Doe anyone have anything POSITIVE to say about Garmin Dakota 10?

[+tiptoethruthetulips]

I have always used my iPhone...but decided to spend 300 bucks on a Garmin Dak.10. I am getting frustrated because I am a dumbass when it comes to this stuff and am trying to figure things out.... I haveread a bunch of negative things about the device....anyone have anything good to say?

[NordicMan]

The Dakota 10 is a great little GPSr. What have you heard negative about it?

[+fegan]

I would prefer a 20, over the 10, but except for the lack of a Wherigo player I thought the 20 looked mighty sweet!

 

What's the problem?

[+jeepdelfuego]

I have always used my iPhone...but decided to spend 300 bucks on a Garmin Dak.10. I am getting frustrated because I am a dumbass when it comes to this stuff and am trying to figure things out.... I haveread a bunch of negative things about the device....anyone have anything good to say?

 

The only thing I didn't like about the Dakota 10 was that it did not have an SD card. But, other than that, it is a great model. Geocaching with it is the same as with the Oregon models. You can find out everything you need to know about geocaching with a Dakota/Oregon, and everything else at the following link: Geocaching

 

The Dakota wiki can be found here: Dakota

 

My wife used to love it because it fit perfectly in her hand. Every once in awhile she'll tell me how much she misses it (she lost her Dakota 10 a few months ago). She now uses my old Oregon 300 and I use an Oregon 450. The main difference between the Oregons and the Dakotas is the size of the screen/unit. The Dakotas have a brighter, smaller screen in direct sunlight. But, the Oregon's better resolution looks great in low light conditions.

 

Don't get frustrated with the unit. Check out the wiki's and let us know what it is that you are trying to do. It usually boils down to loading geocaches from Geocaching.com, or loading maps.

[+tiptoethruthetulips]

I have always used my iPhone...but decided to spend 300 bucks on a Garmin Dak.10. I am getting frustrated because I am a dumbass when it comes to this stuff and am trying to figure things out.... I haveread a bunch of negative things about the device....anyone have anything good to say?

 

The only thing I didn't like about the Dakota 10 was that it did not have an SD card. But, other than that, it is a great model. Geocaching with it is the same as with the Oregon models. You can find out everything you need to know about geocaching with a Dakota/Oregon, and everything else at the following link: Geocaching

 

The Dakota wiki can be found here: Dakota

 

My wife used to love it because it fit perfectly in her hand. Every once in awhile she'll tell me how much she misses it (she lost her Dakota 10 a few months ago). She now uses my old Oregon 300 and I use an Oregon 450. The main difference between the Oregons and the Dakotas is the size of the screen/unit. The Dakotas have a brighter, smaller screen in direct sunlight. But, the Oregon's better resolution looks great in low light conditions.

 

Don't get frustrated with the unit. Check out the wiki's and let us know what it is that you are trying to do. It usually boils down to loading geocaches from Geocaching.com, or loading maps.

I cannot beleive I am asking this...but what is a wiki??

[+tiptoethruthetulips]

The Dakota 10 is a great little GPSr. What have you heard negative about it?

 

Thank you for the reply. I have heard that it is slow...that the maps suck...that I cannot download this or that...

I really want to learn how to use this thing because I love geocaching....but I feel so overwhelmed by this little guy.

[+tiptoethruthetulips]

I would prefer a 20, over the 10, but except for the lack of a Wherigo player I thought the 20 looked mighty sweet!

 

What's the problem?

 

I have just read that it is just "ok" and the maps suck and so on....it got 4/5 stars...I suppose I need to stop being afraid of it and use it.

[+jenny08_1015]

I have a Dakota 10 and like it a lot.

 

It seems like it takes a while to find satellites. I have never tried to download maps because I don't need/want them.

 

But it is GREAT for Geocaching. The paperless(ness) is really easy. It's a good size, fits in your hand, has sunrise/sunset info. I was happy I got it.

[+jeepdelfuego]

I cannot beleive I am asking this...but what is a wiki??

 

A wiki? It is like an encyclopedia, but web based. The mother of all wiki's is wikipedia.org. But, there are wiki's for just about any subject, object, person, whatever.

