Jump to content

Phone vs Garmin


torkel72

Recommended Posts

Been using my android phones (2017 - 2019) on my two past cache day finds, and I find them to not be accurate. Do you prefer your Garmin? I have the beast Montana 650, and thinking about getting a new one.

 

Edit: As I hope to reach 500 caches by the end of this year (right, hehe), I bought the Oregon 700.

Edited by Greenadventure
Link to comment

Which tool you choose depends on the type of caching you are doing.  Casual caching, impromptu caching, dry weather,  etc. are all good uses for phones.  If you are in tree cover, wet weather, out for longer periods, etc you might want to use your GPSr.  There are work arounds for phones that will make them more useful, but best to play to the strengths of both devices.  I'm sure you will get additional advice, but since you already own a GPSR its not an issue for you. 

  • Upvote 2
Link to comment
24 minutes ago, ras_oscar said:

My concerns with phone caching have always been the potential to drop and damage it. I have the app on my phone as a backup but thus far have only used the Garmin because i believe its more rugged.

 

I tend to carry my iPhone, holstered, even while using the Garmin. My Oregon 750 can grab some live information including text messages with the phone safely holstered. An option would be a rugged phone tethered to the iPhone in a similar way. I tried a “Blackview” phone, but it failed on several levels. So I'm back to the iPhone with a Garmin.

 

I don't enjoy discovering that I no longer have data reception (nor that it's on the bleeding edge of data reception), so I cache with a pre-loaded GPS that doesn't complain when something goes offline. And then when back in civilization, I use the phone for “live” stuff. I also use the phone for driving to a cache. With “Waze” and some other Apps, the street route works even if driving into a place with no cell service. Getting out again, yeah, maybe.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

Funny, I was just going to do and say the same as igator :P

 

3 hours ago, kunarion said:

I don't enjoy discovering that I no longer have data reception (nor that it's on the bleeding edge of data reception), so I cache with a pre-loaded GPS that doesn't complain when something goes offline.

 

I download what I need for offline especially if I know I'm going somewhere 'dead'. If you treat the phone as an online-required device, then being offline will be a drawback. If you treat the phone as an offline device with online capability, it's got a leg up on offline devices. Butanyway, you know all that already :ph34r::)

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
4 minutes ago, thebruce0 said:

Funny, I was just going to do and say the same as igator :P

 

 

I download what I need for offline especially if I know I'm going somewhere 'dead'. If you treat the phone as an online-required device, then being offline will be a drawback. If you treat the phone as an offline device with online capability, it's got a leg up on offline devices. Butanyway, you know all that already :ph34r::)


Stop it.

  • Funny 3
Link to comment
50 minutes ago, rustynails. said:

The question is one of accuracy. Phones use cell tower triangulation. GPS uses multiple satellites resulting in better accuracy.


Phones may use multiple sources, typically GPS while outdoors, although sometimes it’s not clear from where the location is derived.  There are Android Apps that let you see which satellites are in use, pretty cool, and the App may be a built-in feature.  
 

But iPhone doesn’t divulge as much info, maybe partly to not overwhelm people with too much info that isn’t well understood.  But it confused me with my Non-Phone iPad that used only the various WiFi signals it saw along the road for triangulation.  :)
 

 

Edited by kunarion
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
10 hours ago, thebruce0 said:

IIRC, there are some apps that indicate a satellite count, but from what I could find I believe they're 'estimated' by signal strength, or something along those lines, so not an actual satellite count. It's annoying Apple doesn't reveal that solid metric in the GPS stats.

 

Yes, I've seen apps which show the signal strength of each of the GPS satellites.  I'm looking at the screen for one that shows the relative location of all of the NAVSTAR (US) and GLONASS (Russia) satellites right now.   Modern smart phones all include a GPS chip.  The operating system (specifically location services) use data from the GPS chip to provide lat/long coordinates for applications.  The location services can also use cell tower signals (triangulation) or wifi to determine location.  The use of cell tower triangulation, or aGPS (assisted/augmented GPS) provides an lower accuracy location which allows the GPS chip to get a quicker fix on satellites when the phone is first turned on.   While a phone can "remember" it's last location before it's turned off, turning a phone off when getting on a plane, then back on when you've landed 5000 miles away, can result in a handheld GPS taking quite awhile to get a fix on the satellites, but with aGPS, a smart phone can lock on satellites quickly.  That does not, however, improve accuracy.  *Current* GPS chips in smart phones provide accuracy similary to a handheld GPS.

