[GeoStL] Re: GSAK rumor
- From: "GC-RGS" <gc-rgs@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <geocaching@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 8 Feb 2007 12:22:13 -0600
-
Not getting into the GSAK good/bad controversy, or if Clyde is being fair,
but the term "Lifetime".
I've bought items that have "Limited lifetime warranty". If there is a
limit, why not say 5 year or 25 year?
Working on cars a lot over the years I would buy most of my parts from
AutoZone because they offer "Lifetime Guarantee" on must mechanical parts
(starters, engine internal parts, suspension, brakes, etc). What that means
to them is they will replace the part ONCE and then the lifetime warranty is
over. Still much better than a 90 day or 1 year, but still misleading think.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Dan Henke" <thunder_monk@xxxxxxxxx>
To: <geocaching@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, February 08, 2007 12:09 PM
Subject: [GeoStL] Re: GSAK rumor
> -
> I agree it is not that GSAK is not a good program and is probably worth
> the extra money but when I paid the $20 in the beginning it was stated
> "for life" ....There is no ambiguity in that staement ...for life means
> just what it says.It is also one of the reasons I bought the program
> instead of using it for free. I remember thinking that it was quite a
> bargain.
> I personally don't use GSAK for most of it's functions but I do use it
> for converting the .gpx file into something my Microsoft Streets and Trips
> software will read and also once in a while for printing out the cache
> pages. I had planned on checking out the rest of the features for use this
> summer. So the point is not that it isn't worth the money but rather a
> statement that was made when I purchased it and which is now just glibly
> thrust aside because it is too costly.
> Jack Konecker <jack.konecker@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> -
> I never said GSAK wasn't a good program. I paid my
> $20 in 2005.
> I only use it a couple of times a month and barely
> use its features. One day when the power went
> out at home, I decided to get out the laptop and take
> some time to go through all the menu items. Neat stuff,
> however, I don't think I'll ever need to use more than
> 10% of its capabilities (even less, now that gc.com
> supports finding caches along a route). I've gotten
> along fine without needing to use its scripting
> capabilities.
> It is convenient to say that everyone should stop
> complaining because they can continue to use v6.
> However, if gc.com changes something that requires
> a change to GSAK (remember when gc.com added
> the special waypoint lists?), Clyde is not going to
> touch the v6 code to make it compatible; thus v6
> will become obsolete.
>
> GSAK got where it is today partly due to people
> paying $20 and expecting to never have to pay
> again 'for a lifetime'. Perhaps that was poor
> wording on Clyde's part and he should have been
> more clear on his intentions (he admitted he changed
> the wording somewhere down the line).
>
> People whose argument is 'shut up and pay for the
> upgrade because GSAK is a good program' are
> missing the point.
>
>
>
> ****************************************
> For List Info or To make _ANY_ changes, including unsubscribing from this
> list, click -----> //www.freelists.org/list/geocaching
> Missouri Caches Scheduled to be Archived http://tinyurl.com/87cqw
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------
> Now that's room service! Choose from over 150,000 hotels
> in 45,000 destinations on Yahoo! Travel to find your fit.
>
>
>
> ****************************************
> For List Info or To make _ANY_ changes, including unsubscribing from this
> list, click -----> //www.freelists.org/list/geocaching
> Missouri Caches Scheduled to be Archived http://tinyurl.com/87cqw
>
****************************************
For List Info or To make _ANY_ changes, including unsubscribing from this
list, click -----> //www.freelists.org/list/geocaching
Missouri Caches Scheduled to be Archived http://tinyurl.com/87cqw
Other related posts:
