| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
tonkaMN
MnGCA Board
Joined: 10 Jun 2009
Posts: 541
|
 Posted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 1:12 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Is it just me, or are the new geocaching maps EXTREMELY slow? |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
beagleboo
Geocacher
Joined: 06 Sep 2007
Posts: 113
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 1:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tonkaMN wrote: |
| Is it just me, or are the new geocaching maps EXTREMELY slow? |
Slow and map not fully loading for me. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rosebud55112
Geocacher
Joined: 03 May 2008
Posts: 90
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 4:59 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| tonkaMN wrote: |
| Is it just me, or are the new geocaching maps EXTREMELY slow? |
Definitely not just you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WestSideDaddy
MnGCA Board
Joined: 06 Apr 2010
Posts: 541
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 6:28 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| So it looks like they have switch completely from google maps now. Probably because google was going to start charging for maps api usage. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Hunter-Killer
Geocacher
Joined: 25 Apr 2009
Posts: 222
|
| Posted: Tue Feb 14, 2012 6:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
It is being discussed on Their Blog Latitude 47
I was hoping it would be compatible with my ipad...no dice. I can now see the caches but can not get any info off them.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
seamusbleu
Geocacher
Joined: 23 Nov 2007
Posts: 188
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2012 11:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Is it just new to me, or did they finally get rid of the beta status for the maps. They have a different look too. Possibly because they switched away from google maps? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Red_Devil35
Past MnGCA Board
Joined: 26 Apr 2006
Posts: 2886
Location: Practically South Dakota!
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2012 11:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| rosebud55112 wrote: |
| tonkaMN wrote: |
| Is it just me, or are the new geocaching maps EXTREMELY slow? |
Definitely not just you. |
Me too. They stink.
_________________
"We never seek things for themselves-what we seek is the very seeking of things"-Pascal |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
RudeRat
Past MnGCA Board
Joined: 09 Jul 2008
Posts: 713
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| WestSideDaddy wrote: |
| So it looks like they have switch completely from google maps now. Probably because google was going to start charging for maps api usage. |
For what we pay, we should get the good(premium) maps.
-1 Groundspeak. At least they are consistent.
_________________
Ahhhhhhhh, the power of cheese! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
timewellspent
Geocacher
Joined: 19 Mar 2008
Posts: 659
Location: Chanhassen, MN
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2012 2:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| RudeRat wrote: |
| WestSideDaddy wrote: |
| So it looks like they have switch completely from google maps now. Probably because google was going to start charging for maps api usage. |
For what we pay, we should get the good(premium) maps.
-1 Groundspeak. At least they are consistent. |
Hmm- There are over 5 million geocachers worldwide and say 1% has a premium membership that's only $1,500,000.00 not including the money made on ads and coin/tb tracking. I would love to know the real number of paid premium members, but I bet that is kept pretty close to the vest. You would hate for the non-paid reviewers to start thinking too much about how they seem to be lining the pockets of a select few.  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
swfan
Geocacher
Joined: 23 Feb 2008
Posts: 103
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2012 4:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I hate the new maps too. They dont show the park area's very well or at all in most of the parks. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Pear Head
Past MnGCA President
Joined: 04 Apr 2004
Posts: 5594
Location: north of Duluth
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2012 5:12 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I haven't seen the maps (yet).
Keep in mind in all of the discussion about premium memberships (and my purpose here isn't to defend Groundspeak although it may appear that way at first), that Groundspeak has a pretty substantial staff, building/office space, server costs, etc.
I'm not sure how the math comes out, and I'm absolutely positive that there's a profit margin in the whole equation, but keep in mind that they're using our premium membership fees for other things as well.
_________________
Hmm... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bflentje
Geocacher
Joined: 29 May 2006
Posts: 3652
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2012 9:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| The maps stink. I don't know what the solution is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ArcherDragoon
Geocacher
Joined: 02 Nov 2007
Posts: 921
Location: Southeastern Minnesota
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2012 10:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
http://forums.groundspeak.com/GC/index.php?showtopic=290420
At any rate...I am hopeful it is a temporary solution until Groundspeak gets something figured out...I will not blame Groundspeak for this...but I will point a finger (and not the bad one) at google...
I just step back and think how many times I load a cache page and how ofter that pulls a map and how often I look at the larger map...etc...etc...etc...take that by all the members (premium or not) that visit geocaching.com...and yeah, I don't blame Grounspeak at all for this move...as I said...I am hopeful it is temporary until a better idea/solution comes along.
Besides...I cache with a GPS...not the maps on the page...those just give me ideas on where the cache is...so, overall, I don't see it as big of an issue that some are making it out to be.
_________________
You may only be young once...but I will be immature forever!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ArcherDragoon
Geocacher
Joined: 02 Nov 2007
Posts: 921
Location: Southeastern Minnesota
|
| Posted: Wed Feb 15, 2012 10:04 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| swfan wrote: |
| I hate the new maps too. They dont show the park area's very well or at all in most of the parks. |
In my common area of caching...the google maps didn't list the parks in the proper place anyway...so, not really seeing a lose yet in regards to "accuracy"...
_________________
You may only be young once...but I will be immature forever!!! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
WestSideDaddy
MnGCA Board
Joined: 06 Apr 2010
Posts: 541
|
| Posted: Thu Feb 16, 2012 9:11 am Post subject: |
|
|
| timewellspent wrote: |
| RudeRat wrote: |
| WestSideDaddy wrote: |
| So it looks like they have switch completely from google maps now. Probably because google was going to start charging for maps api usage. |
For what we pay, we should get the good(premium) maps.
-1 Groundspeak. At least they are consistent. |
Hmm- There are over 5 million geocachers worldwide and say 1% has a premium membership that's only $1,500,000.00 not including the money made on ads and coin/tb tracking. I would love to know the real number of paid premium members, but I bet that is kept pretty close to the vest. You would hate for the non-paid reviewers to start thinking too much about how they seem to be lining the pockets of a select few. |
Wow... though looking at the google map charges. According to the GC blog, they do 2 million map loads a day. Subtract the 25,000 free a day and then charge $4 per 1000 map loads = $7.900 a day or $2.8 million dollars a year.
Wow. But for google that isn't anything, a drop of a drop in a really biiiigggg bucket. And only .35 percent of sites are supposed to be impacted. Seems like a strange decision on the google side since their increase in revenue isn't going to be much, but their image is gonna take a hit.
But it does put GC in a tough spot, increase revenues to cover the API cost (or cut expenses and decrease value) or switch to a different mapping service which might not be as good. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
User list
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
