Sirius:
This was really prompted by the recent digital camera
vs. film discussions.

Would that be the one that showed that digital and film cameras both
have their proponents, and that some people like and use both?

It seems to me that amateur astronomy (and other
hobbies as well) have been seized by what I
call "lastest-and-greatest-itis."

Hobbyists have always liked the latest and greatest. Amateur astronomy
is not a monolith; it is a collective name for a whole lot of people
doing their own thing. Some go for the latest and greatest, others are
more conservative.

The thinking is that newer technology automatically
MUST be better, and older MUST be obsolete.

Never heard anyone say that, but it's often true that newer technology
is better than old technology.

For instance, DSC's have to be better
than setting circles, right?

Yes, for some people at some times.

Naglers, Panoptics, and Radians have to be
better than Orthoscopics, right?

Yes, for some people at some times.

Digital cameras & CCD have to be
better than film, right?

Yes, for some people at some times.

Nobody would want to star-hop when they can
have GPS GoTo, right?

Nobody wants to star-hop? Not a single amateur astronomer on Earth?
That seems unlikely.

If newer = better, then one question:
How come the best electric guitar amps
still use vacuum tubes?

Nonsense. Besides, the sound of that abominable instrument does not
require or deserve more than a RadioShack cheapie.

Davoud

--
usenet *at* davidillig dawt com