This discussion has been locked.
You can no longer post new replies to this discussion. If you have a question you can start a new discussion

Well, so whose tested the fw 2.90 yet?

Former Member
Former Member
I'm afraid to be the first. But since I can downgrade my Dakota 20, what doeth I have to lose? ;)
  • Former Member
    0 Former Member over 15 years ago
    Well, if the new fw screws up your gadget so bad that it doesn't work then how will you do the downgrade to make it work again? I say don't fix it if it aint broken cause the fix might break it anyway. Anybody remember Catch-22? :eek:
  • Former Member
    0 Former Member over 15 years ago
    I've tried it out. Its supposed to have solved 'save track' problem and it doesn't.
  • Former Member
    0 Former Member over 15 years ago
    Well, if the new fw screws up your gadget so bad that it doesn't work then how will you do the downgrade to make it work again? I say don't fix it if it aint broken cause the fix might break it anyway. Anybody remember Catch-22? :eek:


    One might expect software releases to show improvements over earlier versions and one might expect regression and beta testing to have been carried out prior to release, unfortunately the current view expressed here and elsewhere is that 2.7 works (for save track) whereas 2.8 and 2.9 don't.
  • Former Member
    0 Former Member over 15 years ago
    I've tried it out. Its supposed to have solved 'save track' problem and it doesn't.


    Garmin: ***yawn***.

    You dropped the ball on the Dakota (2.80/2.90) and Oregon (3.30). Better hurry up and fix it, the buying season is open and you'll soon have a lot of pissed off customers like me.

    Dakota: 2.70 works, 2.80 clearly does not, and one vote now says 2.90 isn't much better. :confused:

    Oregon: 3.30 is useless as well.