 

That, however, may change soon.   There is a company that is producing a new mass market GPS chip that can be put into a phone that alledgedly will be accurate to within one foot.

 

https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/9/25/16362296/gps-accuracy-improving-one-foot-broadcom

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
20 hours ago, kunarion said:

 

I tend to carry my iPhone, holstered, even while using the Garmin. My Oregon 750 can grab some live information including text messages with the phone safely holstered. An option would be a rugged phone tethered to the iPhone in a similar way. I tried a “Blackview” phone, but it failed on several levels. So I'm back to the iPhone with a Garmin.

 

I don't enjoy discovering that I no longer have data reception (nor that it's on the bleeding edge of data reception), so I cache with a pre-loaded GPS that doesn't complain when something goes offline. And then when back in civilization, I use the phone for “live” stuff. I also use the phone for driving to a cache. With “Waze” and some other Apps, the street route works even if driving into a place with no cell service. Getting out again, yeah, maybe.

 

Pre-load the phone, just like you do a GPS, and you don't need to worry about service.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
55 minutes ago, igator210 said:

 

Pre-load the phone, just like you do a GPS, and you don't need to worry about service.

 

Use the phone where there's service and you don't need to worry about pre-loading.  Please read my posts before responding, don't just reply while ignoring my post.  I don't like all the popups about no data unrelated to "preloaded phones", and the many surprises that occur when data service is weak or intermittent or failing.  I can absolutely not pre-load Waze, Message Center, log sending, new cache info, email, SMS, and data on other online Apps.  So I use a phone for phone things, and a GPS for GPS things.  I will continue to do so.  I've already asked you nicely to stop trolling about it.  I'm asking again.

 

Stop it.

 

Edited by kunarion
  • Upvote 1
  • Surprised 1
Link to comment

With the exception of more remote areas where signal strength of the phone isn't reliable, I've found very little difference between the two types of devices.  That used to not be the case back in the early days of smart phones but they've come a long way.  I have pre-loaded my phone with caches I want to try to find in areas I visit frequently but they're also in areas with good service.  I don't have a lot of caches pre-loaded in areas with spotty cell service.  

 

If I know I'm going caching in a more remote area, I'll have both the phone and GPS loaded up with the caches but leave the phone alone and use the GPS.  The phone comes out for any virtuals, ECs, or even LBHs with more detailed instructions as well as for pictures.  When I've opened up the cache with the app in those areas, it's not been too far off compared to my GPS. 

 

At this point in time, I really don't see how anyone could go wrong with either option, assuming you have the financial wherewithal to afford either type of device.  

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
1 minute ago, coachstahly said:

If I know I'm going caching in a more remote area, I'll have both the phone and GPS loaded up with the caches but leave the phone alone and use the GPS.  The phone comes out for any virtuals, ECs, or even LBHs with more detailed instructions as well as for pictures.  When I've opened up the cache with the app in those areas, it's not been too far off compared to my GPS. 

 

I have a similar plan.  But I have "Lists" within my desired search areas with choice caches to "Go Find".  The Garmin GPS doesn't allow the easy creation of sets caches like that.  So on the phone I have a list of caches in particular, and on the GPS, the mass of everything.  Because I might grab a few others on my way to hunt a cache I'm really interested in. :cute:

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
4 hours ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

 

Yes, I've seen apps which show the signal strength of each of the GPS satellites.  I'm looking at the screen for one that shows the relative location of all of the NAVSTAR (US) and GLONASS (Russia) satellites right now.   Modern smart phones all include a GPS chip.  The operating system (specifically location services) use data from the GPS chip to provide lat/long coordinates for applications.  The location services can also use cell tower signals (triangulation) or wifi to determine location.  The use of cell tower triangulation, or aGPS (assisted/augmented GPS) provides an lower accuracy location which allows the GPS chip to get a quicker fix on satellites when the phone is first turned on.   While a phone can "remember" it's last location before it's turned off, turning a phone off when getting on a plane, then back on when you've landed 5000 miles away, can result in a handheld GPS taking quite awhile to get a fix on the satellites, but with aGPS, a smart phone can lock on satellites quickly.  That does not, however, improve accuracy.  *Current* GPS chips in smart phones provide accuracy similary to a handheld GPS.

