[thebruce0]

JesandTodd, on 25 April 2012 - 07:07 AM, said:

Yes. What I normally do it review the map to decide where I'm going to cache today. I pick the center cache in the area I've decided on, run a PQ off of that, load the PQ in my iphone, and then turn off wifi/data.
The compass works just fine, the blue dot works just fine. It's all good.

For caching just in town, I have a PQ that runs every day, and if I'm worried of archivals, I'll re-download the PQ (it's for about 60k out from my home coordinates, max unfound caches). So I may only update my app's catalogue of caches once or twice a week. Geosphere is great for that because of its local database, and its ability to grab the GPX from any individual cache if I want to ensure I have the latest logs. For the most part, caches don't change. For what does change most often I have notifications set up (disables, archivals, publishes, that sort of thing; not DNFs ).
Being in town I rarely turn off data - it's more of a hassle to go scanning an area at various zoom levels to ensure I have whatever maps cached that I think I'll need. In town, caching is short enough that leaving everything on is fine for a good cache run.
Now, going out on a hike, I'll juice up the phone, and may well leave it all on as well, but more often I'll turn off the GPS until nearing the next waypoint. (Geosphere allows disabling of the GPS while still using the app & maps, showing your last known location until you turn it on again). That ability has greatly stretched any battery use to the point that I really don't worry about battery for anything less than a very, very significant hike. I just don't see the point (and this would go even if I used a dedicated device) of keeping GPS reception on when 80% of the time I don't even look at the device
I can understand the hassle of turning it on and off though, which is why I like geosphere so much - makes saving battery one of the simplest things about geocaching =)

JesandTodd, on 25 April 2012 - 07:07 AM, said:

Wherigos are awesome! I've only done 3 so far. Basically, you download the 'cartridge' into your phone via the Wherigo app. Then you complete it by walking into zones and performing virtual tasks.
That's a lame and brief explanation, so hopefully someone in here can explain it a bit better.

That's pretty much it.
But there is a lot of flexibility in the system. Wherigos can be anything from start somewhere and go somewhere, to complex games and interactions with characters, timing with events, calculated tasks, etc... they can be mixed with physical waypoints as well like multi-caches and mysteries. Wherigos provide the greatest flexibility for creativity in on-the-go experiences - but they need a supported device to run (and lots of testing by the programmer).

They take much more work to create, which is why they're still relatively few and far between.

[JesandTodd]

I actually have geosphere and iGeoknife. I should try them out sometime...

[4Happyhours]

Erm ... what's a PQ please?

[thebruce0]

Pocket Queries!

If you're not a premium member, consider the upgrade - http://www.geocachin...ut/premium.aspx (info about PQs in there)
Custom searches, stored queries, can be scheduled, and created to return caches along routes if you're doing traveling, and much more.

[JesandTodd]

4Happyhours, on 26 April 2012 - 12:23 AM, said:

Erm ... what's a PQ please?

From GS glossary:
Pocket Query (PQ)
A Premium Member feature, a Pocket Query is custom geocache search that you can have emailed to you on a daily or weekly basis. Pocket Queries give you the ability to filter your searches so you only receive information on the caches you want to search for in either a GPX of LOC format. This feature lets you download up to 500 caches at one time.



It's old. We can run PQs of 1000 caches.

Basically, a PQ is a premium member feature where I can specify what caches I want to see and have available offline.
We can run 5 a day. So for me, I have a PQ that's 100 caches cantered from my home. I picked 100 because it's easier to manage on my phone, and because this is my 'functional PQ' if you will. It runs 3 times a week (I pick what days it runs).

In this query, I ask that only want to see enabled caches that I haven't found. Those are my only specifications. So if I go caching and find a slew of caches in my hometown, they are not included next time the PQ runs. So I get 100 fresh caches from my hometown 3x/week.

I also have PQs of each small town around me that i run frequently. So if I take a road trip to another town, I have the caches there covered.

When I'm on vacation, I don't want to see any puzzles, and chances are, no multis. Especially if my time is limited. Also, I don't want to see micros.
So you can ask the PQ to eliminate caches that micros, multis, puzzles, whatever you want...
Another one I run is called 'specials' and it's all the virtuals, webcams, and letterboxes within 150 miles of my house.


Then, after you submit your information to the PQ generator, you get an email in about a minute. Once you get the email, it will already be available on your phone.

I upload the info, and then head out. Now, all the info from the PQ (cache description, last 5 logs, hints) is available offline. So if you are in the forest, or in a tunnel, just plain out of service, or in another country and dont wnt to turn your data on, the PQ will be available.

HTH...

[4Happyhours]

That's clever, I think I am doing something similar on my geocaching app; I can do an advanced search and limit types of caches near wherever I want to specify. Then I can sae them to a saved list for future; I did that with Paris ones for when we were on hols recently. I can also limit to one's I've not found but as I'm new I like to see the little found icon as they are fewer than the ones left to find!!
Thank you for your patience with me

[kwcahart]

I can answer that one pretty easy. Any hand held GPS is better than a phone for geocaching.

[UKDAN]

Caching with the iPhone is very good due to the features of the app, but if you want to go for more than a few hours then a gps is essential due to battery life.

[JesandTodd]

kwhart, on 27 April 2012 - 09:15 PM, said:

I can answer that one pretty easy. Any hand held GPS is better than a phone for geocaching.

Yawn...wrong.

[4Happyhours]

Okay. Iphone doing fine; bit worried I might need to invest in a GPS with geocaching facility/support for the sheer ruggedness of a specific unit just in case I do drop my iphone ...
so I'm tracking some on ebay ... not always sure which come with maps uploaded or not, but will exercise caution.

[JesandTodd]

Have you looked into Otterbox?

[taboo8614]

i just got a mophine air juice case and i feel that with a little strip of tape along the seam it would do a reasonable job at protecting you phone and it would give you greate batterylife.

I would have gotten the larger full size battery case but i could not find it in white and i have a white iphone.

[neohiocacher]

I do enjoy my iphone app to search but have to admit it consumes battery power like a hungry baby does to a bottle.
Deep woods has the path jumping alot BUT so did my etrex, but not as bad.
I sometimes use both to help.
Urban caches are awesome with the iphone and the ability to upload pictures and logs in the field can not be beat.
I myself like to send pictures, not spoilers, of the beauty that comes with some of these hides.
There are a few updates I would like to see with the app but for the most part, it is a creative piece of the iphone. Kudos to the developers.
One update I would like to see is the ability to post a picture to an older log like I have done when I visit geocaching.com without having to post the new picture as a log type.
Maybe there is a way and I just do not know about it.
There are times when time passes on a cache I have logged awhile ago that I would like to post a new picture to my old log about something interesting about the cache. Be it a road closure, geo change, or something interesting about the area to assist new cachers. I dont mind having to post a note with a picture, and maybe this is a better way, but the ability to edit the original text would be a good idea also. My eyes are not as good as they used to and sometimes reading a text I sent from the field, displays embarrasing spelling errors.
If there is a way to do this, I would appreciate a lesson.
Thanks

[thebruce0]

From now on I think everyone posting should qualify their "iPhone" comments with the model being referenced


As for battery life, perhaps one should specify what their personal preference for expected battery life should be. For some, charging the device every evening may be normal. For some, if it has to be charged more than twice a week it's a battery hog.

Context!

This post has been edited by thebruce0: 30 April 2012 - 10:55 AM

[JesandTodd]

Yep.

Hey, I've been using the mophie outdoor plus case and it's been fantastic! Cached all day the other day and never had any problems and my phone remained fully charged (well, I let it dip low, then recharge, then dip, then recharge.)

[_Shaddow_]

Just joining this discussion; read through a lot of it, scanned the rest of it. Lots of strong feelings each way about which is best, which is funny because it's just a matter of opinion

Mostly...

I've used both, first a Garmin eTrex Vista HCx (top of the line at the time), then a Droid smartphone for two years after my eTrex died, then most recently for the last six months a Garmin 60CSx. I used them for geocaching, both in the city and hiking far away from cell service, navigation while driving, navigation while hiking (away from service) and logging my tracks.

