Jump to content

question for vistaHCX owners


gratefulHIKE
Followers 1

Recommended Posts

Hello I am about to buy a vista hcx if I can find a satisfactory answer for these two questions

 

I realize thats it has a trip odometer issue that will probably be fixed soon with a firmware update, that's not a real big issue.

 

My questions are, is it true that the GPS on marks your position if you are going atleast 2mph?

And is the barometric pressure updating at a slower pace than its previous model the vista c?

 

Not updating the barometric pressure often is probably how it saves on batteries, and I would much rather have a gps that got half the battery life and gave me more detailed information. I can live with carrying two extra AA's.

 

Any response would be gratefully appreciated

Link to comment

Hello I am about to buy a vista hcx if I can find a satisfactory answer for these two questions

 

I realize thats it has a trip odometer issue that will probably be fixed soon with a firmware update, that's not a real big issue.

 

My questions are, is it true that the GPS on marks your position if you are going atleast 2mph?

And is the barometric pressure updating at a slower pace than its previous model the vista c?

 

Not updating the barometric pressure often is probably how it saves on batteries, and I would much rather have a gps that got half the battery life and gave me more detailed information. I can live with carrying two extra AA's.

 

Any response would be gratefully appreciated

To answer your first question, no, the 2 kilometer per hour threshold apparently only applies to the trip odometer. Your position is updated continuously, and the track log will record your position, regardless of speed.

For the second question, I don't really know; I haven't played with a Vista C. However, the pressure (well, altitude) update does seem to be responsive. It seemed to track in real-time while driving up and down hills in the car (although it wasn't very accurate--I seem to recall it was off by a couple hundred feet compared to the signage, but I hadn't given it much time to auto-calibrate).

Link to comment

The whole deal of the inaccurate odometer was really much ado about nothing. O.K...The trip odometer read short...Big deal! (It is mostly better now) The tracklog still records fine and it will tell you how far you have travelled.

It was just something people liked to focus on. I'm glad Garmin is working on it, I want it to work too. But I didn't lie awake at night wringing my hands and grinding my teeth together worrying about it either.

 

The altimeter function seems just fine to me...Though I seldom (if ever) use it. I am at the altitude where I am, so I don't need to see it in numbers. In reality, the barometric altimeter is pretty much useless to me. The GPS altimeter does just fine for my purposes. As for watching the pressure rise or fall over any time period...That is the weatherman's job.

Link to comment

The whole deal of the inaccurate odometer was really much ado about nothing. O.K...The trip odometer read short...Big deal! (It is mostly better now) The tracklog still records fine and it will tell you how far you have travelled.

It was just something people liked to focus on. I'm glad Garmin is working on it, I want it to work too. But I didn't lie awake at night wringing my hands and grinding my teeth together worrying about it either.

 

No, it's not much ado about nothing... it's only nothing to you because you don't use it. For others, such as those who head off-trail, it can be extremely helpful to know how far you've traveled in a given length of time. If you're bushwhacking through brush and trying to make a decision about whether you can make it to a particular point by sundown (for example), knowing how quickly you're covering ground is valuable. Once I'm home to upload tracklogs, I'm past needing to know how far I've come. By then, it's trivial but while I'm on the trail it's important. Perhaps you only do caches that are close to the road, but lots of us actually combine caching with significant hiking and for us the trip odometer matters. Honestly, I'm content that Garmin is working on this and will probably fix it, but I'm getting really tired of people who have no need of the odometer proclaiming that the concerns of those of us who do are not legitimate.

 

On the original barometer question, while I haven't done any tests or measurements, my subjective impression is that the barometer on the Vista HCx is working pretty much the same as the one on my Vista C did. I admit, though, that I focus more on how accurate it is when I cross a known elevation after calibrating it at the beginning of the day than on how frequently it updates. I take it that it seems less frequent to gratefulhike. On my next hike, I'll carry both and compare them. I agree in principle that I'd rather have the feature work well at the old battery life than have longer battery life but poor information to work with while hiking.

Link to comment

well the reason why I ask, overnight at a camp site I enjoy having a GPS that reads barometric pressure tendencies for weather purposes, because it usually is a great way to predict storm fronts.....but not always and according to gpsinformation.us the vista c is more indepth with that sense

 

http://gpsinformation.us/vistacolor/etrexvistacolor.html

 

That's an interesting article. I hadn't gotten to this yet when I wrote my last reply. While the two seemed to me to work well for regular hiking, and for testing the elevation at a known point, this article brings up some issues about how the HCx works that are worth looking into. I may have to read it through carefully and do some of my own tests to see what works well and what doesn't.