 

That, however, may change soon.   There is a company that is producing a new mass market GPS chip that can be put into a phone that alledgedly will be accurate to within one foot.

 

https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/9/25/16362296/gps-accuracy-improving-one-foot-broadcom

Did you notice the date on that article?  It's Sep 25, 2017 - so where are these one foot accurate phones?  They're two years late... :o

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
55 minutes ago, kunarion said:

 

I have a similar plan.  But I have "Lists" within my desired search areas with choice caches to "Go Find".  The Garmin GPS doesn't allow the easy creation of sets caches like that.  So on the phone I have a list of caches in particular, and on the GPS, the mass of everything.  Because I might grab a few others on my way to hunt a cache I'm really interested in. :cute:

Depending on how you load your GPSr, there are ways to do this on a Garmin.  I use GSAK and number the finds I want in order using the User Sort column, then use a short macro in the load to put that in front of the name.  Then I can navigate from '001 Cache' to '002 Cache' to...  All the other local caches are also loaded and can be seen on the map/list if I want something between the main stops.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, kunarion said:

 

Use the phone where there's service and you don't need to worry about pre-loading.  Please read my posts before responding, don't just reply while ignoring my post.  I don't like all the popups about no data unrelated to "preloaded phones", and the many surprises that occur when data service is weak or intermittent or failing.  I can absolutely not pre-load Waze, Message Center, log sending, new cache info, email, SMS, and data on other online Apps.  So I use a phone for phone things, and a GPS for GPS things.  I will continue to do so.  I've already asked you nicely to stop trolling about it.  I'm asking again.

 

Stop it.

 

 

So... you get mad at me when I snip your comment because I wanted to address a very specific part of it, then you get mad at me when I quote the whole thing but only address a very specific part of it.

I wasn't going to try to persuade you one directions or another for any other issue that you have brought up. Many people think that the phone apps can only be used for live mode, and that is a fallacy. I have offline caches loaded on my phone, split over different groupings. I preload my phone just like any other handheld GPSr. I can do this without using data. I can then go out into the field and not worry about losing service. I can get home and log caches, without worrying about using data. There are many other drawbacks about using a phone, but being offline isn't one of them.

Just because I point out something, doesn't meaning I'm trolling. It just means there are other ways to do things, and it just happens you brought it up. If someone else had said that same thing, I would have quoted them, and I have in other threads. 

 

  • Upvote 3
  • Love 1
Link to comment
34 minutes ago, The Jester said:

Depending on how you load your GPSr, there are ways to do this on a Garmin.  I use GSAK and number the finds I want in order using the User Sort column, then use a short macro in the load to put that in front of the name.  Then I can navigate from '001 Cache' to '002 Cache' to...  All the other local caches are also loaded and can be seen on the map/list if I want something between the main stops.

 

Yes, that's what I was thinking, you could use helper software to creatively name the caches.  A sortable sequence seems OK!

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
5 hours ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

 

Yes, I've seen apps which show the signal strength of each of the GPS satellites.  I'm looking at the screen for one that shows the relative location of all of the NAVSTAR (US) and GLONASS (Russia) satellites right now.   Modern smart phones all include a GPS chip.  The operating system (specifically location services) use data from the GPS chip to provide lat/long coordinates for applications.  The location services can also use cell tower signals (triangulation) or wifi to determine location.  The use of cell tower triangulation, or aGPS (assisted/augmented GPS) provides an lower accuracy location which allows the GPS chip to get a quicker fix on satellites when the phone is first turned on.   While a phone can "remember" it's last location before it's turned off, turning a phone off when getting on a plane, then back on when you've landed 5000 miles away, can result in a handheld GPS taking quite awhile to get a fix on the satellites, but with aGPS, a smart phone can lock on satellites quickly.  That does not, however, improve accuracy.  *Current* GPS chips in smart phones provide accuracy similary to a handheld GPS.

 

That, however, may change soon.   There is a company that is producing a new mass market GPS chip that can be put into a phone that alledgedly will be accurate to within one foot.