A very quick summary of my experiences:
eTrex: big problems with tracks due to faulty chipset (Google about it if interested)
Droid: very accurate but a pain to use, and maps are difficult to upload and use, short battery life
60CXs: accurate, easy to use, easy map upload, no worries about protecting it during use, long battery life

One thing that hasn’t been talked about much in this forum topic is the mapsets, especially NW Trails and NW Topos. These, and many of the other mapsets, both general and with custom information, are very easy to load to the Garmins but can not, as far as I know, be loaded directly to any of the smartphones.

Without use of those mapsets, a smartphone has very limited use for geocaching while hiking away from service

[JesandTodd]

I hear you shaddow...I've said it a bunch of times before on these forums, if Moun10bike could get NWtrails on the iPhone, then I'd resell my 60CSx back to eBay.

I'd even be willing to drop a pretty penny on a NWTrails app...



However, I disagree somewhat with your description. Spoiled by the ease of the iPhone, I found the 60 far from easy to use. It requires me to interact with GSAK (which I haven't even come close to understanding). GSAK causes me much frustration....
When I uploaded the NWTrails, I lost my topo maps that came with the GPS. I don't know where they went, if they are gone, what to do if I found them, etc..... I understand my GPS so little that I'm fearful of ever upgrading its software. I dunno....do you even upgrade it's software? Honestly...I barely know how to operate the thing.

Meanwhile, I'm quite fluent in my iPhone.

On the trail, the only, and I mean ONLY thing I ask of my 60csx is that it shows me where I am on the NWTrails. That's it's. Sometimes I'll tell it I found a cache, sometimes I'll ask it to stop navigating.

For the majority of my caching, I find myself just going back to the ease and comfort of my iPhone.


Again....if NWTrails could only be an app on my iPhone......

This post has been edited by JesandTodd: 30 April 2012 - 08:11 PM

[thebruce0]

And there are numerous apps that provide various topo/trail sources. But I primarily use Google and openmaps. For caching in the Ontario wilderness I did load in a GPX of the series of trails from the Ontario Trails Project we were hiking on for use in one of the more quality GPS apps (I highly recommend EveryTrail)
I haven't cached in distant enough wilderness regions yet to warrant specialized topo or trail maps. OTP is already doing their best to confirm and provide trails for everywhere possible within Ontario, either by crowdsourcing or via other reputable trail projects.

I do say though, having all those trails imported to openmaps would be phenomenal

[_Shaddow_]

JesandTodd, on 30 April 2012 - 08:09 PM, said:

I hear you shaddow...I've said it a bunch of times before on these forums, if Moun10bike could get NWtrails on the iPhone, then I'd resell my 60CSx back to eBay.I'd even be willing to drop a pretty penny on a NWTrails app...

This would also influence my use of my smartphone but I would still use my 60 as my primary device. Filling this void to get these mapsets on phones is the next logical big step. My guess is that M10B doesn't have the time, unfortunately.

JesandTodd, on 30 April 2012 - 08:09 PM, said:

However, I disagree somewhat with your description. Spoiled by the ease of the iPhone, I found the 60 far from easy to use. It requires me to interact with GSAK (which I haven't even come close to understanding). GSAK causes me much frustration....When I uploaded the NWTrails, I lost my topo maps that came with the GPS. I don't know where they went, if they are gone, what to do if I found them, etc..... I understand my GPS so little that I'm fearful of ever upgrading its software. I dunno....do you even upgrade it's software? Honestly...I barely know how to operate the thing.Meanwhile, I'm quite fluent in my iPhone. On the trail, the only, and I mean ONLY thing I ask of my 60csx is that it shows me where I am on the NWTrails. That's it's. Sometimes I'll tell it I found a cache, sometimes I'll ask it to stop navigating. For the majority of my caching, I find myself just going back to the ease and comfort of my iPhone. Again....if NWTrails could only be an app on my iPhone......

Well, everything has a learning curve, including smartphones. Personally, I found it harder to figure out the map apps on the phone than the GPSr. But then again, it had been a while since I learned to thoroughly use my eTrex so hard to tell which was harder.

I can answer some of your questions:
There is one file on the 60 for all the maps, it's a .img file type (gmapsupp.img specifically). It has all the loaded mapsets; when you upload new maps it recreates gmapsupp.img and overwrites the old one. So, yes your old topo is 'lost' if you don't have a copy elsewhere. The good news is that there are free topo maps, included NW Topos, that are much, much better than Garmin's.

You can have many maps loaded at one time, though they must be loaded all at the same time. You can then turn the display of them off and on individually in the GPSr.

thebruce0, on 01 May 2012 - 10:22 AM, said:

And there are numerous apps that provide various topo/trail sources. But I primarily use Google and openmaps. For caching in the Ontario wilderness I did load in a GPX of the series of trails from the Ontario Trails Project we were hiking on for use in one of the more quality GPS apps (I highly recommend EveryTrail)I haven't cached in distant enough wilderness regions yet to warrant specialized topo or trail maps. OTP is already doing their best to confirm and provide trails for everywhere possible within Ontario, either by crowdsourcing or via other reputable trail projects.I do say though, having all those trails imported to openmaps would be phenomenal

The gpx loads as a track (or route), yes? On the 60 NW Trails loads as a map. Without going into details, there is a very large difference.

Google maps won't work outside of, or with limited, cell service, which is often when I'm in the woods (as close as 45 minutes from Seattle). I think you can pre-download some maps to openmaps but you have to do this ahead of time and it's tricky to do and easy to miss areas that you may need. I also think you have to pick the zoom levels ahead of time; if you include a high zoom for details then it quickly becomes a LOT of data.

In my 60, I can have topos of Washington State (down to 20ft contours), trails, routeable street maps, and about 10 other maps always loaded (with plenty of room for more; I used to keep a routeable street map of the entire US). With POIs (points of interest) I can have every cache in the State loaded as well. The main downside is lack of satellite view but I won't have that with my phone either since I'm out of service range.

Basically, we are hitting on one of the major differences, if not the major difference: the availability of mapsets. Another being the availability of service.

BTW and FWIW: I'll swear up and down that my Droid was/is more accurate than my 60...

[JesandTodd]

_Shaddow_, on 01 May 2012 - 04:56 PM, said:

I can answer some of your questions:
There is one file on the 60 for all the maps, it's a .img file type (gmapsupp.img specifically). It has all the loaded mapsets; when you upload new maps it recreates gmapsupp.img and overwrites the old one. So, yes your old topo is 'lost' if you don't have a copy elsewhere. The good news is that there are free topo maps, included NW Topos, that are much, much better than Garmin's.

You can have many maps loaded at one time, though they must be loaded all at the same time. You can then turn the display of them off and on individually in the GPSr.
.

While geocaching, can I see the topo lines, NWTrails, and geocaches all on the same screen at the same time??

_Shaddow_, on 01 May 2012 - 04:56 PM, said:

The main downside is lack of satellite view but I won't have that with my phone either since I'm out of service range.

I don't ever use the sat views on my iPhone when hiking our trails out here. It's all green. Trees are trees...in Az i only used sat view...i could pick out which cactus, rock pile, or palo verde trees the cache was near. It wasn't until I moved here that I found the "topo" view on the iPhone app. They blow, tbh. But....some trails are listed there. Like about half of the trails on cougar/tiger mtn show on the app.

_Shaddow_, on 01 May 2012 - 04:56 PM, said:

BTW and FWIW: I'll swear up and down that my Droid was/is more accurate than my 60...

[thebruce0]

_Shaddow_, on 01 May 2012 - 04:56 PM, said:

The gpx loads as a track (or route), yes? On the 60 NW Trails loads as a map. Without going into details, there is a very large difference.

