> Ranting
> about Meade because they didn't hold your hand while you attached the dew
> shield hardly seems warranted. This is at least the third time I can
> remember hearing about the fact that the corrector cover doesn't fit on the
> dew shield, meanwhile solutions have been presented. You invested about
> $15K, now think about the problems a little, solve them and move on. The
> solutions for this problem aren't tough, there are others which are rather
> harder.

I _have_ solved them (which you'd have realized if you'd read what I
wrote, and since you included my entire message, you even had another chance
when you replied), but for the amount of money Meade charges, I shouldn't
have had to.

There's something wrong when you spend well over $15K on a scope and you
can't solve the problem with what you've been given.

I didn't rant because "Meade didn't hold my hand." I ranted about how
the official dew shield renders the official solutions to balancing and
protecting the scope useless. Not a $20 third party add-on, but the $150
Meade product. As an exercise, try and figure out how that fits in with
the ongoing discussion about Meade's QC.


======================================================================
Whenever you find that you are on the side of the majority,
it is time to reform. - Mark Twain

View index by [date] [author] [subject]
Previous message: [M]: Lumicon Giant EasyGuider parts, Frank Schwartz
Next message: [M]: Re: Pictor 216XT help, Geoff Todd
Next message in thread: RE: [M]: Balancing Issue, peter erdman
Previous message in thread: RE: [M]: Balancing Issue, ddyer