 

https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/9/25/16362296/gps-accuracy-improving-one-foot-broadcom

I know selective availability was turned off some time ago. Are consumer grade GPS units now equally accurate as military units? I assume the difference between a consumer grade GPS and (for instance) a total station GPS survey instrument is less about the GPS accuracy and more about the types of data the unit can store, display and manipulate? 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
32 minutes ago, igator210 said:

Just because I point out something, doesn't meaning I'm trolling. It just means there are other ways to do things, and it just happens you brought it up. If someone else had said that same thing, I would have quoted them, and I have in other threads. 

 

Hey, being reasonable? Stop it. ;)

 

5 hours ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

Yes, I've seen apps which show the signal strength of each of the GPS satellites.  I'm looking at the screen for one that shows the relative location of all of the NAVSTAR (US) and GLONASS (Russia) satellites right now.   Modern smart phones all include a GPS chip... <snip>

 

Yes indeed, I was just pointing out the unfortunate fact that Apple doesn't reveal as much information about the GPS functions to app developers as other smartphone brands. Unless something has changed recently (IANAA(pple)D(eveloper))

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment

From the Forum Guidelines:

 

Quote

Sometimes, a discussion thread strays off into a friendly dialogue or a heated debate among a very small number of users. For these exchanges, we ask that you please use the Private Message feature that is provided through the Geocaching Forums, or the Geocaching.com Email or Message Center. Public forum posts should be reserved for matters of interest to the general geocaching community.

 

If people involved in a side debate do not wish to continue it, they can simply not respond.

  • Upvote 4
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment
2 hours ago, kunarion said:

 

I have a similar plan.  But I have "Lists" within my desired search areas with choice caches to "Go Find".  The Garmin GPS doesn't allow the easy creation of sets caches like that.  So on the phone I have a list of caches in particular, and on the GPS, the mass of everything.  Because I might grab a few others on my way to hunt a cache I'm really interested in. :cute:

 

Yep.  That's one of the big advantages to phones over GPS, the ability to create sorted lists that contain caches selected from the overall set loaded onto the GPS.  That helps narrow down the "target" caches from the rest of the caches in the area.

 

GSAK has the workaround mentioned above but it still doesn't truly create a separate list, only a separate cache name that singles out a target cache.  The list function also allows me to choose certain caches in said list when time might be limited or I'm beginning to run low on time, thereby allowing me to skip other caches I had wanted to do within each list but just didn't have time to get to.

 

43 minutes ago, kunarion said:

 

What are you missing from the Oregon that you use on the Montana?  Do you mean voice prompts for street routing?  That was a cool feature of the Monterra/Montana (both discontinued), loud and clear voice prompts, charging cradle with speaker, huge screen.  It was pretty cool as a car nav.  Probably too cool to keep in the car in an unfamiliar area, though.  :)

 

I haven't used my mount in quite some time but I still have it.  It's a great feature, assuming the maps you have loaded are routable (24K IIRC or OSM maps).  Of course, phones now can do this as well, or at least get you really close, depending on where you are.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
2 hours ago, The Jester said:
6 hours ago, NYPaddleCacher said:

That, however, may change soon.   There is a company that is producing a new mass market GPS chip that can be put into a phone that alledgedly will be accurate to within one foot.

 

https://www.theverge.com/circuitbreaker/2017/9/25/16362296/gps-accuracy-improving-one-foot-broadcom

Did you notice the date on that article?  It's Sep 25, 2017 - so where are these one foot accurate phones?  They're two years late... :o

 

https://www.gsa.europa.eu/newsroom/news/world-s-first-dual-frequency-gnss-smartphone-hits-market

 

The dual-band chip has been developed.  The challenge is that Qualcomm had cornered the market for GPS chips for mobile phones the bigger brands (like the iPhone) won't be getting those chips anytime soon.  

Link to comment

I use my phone for impromptu caching almost strictly. For unplanned, more remote areas, I will load them on my phone and use my garmin watch. Both work fine, I would just rather not search for a cell signal when I could be caching. 
 

I will never, ever list a geocache using my phones coordinates, though. (Most) Phones use triangulation, not actual GPS, so readings can and will vary drastically. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Ry Dawg said:

I will never, ever list a geocache using my phones coordinates, though. (Most) Phones use triangulation, not actual GPS, so readings can and will vary drastically. 