In this particular case, yes they've created the trails as a collection and offer them in a few formats, but not in map image tiles, AFAIK.
If I were looking for map tiles, however, I'd download them to the phone and use an image viewer :) (though granted that wouldn't come with overlaid gps location). Who knows, maybe there's an app for that. But for any service, you're getting into not just map tiles, but the actual ability to use gps interacting with those maps. For hardware, of course, it's easier as the device may be set up to handle that already, so you'd just need to load up the tiles. For software, you'd need an app that's built for that - either a proprietary one (like openmaps' with their own tiles) or some free-use dynamic one... On the web, Google does let you set up custom map layers for use in their embedded map widget, but no, I don't think they have provided that ability at all in mobile device apps :)

Nonetheless, I've personally never come to a point of having to use 3rd party map tiles with my caching. As mentioned below, cached map tiles from generic sources (google or openmaps, typically) have always been enough.

Quote

Google maps won't work outside of, or with limited, cell service, which is often when I'm in the woods (as close as 45 minutes from Seattle). I think you can pre-download some maps to openmaps but you have to do this ahead of time and it's tricky to do and easy to miss areas that you may need. I also think you have to pick the zoom levels ahead of time; if you include a high zoom for details then it quickly becomes a LOT of data.

There are GPS apps that will allow you to explicitly download map tile packs (where allowed), even within specific ranges, and between specific zoom levels - they typically tell you how large of a download it would be, but that allows you to use them offline without data.
Geosphere, and the basic Google maps app both cache map tiles automatically as well as you pan around. If I know I'm going to be without data for a while, I'll zoom up to the level I usually view and slide around the area I'll be in, then do the same up and down a zoom level or two. That's usually enough for my outing.
No data, no problem! :)

Quote

In my 60, I can have topos...

And I've never been a fan of topos :) for geocaching, I either review the area on my desktop before heading out, or just check a few maps of the area to determine the landscape and best routes when I'm near... *shrug* I'm not as concerned with having offline topographic maps for my geocaching trips. Never needed them, never really found high value in them. (that's not to say they don't have value, but I've never personally found enough value in them to warrant seeking out proper apps or hardware to support their use)

Quote

Basically, we are hitting on one of the major differences, if not the major difference: the availability of mapsets. Another being the availability of service.

enh. For the points mentioned above :)

Quote

BTW and FWIW: I'll swear up and down that my Droid was/is more accurate than my 60...

Not surprised... it all depends on hardware models being compared, not general brand names (which so many in this hobby seem to love comparing)! :)

[RangerR47]

If you are referring to straight up geocaching , trail use that actually goes into the wilderness, then its a resounding YES. There is no doubt about it. But if you like to be able to stay on paved paths and be able to just pull up new caches on the fly, the iphone works fine. But for real GPS applications, that is what a GPS handheld is for, the phones its a very small added extra to the many functions it has, so its not suppose to be as accurate and durable. So I dont think you need to get all uptight if you want to use your phone and you think your not missing anything by doing this, you may not. But if you leave the pavement and get to the wilderness and want to really track your movement and still have really good accuracy,save waypoints, etc then a dedicated GPS is the answer. I have used my iphone at times and have it work fine, then other times with more tree cover and it was worthless, was off by at least 50+yrds. The battery will not last, if you really do a day of caching around the city, leaving the phone on using maps to get there etc. It will not last 2-4hrs tops, sure you can charge in the car, who wouldnt, but you have to or it will not make it. Most GPSs will last 14hrs give or take. So again, there is nothing wrong with use a new smart phone for doing these activities at all, its part of their utility for sure. But to ask if a dedicated GPS is better for GPS "stuff" , the answer is plain to see.

[thebruce0]

RangerR47, did you even read the rest of the thread?

That said, I'm sorry your experience with your iPhone (whatever model it is) isn't very positive...
To recap: I cached with my 3GS in almost every environment, without problems. The only environment I haven't truly tested is deep wilderness, though I've come pretty darn close with some of the larger forested conservation areas in central Ontario. Still no problems.

Nonetheless, the recommendation is still sound - caching in the wilderness is still very good reason to carry a good dedicated GPS.

[JesandTodd]

thebruce0, on 04 May 2012 - 03:10 PM, said:

RangerR47, did you even read the rest of the thread?

That was my first thought. "ahh, another person who didn't read any of the thread". Meh...
But since his last find was 2.5 yrs ago, I'd venture to say the best model he could have used would be the 3gs. And like you, I found that to be pretty good too.


My external battery came with some mapsets and the ability to store tracks. I'll be curious to see how much battery it uses.

This post has been edited by JesandTodd: 04 May 2012 - 04:26 PM

[_Shaddow_]

thebruce0, on 02 May 2012 - 03:41 PM, said:

_Shaddow_, on 01 May 2012 - 04:56 PM, said:

The gpx loads as a track (or route), yes? On the 60 NW Trails loads as a map. Without going into details, there is a very large difference.

In this particular case, yes they've created the trails as a collection and offer them in a few formats, but not in map image tiles, AFAIK.
If I were looking for map tiles, however, I'd download them to the phone and use an image viewer (though granted that wouldn't come with overlaid gps location). Who knows, maybe there's an app for that. But for any service, you're getting into not just map tiles, but the actual ability to use gps interacting with those maps. For hardware, of course, it's easier as the device may be set up to handle that already, so you'd just need to load up the tiles. For software, you'd need an app that's built for that - either a proprietary one (like openmaps' with their own tiles) or some free-use dynamic one... On the web, Google does let you set up custom map layers for use in their embedded map widget, but no, I don't think they have provided that ability at all in mobile device apps

Nonetheless, I've personally never come to a point of having to use 3rd party map tiles with my caching. As mentioned below, cached map tiles from generic sources (google or openmaps, typically) have always been enough.

Quote

Google maps won't work outside of, or with limited, cell service, which is often when I'm in the woods (as close as 45 minutes from Seattle). I think you can pre-download some maps to openmaps but you have to do this ahead of time and it's tricky to do and easy to miss areas that you may need. I also think you have to pick the zoom levels ahead of time; if you include a high zoom for details then it quickly becomes a LOT of data.

There are GPS apps that will allow you to explicitly download map tile packs (where allowed), even within specific ranges, and between specific zoom levels - they typically tell you how large of a download it would be, but that allows you to use them offline without data.
Geosphere, and the basic Google maps app both cache map tiles automatically as well as you pan around. If I know I'm going to be without data for a while, I'll zoom up to the level I usually view and slide around the area I'll be in, then do the same up and down a zoom level or two. That's usually enough for my outing.
No data, no problem!

Quote

In my 60, I can have topos...

And I've never been a fan of topos for geocaching, I either review the area on my desktop before heading out, or just check a few maps of the area to determine the landscape and best routes when I'm near... *shrug* I'm not as concerned with having offline topographic maps for my geocaching trips. Never needed them, never really found high value in them. (that's not to say they don't have value, but I've never personally found enough value in them to warrant seeking out proper apps or hardware to support their use)

Quote

Basically, we are hitting on one of the major differences, if not the major difference: the availability of mapsets. Another being the availability of service.

enh. For the points mentioned above

Quote

BTW and FWIW: I'll swear up and down that my Droid was/is more accurate than my 60...

Not surprised... it all depends on hardware models being compared, not general brand names (which so many in this hobby seem to love comparing)!

I just turn my GPSr on

[_Shaddow_]

thebruce0, on 04 May 2012 - 03:10 PM, said:

RangerR47, did you even read the rest of the thread?

That said, I'm sorry your experience with your iPhone (whatever model it is) isn't very positive...
To recap: I cached with my 3GS in almost every environment, without problems. The only environment I haven't truly tested is deep wilderness, though I've come pretty darn close with some of the larger forested conservation areas in central Ontario. Still no problems.

Nonetheless, the recommendation is still sound - caching in the wilderness is still very good reason to carry a good dedicated GPS.

Your phone seems to be the best thing for you, based on your opinions. For me, when caching in the city and not on a park trail, I prefer to use my phone. For caching in a park where I like to know the trails to pick the best route, or any time when I hike it's GPSr all the way for location and mapping related use. For the parks, I would use my phone if it had the trail mapset on it AND it was very easy to use AND fast to use. For hiking, a dedicated GPSr is the only serious way to go. I think your 'deep wilderness' is my normal hike. Not a knock just a difference. Though I've been paperless from when I started caching so will still have the cache info loaded to my phone in case I need it.

