S!G wrote:

If I run a usual 1,000 caches PQ throug SpoilerSync, there are about 70 - 80 MB of additional pictures.
Maybe, this is different in the US.

I don't have thousands on caches to my name but to date I have never seen a "Spoiler/Hint" picture like the one on the linked cache. This may be a local practice specific to some areas but I don't think it is a widespread or GC.com would have built the capability into the hint field.

Has anyone tried it to do like it is possible with the Tritons?

Downloading spoiler pics with Spoiler Sync
Building the pics into the Cache description with GSAK macro SpoilerSync
Transfering the Caches with >GSAK -> GPS -> Send Waypoints< to the eXplorist, including the spoiler pics. I don't have my eX yet, so I have to wait a nother few days until I can try it. 😉

If we can get Jeremy over at Ground Speak to add the capability to place a picture in the hint field on GC.com, or at least allow us to use HTML in the hint field on the site so we can link our own pictures, stored remotely like in the descriptions - then we'll have something to go back to Magellan with and as you know, we have their ear. They want to give us what we're asking for, however, it has to fall within the reasonable capabilities of the devices and compatible with GC.com. As far as having the unit parse for a specific picture name, the problem I see with that is going to be getting others to always use the same name! Especially if they're NOT Magellan users. So, the first step is going to need to be at Ground Speak. If we can get them to take action, then I'm pretty sure we'll be able to get Magellan to follow suit!!!

This is a copy of something I posted some time ago:

Kim,

I hate to be the barrier of bad news, but I really wouldn’t be looking for Magellan to implement this into the GC and here is why. As I programmer I decided to look into this and I found a big problem. The GC “claims” to be able to handle something like 10,000 caches. Currently, I normally load between 1,000 to 1,500 caches so I used 1,000 as a trail number. After looking at a number of caches I cam up with an average of around 5.88 pictures per cache with an average size of around 100Kb. So, with a 1,000 caches loaded and 5.88 pictures per cache, that is 5880 pictures at 100kbs a piece coming up to 588 Meg pictures that would have to be transferred. If you look at your GCs memory you’ll see that it has a total memory of 1.8GB, 1.0GB of which is taken by the map and 13MB taken by applications leaving 699MB. So, if you were to transfer 588MB of pictures to the unit to would really be pushing it to its limits, which is greatly going to slow down a unit that is already receiving complaints about freezing up, and you would be spending a GOOD deal of time loading your GC before you went out! Personally, I believe that the cost of performance, time and memory is greater than the payoff of having the pictures in the field – although I too would love to have them!

David

If we're already complaining that VP is taking to long to load the pictures contained within the descriptions for the caches, we'd better be careful what we're asking for! Plus, if you're loading 3 to 4 thousand caches or more, then the software is having to parse everyone of them and do internet request from GC.com, which is already having some issues with their servers being over taxed... We can say this isn't our problem, but it will be when we're sitting and waiting and waiting and waiting for things to happen!!! Yes, I to would like to have ALL of the data from the website loaded into my GPS, but at what cost! You also need to think about the amount of memory it is using in the GPS.

David