 

You just need to check the specs.  Many modern smartphones will use more than one source for location, preferring GPS for a pretty precise reading.  My non-phone iPad has no GPS circuit (but I bought GPS accessories for it), so look for specifications that mention "GPS" capability.  Also be sure it says something like "Magnetic Compass Sensor".  The cheapest bare-bones phones may not be suitable, many others tend to be.  There are considerations for using a handheld GPS over a phone.  But for Geocaching purposes, a lot of newer phones are plenty "accurate".

 

 

Edited by kunarion
  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 2
Link to comment
23 minutes ago, kunarion said:

 

You just need to check the specs.  Many modern smartphones will use more than one source for location, preferring GPS for a pretty precise reading.  My non-phone iPad has no GPS circuit (but I bought GPS accessories for it), so look for specifications that mention "GPS" capability.  Also be sure it says something like "Magnetic Compass Sensor".  The cheapest bare-bones phones may not be suitable, many others tend to be.  There are considerations for using a handheld GPS over a phone.  But for Geocaching purposes, a lot of newer phones are plenty "accurate".

 

 

Thank you for the information. I will look into that further. I’m not sure my phone is considered modern or not. 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
On 2/22/2020 at 5:06 PM, Greenadventure said:

Been using my android phones (2017 - 2019) on my two past cache day finds, and I find them to not be accurate. Do you prefer your Garmin? I have the beast Montana 650, and thinking about getting a new one.

 

Edit: As I hope to reach 500 caches by the end of this year (right, hehe), I bought the Oregon 700.

I use my old Android cell and downloaded the Geocaching.com app. Love it. In damp weather we put the cell in a baggie.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
58 minutes ago, HunterandSamuel said:

I use my old Android cell and downloaded the Geocaching.com app. Love it. In damp weather we put the cell in a baggie.

 

I wouldn't trust a baggie when crossing streams or during a very heavy rain.  There is a huge variety of waterproof bags one can get for a phone that will even protect the phone during a full submersion.   They let you use the phone while it's in the bag and some even float.

 

  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 2
Link to comment
10 hours ago, Ry Dawg said:

 

I will never, ever list a geocache using my phones coordinates, though. (Most) Phones use triangulation, not actual GPS, so readings can and will vary drastically. 

 

The first 2 1/2 years we geocached, and the first 20 +hides we did (Hubby and my account combined) we used only our phones to find AND place caches.  Only one complaint of coordinates being "off", and the suggested new coordinates were 6 ft. away from ours, and the photo sent us of where the cacher was looking based on our coordinates was about 30 feet away - our posted coordinates, when we double checked, took us to the cache.  Others have not said anything on this particular cache, and in all other cases, coordinates have been good, "spot on", great coordinates, etc in the comments. and logs.  We typically take multiple readings for hides, with both our phones, on different days and different approaches when possible, and check where it puts us on Google maps.  It's worked for us!  We now have a Garmin Etrex 30x anduse it more for backup checks...

 

Just out of curiosity, I looked up the specs on our 1st generation Pixel phones (which are still working wonderfully after 3.5 years!) :
 

COMMS WLAN Wi-Fi 802.11 a/b/g/n/ac, dual-band, Wi-Fi Direct, DLNA, hotspot
Bluetooth 4.2, A2DP, LE, aptX
GPS Yes, with A-GPS, GLONASS
NFC Yes
Radio No
USB 3.0, Type-C 1.0 reversible connector
FEATURES Sensors Fingerprint (rear-mounted), accelerometer, gyro, proximity, compass, barometer
Link to comment
10 hours ago, kunarion said:

You just need to check the specs.  Many modern smartphones will use more than one source for location, preferring GPS for a pretty precise reading.  My non-phone iPad has no GPS circuit (but I bought GPS accessories for it), so look for specifications that mention "GPS" capability.  Also be sure it says something like "Magnetic Compass Sensor".  The cheapest bare-bones phones may not be suitable, many others tend to be.  There are considerations for using a handheld GPS over a phone.  But for Geocaching purposes, a lot of newer phones are plenty "accurate".

I bought an unlocked Android phone last year. It cost less than $200 walking out the door, and it came with an electronic compass. You don't have to go very far up the scale to get an electronic compass.

 

And all my Android phones (even the G1) have had real GPS chips. The last time I listed a cache, I took coordinates with both the Android phone I was using at the time and my handheld GPS receiver. The app I used had an averaging function, and so did the handheld GPS receiver. The coordinates I got from both were virtually identical.