[_Shaddow_]

BTW: this topic 'Is there REALLY a gps device better than the iPhone?' really sounds like something a troll would post.

I don't think the OP is one, or intended that, but wow, ask if something better than the iPhone? Everyone knows that iphone owners think it's the center of the universe

[JesandTodd]

Shaddow...is there a local hike around here that you think an iPhone is incapable of supporting?


Serious question here....

Center of the universe??? I dunno.....maybe....

[thebruce0]

_Shaddow_, on 04 May 2012 - 07:43 PM, said:

BTW: this topic 'Is there REALLY a gps device better than the iPhone?' really sounds like something a troll would post.

I don't think the OP is one, or intended that, but wow, ask if something better than the iPhone? Everyone knows that iphone owners think it's the center of the universe

Most definitely, it is not. And saying we're implying that won't get you any brownie points (not that you're looking for any ) especially after the objective looks we've done at various models and brands throughout the thread.

Your experience may be truth. Everyone has different experiences, to varying degrees. Their opinions of their experiences vary to a far greater degree depending on comfort level and skill level, plus other factors.

You're more comfortable with a GPSr; that's great. To say the iPhone (without qualification) cannot handle what you're uncomfortable using it for is a misnomer, as evidenced by our own experiences.

We're not trying to debate that the "iPhone" is the best gps device (and earlier in the thread I emphatically stated it wasn't - it's a hybrid device, not a dedicated GPS, meaning one would hope that there are dedicated GPS devices better than any and all iPhone models, and there are)

We're just trying to stay objective here. Qualify your device by providing brand and model, share your opinions and experiences and their contexts, but try to avoid making blanket statements of certain fact please

[_Shaddow_]

JesandTodd, on 04 May 2012 - 10:01 PM, said:

Shaddow...is there a local hike around here that you think an iPhone is incapable of supporting?Serious question here....Center of the universe??? I dunno.....maybe....

lol I noticed that the title didn't read '... than a -smartphone-?'

What you mean by incapable of supporting (also a serious question) Also, I never said it was incapable of supporting... anything. Well, except NW Trails. Which is extremely useful. The rest I had to say was about usage styles.

But to address your question, I will say that a GPSr loaded with NW Trails will be much more effective than any smartphone on a hike, and I'll even suggest a hike in an area with service, and a generally extremely easy/safe area to hike as well: Cougar Mt. Lets load some waypoints and see who has an easier time getting to them and back to the trailhead. Both will load up and point the direction to the waypoints, but only the GPSr with NW Trails will show you all the miles of spiderweb trails and let you every easily workout the best route.

There's only two primary things for a GPSr or smartphone to do, determine your location and display it on a map (the rest is info derived from your location and your track). Obviously, both will know your location. Then it comes to maps and getting and maintaining maps on any phone right now is very cumbersome. I would love to be wrong. In fact I came to the forums and discovered this topic while researching into a smartphone app that would support Garmin's img file type. If anyone knows of one, please tell me.

thebruce0, on 07 May 2012 - 05:32 AM, said:

_Shaddow_, on 04 May 2012 - 07:43 PM, said:

BTW: this topic 'Is there REALLY a gps device better than the iPhone?' really sounds like something a troll would post.I don't think the OP is one, or intended that, but wow, ask if something better than the iPhone? Everyone knows that iphone owners think it's the center of the universe

Most definitely, it is not. And saying we're implying that won't get you any brownie points (not that you're looking for any ) especially after the objective looks we've done at various models and brands throughout the thread.Your experience may be truth. Everyone has different experiences, to varying degrees. Their opinions of their experiences vary to a far greater degree depending on comfort level and skill level, plus other factors.You're more comfortable with a GPSr; that's great. To say the iPhone (without qualification) cannot handle what you're uncomfortable using it for is a misnomer, as evidenced by our own experiences.We're not trying to debate that the "iPhone" is the best gps device (and earlier in the thread I emphatically stated it wasn't - it's a hybrid device, not a dedicated GPS, meaning one would hope that there are dedicated GPS devices better than any and all iPhone models, and there are)We're just trying to stay objective here. Qualify your device by providing brand and model, share your opinions and experiences and their contexts, but try to avoid making blanket statements of certain fact please

Actually, those are the very points and prospective that I've taken. Which makes me think your at least a little touchy about comments that seem negative in any way towards the iphone. Which supports my theory that iphone users think it's the holy grail. Plus the whole topic subject thing asking if anything is else is better, you know, singling iphones over all the other smartphones. And the fact that my comment was just a playful jab that was seen as serious.

I did notice the Freudian slip '...blanket statements of certain FACT...' when I think you meant opinions. Ok, just playing a little again.

Seriously, I've stated that not only my opinions are opinions, but that others statements are as well. Heck, my first sentence was "Lots of strong feelings each way about which is best, which is funny because it's just a matter of opinion" So, I think you jumped to an erroneous conclusion about my perspective based on your emotional response to only one of many statements I made. Maybe my playful jab landed hard.

[JesandTodd]

_Shaddow_, on 07 May 2012 - 06:22 AM, said:

JesandTodd, on 04 May 2012 - 10:01 PM, said:

Shaddow...is there a local hike around here that you think an iPhone is incapable of supporting?Serious question here....Center of the universe??? I dunno.....maybe....

lol I noticed that the title didn't read '... than a -smartphone-?'

What you mean by incapable of supporting (also a serious question) Also, I never said it was incapable of supporting... anything. Well, except NW Trails. Which is extremely useful. The rest I had to say was about usage styles.

Shaddow..I wasnt putting words in your mouth, or implying anything when I said that. I was unable post coherently at the time of that posting for various reasons. Also, I reply to the forums on my iphone so I am sometimes to the point in an ineffecient and abrupt manner.

My question meant to say....Is there anyplace around here where you think the iphone (or other smartphone) cant handle being the one and only GPS?
(I've never owned any other smartphone so I can't comment on them).

Obviously, we share the same GC area. You are familiar with where I cache. Is there anyplace where you would feel uncomfortable using only a smartphone?

I can't deny the awesomeness of NWTrails. I know I've said it before, but it's the only reason I got the CSx.
Yes, NWTrails is fantastical for Cougar Mtn....they are fantastical for any and all mountains around here.

But...Of all the caches Ive found on Cougar, probably 90% of them were found without NWTrails. Its ok. I like finding a new trailhead and taking it to see where it goes. I like exploring.

Would I like exploring in an unfamiliar mountain where I am miles from my car and all alone? God no. Before I got the CSx I wouldn't venture that far *because* I couldn't see all the trails.

But, I could.

[_Shaddow_]

JesandTodd, on 07 May 2012 - 08:10 AM, said:

_Shaddow_, on 07 May 2012 - 06:22 AM, said:

JesandTodd, on 04 May 2012 - 10:01 PM, said:

Shaddow...is there a local hike around here that you think an iPhone is incapable of supporting?Serious question here....Center of the universe??? I dunno.....maybe....

lol I noticed that the title didn't read '... than a -smartphone-?'

What you mean by incapable of supporting (also a serious question) Also, I never said it was incapable of supporting... anything. Well, except NW Trails. Which is extremely useful. The rest I had to say was about usage styles.

Shaddow..I wasnt putting words in your mouth, or implying anything when I said that. I was unable post coherently at the time of that posting for various reasons. Also, I reply to the forums on my iphone so I am sometimes to the point in an ineffecient and abrupt manner.

I didn't see anything like that in your post, nor did I mean any in mine, no worries, I think we're just fine.

JesandTodd, on 07 May 2012 - 08:10 AM, said:

_Shaddow_, on 07 May 2012 - 06:22 AM, said:

JesandTodd, on 04 May 2012 - 10:01 PM, said:

Shaddow...is there a local hike around here that you think an iPhone is incapable of supporting?Serious question here....Center of the universe??? I dunno.....maybe....

lol I noticed that the title didn't read '... than a -smartphone-?'

