"So which one qualifies as a bright object?"

who............................................... .................................................. ............cares.

Brian Tung wrote:

Jan Owen wrote:
Ahhh!

But I didn't say they don't...

In fact, I agree with your last sentence, and don't *necessarily* disagree
with what you said above it. *Necessarily.*

But, then, that wasn't what I *said*, either. Was it?

?!?!?!

You must have me confused with someone who wants to play word games or
logic twists with the Meade ad and what it says. I do enjoy word games
and logic twists, but no--not in this case.

--
Brian Tung
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.html

The subject is the headline of a new Meade ad seen in the February S&T.
It's an attack against Celestron's SkyAlign alignment system, in which
the user has to point the scope at 3 bright stars, but without
necessarily knowing which stars they are. They only have to be bright.

The ad goes on about how hard it is to decide which of all the objects
in the sky are brighter than the rest.

It says you have to "guess at random" which objects might be considered
bright.

I would like to propose a new headline that really cuts to the point of
what Meade is trying to say:

"So what if you're a total dimwit?"

--
Joe Bergeron

http://www.joebergeron.com

"Joe Bergeron" wrote in message
ed...
The subject is the headline of a new Meade ad seen in the February S&T.
It's an attack against Celestron's SkyAlign alignment system, in which
the user has to point the scope at 3 bright stars, but without
necessarily knowing which stars they are. They only have to be bright.

The ad goes on about how hard it is to decide which of all the objects
in the sky are brighter than the rest.

It says you have to "guess at random" which objects might be considered
bright.

I would like to propose a new headline that really cuts to the point of
what Meade is trying to say:

"So what if you're a total dimwit?"

--
Joe Bergeron

http://www.joebergeron.com

Maybe you should apply for a job writing their ad copy for them.

--
Jan Owen

To reach me directly, remove the Z, if one appears in my e-mail address...
Latitude: 33.6
Longitude: -112.3

Joe Bergeron wrote:
The subject is the headline of a new Meade ad seen in the February S&T.
It's an attack against Celestron's SkyAlign alignment system, in which
the user has to point the scope at 3 bright stars, but without
necessarily knowing which stars they are. They only have to be bright.

The ad goes on about how hard it is to decide which of all the objects
in the sky are brighter than the rest.

It says you have to "guess at random" which objects might be considered
bright.

I would like to propose a new headline that really cuts to the point of
what Meade is trying to say:

"So what if you're a total dimwit?"

It remains to be seen how many people are taken in by this, but if
you've accurately described the ad, I hope it disappears soon. I
wouldn't want Meade to develop a reputation of litigating and bad-
mouthing rather than actually designing new products.

--
Brian Tung
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.html

Joe Bergeron wrote:
The subject is the headline of a new Meade ad seen in the February S&T.
It's an attack against Celestron's SkyAlign alignment system, in which
the user has to point the scope at 3 bright stars, but without
necessarily knowing which stars they are. They only have to be bright.



Hi Joe:

Well, you know... I like Meade scopes just fine. While I've always
considered myself a "Celestron man"...I tend to pick a manufacturer
whether it be Celestron on Toyota and stick with it, but that doesn't
mean I don't like Meades or Hondas. In fact, I currently own a Meade
ETX125, which I like just fine as a grab 'n go.

However, I think most beginners will find Celestron's alignment system
easier to use than Meades...considerably so. The irony? Meade FORCED
Celestron to develop this technology by patenting the "north and level"
alignment process (!). Now, Meade is apparently trying to make the best
of the situation by means of a lame and ill-natured ad campaign.

MEADE: TELL US WHAT YOUR SCOPES CAN DO FOR US, NOT WHAT'S WRONG WITH
YOUR COMPETITOR'S SCOPES! SHEESH!

Peace,
Rod Mollise
Author of _Choosing and Using a Schmidt Cassegrain Telescope_
Like SCTs and MCTs?
Join the SCT User Mailing List.
http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/sct-user
============================
See my home page at
http://skywatch.brainiac.com/astroland/index.htm
for further details!
============================
For Uncle Rod's Astro Blog See:
http://journals.aol.com/rmollise/UncleRodsAstroBlog/

"Brian Tung" wrote in message
...
Joe Bergeron wrote:
The subject is the headline of a new Meade ad seen in the February
S&T.
It's an attack against Celestron's SkyAlign alignment system, in which
the user has to point the scope at 3 bright stars, but without
necessarily knowing which stars they are. They only have to be bright.