Edited by niraD
  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment

When someone simply says how bad their phone is with coordinates I'm extremely skeptical without having additional information about the circumstance. Model? Brand? Age? Environment? App? User? In my experience most of the time someone reports inaccurate coordinates of more than a few meters it's not because of the hardware directly. Most often it's a user habit that didn't translate from handheld to smartphone, so nor surprisingly didn't provide optimal coordinates, but occasionally it's simply not understanding a process, and sometimes an app that doesn't do a good job of providing a good reading (like the infamous 'compass' iOS app).  I don't recall ever having an issue with coordinates that wasn't resolved with adjusting how I use my phone to determine them.

In short, for the most part, it's not the tool, it's how you use the tool. And that applies to both handhelds and smartphones.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
32 minutes ago, niraD said:

I bought an unlocked Android phone last year. It cost less than $200 walking out the door, and it came with an electronic compass. You don't have to go very far up the scale to get an electronic compass.

 

And all my Android phones (even the G1) have had real GPS chips. The last time I listed a cache, I took coordinates with both the Android phone I was using at the time and my handheld GPS receiver. The app I used had an averaging function, and so did the handheld GPS receiver. The coordinates I got from both were virtually identical.

 

It's best to know which phone and which GPS one is comparing, by make and model. I would hope that “a” new phone that costs twice what a top of the line new “Garmin” costs, plus monthly phone subscription, would at least be comparable. But looking at posts around here, people are surprised to discover no magnetic compass, or no App support or whatever. People luck out, and some are unlucky.

 

Similar things happen with a GPS, where you can't easily load it up directly from the web site. And “No GPS” on my tablet was a surprise to me. I was careful to review the specs, then at the store I saw the clearance model for half the price. Yeah, I didn't notice that one had no GPS, and I wouldn't have expected that in a million years. When people ask, be sure about the specifications of the particular devices.

 

It's also a personal preference thing, even a situational thing, which device I may choose at a given moment. I don't like the sun reflection from a phone screen that I can't even see outside. I don't like drilling down through weird menus to get to the Geocaching stuff of a Geocaching App, especially the ones that are barely in English. I'm happy with being one or two clicks away from any function on the Handheld GPS, fully customizable to me. I don't set coordinates from any of my “phone” devices. The phone's good enough for Geocaching, but the GPS is good enough for a precise point. Which is totally unneccesary and totally cool. :cute:

 

 

 

Edited by kunarion
  • Upvote 1
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment

I haven't hidden many geocaches, but I've been a hider for Snag The Tag. I've now hidden 40 tags using my phone and so far I've only had two complaints. One was off by 10 feet and the other I flipped two numbers. 

I have a GPS Averaging app and take three reads of around 100 points each. I don't have time to go back and double check coordinates, so I need to be accurate the first time.

 

Knowing how to use the tools you have, and knowing the limits are key. This also applies to GPSrs.

 

I know the debate is subjective, but the technology gap between the platforms has narrowed dramatically. 

Edited by igator210
  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
On ‎2‎/‎25‎/‎2020 at 11:35 AM, coachstahly said:

GSAK has the workaround mentioned above but it still doesn't truly create a separate list, only a separate cache name that singles out a target cache.  The list function also allows me to choose certain caches in said list when time might be limited or I'm beginning to run low on time, thereby allowing me to skip other caches I had wanted to do within each list but just didn't have time to get to.

 

Some of that depends on the GPSr.  The Nuvi I use for travel and routing allows me to put in different data files that are "separate lists" of caches.  I can look at all caches or only those in each file ("list").   On the handheld I can filter to just the numbered caches (the list) and see if I want to follow my original plan and get them in numbered order, or if I need to change ideas and grabbed the next one meeting whatever my new plan is. 

 

On multi day trips I've numbered caches like this: 01001 (day one, first cache) or 03010 (day three, tenth cache).  Of course, the first couple of digit don't have to be days but could stand for anything.  Or prepend a code from User Data column to separate lists:  CC001 (first Challenge cache).  How is this so different from having lists on the phone?

 

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
10 minutes ago, The Jester said:

How is this so different from having lists on the phone?

