Bookmark this page:
  Re: Google no longer sends POIs to my garmin Sat N...
| Elmo P. Shagnas... | 02-07-2010 |
  Re: Google no longer sends POIs to my garmin Sat N...
| Elmo P. Shagnas... | 02-09-2010 |
| Re: Google no longer sends POIs to my garmin Sat N...
| Peter H. Coffin | 02-09-2010 |
| Re: Google no longer sends POIs to my garmin Sat N...
| Elmo P. Shagnas... | 02-09-2010 |
| Re: Google no longer sends POIs to my garmin Sat N...
| Peter H. Coffin | 02-09-2010 |
| Re: Google no longer sends POIs to my garmin Sat N...
| Elmo P. Shagnas... | 02-09-2010 |
 Re: Google no longer sends POIs to my garmin Sat N...
| Peter H. Coffin | 02-09-2010 |
| Re: Google no longer sends POIs to my garmin Sat N...
| Elmo P. Shagnas... | 02-10-2010 |
If you were Registered and logged in, you could reply and use other advanced thread options
On Wed, 10 Feb 2010 07:19:51 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
:>
:>> > It was free. It was handy. Google owned it and let you use it. Google
:>> > chose to take it away, for whatever reason. You don't own it, so you
:>> > can't demand that they give it back.
:>> > Or do you honestly believe that you're ENTITLED to something like this
:>> > simply because it once existed and served you? That you're ENTITLED to
:>> > Google forever maintaining this simply because YOU want it?
:>> > chose to take it away, for whatever reason. You don't own it, so you
:>> > can't demand that they give it back.
:>> > Or do you honestly believe that you're ENTITLED to something like this
:>> > simply because it once existed and served you? That you're ENTITLED to
:>> > Google forever maintaining this simply because YOU want it?
:>>
:>> We're entitled to know whether it's coming back and when. I'm perfectly
:>> capable of writing a process to work around it, and so are many others.
:>> Waiting in limbo is *not* an option.
:>> We're entitled to know whether it's coming back and when. I'm perfectly
:>> capable of writing a process to work around it, and so are many others.
:>> Waiting in limbo is *not* an option.
:>
:>You're not ENTITLED to jack shit. The sooner you realize that, the
:>better off you'll be.
:>
:>Someone owned something, and let you use it freely. It's now not there.
:>You're not ENTITLED to know anything about it, let alone have access to
:>it in perpetuity.
:>
:>Where the hell do you get your sense of entitlement from, anyway? Why
:>the fuck do you think you're owed ANYTHING in this world, let alone some
:>pissant little Google thing?
:>You're not ENTITLED to jack shit. The sooner you realize that, the
:>better off you'll be.
:>
:>Someone owned something, and let you use it freely. It's now not there.
:>You're not ENTITLED to know anything about it, let alone have access to
:>it in perpetuity.
:>
:>Where the hell do you get your sense of entitlement from, anyway? Why
:>the fuck do you think you're owed ANYTHING in this world, let alone some
:>pissant little Google thing?
At the time I'm posting this it seems to be working again. At least the Send
link is there and clicking on it brings up the choices that were there
before. Email, Phone, Car and GPS. I haven't tested it to see if it actually
is working again since my Garmin is out in the car and I'm too lazy to go
get it and plug it into the computer. ;-)
me/2
If you don't like the answer ask for your money back.
> On Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:13:04 -0500, Elmo P. Shagnasty wrote:
>>> > I mean, I want a personal jet pack and/or the flying cars they all
>>> > promised us 50 years ago. Where can I go get help for that? Oh,
>>> > yeah--the forum where they discuss how to build one yourself, or how
>>> > the
>>> > gummint conspiracy is keeping them from existing, or whatever. That's
>>> > the only help I can get...
>>> Not comparable. You never did have a jet pack. Pretend instead, someone
>>> took away your bicycle to fix a gear-change issue. And they only tell
>>> you "Yes, we're aware that we took your bicycle. Thank you for calling."
>>> > promised us 50 years ago. Where can I go get help for that? Oh,
>>> > yeah--the forum where they discuss how to build one yourself, or how
>>> > the
>>> > gummint conspiracy is keeping them from existing, or whatever. That's
>>> > the only help I can get...
>>> Not comparable. You never did have a jet pack. Pretend instead, someone
>>> took away your bicycle to fix a gear-change issue. And they only tell
>>> you "Yes, we're aware that we took your bicycle. Thank you for calling."
>> Not comparable.
>> Pretend instead that you were using someone else's bicycle, that he let
>> you use freely, then he took it away to fix it. And then he says,
>> "Yeah, it's not available right now. You may use it again when it's
>> available again."
>> Are we now down to the level where we have expectations that free Google
>> things should forever be available and/or free? To the point where we
>> get upset and maybe even litigious?
>> Pretend instead that you were using someone else's bicycle, that he let
>> you use freely, then he took it away to fix it. And then he says,
>> "Yeah, it's not available right now. You may use it again when it's
>> available again."
>> Are we now down to the level where we have expectations that free Google
>> things should forever be available and/or free? To the point where we
>> get upset and maybe even litigious?
> No, but Google goes out of their way to promote their tools, with the
> expectation and intent that processes will be built around them. It is
> therefore entirely reasonable to expect that if something vanishes that
> when a Google rep posts that the thing is known to be gone that they
> ALSO mention whether it will be back and when it is known to be coming
> back, or a clear statement that this is not known at the time. It's also
> good policy from the standpoint that unreliable tools get replaced.
> expectation and intent that processes will be built around them. It is
> therefore entirely reasonable to expect that if something vanishes that
> when a Google rep posts that the thing is known to be gone that they
> ALSO mention whether it will be back and when it is known to be coming
> back, or a clear statement that this is not known at the time. It's also
> good policy from the standpoint that unreliable tools get replaced.