Link to comment

well the reason why I ask, overnight at a camp site I enjoy having a GPS that reads barometric pressure tendencies for weather purposes, because it usually is a great way to predict storm fronts.....but not always and according to gpsinformation.us the vista c is more indepth with that sense

 

http://gpsinformation.us/vistacolor/etrexvistacolor.html

 

That's an interesting article. I hadn't gotten to this yet when I wrote my last reply. While the two seemed to me to work well for regular hiking, and for testing the elevation at a known point, this article brings up some issues about how the HCx works that are worth looking into. I may have to read it through carefully and do some of my own tests to see what works well and what doesn't.

I'd take that article with a huge grain of salt. In it they say "At present, there is some 'mystery' as to where this new receiver comes from. Garmin tells us that they purchase from many different receiver chip vendors, but there is a news release, "Garmin Integrates New GPS Chipset from STMicroelectronics" (HERE)." See this article here with a bootup screenshot which clearly says "MediaTek". "Mystery" solved!

 

Also, the big deal with the "less-versatile" pressure track is that the Vista HCx doesn't record pressure while it's off. That's the significance of the two screen shots. It doesn't say that the Vista HCx updates less frequently. If it's important to you to have a pressure log while the unit is off, you might consider getting the older model or a separate barometer (or you could try using the Vista HCx in GPS-off mode; that would extend your battery life).

 

Their comment about "lock to road" near the bottom is inaccurate, too. (Lock to road is a separate setting from On road/Off road).

Link to comment

The whole deal of the inaccurate odometer was really much ado about nothing. O.K...The trip odometer read short...Big deal! (It is mostly better now) The tracklog still records fine and it will tell you how far you have travelled.

It was just something people liked to focus on. I'm glad Garmin is working on it, I want it to work too. But I didn't lie awake at night wringing my hands and grinding my teeth together worrying about it either.

 

No, it's not much ado about nothing... it's only nothing to you because you don't use it. For others, such as those who head off-trail, it can be extremely helpful to know how far you've traveled in a given length of time. If you're bushwhacking through brush and trying to make a decision about whether you can make it to a particular point by sundown (for example), knowing how quickly you're covering ground is valuable. Once I'm home to upload tracklogs, I'm past needing to know how far I've come. By then, it's trivial but while I'm on the trail it's important. Perhaps you only do caches that are close to the road, but lots of us actually combine caching with significant hiking and for us the trip odometer matters. Honestly, I'm content that Garmin is working on this and will probably fix it, but I'm getting really tired of people who have no need of the odometer proclaiming that the concerns of those of us who do are not legitimate.

By the way, our destination was a place called "Fairyland Basin". You can read all about it with a Google search.

 

On the original barometer question, while I haven't done any tests or measurements, my subjective impression is that the barometer on the Vista HCx is working pretty much the same as the one on my Vista C did. I admit, though, that I focus more on how accurate it is when I cross a known elevation after calibrating it at the beginning of the day than on how frequently it updates. I take it that it seems less frequent to gratefulhike. On my next hike, I'll carry both and compare them. I agree in principle that I'd rather have the feature work well at the old battery life than have longer battery life but poor information to work with while hiking.

Oh brother...Here is just a little bit of a tracklog from a trip I took just last month. This trip is 32 miles of bushwhacking in Yellowstone National Park to a place that has had fewer human visitors than the summit of Mount Everest. There are no trails here...Not even a "sort of" trail. I've made this same trip twice now, both times with a GPS. In fact, this trip is very nearly impossible without a GPS. Our team had 3 of them along for redundancy. I know exactly what is and is not "needed" in serious back-country travel. Take a look at those contour lines and you can appreciate the terrain we were moving in. I didn't use the odometer obviously, as it didn't even work at my average speed of less than 1 mph. And I didn't miss it one bit either. I stand by my statement that it is much ado about nothing. If you really need an odometer to move around in the back country, you are relying too much on technology.

1508475777_31657f8595_o.jpg

Edited by Alphawolf
Link to comment

The whole deal of the inaccurate odometer was really much ado about nothing. O.K...The trip odometer read short...Big deal! (It is mostly better now) The tracklog still records fine and it will tell you how far you have travelled.