 

The most obvious is that you don't have to do all that work on GSAK in order to create a specified type of "list", i.e. 01001, 03010, etc...  Once you add a cache to a list on the phone, it's there and nothing else need be done, other than to run the PQ if I generated it on the site first.  I can even create a new list and save caches directly to that list (on my app), ones that are either already part of a separate stored list or from a view of the map that shows all caches.  Another is that it's much easier to add/edit/create/update lists on the phone than it is within GSAK due to the immediacy of the action.

 

I can create multiple lists within each area I'm traveling, again by adding it to a specified list, and those lists are selectable, which means I don't need to sift through ALL of the caches like I would on a GSAK gpx file.  For example, I can create a multi list, a ? list, a traditional list, or a LBH list for the location I'm visiting and then select the type I want to find by selecting the list.  If I want a few caches from each list I can create a "target" list (or some other name) and add them to that list so that only those caches on that list show on my phone.  Then, assuming I find (or don't find) all the caches I targeted, I can choose which caches from which lists I want to select and easily move between each list to determine my next cache.  If I want to, I can always revert back to the general map that shows me all the caches and go through that if I'd like.  If I see a cache I missed (new publish or just somehow missed it) on my initial scan, then I can select it and add it to a list on the fly.  No need to put it into my GSAK database, connect my GPS unit, and then export the .gpx to the GPS unit.  I guess I could conceivably create multiple databases within GSAK to sort out caches as well but I'd need to import each one via a gpx file, rename it before importing the next gpx file (and so on and so forth), and then figure out how to select a subset gpx file to display only those caches on my GPS unit. (Can that be done?  I've never tried loading multiple gpx files and seeing if I could choose which gpx file would display on my Montana). I seem to recall that it shows all gpx files and all the caches within those files, found and unfound.

 

I have put together a list of caches I'm interested in trying to find in Detroit (here on the website).  There's NO way I'm going to have time for all of them because I'll be coaching in a tournament that weekend but I will have some time to cache.  I'm not going to bring my GPS unit because all the caches are close to Detroit and I'm not concerned about cell service. Once the PQ is run, I can open the PQ and save it as a specific list.  If I want to sort multiple lists into a more specific grouping (perhaps the ones I would really prefer to find), I can do that as well,  by creating a new list on my app and then saving it to that list, without having to run a PQ and without having to go the site.  I don't have to create a new database, move/copy within GSAK from one database to another, and then rename each and every cache in order to get the same result. 

 

For areas with possible cell service issues I've not been to before, I'll use both my GPS (and GSAK) and my phone.  I'll use GSAK to filter out caches I have no interest in and then export a gpx file to the unit and one to my email, which I'll open with my app and then name the list, thereby saving it on my phone.  That's what I did for the family spring break trip a year ago when we went to Sedona, the Grand Canyon, and Phoenix and I used my GPS unit more than I did my phone, using the phone for the occasional virtual (to see what I needed to do) and specifically for ECs.  I'm not nearly as particular about what caches I find in a new area (once I've winnowed the caches using GSAK) because I've not found any so there's no real need to break them up into smaller separate lists.

 

When I was in Louisville this past weekend for a volleyball tournament, I had a saved list of caches I wanted to find in Louisville that I've kept up to date on my app (and on the site) and I used that list to find the 7-8 caches I had time for both weekend mornings.  I can remove them from my list so they won't show (now that my logs have been submitted) and my list is still current, based on what I would like to find.  I couldn't do that with the GPS unit unless I updated the database and exported a brand new gpx file with my found caches removed.

 

I'm not saying that one way is better than the other.  I am saying that it's easier to update/add to/edit/create lists on my phone that it is on my GPS unit.  When I use my GPS unit, it's usually in areas where I know service will be spotty and my caching options are much more wide open because I've not cached there at all previously.  I like having the ability to use both if I want to and the ease of moving between lists and creating new lists on the phone is much less of a PITA than having to bring my laptop along to update my GSAK database, plug in my unit, and export a new gpx file if I find some caches that I had somehow missed on my initial scan or were published after my database was finalized.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
48 minutes ago, coachstahly said:

 

The most obvious is that you don't have to do all that work on GSAK in order to create a specified type of "list", i.e. 01001, 03010, etc...  

From what you described it sounds as much work as slicing and dicing in GSAK.  I suppose it's what you (generic) get used to that defines what is "easier".  Most of my 'heavy' lifting in GSAK is automated or semi-automated.  So after selecting the caches I'm most interested in (which I find is much easier in GSAK than on the website) a couple of clicks on each cache numbers them, then the export (load) macro sends it to the GPSr prepending the any numbers to the cache name. 

