Groundspeak responds about C:geo
Thursday, February 23, 2012 at 8:49AM I have heard a number of people complain that groundspeak personally is working to destroy other apps. Especially with this change in maps. It has bugged me because with my work as a moderator, and reviewer, Groundspeak has never mentioned doing anything to hurt another program. Even in the day when they asked me to moderate and pull non-geocaching.comapps out of forum listing. They were more worried about internal affairs then the work of others.
Today tBryan at groundspeak posted this note to C:geo
firennice
firennice
Some may not have seen this in the comments so I thought I would post it. From SammyHP
I'm one of the core developers of c:geo. We talked several times with Groundspeak about the API but there are some reasons why we don't use it currently:
Why c:geo is not using Groundspeak's public API
Let us answer this once and for all in one place. But let's start with basics.
There is very simple reason why us and GC.com can't sync. We are FREE, opensource application, they are corporation. We give our software for no money, they would like to make a big profit with a service. They don't like what we do, we don't like what they do. It's like fire & water, cat & dog, hell & heaven....
The initial idea of c:geo is to provide a free (and open-source) app for mobile geocaching for everybody.What would change with the API?
- c:geo only for premium members
- no support for OpenCaching or other platforms than gc.com
- Groundspeak-adsAlso there are problems with development:
- development would take 2-4 months to implement the API
- during this time there would be only access to a testing-server, no nightly-builds
- devs are using the development-build for caching
- the API requires a private key for the app. But c:geo is open-source. There are a lot of independent developers, but only one would get the key - all other developers wouldn't be able to test what they do
- c:geo no longer open-source
- only few core-developers
- much slower developmentThe Groundspeak's "public" API would fix most of our current problems, however c:geo would then force users to pay money to a corporation. This is not the opensource spirit.
If the Groundspeak says OK to our idea then c:geo might have API some day...
firennice
I think there are two things here to look at.
1-Should geocaching be free?
2-Should access be granted to everyone free?
The first argument is pretty tricky.
The answer to that answers the second part. Does groundspeak manage geocachine well and resposibly. Perhaps an opensource setup could be created. However I am pretty sure it would be crappy. Most open source projects end up pretty bad. There are exceptions to the rule, however 4-5 years down the line and most are closed, and people walk away.
Perhaps it is the American in me, but making a profit can be a great equalizer. The bandwidth needed at groundspeak would be pretty impressive. I am sure the costs are pretty high as well. The servers used, maintenance on them, an office, programmers, legal, all eat into the costs.
There is only one site that is managed and taken care of full time, and there is only one web site that is any good. Is that coincidence? No. If another site had a full time programmer, etc they would look better as well. Some of the other sites are well done, for the budgets they have. So if you decide that it costs, then someone has to pay.
To me the reason it is so good is that we have so many people working on geocaching, finding ways to make it fun and interesting. They have had their failures (waymarking) , successes (geocoins), and stagnant areas (Wherigo). Yet they keep trying new things and delivering to others. See the Map improvements, pocket queries, challenges. They list thousands of new caches every day, and review for old dead ones to take off (something that few other sites seem to do). They serve as arbitrators, remove people that are troublemakers, and try and make sure there are no major issues that show up.
Onto the second.
If you decide they do need money, where does it come from. Well Every visit to a page with an advertisement helps. Premium members don't see some of those ads on the pages. So you have paid to have some of them removed with your few dollars every month. You can go to your computer and pull a handful of caches off with your gps, and head out. If you are not a member, you get a few ads to help pay for them. (kind of, they get a dollar or so every 1000 hits if I remember my online advertising).
Now onto phones. They make no money from a phone app. The app creator gets funds from ads. In other words when you use your phone app, you now put groundspeak in a position of having to pay for bandwidth and managing those services, at no profit. None at all.
So there are only two ways to make some money from a phone app. Limit use to premium members (they do that now). If your app does not use the API, does not encourage premium members, and scrapes the site then you are a burden, and a drain on the rest of us. Or you can buy the groundspeak app. I am not sure how it reacts with those that are not premium member.
firennice |
7 Comments |
application,
c:geo,
groundspeak in
Applications,
Groundspeak 
Reader Comments (7)
I completely agree. When you scrape data you HAVE to know that any changes to the site will effect that. If you are not willing to use the API freely given to you, you have no right to complain
Do you mind telling us where Bryan's text was posted originally?
I'm one of the core developers of c:geo. We talked several times with Groundspeak about the API but there are some reasons why we don't use it currently:
Why c:geo is not using Groundspeak's public API
Let us answer this once and for all in one place. But let's start with basics.