It was just something people liked to focus on. I'm glad Garmin is working on it, I want it to work too. But I didn't lie awake at night wringing my hands and grinding my teeth together worrying about it either.

 

No, it's not much ado about nothing... it's only nothing to you because you don't use it. For others, such as those who head off-trail, it can be extremely helpful to know how far you've traveled in a given length of time. If you're bushwhacking through brush and trying to make a decision about whether you can make it to a particular point by sundown (for example), knowing how quickly you're covering ground is valuable. Once I'm home to upload tracklogs, I'm past needing to know how far I've come. By then, it's trivial but while I'm on the trail it's important. Perhaps you only do caches that are close to the road, but lots of us actually combine caching with significant hiking and for us the trip odometer matters. Honestly, I'm content that Garmin is working on this and will probably fix it, but I'm getting really tired of people who have no need of the odometer proclaiming that the concerns of those of us who do are not legitimate.

By the way, our destination was a place called "Fairyland Basin". You can read all about it with a Google search.

 

On the original barometer question, while I haven't done any tests or measurements, my subjective impression is that the barometer on the Vista HCx is working pretty much the same as the one on my Vista C did. I admit, though, that I focus more on how accurate it is when I cross a known elevation after calibrating it at the beginning of the day than on how frequently it updates. I take it that it seems less frequent to gratefulhike. On my next hike, I'll carry both and compare them. I agree in principle that I'd rather have the feature work well at the old battery life than have longer battery life but poor information to work with while hiking.

Oh brother...Here is just a little bit of a tracklog from a trip I took just last month. This trip is 32 miles of bushwhacking in Yellowstone National Park to a place that has had fewer human visitors than the summit of Mount Everest. There are no trails here...Not even a "sort of" trail. I've made this same trip twice now, both times with a GPS. In fact, this trip is very nearly impossible without a GPS. Our team had 3 of them along for redundancy. I know exactly what is and is not "needed" in serious back-country travel. Take a look at those contour lines and you can appreciate the terrain we were moving in. I didn't use the odometer obviously, as it didn't even work at my average speed of less than 1 mph. And I didn't miss it one bit either. I stand by my statement that it is much ado about nothing. If you really need an odometer to move around in the back country, you are relying too much on technology.

1508475777_31657f8595_o.jpg

He said: ...but I'm getting really tired of people who have no need of the odometer proclaiming that the concerns of those of us who do are not legitimate.

 

>>If you really need an odometer to move around in the back country, you are relying too much on technology.

But you take 3 of them :blink:

Link to comment

The whole deal of the inaccurate odometer was really much ado about nothing. O.K...The trip odometer read short...Big deal! (It is mostly better now) The tracklog still records fine and it will tell you how far you have travelled.

It was just something people liked to focus on. I'm glad Garmin is working on it, I want it to work too. But I didn't lie awake at night wringing my hands and grinding my teeth together worrying about it either.

 

No, it's not much ado about nothing... it's only nothing to you because you don't use it. For others, such as those who head off-trail, it can be extremely helpful to know how far you've traveled in a given length of time. If you're bushwhacking through brush and trying to make a decision about whether you can make it to a particular point by sundown (for example), knowing how quickly you're covering ground is valuable. Once I'm home to upload tracklogs, I'm past needing to know how far I've come. By then, it's trivial but while I'm on the trail it's important. Perhaps you only do caches that are close to the road, but lots of us actually combine caching with significant hiking and for us the trip odometer matters. Honestly, I'm content that Garmin is working on this and will probably fix it, but I'm getting really tired of people who have no need of the odometer proclaiming that the concerns of those of us who do are not legitimate.

By the way, our destination was a place called "Fairyland Basin". You can read all about it with a Google search.

 

On the original barometer question, while I haven't done any tests or measurements, my subjective impression is that the barometer on the Vista HCx is working pretty much the same as the one on my Vista C did. I admit, though, that I focus more on how accurate it is when I cross a known elevation after calibrating it at the beginning of the day than on how frequently it updates. I take it that it seems less frequent to gratefulhike. On my next hike, I'll carry both and compare them. I agree in principle that I'd rather have the feature work well at the old battery life than have longer battery life but poor information to work with while hiking.