 

I rarely use PQ's for planning, the API GetCaches call allows me to download caches like what I'm interested in (type, D/T, Fav points, etc.) within the region I'm looking.

 

I'm more interested in a ordered list of what I want to find.  If I'm just interested in types of cache (a 'list' of earthcaches) the GPSr can give me that with a couple buttons hits.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
13 hours ago, The Jester said:

From what you described it sounds as much work as slicing and dicing in GSAK. 

 

It's not.  The bare bones of this is this - I create a list and then add the cache to the list.  That's it and I'm done.  I don't even need to go to the site if I don't want to.  I don't have to "get caches" and then sort through them to see if they're ones I'm interested in adding to a potential list, rename them, and then connect my GPS to send to GPS.  I can create as many lists as I want, customize them based on whatever my criteria might be, and then add a cache to the list. I can do it from a live map without needing to visit the site or if I'm on the site, do it from the website search map or the browse map then run the PQ and open the subsequent gpx file and store them within my app, either as part of an already existing list or as a newly named list.

 

13 hours ago, The Jester said:

So after selecting the caches I'm most interested in (which I find is much easier in GSAK than on the website)

 

I do this when it comes to a brand new area I'm visiting and certainly agree with the ease of filtering and selection.  However, I've got family in the Louisville area and have cached there quite a bit so I don't really need to sift through the mass of caches there as I've already done that.  It's the new ones that pop up that I add to my list (either when I'm out caching or when I'm looking at the map and see one I don't recall seeing before) for a possible attempt.  I don't need to add those 1 to 5 new caches to my Louisville database and then connect my Montana and send to GPS to overwrite or upload a new gpx file with the new caches.  I just add them to the list and I'm done.  That's what's easier -  a single button click/tap and I'm done, unless I'm on the site and then it's time to run the PQ and open it with my app to save those caches to the list.

 

13 hours ago, The Jester said:

I rarely use PQ's for planning, the API GetCaches call allows me to download caches like what I'm interested in (type, D/T, Fav points, etc.) within the region I'm looking.

 

As do I.  For me, the lists are more geared toward adding a few caches here and there in areas I cache frequently. GSAK is for areas I don't cache in frequently.  However, I'll still have the entire list for a new area on my GPS unit as well as my phone and use my GPS for most caching and the phone for ECs, virtuals, and LBHs (if it has instructions), as it's easier to read on my phone than my GPS screen.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
1 hour ago, Twentse Mug said:

I have a red subaru. My neighbour has a black ferrari. So my conclusion: black cars go faster than red cars. This is what you get comparing "a gps" with "a smartphone".

 

The OP is driving a Subaru in a Ferrari.  The best of both worlds, but driving is more complicated.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
On 2/26/2020 at 9:44 AM, thebruce0 said:

 

Yep.   We bought a six pack of them that we have available at our vacation rental house (on the Delaware river).  There's a kayak rental place about a 5 minute walk away but they don't provide dry bags.   The risk of capsizing on the section where they run their trips is low but certainly not rare.  A bag like this also allows the phone to be used for photos.   I had mine stashed in a real drybag in a hatch so missed a shot of a bald eagle in a tree.  If you want to do boat accessible caches, and use a smart phone, a waterproof bag like this is essential.   

 

My first GPS was has Garmin 76Cx, which is waterproof and allegedly floats.  I had a tether for it and just put it on the deck of my kayak under the deck bungees.   I rolled that kayak many times and the GPS never had any issues.  

Link to comment
On 2/26/2020 at 12:35 AM, Ry Dawg said:

I use my phone for impromptu caching almost strictly. For unplanned, more remote areas, I will load them on my phone and use my garmin watch. Both work fine, I would just rather not search for a cell signal when I could be caching. 
 

I will never, ever list a geocache using my phones coordinates, though. (Most) Phones use triangulation, not actual GPS, so readings can and will vary drastically. 

 

That's patently false.  All but the lowest-end phones out there now have fully integrated GPS receivers integrated into them.  Yes, they are also capable of approximating location based on cell towers which can be useful when indoors or underground, but to say that most phones do not use "actual GPS" is absolutely not true.

 

  • Upvote 2
  • Helpful 1
Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...