 

The Dakota's, like most garmin handhelds, don't come preloaded with maps. Well, actually, they do have a worldwide map that doesn't do much good when you want to autoroute. What that last sentence means is that it will not give you directions on how to get there. For that, you need to fork out money for the City Navigator maps. Or, you could get some free maps from GPSfiledepot.com .

[+dfx]

A wiki? It is like an encyclopedia, but web based. The mother of all wiki's is wikipedia.org. But, there are wiki's for just about any subject, object, person, whatever.

i'm sorry, but i have to do some nitpicking/smartassing here. a wiki, or more precisely a wiki-wiki, has nothing to do with being an encyclopedia. instead, the whole point of a wiki-wiki is that all the content is editable by everyone, or at least everyone who has a (usually free) account. this is contrary to the traditional model of content on the web, where whoever owns the website provides all the content. so, if you come across a wiki, then it's only a true wiki if you, the reader, have the option of changing the content, editing it, adding to it, making new articles, linking to them, etc etc. if you can't edit it yourself, then it's not a wiki.

 

and, wikis have been around long before wikipedia has existed.

Edited July 16, 2010 by dfx

[+jeepdelfuego]

A wiki? It is like an encyclopedia, but web based. The mother of all wiki's is wikipedia.org. But, there are wiki's for just about any subject, object, person, whatever.

i'm sorry, but i have to do some nitpicking/smartassing here. a wiki, or more precisely a wiki-wiki, has nothing to do with being an encyclopedia. instead, the whole point of a wiki-wiki is that all the content is editable by everyone, or at least everyone who has a (usually free) account. this is contrary to the traditional model of content on the web, where whoever owns the website provides all the content. so, if you come across a wiki, then it's only a true wiki if you, the reader, have the option of changing the content, editing it, adding to it, making new articles, linking to them, etc etc. if you can't edit it yourself, then it's not a wiki.

 

and, wikis have been around long before wikipedia has existed.

 

Me too.

 

Encylopedia:

a book or set of books containing articles on various topics, usually in alphabetical arrangement, covering all branches of knowledge or, less commonly, all aspects of one subject.

 

If we fast forward the definition of an encyclopedia a few hundred years, and replace books with web pages, an encyclopedia starts sounding a lot like a wiki. Also, I didn't mean to say that Wikipedia.org was the original wiki, just that it is the largest one out there to my knowledge.

 

From Wikipedia.org:

__________________________

Indeed, the purpose of an encyclopedia is to collect knowledge disseminated around the globe; to set forth its general system to the men with whom we live, and transmit it to those who will come after us, so that the work of preceding centuries will not become useless to the centuries to come; and so that our offspring, becoming better instructed, will at the same time become more virtuous and happy, and that we should not die without having rendered a service to the human race in the future years to come.[6]

— Diderot

__________________________

 

For the full etymology and history of the word, "encyclopedia", click on the following link: Encyclopedia

 

...what does this post have to do with geocaching?

[+dfx]

Encylopedia:

a book or set of books containing articles on various topics, usually in alphabetical arrangement, covering all branches of knowledge or, less commonly, all aspects of one subject.

 

If we fast forward the definition of an encyclopedia a few hundred years, and replace books with web pages, an encyclopedia starts sounding a lot like a wiki. Also, I didn't mean to say that Wikipedia.org was the original wiki, just that it is the largest one out there to my knowledge.

no you got that the wrong way around. wikipedia of course is a kind of encyclopedia, no question about that. wikipedia is also a wiki, because all the content is user-editable, and it's probably the largest one too. but not every wiki is an encyclopedia (example: the original wikiwiki at http://c2.com/cgi/wiki ), in the same way that not every online encyclopedia is a wiki (example: http://www.britannica.com/ ). also read up on the concept at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wiki, which tells you everything about how it's user-editable and nothing about the content. of course most wikis do have informational content and act a kind of knowledge base, but that's not what makes a wiki a wiki.

 

and yeah, this is all OT. i just don't like it when wrong information is being spread

[+splashy]

All veryyyyy interesting this Wiki stuff, but what he WANT is

http://garminoregon.wikispaces.com/

 

THE GARMIN WIKI

[+jeepdelfuego]

All veryyyyy interesting this Wiki stuff, but what he WANT is

http://garminoregon.wikispaces.com/

 

THE GARMIN WIKI

 

Yeah!