Oh brother...Here is just a little bit of a tracklog from a trip I took just last month. This trip is 32 miles of bushwhacking in Yellowstone National Park to a place that has had fewer human visitors than the summit of Mount Everest. There are no trails here...Not even a "sort of" trail. I've made this same trip twice now, both times with a GPS. In fact, this trip is very nearly impossible without a GPS. Our team had 3 of them along for redundancy. I know exactly what is and is not "needed" in serious back-country travel. Take a look at those contour lines and you can appreciate the terrain we were moving in. I didn't use the odometer obviously, as it didn't even work at my average speed of less than 1 mph. And I didn't miss it one bit either. I stand by my statement that it is much ado about nothing. If you really need an odometer to move around in the back country, you are relying too much on technology.

1508475777_31657f8595_o.jpg

He said: ...but I'm getting really tired of people who have no need of the odometer proclaiming that the concerns of those of us who do are not legitimate.

 

>>If you really need an odometer to move around in the back country, you are relying too much on technology.

But you take 3 of them :blink:

Yup...We take 3 GPS receivers, and use 2 of them. Like I said, I doubt you could make the trip reliably without one. Many, many parties have had to turn back after failing to find the only route in here.

But...The odometer on the GPS? It is just about as important to me on a trip like this as the games in the menu are...

Link to comment
Yup...We take 3 GPS receivers, and use 2 of them. Like I said, I doubt you could make the trip reliably without one. Many, many parties have had to turn back after failing to find the only route in here.

But...The odometer on the GPS? It is just about as important to me on a trip like this as the games in the menu are...

 

As you have described your trip - I noted that you have done it twice and both times using GPS for navigation - I can understand why you might not have needed the odometer. But, it sounds as though you had pre-programmed the route into your GPSr. Thus, had you needed to know how far you had traveled or how far you had to go to the next intermediate destination, you could easily have made that determination from your position, relative to your route.

Link to comment
Yup...We take 3 GPS receivers, and use 2 of them. Like I said, I doubt you could make the trip reliably without one. Many, many parties have had to turn back after failing to find the only route in here.

But...The odometer on the GPS? It is just about as important to me on a trip like this as the games in the menu are...

 

As you have described your trip - I noted that you have done it twice and both times using GPS for navigation - I can understand why you might not have needed the odometer. But, it sounds as though you had pre-programmed the route into your GPSr. Thus, had you needed to know how far you had traveled or how far you had to go to the next intermediate destination, you could easily have made that determination from your position, relative to your route.

The way I use my GPS in the backcountry:

I preload waypoints in for my desired route. I have my GPS set to show degrees not cardinal points. I am always set to mag. north. I bring up the desired waypoint, read the bearing and distance and shut it back off. From turn on to turn off is about 30 seconds.

I then bring up my Silva compass, dial in the bearing and take off. I check the compass bearing occasionally, and turn the GPS on about once every half hour to "tweak" my route. This way, the batteries will last me a 5 day backpacking trip very easily. So, you can see why my odometer function is totally useless to me. My GPS is turned off saving batteries about 90% of the time.

The tracklog I showed in the picture is very unique, in that I actually left my GPS turned on just for the tracklog recording. I seldom do that. I t uses too much battery life in backpacking.

Edited by Alphawolf
Link to comment

Oh brother...Here is just a little bit of a tracklog from a trip I took just last month. This trip is 32 miles of bushwhacking in Yellowstone National Park to a place that has had fewer human visitors than the summit of Mount Everest. There are no trails here...Not even a "sort of" trail. I've made this same trip twice now, both times with a GPS. In fact, this trip is very nearly impossible without a GPS. Our team had 3 of them along for redundancy. I know exactly what is and is not "needed" in serious back-country travel. Take a look at those contour lines and you can appreciate the terrain we were moving in. I didn't use the odometer obviously, as it didn't even work at my average speed of less than 1 mph. And I didn't miss it one bit either. I stand by my statement that it is much ado about nothing. If you really need an odometer to move around in the back country, you are relying too much on technology.

 

The odometer provides one more piece of information that is useful in making good decisions while doing exactly what -- it turns out -- you also do. If you were less set on trying to prove a meaningless point and would just stop and think about it, you'd realize that it would also have been a useful tool for your trip in Yellowstone. Not a critical, life-or-death thing... just one more piece of information that can be useful in making decisions. I can recall many times outdoors wishing that I had more information; I don't remember ever wishing I had less. Perhaps you just don't see the potential because 1) your odometer didn't work on this trip when you did keep a route, and 2) your usual method of turning the GPSr off most of the time negates the value of the odometer.

 

In any event, I stand by my original statement. You are in no position to tell me what my needs are and have no place claiming they are not valid simply because you don't share them. If the manufacturer of the device claims it does this thing, and I say I need it, then that in itself is a legitimate reason for complaint. It is not much ado about nothing, it is a little ado about something.

 

Normally, I wouldn't waste my time arguing with you about this, as I really don't care what you think of how I use my GPSr or my dependence on technology. (Freeday makes a good point on that!) But since there seem to be several of you trying to shut the rest of us up, it actually becomes a problem that requires a response.

 

The only way that Garmin will devote resources to fixing this bug is if they feel that it is causing a problem with their user community. If everyone listens to you, and shuts up about it, then they will assume we're all content and we'll never get it fixed. So we're not going to do that. On the other hand, if we are successful in getting Garmin to fix this bug, then it costs you exactly nothing and you are no better or worse off than you are now. As they say in this part of the country, you have no dog in this fight. So how about giving us a break and, instead of complaining that we're trying to get a bug fixed, either support us (the civil response) or at least stop trying to convince people that it doesn't matter. Individuals can decide that for themselves.

Link to comment

I hope Garmin fixes this in one of their updates because I use the Trip Computer frequently. I can think of a time last year when I was on a "cache hiding" trip and only turned around when I reached the 4.5 mile mark of my hike, thinking nine miles was all the further I wanted to walk that day.

 

The way the Trip Computer is now, I would have actually covered much more distance than I thought before turning around . . . and would have been really hurting by the time I got back to my car . . . :blink:

 

The other day I went for a slow, meandering hike. The Trip Computer said I had covered only 2.6 miles when in fact, according to the Tracks downloaded to Mapsource, I had gone nearly four miles. :blink:

Link to comment

Oh brother...Here is just a little bit of a tracklog from a trip I took just last month. This trip is 32 miles of bushwhacking in Yellowstone National Park to a place that has had fewer human visitors than the summit of Mount Everest. There are no trails here...Not even a "sort of" trail. I've made this same trip twice now, both times with a GPS. In fact, this trip is very nearly impossible without a GPS. Our team had 3 of them along for redundancy. I know exactly what is and is not "needed" in serious back-country travel. Take a look at those contour lines and you can appreciate the terrain we were moving in. I didn't use the odometer obviously, as it didn't even work at my average speed of less than 1 mph. And I didn't miss it one bit either. I stand by my statement that it is much ado about nothing. If you really need an odometer to move around in the back country, you are relying too much on technology.

 

The odometer provides one more piece of information that is useful in making good decisions while doing exactly what -- it turns out -- you also do. If you were less set on trying to prove a meaningless point and would just stop and think about it, you'd realize that it would also have been a useful tool for your trip in Yellowstone. Not a critical, life-or-death thing... just one more piece of information that can be useful in making decisions. I can recall many times outdoors wishing that I had more information; I don't remember ever wishing I had less. Perhaps you just don't see the potential because 1) your odometer didn't work on this trip when you did keep a route, and 2) your usual method of turning the GPSr off most of the time negates the value of the odometer.

 

In any event, I stand by my original statement. You are in no position to tell me what my needs are and have no place claiming they are not valid simply because you don't share them. If the manufacturer of the device claims it does this thing, and I say I need it, then that in itself is a legitimate reason for complaint. It is not much ado about nothing, it is a little ado about something.

 

Normally, I wouldn't waste my time arguing with you about this, as I really don't care what you think of how I use my GPSr or my dependence on technology. (Freeday makes a good point on that!) But since there seem to be several of you trying to shut the rest of us up, it actually becomes a problem that requires a response.

 

The only way that Garmin will devote resources to fixing this bug is if they feel that it is causing a problem with their user community. If everyone listens to you, and shuts up about it, then they will assume we're all content and we'll never get it fixed. So we're not going to do that. On the other hand, if we are successful in getting Garmin to fix this bug, then it costs you exactly nothing and you are no better or worse off than you are now. As they say in this part of the country, you have no dog in this fight. So how about giving us a break and, instead of complaining that we're trying to get a bug fixed, either support us (the civil response) or at least stop trying to convince people that it doesn't matter. Individuals can decide that for themselves.

 

Ummmm...Did you even read the part of my posting where I said " I'm glad Garmin is working on it, I want it to work too."?

Link to comment

The way I use my GPS in the backcountry:

I preload waypoints in for my desired route. I have my GPS set to show degrees not cardinal points. I am always set to mag. north. I bring up the desired waypoint, read the bearing and distance and shut it back off. From turn on to turn off is about 30 seconds.