>> It was free. It was handy. Google owned it and let you use it. Google
>> chose to take it away, for whatever reason. You don't own it, so you
>> can't demand that they give it back.
>> Or do you honestly believe that you're ENTITLED to something like this
>> simply because it once existed and served you? That you're ENTITLED to
>> Google forever maintaining this simply because YOU want it?
>> chose to take it away, for whatever reason. You don't own it, so you
>> can't demand that they give it back.
>> Or do you honestly believe that you're ENTITLED to something like this
>> simply because it once existed and served you? That you're ENTITLED to
>> Google forever maintaining this simply because YOU want it?
> We're entitled to know whether it's coming back and when. I'm perfectly
> capable of writing a process to work around it, and so are many others.
> Waiting in limbo is *not* an option.
> --
> Science is like sex:
> sometimes something useful comes out, but that's not why we're doing it.
> -- Richard Feynman
> capable of writing a process to work around it, and so are many others.
> Waiting in limbo is *not* an option.
> --
> Science is like sex:
> sometimes something useful comes out, but that's not why we're doing it.
> -- Richard Feynman
On Tue, 09 Feb 2010 16:13:04 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
>> > I mean, I want a personal jet pack and/or the flying cars they all
>> > promised us 50 years ago. Where can I go get help for that? Oh,
>> > yeah--the forum where they discuss how to build one yourself, or how the
>> > gummint conspiracy is keeping them from existing, or whatever. That's
>> > the only help I can get...
>> > promised us 50 years ago. Where can I go get help for that? Oh,
>> > yeah--the forum where they discuss how to build one yourself, or how the
>> > gummint conspiracy is keeping them from existing, or whatever. That's
>> > the only help I can get...
>>
>> Not comparable. You never did have a jet pack. Pretend instead, someone
>> took away your bicycle to fix a gear-change issue. And they only tell
>> you "Yes, we're aware that we took your bicycle. Thank you for calling."
>> Not comparable. You never did have a jet pack. Pretend instead, someone
>> took away your bicycle to fix a gear-change issue. And they only tell
>> you "Yes, we're aware that we took your bicycle. Thank you for calling."
>Not comparable.
>Pretend instead that you were using someone else's bicycle, that he let
>you use freely, then he took it away to fix it. And then he says,
>"Yeah, it's not available right now. You may use it again when it's
>available again."
>Are we now down to the level where we have expectations that free Google
>things should forever be available and/or free? To the point where we
>get upset and maybe even litigious?
>It was free. It was handy. Google owned it and let you use it. Google
>chose to take it away, for whatever reason. You don't own it, so you
>can't demand that they give it back.
>Or do you honestly believe that you're ENTITLED to something like this
>simply because it once existed and served you? That you're ENTITLED to
>Google forever maintaining this simply because YOU want it?
>Pretend instead that you were using someone else's bicycle, that he let
>you use freely, then he took it away to fix it. And then he says,
>"Yeah, it's not available right now. You may use it again when it's
>available again."
>Are we now down to the level where we have expectations that free Google
>things should forever be available and/or free? To the point where we
>get upset and maybe even litigious?
>It was free. It was handy. Google owned it and let you use it. Google
>chose to take it away, for whatever reason. You don't own it, so you
>can't demand that they give it back.
>Or do you honestly believe that you're ENTITLED to something like this
>simply because it once existed and served you? That you're ENTITLED to
>Google forever maintaining this simply because YOU want it?
Many a divorce lawyer and men paying alimony today would _like_ to agree
with you but that's not life. Laws clearly state that someone is entitled
to the life they have become accustomed to. If not, the provider is then
punished to the excess for withholding that way of life from someone.
You've not been alive for very long or not had much experience with the
real world, have you. I'm guessing the latter.
On Sun, 07 Feb 2010 14:07:03 -0500, "Elmo P. Shagnasty"
:>
:>> Hi Garminers,
:>>
:>> Google Send to GPS Not working anymore?
:>> Google no longer provides the option send to My Sat nav. This feature worked
:>> perfectly till recently . I see on internet many people have same problem
:>> please reply. Any Ideas on how to restore this much loved feature.
:>>
:>> Thanx Jimbo
:>>
:>>
:>> Google Send to GPS Not working anymore?
:>> Google no longer provides the option send to My Sat nav. This feature worked
:>> perfectly till recently . I see on internet many people have same problem
:>> please reply. Any Ideas on how to restore this much loved feature.
:>>
:>> Thanx Jimbo
:>>
:>
:>http://tinyurl.com/yc66uzw
:>
:>which reveals that Google Maps has a help forum.
:>
:>http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/maps/thread?tid=58371520dd66844c&hl
:>=en
:>http://tinyurl.com/yc66uzw
:>
:>which reveals that Google Maps has a help forum.
:>
:>http://www.google.com/support/forum/p/maps/thread?tid=58371520dd66844c&hl
:>=en
Yep and Google has said the problem is at their end and that they are
working on it. BTW, it affects "send to" any device, not just Garmin. That's
why the "Send" link doesn't even show up.
me/2
- Garmin Keygen version 1.3 by JetMouse
- Garmin GPS
- 2008-01-03
- Export from Google Earth into GPS?
- Garmin GPS
- 2007-05-17
- Google Earth And My Garmin
- Garmin GPS
- 2007-08-14
- Google Earth Plus Vs Garmin - HELP!
- Garmin GPS
- 2006-11-26
- Garmin c330 software update question
- Garmin GPS
- 2007-06-05
- Garmin registration help
- Garmin GPS
- 2007-01-14
- Garmin POI loader problem
- Garmin GPS
- 2006-07-12