What you mean by incapable of supporting (also a serious question) Also, I never said it was incapable of supporting... anything. Well, except NW Trails. Which is extremely useful. The rest I had to say was about usage styles.

My question meant to say....Is there anyplace around here where you think the iphone (or other smartphone) cant handle being the one and only GPS?
(I've never owned any other smartphone so I can't comment on them).

Obviously, we share the same GC area. You are familiar with where I cache. Is there anyplace where you would feel uncomfortable using only a smartphone?

I can't deny the awesomeness of NWTrails. I know I've said it before, but it's the only reason I got the CSx.
Yes, NWTrails is fantastical for Cougar Mtn....they are fantastical for any and all mountains around here.

But...Of all the caches Ive found on Cougar, probably 90% of them were found without NWTrails. Its ok. I like finding a new trailhead and taking it to see where it goes. I like exploring.

Would I like exploring in an unfamiliar mountain where I am miles from my car and all alone? God no. Before I got the CSx I wouldn't venture that far *because* I couldn't see all the trails.

But, I could.

I'm honesty not clear on the question, I mean both a GPS chip is a GPS chip whether it's in a smartphone or a dedicated device, so we're not talking about accuracy, at least not to point where it would affect the ability to navigate or cache. Both will tell you where you are which is the one and only function of GPS (Global Position System).

After that, it's all about using the positional information; the supporting software will do about the same things such as compute, speed, direction, etc. And the other critical item is the mapsets. That's where they differ in ability right now. Mapsets are currently designed for dedicated devices and not smartphones. The maps that are available for use on smartphones are the same ones you'll find on your home computer and also require a connection to the internet, via hard line or the cellphone data network. So if your phone can reach the network, you have access to some maps (not NW Trails and similar). Yes, you can download maps to a smartphone but it's a cumbersome time consuming process that is less than desirable. And you still won't have NW Trails.

Then remaining differences between smartphones and a dedicated GPSr is all about the physical aspects, durability, battery life, ease of use etc. Some of those things can be debated endlessly, such as quality of use, while others are more factual, such as battery life. I'm wondering if I might be blurring a line here and that is causing some confusion in the conversation: the line between the fact that dedicated GPSrs have better mapsets for hiking and my opinion that the availability of those mapsets makes GPSrs better when hiking. I've used both smartphones map apps and dedicated GPSrs extensively, both in the city and far off trail in the mountains, both for caching, navigation and search and rescue use, and given that, my opinions are as follows:

Smartphone: great for satellite view, more up-to date and better rendered street maps when service is available, better screens for viewing
Dedicated GPSr: better topo and trail maps, much faster and easier to use in the field, faster and easier to prepare to go into the field, more durable, more reliable, longer battery life, less of my attention is needed, easier to use in every way.

For a bigger picture comparsion, neither a smartphone or GPSr are necessary to go into the field; some (many) will say that a map and compass is superior (for one, the batteries won't run out)

[JesandTodd]

_Shaddow_, on 07 May 2012 - 09:04 AM, said:

I didn't see anything like that in your post, nor did I mean any in mine, no worries, I think we're just fine.

Good

_Shaddow_, on 07 May 2012 - 09:04 AM, said:

Smartphone: great for satellite view, more up-to date and better rendered street maps when service is available, better screens for viewing
Dedicated GPSr: better topo and trail maps, much faster and easier to use in the field, faster and easier to prepare to go into the field, more durable, more reliable, longer battery life, less of my attention is needed, easier to use in every way.

For a bigger picture comparsion, neither a smartphone or GPSr are necessary to go into the field; some (many) will say that a map and compass is superior (for one, the batteries won't run out)

I think we can agree here (except for the 'easier to use in every way' part.)

Map and compass...yes. I'm already scheduled for an outdooor class (at Discovery Park I believe) Afterall, the reason I got into geocaching was the map aspect of it all.... I <3 maps!

[_Shaddow_]

I'm also wondering if the discussion might be crossing a line between two distinctive groups that don't compare very well; city caching and hiking caching (with the vast majority of cachers being of the city type). I think the discussion could be quite different within the two groups. For the city, the smartphone is going to be on a much more even level and the discussion might center mostly around styles then unit capabilities. For serious hiking, it's GPSr all the way - not just my opinion but a general consensus

[_Shaddow_]

JesandTodd, on 07 May 2012 - 09:16 AM, said:

I think we can agree here (except for the 'easier to use in every way' part.)

After I posted that I reread it and thought oops, I'll be hearing about that hehe
Yeah, lets put 'many' in there instead
In fact, I'd like to instead remove that one as it's too general

JesandTodd, on 07 May 2012 - 09:16 AM, said:

Map and compass...yes. I'm already scheduled for an outdooor class (at Discovery Park I believe) Afterall, the reason I got into geocaching was the map aspect of it all.... I <3 maps!

Great! A very valuable hiking skill to have, even if just for backup.

I think it's fun in it's own way too, thought about doing some orienteering at some point. I also like maps. Figuring how to use GIS info is on my future fun list. Then maybe I could make my own mapsets, maybe for smartphones

[JesandTodd]

Sure, but the general consensus 2 years ago was the iPhone couldn't ever find a micro. Or leave the city, or step off the cement onto a dirt path. People with iPhones weren't real cachers, the scourge of geocaching, and may infact result in the fall of the game.

Given enough time, I could actually pull of a post that says each and every one of those things. The general consensus isn't always right.

In my field, we practice evidence based practice. We don't look at things and say, "this is the way we've always done it". In fact, if you find yourself saying that, then we assume its wrong, and seek better ways to improve things.

I think so many people (in general) refuse the believe that the iphone (smartphone) can actually work. Each thread is filled with people who simply won't have it.

Then I or someone else comes up here and says it really works and usually I have to endure a small beating. But that's ok. Because I know how my device works.

I feel I'm serious about hiking. I have my limitations but I do my best.


If we were just talking about city caching, then this thread wouldn't be as long as it is. It's a no brainer that a smartphone is superior here.
If you think we're blurring lines, my whole participation in this thread is that smartphones can be used just fine for serious hiking.

[JesandTodd]

_Shaddow_, on 07 May 2012 - 09:30 AM, said:

Then maybe I could make my own mapsets, maybe for smartphones

I'd be very pleased

[thebruce0]

Shaddow, your last comment was the best you've posted so far =P

As for your reply to me, please stop falsely claiming I'm making emotional responses. You couldn't be further from the truth.

As for "blanket statements of certain fact", perhaps I should have put "certain fact" in quotes; it was not a freudian slip. I thought that would be understood; my bad. By that I mean stating your opinion then stating it as truth (eg "Everyone knows that iphone owners think it's the center of the universe" - comes off as a sarcastic attack on iPhone owners). Again, your last comment was better in that regard.

Now, instead of discussing each other's discussion methods, let's keep this on track...

As for map sets, the value of the device based solely on availability of map sets is entirely up to the cacher's caching style. The existence of certain map sets aren't necessarily exclusive to specific devices, and many would argue that yes, satellites, maps, and preparing beforehand are normal and standard practice for going caching out in the wilderness, whatever device you choose to use.

I don't think anyone in this thread recommended going out only with a smartphone into the far wilderness away from civilization. Heck I'd even recommend that if you only had one GPSr you should take a 2nd as backup.


In short, please stop claiming we're somehow emotionally attached to our iPhones above all other GPS devices, especially in this thread; then read over our comments again to see where our opinions lie regarding various GPS devices and models, including smartphones and iPhones specifically; and how we've responded addressing the OP; and that we didn't start this thread, only tried to keep it grounded away from emotional responses on either side

Quote

I'm also wondering if the discussion might be crossing a line between two distinctive groups that don't compare very well; city caching and hiking caching (with the vast majority of cachers being of the city type). I think the discussion could be quite different within the two groups. For the city, the smartphone is going to be on a much more even level and the discussion might center mostly around styles then unit capabilities. For serious hiking, it's GPSr all the way - not just my opinion but a general consensus

I wouldn't say city caching vs hiking caching - though there might be a certain sway in general cacher habits... once again, the iPhone (from the 3GS and up) is certainly capable of caching effectively and successfully in many environments that non-smartphone cachers seem to think it's not. So that point specifically is moot. However, ease of use, skill requirements, common sense, additional environmental factors -- all play into a more detailed overview of whether smartphones or dedicated devices are "better" in certain environments. So there is no generic "X is better than Y". -- another reason these debates can go on and on, because even apart from devices, cachers will still debate about which style is better...