The ad goes on about how hard it is to decide which of all the objects
in the sky are brighter than the rest.

It says you have to "guess at random" which objects might be
considered
bright.

I would like to propose a new headline that really cuts to the point
of
what Meade is trying to say:

"So what if you're a total dimwit?"

It remains to be seen how many people are taken in by this, but if
you've accurately described the ad, I hope it disappears soon. I
wouldn't want Meade to develop a reputation of litigating and bad-
mouthing rather than actually designing new products.

--
Brian Tung

We have folks here on SAA who appear to be dedicated to ensuring that
Meade gets a reputation for litigating and badmouthing, or pick your
poison, no matter WHAT they do next.

But it does sort of appear that Meade HAS come out with at least one
interesting new product recently, no? With more on the way...

Isn't that what most of this anguish is really all about???

And as for those on SAA who feel one or more of these products are not
appropriately named, I don't personally care if Meade chooses to call
their latest sku's Bat Guano, as long as they perform. Performance and
value will determine whether they're successful. Not badmouthing by SAA.

--
Jan Owen

To reach me directly, remove the Z, if one appears in my e-mail address...
Latitude: 33.6
Longitude: -112.3

In article , Brian Tung
wrote:

It remains to be seen how many people are taken in by this, but if
you've accurately described the ad, I hope it disappears soon. I
wouldn't want Meade to develop a reputation of litigating and bad-
mouthing rather than actually designing new products.

Heavens, no, we wouldn't want anything like THAT to happen!

To be fair, the ad doesn't mention Celestron or SkyAlign by name. But
it's obvious what they're getting at.

--
Joe Bergeron

http://www.joebergeron.com

Jan Owen wrote:
We have folks here on SAA who appear to be dedicated to ensuring that
Meade gets a reputation for litigating and badmouthing, or pick your
poison, no matter WHAT they do next.

The *fact* is that they do both. They develop new products, *and*
they litigate and--with this ad, if accurately described--badmouth.
Not the performance of the Celestron product, but the notion that it
doesn't improve the ease of use *enough*. Before you had to know
which bright objects you were pointing at; now, you only need to pick
three bright ones. I don't think it's a legitimate weakness that you
have to know they're bright enough.

I feel that Meade is capable of being innovative enough not to resort
to that kind of tactic.

--
Brian Tung
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.html

"Brian Tung" wrote in message
...
Jan Owen wrote:
We have folks here on SAA who appear to be dedicated to ensuring that
Meade gets a reputation for litigating and badmouthing, or pick your
poison, no matter WHAT they do next.

The *fact* is that they do both. They develop new products, *and*
they litigate and--with this ad, if accurately described--badmouth.
Not the performance of the Celestron product, but the notion that it
doesn't improve the ease of use *enough*. Before you had to know
which bright objects you were pointing at; now, you only need to pick
three bright ones. I don't think it's a legitimate weakness that you
have to know they're bright enough.

I feel that Meade is capable of being innovative enough not to resort
to that kind of tactic.

--
Brian Tung

Ahhh!

But I didn't say they don't...

In fact, I agree with your last sentence, and don't *necessarily* disagree
with what you said above it. *Necessarily.*

But, then, that wasn't what I *said*, either. Was it?

--
Jan Owen

To reach me directly, remove the Z, if one appears in my e-mail address...
Latitude: 33.6
Longitude: -112.3

Jan Owen wrote:
Ahhh!

But I didn't say they don't...

In fact, I agree with your last sentence, and don't *necessarily* disagree
with what you said above it. *Necessarily.*

But, then, that wasn't what I *said*, either. Was it?

?!?!?!

You must have me confused with someone who wants to play word games or
logic twists with the Meade ad and what it says. I do enjoy word games
and logic twists, but no--not in this case.

--
Brian Tung
The Astronomy Corner at http://astro.isi.edu/
Unofficial C5+ Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/c5plus/
The PleiadAtlas Home Page at http://astro.isi.edu/pleiadatlas/
My Own Personal FAQ (SAA) at http://astro.isi.edu/reference/faq.html