There is very simple reason why us and GC.com can't sync. We are FREE, opensource application, they are corporation. We give our software for no money, they would like to make a big profit with a service. They don't like what we do, we don't like what they do. It's like fire & water, cat & dog, hell & heaven....
The initial idea of c:geo is to provide a free (and open-source) app for mobile geocaching for everybody.
What would change with the API?
- c:geo only for premium members
- no support for OpenCaching or other platforms than gc.com
- Groundspeak-ads
Also there are problems with development:
- development would take 2-4 months to implement the API
- during this time there would be only access to a testing-server, no nightly-builds
- devs are using the development-build for caching
- the API requires a private key for the app. But c:geo is open-source. There are a lot of independent developers, but only one would get the key - all other developers wouldn't be able to test what they do
- c:geo no longer open-source
- only few core-developers
- much slower development
The Groundspeak's "public" API would fix most of our current problems, however c:geo would then force users to pay money to a corporation. This is not the opensource spirit.
If the Groundspeak says OK to our idea then c:geo might have API some day...
SammysHP,
If your scraping data from a website it is the same as if your pulling wifi internet from my house for free. You have no right to get mad if i decide to lock my wifi down or change the placement of it so you can no longer get it fro your house.
Development may take 2-4 months, you didnt know the api was coming? you didnt have access to it back when everyone else decided to start developing for it?
You mention that you wouldnt have the option to do caches from opencaching, why not? GSAK has the ability to accept gpx files or API calls from any service not just groundspeak.
I understand that you want to keep it free and have free this and free that. Groundspeak is a business and as such has to make money some how. otherwise their site would be like the other open sites. Ok but not great. not that many people caching on it.
I commend you on wanting to do something free however people need to make money? what do you do for a living? do you do it free?
> If your scraping data from a website it is the same as if your pulling wifi internet from my house for free. You have no right to get mad if i decide to lock my wifi down or change the placement of it so you can no longer get it fro your house.
Not really. We only provide another interface to the website. ;) But it's correct, that Groundspeak is not responsible when c:geo doesn't work. And we didn't get mad. ;)
> Development may take 2-4 months, you didnt know the api was coming? you didnt have access to it back when everyone else decided to start developing for it?
We are aware of the API since it was announced. And we tried it, too. But the license was not ok for us we never tried to implement it. Now it would take a few months to change the code.
> You mention that you wouldnt have the option to do caches from opencaching, why not? GSAK has the ability to accept gpx files or API calls from any service not just groundspeak.
We talked to Bryan and he told us that it's not allowed. But maybe I'm wrong. But correct is, that we must stop scraping the site, but we also want to support basic members. We plan a connector interface so that third-party-developers can provide add-ons. Once this is done we want to outsource all external data sources into add-ons and create one that uses the API. We will not provide a scraping-add-on but I'm sure that somebody will do it. If this is ok for Groundspeak, everything will be fine.
> What would change with the API?
> - c:geo only for premium members
Use of the API would not suddenly make c:geo unusable to basic members. Rather, the API currently restricts basic members to 3 full geocache detail downloads a day. Note that this is *full* details; "lite" data would still be freely available, which includes coordinates, ratings, etc. The live map, for example, would be completely functional. It is only full descriptions, logs and hints that would be restricted (beyond those initial 3 caches).
> - no support for OpenCaching or other platforms than gc.com
Through the Groundspeak API, of course not; but nothing would restrict you from also using Garmin's API in the app for getting Opencaching.com data.
> - Groundspeak-ads
Hmm, I'm unaware of Groundspeak serving up any ads through their API on any platform.
As a premium member of gc.com I find their app of poor quality. So bad in fact, I uninstalled it in favour of cgeo. One mans work deserves the credit he has earned. So what if he scrapes data, iff it wasnt for cgeo, I never would have tried geocaching and gc.com would never have gotten my money for premium. Gc could learn something from cgeo developer... Give the customer the pickle and youve made a customer for life. Charge me ridiculous amounts for an app that sucks... Not only will I refund it, I never buy the premium membership and tell my friends of my bad experience. Think about that for a while.. :)
I think cgeo has brought more business to gc.com than they even know. All of my friends use cgeo, nobody I know actually enjoys or currently uses gc official app. Yet most of my friends are premium. I would have stopped caching ages ago if it was not for the awesome cgeo app. I love it, but not enough to put up with a crap paid app over a superior free one. Cheers