So my interest in these debates really is more about test cases with specific models. What is the model capable of? Because I know how I like to cache, so which device is best for me. (and by extension, when someone asks which device is better, I like to know a little more about their case than simply saying "X is better than Y")

This:

Quote

In my field, we practice evidence based practice. We don't look at things and say, "this is the way we've always done it". In fact, if you find yourself saying that, then we assume its wrong, and seek better ways to improve things.

I think so many people (in general) refuse the believe that the iphone (smartphone) can actually work. Each thread is filled with people who simply won't have it.

Then I or someone else comes up here and says it really works and usually I have to endure a small beating. But that's ok. Because I know how my device works.

This post has been edited by thebruce0: 07 May 2012 - 09:36 AM

[_Shaddow_]

JesandTodd, on 07 May 2012 - 09:32 AM, said:

Sure, but the general consensus 2 years ago was the iPhone couldn't ever find a micro. Or leave the city, or step off the cement onto a dirt path. People with iPhones weren't real cachers, the scourge of geocaching, and may infact result in the fall of the game.

Given enough time, I could actually pull of a post that says each and every one of those things. The general consensus isn't always right.

In my field, we practice evidence based practice. We don't look at things and say, "this is the way we've always done it". In fact, if you find yourself saying that, then we assume its wrong, and seek better ways to improve things.

I think so many people (in general) refuse the believe that the iphone (smartphone) can actually work. Each thread is filled with people who simply won't have it.

Then I or someone else comes up here and says it really works and usually I have to endure a small beating. But that's ok. Because I know how my device works.

I feel I'm serious about hiking. I have my limitations but I do my best.


If we were just talking about city caching, then this thread wouldn't be as long as it is. It's a no brainer that a smartphone is superior here.
If you think we're blurring lines, my whole participation in this thread is that smartphones can be used just fine for serious hiking.

Sorry, didn't mean to insult you and my comments where directed towards others while considering the topic title.
You're working on my elevation challenge and that makes you a serious hiker in my book. (And participation in my challenge isn't necessary to be a serious hiker either)

We're about 100% on the same line of thinking. For one, when I hear someone say 'old school' as if it's better, I say 'oh, you mean the one that burned down?'

But I see the consensus here in this forum topic being that a smartphone is just a good as a dedicated GPSr for all situations, and that currently isn't true.

The consensus I know on the trail isn't just what I hear (from friends that might tend to share my same opinion), it's what I see. What I'm about to say probably won't be liked but the truth is that those with smart phones are also generally the ones clearly less prepared, those I see using GPSrs generally are clearly more prepared. This by their clothing choice (style and funtion), footware, amount and type of gear carried, etc, and the amount of wear on those items (read: time on the trail). I've concluded that those more prepared prefer dedicated GPSrs.

Personally I go to what works best for me now, not because it was the best before. For the same reason that you won't find me hanging on to the past, you won't find me jumping on the new is better bandwagon. For me, smartphones will be better for this situation when they are better for this situation. I'm not bitter towards smartphones either, I love mine, I think it's awesome. But not at everything.

[JesandTodd]

_Shaddow_, on 07 May 2012 - 09:54 AM, said:

Sorry, didn't mean to insult you and my comments where directed towards others while considering the topic title.

You're working on my elevation challenge and that makes you a serious hiker in my book. (And participation in my challenge isn't necessary to be a serious hiker either)

We're about 100% on the same line of thinking. For one, when I hear someone say 'old school' as if it's better, I say 'oh, you mean the one that burned down?'

But I see the consensus here in this forum topic being that a smartphone is just a good as a dedicated GPSr for all situations, and that currently isn't true.

The consensus I know on the trail isn't just what I hear (from friends that might tend to share my same opinion), it's what I see. What I'm about to say probably won't be liked but the truth is that those with smart phones are also generally the ones clearly less prepared, those I see using GPSrs generally are clearly more prepared. This by their clothing choice (style and funtion), footware, amount and type of gear carried, etc, and the amount of wear on those items (read: time on the trail). I've concluded that those more prepared prefer dedicated GPSrs.

Personally I go to what works best for me now, not because it was the best before. For the same reason that you won't find me hanging on to the past, you won't find me jumping on the new is better bandwagon. For me, smartphones will be better for this situation when they are better for this situation. I'm not bitter towards smartphones either, I love mine, I think it's awesome. But not at everything.

I haven't been insulted by anything you've said or in the manner in which you said it. I don't insult easily. As a nurse, I get raked over the coals with great frequency, lol.
We're still good : )

Yes...there is a much, MUCH higher amount of unprepared smartphone users our there then GPSr users out there. I can't argue that. And not just on the trail.

Its easier to get into geocaching, hiking, etc now with a smartphone, and cheaper. Cheaper because I already have the phone. The GPS + GSAK, plus the holder, the endless supply of batteries, the length of time it takes me to prepare my garmin....those things stink, cost more money, and would require one to be more serious, I would assume.


Anyhow, If I believed that the iphone was perfect in all occasions, I never would have purchased my garmin. Even if it only sits in my backpack while I hike.

[_Shaddow_]

thebruce0, on 07 May 2012 - 09:36 AM, said:

As for your reply to me, please stop falsely claiming I'm making emotional responses. You couldn't be further from the truth.

As for "blanket statements of certain fact", perhaps I should have put "certain fact" in quotes; it was not a freudian slip. I thought that would be understood; my bad. By that I mean stating your opinion then stating it as truth (eg "Everyone knows that iphone owners think it's the center of the universe" - comes off as a sarcastic attack on iPhone owners). Again, your last comment was better in that regard.

also

thebruce0, on 07 May 2012 - 09:36 AM, said:

In short, please stop claiming we're somehow emotionally attached to our iPhones above all other GPS devices, especially in this thread; then read over our comments again to see where our opinions lie regarding various GPS devices and models, including smartphones and iPhones specifically; and how we've responded addressing the OP; and that we didn't start this thread, only tried to keep it grounded away from emotional responses on either side

It was a JOKE. Using a sarcastic attack. For fun. Obviously there is some truth to it as you keep having to comment on it which means that you're a little emotional about it too. Just say'n

thebruce0, on 07 May 2012 - 09:36 AM, said:

As for map sets, the value of the device based solely on availability of map sets is entirely up to the cacher's caching style. The existence of certain map sets aren't necessarily exclusive to specific devices, and many would argue that yes, satellites, maps, and preparing beforehand are normal and standard practice for going caching out in the wilderness, whatever device you choose to use.

I don't think anyone in this thread recommended going out only with a smartphone into the far wilderness away from civilization. Heck I'd even recommend that if you only had one GPSr you should take a 2nd as backup.

Then we are saying the same thing and I'm not sure what the issue is.

Though I would say it's not the best advice to take a seconded GPSr as backup; you're better off using that weight carrying power to take other items, such as more or better food, first aid, survival items, shelter, fire starting, etc. Assuming you have a map and compass which anyone should have if they are going into the situation where they think a second GPSr is important. Loading yourself down with misappropriated weight is counterproductive to survival.

thebruce0, on 07 May 2012 - 09:36 AM, said:

Quote

I'm also wondering if the discussion might be crossing a line between two distinctive groups that don't compare very well; city caching and hiking caching (with the vast majority of cachers being of the city type). I think the discussion could be quite different within the two groups. For the city, the smartphone is going to be on a much more even level and the discussion might center mostly around styles then unit capabilities. For serious hiking, it's GPSr all the way - not just my opinion but a general consensus

I wouldn't say city caching vs hiking caching - though there might be a certain sway in general cacher habits... once again, the iPhone (from the 3GS and up) is certainly capable of caching effectively and successfully in many environments that non-smartphone cachers seem to think it's not. So that point specifically is moot. However, ease of use, skill requirements, common sense, additional environmental factors -- all play into a more detailed overview of whether smartphones or dedicated devices are "better" in certain environments. So there is no generic "X is better than Y". -- another reason these debates can go on and on, because even apart from devices, cachers will still debate about which style is better...

