Sponsored By:

Subject: RE: LX200 Software
From: Rob Roy
Reply To: mapug@shore.net
Date: Fri Jan 04 06:28:16 1980

I apologize for the hotheadedness, Kal. I should have counted to 10 000
before my reply to Ron Erza. Re 64K library upgrade, my ver 3.2-64K library
DIDN'T (sorry for shouting) come with instructions that said, "BTW, if you
want to find variable stars, you'll have to spend more money to upgrade to
ver 3.3 or we won't fix these chips in Oct/95!" I don't want HP mode, I
just want my 64K library to find the things it was advertised to find (like
the GCVStars.)

If ANY (oops!) 64K chips are defective, they should be corrected, not just
those that belong to owners of ver 3.3 or higher. Do you think that is an
unreasonable request? What twists the knife after sticking it in, is that
ver 3.3 scopes came with a free 64K library, whereas 3.2 owners had to buy
it as an option (2.5 scopes never could use the 64K library, of course.)
Now, 3.3 owners also get the upgrade free and 3.2 owners are expected to pay
extra, again! Unless I'm way out to lunch somewhere, this is clearly not
fair. Besides, how many 3.2 owners are there on this list? It's not as if
Meade's doing it for the whole world!

Thanks for 'listening', Kal. Now I feel better.
Rob

>Cool down, Rob!
>
>My interpretation of Ron Ezra's message is that the *free* upgrade offer
only applies to the 3.30& above software.
>
>If (like me) you have a pre-HP software, you need to pay the upgrade
charges to go to the HP mode. This does not seem entirely unreasonable (we
could hope of course, but we can't demand!)
>
>My only beef at this time is the steep charges to go from my 2.x firmware
to the 3.x. I wish Meade could be a little more reasonable about this. Ron,
maybe it's time to drop the price on this upgrade?
>
>-Kal.
>
>----------
>From: Rob Roy[SMTP:a5817394@mcmail.cis.mcmaster.ca]
>Does this mean if you have a version 3.2 and want to do variable star work,
>you are shit hot out of luck? I knew something was wrong with the
>database, right from the beginning, but figured it was just one of the VERY
>long list of frustrations with my scope. It was Steve Ashe who first made a
>post and inquiry and my agreement with him was within hours. I have been
>waiting for corrected eproms since then. What kind of (please pardon the
>expression, but I'm furious) crap is this!!!!!!!!!?????????????
>
>Rob Roy
>