to also display search results (PQs/Lists), but the new map is intended to do that just without the browsing ability.  So when you say you're retiring the "search results map", are you referring to the new map? Or... the ability for the new map to display search results, or... ?

 

Here's what I mean visually:

 

"Browse" map:

 

"Browse" map with plotted PQ results (from a bookmark list of 100 oldest caches):

 

Advanced "Search list" (first 1000 worldwide sorted by oldest)

 

"Search" map with basic filters (first 500 sorted by distance from center point):

 

 

"Search" map with plotted search results (from the "Search list", first 500 worldwide caches sorted by oldest first)

 

So if you say you're retiring the "Search results map", which exactly are you referring to?

Edited January 23, 2019 by thebruce0

[+K13]

2 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

REMINDER: Because there are two directions to approach mapping, and the community is split (even apparent in these comments), a single resource can't appease both.

 

The old map is a BROWSE map - it has minimal filter options, and thus can display the entire selection of worldwide caches as a tile layer, and once the zoom is close enough it can add an additional dynamic parameter that shows things like Found state, disabled, etc because the result set will be smaller, limited to the window dimensions.  It's fast, simple, but that map doesn't have the flexibility of complex search filters - which is why we had the separate search page and result list with the option to map the results. Which brings us to the other end of the spectrum:

 

The new map is a SEARCH plotter - it has advanced search filters from the very beginning, and thus cannot display the entire selection of worldwide caches as a dynamic tile layer.  Just as when completing a search you would "map the results", or view a PQ or Bookmarklist query on the map, this map view starts with the idea that you are first searching for a specific set of parameters, the results of which are shown on the map. That necessarily means that there will be a maximum.  It also means that the map view will be confusing when doing things like sorting results when there's a maximum number results return. If only 500 of 6000 caches are displayed, then depending on the sort, only the top 500 will show, and that will change when you change the sort. That is especially confusing when searching from a center point, or within a region boundary.  One second a cache is there, and another it's not, even though it does match the filter parameters.

 

There is a fundamental difference in the intent and use of the new map that confuses many people because of its presentation. There may be nothing that can be done about that, or maybe there is some kind of intro or instructional guidance that can be presented to help people ease into that functional difference.

 

It's also a reason, again, why the search LIST result view should NOT be retired - that makes more natural sense for a filtered search with a capped result set. When sorted, you see results in a specific order - the sort chosen has maximum visibility. When started from a visual plotting standpoint, the sort order is completely lost and the first instinct is location, which may entirely irrelevant to the result set. It clashes.

 

 

What if (just a thought) when changing filters, more prominence is placed on the new result LIST in the sidebar than on the map? If attention is first drawn to the list, the brain will natural parse the results that way, then understand that the plotted results are secondary to the search results. The list will drive the view, rather than people expecting to see EVERY possible match automatically on the map?

 

The list view of results should never be removed; but whether it shows on its own page or combined with map will entirely depend on the user's experience and how easy it is to use. And when someone wants the list with more detail presented at once, most likely they don't want the map plotting taking up render time and clogging up the browser use. So how can these two functions coexist?

 

These are basic, and fundamentally, significantly different functions, all trying to coexist in the new map (by user desire, or developer intent):

1. Simplistic browse

2. Complex search/filtering

3. Search results map view (of Searches, PQs, and Lists)

 

And on top of that, it appears the goal is to have a user interface that will be unfiied for use on a mobile device AND on desktop.

...

To a degree, I can understand why 'open in a new tab' hasn't simply been added as the default. That's not mobile friendly. Perhaps they are struggling to design a way that works simultaneously for both mobile and desktop. Then again, I don't see why they don't add a platform checker to add that functionality only for non-mobile browsers, and some other (yet to be developed?) solution for mobile users (due to "back" possibly playing havoc with filters and map settings since the whole page is reloaded).

 

Anyway.

Point being, this is a BEAST of a website feature. And I fear HQ is trying to do far too much in one single module.

 

First, GS should pay you to explain their new updates. This is the most understandable explanation that has been offered to date. Had one of the Lackeys stated this early on, there would have been much less angst among the users. Thank You!

 

 

[+CAVinoGal]

This works!  I switched to the "New map" - that I get to by using Search on the main menu, or from the Browse map.