I'm not sure your point here so can't respond to it

thebruce0, on 07 May 2012 - 09:36 AM, said:

So my interest in these debates really is more about test cases with specific models. What is the model capable of? Because I know how I like to cache, so which device is best for me. (and by extension, when someone asks which device is better, I like to know a little more about their case than simply saying "X is better than Y")

Ok. As long as you're not saying that we're only to discuss what interests you.

thebruce0, on 07 May 2012 - 09:36 AM, said:

This:

Quote

In my field, we practice evidence based practice. We don't look at things and say, "this is the way we've always done it". In fact, if you find yourself saying that, then we assume its wrong, and seek better ways to improve things.

I think so many people (in general) refuse the believe that the iphone (smartphone) can actually work. Each thread is filled with people who simply won't have it.

Then I or someone else comes up here and says it really works and usually I have to endure a small beating. But that's ok. Because I know how my device works.

Which is what I'm doing. Look to my posts to see my clear and concise conclusions and how I support them or came to believe them.

[_Shaddow_]

JesandTodd, on 07 May 2012 - 10:27 AM, said:

I haven't been insulted by anything you've said or in the manner in which you said it. I don't insult easily. As a nurse, I get raked over the coals with great frequency, lol.
We're still good : )

Yes...there is a much, MUCH higher amount of unprepared smartphone users our there then GPSr users out there. I can't argue that. And not just on the trail.

Its easier to get into geocaching, hiking, etc now with a smartphone, and cheaper. Cheaper because I already have the phone. The GPS + GSAK, plus the holder, the endless supply of batteries, the length of time it takes me to prepare my garmin....those things stink, cost more money, and would require one to be more serious, I would assume.


Anyhow, If I believed that the iphone was perfect in all occasions, I never would have purchased my garmin. Even if it only sits in my backpack while I hike.

Good to hear about the good part, ouch on the other. (One of my first jobs was a central service tech at Swedish and what we did was bring supplies to the nursing stations so I know some about what you guys have to put up with from some of the doctors. )

That's a good point, why pay extra for a GPSr if you don't need to. Also the speed, it is much faster to use in most cases, basically grab and go using an app to bring up a particular or nearby cache. That's the reason I use my phone for city caching (as I ready said). But when I step onto any kind of significant trail system, which can be found in many of our city parks, it gets faster to load the waypoint in my GPSr to see the location verse the trails. Might have something to do with the part of the country we live in too (PNW), our terrain can change fast to pretty rough even in the city, plus with the heavy ground cover and 100'+ trees you can't see much but the immediate area around you and the sky above (clouds lol), so you can't go directly to the cache ie can't follow the arrow, need to navigate. It's much like driving a car, you can't just go there but need to find a route.

[thebruce0]

Quote

It was a JOKE. Using a sarcastic attack. For fun. Obviously there is some truth to it as you keep having to comment on it which means that you're a little emotional about it too. Just say'n

I can get emotional about comments directed at me - not my iPhone. Stop talking about me.

_Shaddow_, on 07 May 2012 - 09:54 AM, said:

You're working on my elevation challenge and that makes you a serious hiker in my book. (And participation in my challenge isn't necessary to be a serious hiker either)

Who are you referring to? I haven't seen that challenge yet, but it does look intriguing and fun. If I were near, I'm sure I would be up for the challenge! (even just using my 4S, as that data input I'm sure you'd find valuable; I'm sure you know tracking and elevation can be done with some available iOS apps)
I'm more curious about the requirement to use (and by your words "promote") the NW Trail maps, and whether a cache like that would get published now (as it essentially requires 3rd party software or resources in order to complete, as per 4.15). Can it be completed by anyone who doesn't have a Garmin GPS device? I'm sure it could be, though I'm not sure legally :P (Mapsource would be needed, correct?)

But more importantly, could elevation challenges be published now since afaik elevation data isn't available/verifiable via geocaching.com.

Quote

We're about 100% on the same line of thinking. For one, when I hear someone say 'old school' as if it's better, I say 'oh, you mean the one that burned down?'

Well there are plenty of debates about how geocaching "used to be" who express emphatic distaste at the variety of tools and skillsets in use now, as opposed to even a few years ago... "old school" isn't meant as an insult, only as a way to distinguish between people who prefer geocaching the way it used to be, versus those who have started recently and are more used to many of the ways things are done now (smartphone use, as an obvious example; also the proliferation of nano caches, or urban caches, or LPCs, park-n-grabs, etc, when compared to the "good old days" of just finding a big container out in the woods... as a few examples ;) ). If "old school" is insulting, then I apologize and would like a better term to describe the mindset.

Quote

But I see the consensus here in this forum topic being that a smartphone is just a good as a dedicated GPSr for all situations, and that currently isn't true.

Whose consensus? I certainly don't agree, and I've never said as much... but then maybe my input isn't in line with the thread consensus? *shrug* ("just as good" isn't the same "capable of", let alone the fact that I'll never compare "smartphones" with "dedicated GPSrs" overall, specifically because of the brand/model issue and wide range of quality and capabilities and technological improvements over the years)

Quote

What I'm about to say probably won't be liked but the truth is that those with smart phones are also generally the ones clearly less prepared, those I see using GPSrs generally are clearly more prepared.

Generally speaking, sure... but GPSr users can still be unprepared, just as smartphone users can be prepared. It's the same argument about GPSr users finding caches faster -- my opinion on the matter is that bad coordinates will always mess up everybody equally. Who cares if your device is accurate to 1/2m - if the coordinates are wrong, no amount of pinpointing your location accurately will help you find the cache better than anyone else. The one who finds it is the one who uses their honed senses while on their way towards GZ (whether the coordinates are accurate or not). :) I find it intriguing when on cache listings there are logs from people both claiming perfectly accurate, and wildly inaccurate posted coordinates. There are obviously more factors at play there :P

Quote

This by their clothing choice (style and funtion), footware, amount and type of gear carried, etc, and the amount of wear on those items (read: time on the trail). I've concluded that those more prepared prefer dedicated GPSrs.

I know plenty of "smartphone users" quite the opposite. So again it all depends on your sample size and context :) Equating "smartphone users" to "unprepared cachers" is unfair in regards to which device you'd recommend for someone. Rather, regardless of device being used, encourage everyone to be prepared, especially when caching out in the wilderness! But yes, it may well be that 'city-slickers' who take up geocaching, likely due to possession of a smartphone, are more likely to be unprepared for nature. Not because of the smartphone, but because they're not used to going outdoors for lengthier periods as much.

Quote

Personally I go to what works best for me now, not because it was the best before. For the same reason that you won't find me hanging on to the past, you won't find me jumping on the new is better bandwagon.

Excellent, ditto :)

Quote

For me, smartphones will be better for this situation when they are better for this situation. I'm not bitter towards smartphones either, I love mine, I think it's awesome. But not at everything.

And on that sentiment, we agree. :)
For me, I've used my 3GS and 4S under many heavier terrains and environments successfully and without issue, so the device itself is certainly capable.
Whether someone else who is not me could have the same results, well that would depend on the person.
Whether someone else with a higher quality dedicated GPSr could have an easier/faster time, well that would also depend on the person :P

Know your caching habits, know your caching device, hone your geosenses, be prepared for your caching environment. <--- advice for all cachers!

Which device should you (general) get? If you have nothing, get a GPSr in your price range. Smartphone in your sights? Here are the models you should look at and here are the ones you should avoid. But whatever you get, play with it, get used to it, find a bunch of local caches before heading out into the more rural/adventurous ones alone, and definitely before you hide caches. Know that ultimately, regardless of device used, you can never completely trust the accuracy of posted coordinates - and therein lies the fun of the hunt.