I then bring up my Silva compass, dial in the bearing and take off. I check the compass bearing occasionally, and turn the GPS on about once every half hour to "tweak" my route. This way, the batteries will last me a 5 day backpacking trip very easily. So, you can see why my odometer function is totally useless to me. My GPS is turned off saving batteries about 90% of the time.

The tracklog I showed in the picture is very unique, in that I actually left my GPS turned on just for the tracklog recording. I seldom do that. I t uses too much battery life in backpacking.

 

Thanks for the explanation and, for an extended bush whacking trip, that's the logical way to use a GPSr, i.e. one of several tools to assist with plotting and maintaining a course.

Link to comment

The way I use my GPS in the backcountry:

I preload waypoints in for my desired route. I have my GPS set to show degrees not cardinal points. I am always set to mag. north. I bring up the desired waypoint, read the bearing and distance and shut it back off. From turn on to turn off is about 30 seconds.

I then bring up my Silva compass, dial in the bearing and take off. I check the compass bearing occasionally, and turn the GPS on about once every half hour to "tweak" my route. This way, the batteries will last me a 5 day backpacking trip very easily. So, you can see why my odometer function is totally useless to me. My GPS is turned off saving batteries about 90% of the time.

The tracklog I showed in the picture is very unique, in that I actually left my GPS turned on just for the tracklog recording. I seldom do that. I t uses too much battery life in backpacking.

 

Thanks for the explanation and, for an extended bush whacking trip, that's the logical way to use a GPSr, i.e. one of several tools to assist with plotting and maintaining a course.

One thing I didn't mention, and I should have: I always, always have a printed 1:24,000 Topo of the area I will be in, along with a UTM grid card. I have mappping on my GPSR, but I would never in a million years rely on that as my only map.

My naviagational "triad" consists of the map & grid card, a magnetic compass, and my GPS. None are any more important than the other, nor are they any less important than the next.

It is way too easy to start getting complaicent about backcountry navigation when using GPS. Just remember, a GPS can fail, and it will probably be at the worst possible time. Always have a back-up for navigation. Remember, only a fool uses any single source of navigation.

Link to comment

Ummmm...Did you even read the part of my posting where I said " I'm glad Garmin is working on it, I want it to work too."?

 

Why yes, I did, but let's not just pick and choose. Let's keep it in context with what you said before and after that.

 

The whole deal of the inaccurate odometer was really much ado about nothing. O.K...The trip odometer read short...Big deal! (It is mostly better now) The tracklog still records fine and it will tell you how far you have travelled.

It was just something people liked to focus on. I'm glad Garmin is working on it, I want it to work too. But I didn't lie awake at night wringing my hands and grinding my teeth together worrying about it either.

 

Your preceding that by the 'much ado about nothing' and 'big deal' comments, and following it by characterizing people who do complain about it as laying awake at night wringing their hands and grinding their teeth over the issue was disrespectful and expressed contempt for people who are trying to get it fixed. That's what I have objected to all along. Anyway, I've said what I have to say. Miragee gets exactly what I'm talking about and I'm sure others do too, so there's no point beating this horse any more dead than it already is. I'll not reply again in this thread.

Link to comment

I guess I started this whole fight. My real point is not that this isn't a bug. It is, an it should be fixed (if it can be). My problem is with the tone of the complaints--running around with your hands in the air and your hair on fire like it's the worst bug ever and Garmin is intentionally deceiving customers with this horrible software. Come on, 72 point font, red text and multiple exclamation points? (I know G&G, it wasn't you.) A better approach would have been "The odometer on the Vista HCx reads short in comparison to the 60CSx. This is an important feature for me and I wanted people to know in case it's important to them, too. I'll be contacting Garmin in hopes of a satisfactory resolution to my concern."

Link to comment

I guess I started this whole fight. My real point is not that this isn't a bug. It is, an it should be fixed (if it can be). My problem is with the tone of the complaints--running around with your hands in the air and your hair on fire like it's the worst bug ever and Garmin is intentionally deceiving customers with this horrible software. Come on, 72 point font, red text and multiple exclamation points? (I know G&G, it wasn't you.) A better approach would have been "The odometer on the Vista HCx reads short in comparison to the 60CSx. This is an important feature for me and I wanted people to know in case it's important to them, too. I'll be contacting Garmin in hopes of a satisfactory resolution to my concern."

I agree.

Link to comment

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Followers 1
×
×
  • Create New...