 

When I leave that open, and then go to "View map" on the main menu, my old, familiar "Browse map" hasn't changed.  There are two different maps, and only the "Search" is being updated.  The "Browse" remains the same, with limited filters by cache type...

[+K13]

25 minutes ago, brendanjw said:

Hi all,

 

I appreciate your comments, and feel that I can make one distinction that may put some fears to rest.  The map that I have cited that we are retiring is as @thebruce0 noted in his post earlier the search results map and not the browse map.

 

Here is an image depicting the browse map, and the reiterate, when I've discussed retiring the map, I am referring to the search results map, and not the browse map. I hope this clears things up.

 

 

 

I'm a bit confused about the "search Results Map' vs 'Browse Map' terminology. As I understand it, the map in the screenshot in your post is the 'Browse Map' and it is staying available as it currently exists. 

 

Please clarify.

[+VioletScorpio]

On 1/18/2019 at 12:48 AM, Pontiac_CZ said:

Nickname still omitted? ?

 

I agree!  Seeing the CO's name would be a great addition to the cache details!

[+cghove]

[+VioletScorpio]

On 1/18/2019 at 3:36 PM, The A-Team said:

• The "More info", "View all N logs", and "Log geocache" buttons don't open the link in a new tab.
• The "Back" button is separated both horizontally and vertically from the "More info" button. These are effectively opposite functions of each other and therefore related, so they should be styled similarly and be aligned vertically. The current placement of the "Back" button beside the search text field implies that one is going back from the search, but this isn't the case.

 

I agree with all The A-Team said, but specifically more about the points listed above.

 

When clicking more info and having it load into the same page, and then hitting the back button on the browser, it doesn't use the same search that I had before.  For example, If i type in a location to search the area, then click on a cache, then click more info to view the cache page, and then hit the back button in my browser...  the search box will now have the cache in it that I clicked on to view.  So, while it's technically in the same area as the search performed previously, it's not exactly the same search.

 

So as of now, on a computer, I will be right clicking the More Info button and selecting to open it in a different tab.

 

I also agree, that the Back button is not intuitive.  It is not apparent that this is a back button to go back to the search list from the cache details.

[+GordEtob]

I just tried your NEW MAP.  I selected an area, and then applied the given filters.  I added the 32 caches to a list.  (It would also be nice to apply a smaller limit to the search, by overriding the "500" -- I have never asked for more than 60 caches in a day).  One major problem for me:  I usually build pocket queries, excluding certain attributes (e.g. "Tree climbing", "ticks", "boat required", etc.  in summer and "NOT winter friendly" in winter).  I can't see any way to do this on the new map filters.  The list I produced would have to be edited one at a time to drop caches I don't want to visit.  If you could include attribute selection in the filters, I would be glad to use it.  Otherwise, I will most likely avoid it.

 

If someone has mentioned this already, please forgive me -- I didn't want to read through dozens or hundreds of posts!

[+thebruce0]

I have just noted thankfully that at least the More Info button is no longer a form postback, so middle/ctrl-clicking and context menu 'open in new tab' functions do work as expected. So thanks for that (that may have been changed a while back).

[+thebruce0]

1 minute ago, GordEtob said:

I just tried your NEW MAP.  I selected an area, and then applied the given filters.  I added the 32 caches to a list.  (It would also be nice to apply a smaller limit to the search, by overriding the "500" -- I have never asked for more than 60 caches in a day).  One major problem for me:  I usually build pocket queries, excluding certain attributes (e.g. "Tree climbing", "ticks", "boat required", etc.  in summer and "NOT winter friendly" in winter).  I can't see any way to do this on the new map filters.  The list I produced would have to be edited one at a time to drop caches I don't want to visit.  If you could include attribute selection in the filters, I would be glad to use it.  Otherwise, I will most likely avoid it.

 

Searching by attributes has never been available on gc.com, the only way to get those filters has been via PQs.  But I agree it would be nice to be able to have attributes as an additional filter option.

[+cghove]

2 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

 

Searching by attributes has never been available on gc.com, the only way to get those filters has been via PQs.  But I agree it would be nice to be able to have attributes as an additional filter option.

It would also be handy 2 search for å cache by it's name...

[+ronkeykong]

On the Play > View map option, found caches with corrected coordinates appear in the original coordinate spot.  On the new search map, this is not the case as the corrected coordinates reflect the location.  I don't recall what the previous search map did, as I can't seem to get back to it!

 

Thanks.