Quote

That's a good point, why pay extra for a GPSr if you don't need to. Also the speed, it is much faster to use in most cases, basically grab and go using an app to bring up a particular or nearby cache. That's the reason I use my phone for city caching (as I ready said). But when I step onto any kind of significant trail system, which can be found in many of our city parks, it gets faster to load the waypoint in my GPSr to see the location verse the trails. Might have something to do with the part of the country we live in too (PNW), our terrain can change fast to pretty rough even in the city, plus with the heavy ground cover and 100'+ trees you can't see much but the immediate area around you and the sky above (clouds lol), so you can't go directly to the cache ie can't follow the arrow, need to navigate. It's much like driving a car, you can't just go there but need to find a route.

This has been my favourite paragraph of yours :) I have no idea what it's like caching in your area, but it sounds fun with so many trails and mountainous areas. Southwest Ontario is sort of boring in that sense... we've got wilderness up north, but around here it's mostly flat (lots of forests, trails, and conservation areas though) outside the Niagara Escarpment. And that whole stretch is quickly filling up with great caches :) (the Hamilton area is becoming challenge central - check it out on the map if you want, LOADS of challenges of many varieties)

This post has been edited by thebruce0: 07 May 2012 - 11:16 AM

[JesandTodd]

_Shaddow_, on 07 May 2012 - 10:57 AM, said:

But when I step onto any kind of significant trail system, which can be found in many of our city parks, it gets faster to load the waypoint in my GPSr to see the location verse the trails. Might have something to do with the part of the country we live in too (PNW), our terrain can change fast to pretty rough even in the city, plus with the heavy ground cover and 100'+ trees you can't see much but the immediate area around you and the sky above (clouds lol), so you can't go directly to the cache ie can't follow the arrow, need to navigate. It's much like driving a car, you can't just go there but need to find a route.

Are you being funny with me now?

http://coord.info/GL6XVYX4

[thebruce0]

JesandTodd, on 07 May 2012 - 11:19 AM, said:

Are you being funny with me now?

http://coord.info/GL6XVYX4

haha, yes, stay on the trails Learned that the hard way a few times too... glad that openmaps is getting more use these days, as Google's often slow on the updates, especially trail systems, as are others like Bing.
These days if I'm heading into a forest with no trail info I'll track the trails (if there's time) before heading off into a bushwack for the find Hate it when "oh it's only 50m that way" (bushwack through dense brush) only to find the trail curves around and it's only 1m off the trail.
yay "shortcuts"

[JesandTodd]

thebruce0, on 07 May 2012 - 11:11 AM, said:

_Shaddow_, on 07 May 2012 - 09:54 AM, said:

You're working on my elevation challenge and that makes you a serious hiker in my book. (And participation in my challenge isn't necessary to be a serious hiker either)

Who are you referring to? I haven't seen that challenge yet, but it does look intriguing and fun. If I were near, I'm sure I would be up for the challenge! (even just using my 4S, as that data input I'm sure you'd find valuable; I'm sure you know tracking and elevation can be done with some available iOS apps)

Bruce-he's referring to me. I'm about 10% in to the 50k elevation challenge.

[thebruce0]

JesandTodd, on 07 May 2012 - 11:25 AM, said:

Bruce-he's referring to me. I'm about 10% in to the 50k elevation challenge.

Oooh, nice! Good job

Also, I see where I messed up... replying to different segments over various comments had me thinking that block was in reply to me. My bad.

This post has been edited by thebruce0: 07 May 2012 - 11:28 AM

[_Shaddow_]

JesandTodd, on 07 May 2012 - 11:19 AM, said:

_Shaddow_, on 07 May 2012 - 10:57 AM, said:

But when I step onto any kind of significant trail system, which can be found in many of our city parks, it gets faster to load the waypoint in my GPSr to see the location verse the trails. Might have something to do with the part of the country we live in too (PNW), our terrain can change fast to pretty rough even in the city, plus with the heavy ground cover and 100'+ trees you can't see much but the immediate area around you and the sky above (clouds lol), so you can't go directly to the cache ie can't follow the arrow, need to navigate. It's much like driving a car, you can't just go there but need to find a route.

Are you being funny with me now?

http://coord.info/GL6XVYX4

OMG How did I not see that log! NO! I'm sorry, that you had to go through that. If you need any help getting your Garmin and NW Trails up and running, please feel free to email me

This post has been edited by _Shaddow_: 07 May 2012 - 11:34 AM

[JesandTodd]

thebruce0, on 07 May 2012 - 11:23 AM, said:

JesandTodd, on 07 May 2012 - 11:19 AM, said:

Are you being funny with me now?

http://coord.info/GL6XVYX4

haha, yes, stay on the trails Learned that the hard way a few times too... glad that openmaps is getting more use these days, as Google's often slow on the updates, especially trail systems, as are others like Bing.
These days if I'm heading into a forest with no trail info I'll track the trails (if there's time) before heading off into a bushwack for the find Hate it when "oh it's only 50m that way" (bushwack through dense brush) only to find the trail curves around and it's onJly 1m off the trail.
yay "shortcuts"

That's shaddow's cache in a small trail system in the middle of a big city. I left work early because the sun was out (yup) and picked these caches randomly. I made a terrible mistake to bushwack and couldnt navigate my way back to the trail system because it was a blackberry wall of china! Also, I didn't know where the trails were anymore...

I remember one point where I slid down to the ground, frustrated and almost started crying.I seriously couldn't figure out how to get myself out of this situation. I was seriously stuck, bleeding, injured, hungry, etc... I considered calling my husband, but then I knew he'd be....upset, as he already worries about me caching alone.

I eventually found my way through some lesser dense blackberries and made my way to my car. That's when I cried, lol. I think I spent ~2hrs getting myself out of that situation.

Had I had NWTrails on my Garmin, could this have been prevented? Maybe...I was unfamiliar with the trails and didn't quite know the fastest way home. I was being lazy and didn't want to backtrack alllll the way back. Bad decision.

But bad decisions can come from bad information. That's why I have the Garmin with NWTrails.

[_Shaddow_]

JesandTodd, on 07 May 2012 - 11:38 AM, said:

thebruce0, on 07 May 2012 - 11:23 AM, said:

JesandTodd, on 07 May 2012 - 11:19 AM, said:

Are you being funny with me now?

http://coord.info/GL6XVYX4

haha, yes, stay on the trails Learned that the hard way a few times too... glad that openmaps is getting more use these days, as Google's often slow on the updates, especially trail systems, as are others like Bing.
These days if I'm heading into a forest with no trail info I'll track the trails (if there's time) before heading off into a bushwack for the find Hate it when "oh it's only 50m that way" (bushwack through dense brush) only to find the trail curves around and it's onJly 1m off the trail.
yay "shortcuts"

That's shaddow's cache in a small trail system in the middle of a big city. I left work early because the sun was out (yup) and picked these caches randomly. I made a terrible mistake to bushwack and couldnt navigate my way back to the trail system because it was a blackberry wall of china! Also, I didn't know where the trails were anymore...

I remember one point where I slid down to the ground, frustrated and almost started crying.I seriously couldn't figure out how to get myself out of this situation. I was seriously stuck, bleeding, injured, hungry, etc... I considered calling my husband, but then I knew he'd be....upset, as he already worries about me caching alone.

I eventually found my way through some lesser dense blackberries and made my way to my car. That's when I cried, lol. I think I spent ~2hrs getting myself out of that situation.

Had I had NWTrails on my Garmin, could this have been prevented? Maybe...I was unfamiliar with the trails and didn't quite know the fastest way home. I was being lazy and didn't want to backtrack alllll the way back. Bad decision.

But bad decisions can come from bad information. That's why I have the Garmin with NWTrails.

I'm going to add a screenshot of the map to my caches up there, an area I call the Redmond Backcountry, just so this doesn't happen again.