BIG BROTHER IS COMING!! (was: teen driver alert)

"GPSMike" > wrote in message
ups.com...
> Why would you want the viewpoint from the driver? If your car is
> stolen, and it's on the freeway being driven, with this you can
> identify that it is ON the freeway or in front of a building or
> something along those lines.

If you are at all able to use a map you could identify whether it's on a
highway. In front of a building is a little useless since there are many
buildings in existance. You would have to be able to identify the building
in the arial photo, in which case you would be familier with the area and
could probably identify where it is simply by looking at the map.

Also, unless you happen to have a live internet connection in the car you're
using to track yours (or have someone relaying information over the phone),
the car might not be where the website last said it was.


> And on top of that, it gives you the
> address or location and orientation (direction traveling)

Which are much more useful than a photo.

And watch out for CAPITALIZATION, too!

"Richard Ness" > wrote in message
...
> Crossposting may possibly qualify you....
>
> I wasn't complaining, just a word of caution.
> Some newsgroups have members who are HIGHLY
> militant and will complain to your ISP with very little
> provocation. It's good to be VERY aware of this.
>
> Proceed with EXTREME caution.
>
>
>
> "GPSMike" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> >
> > Richard Ness wrote:
> >> He didn't bring to your attention that you are a spammer.
> >>
> >> Another word of advice to take heed of:
> >> Be very careful when spamming. Complaints will get you shut
> >> down VERY quickly
> >
> > I thought spamming was sending unsolicited mass e-mails or flodding
> > message boards with advertising. Neither of these things I have done.
> > All I wish to accomplish is to drive a specific demographic to my site.
> >
>
>

And watch out for CAPITALIZATION, too!

"Richard Ness" > wrote in message
...
> Crossposting may possibly qualify you....
>
> I wasn't complaining, just a word of caution.
> Some newsgroups have members who are HIGHLY
> militant and will complain to your ISP with very little
> provocation. It's good to be VERY aware of this.
>
> Proceed with EXTREME caution.
>
>
>
> "GPSMike" > wrote in message
oups.com...
> >
> > Richard Ness wrote:
> >> He didn't bring to your attention that you are a spammer.
> >>
> >> Another word of advice to take heed of:
> >> Be very careful when spamming. Complaints will get you shut
> >> down VERY quickly
> >
> > I thought spamming was sending unsolicited mass e-mails or flodding
> > message boards with advertising. Neither of these things I have done.
> > All I wish to accomplish is to drive a specific demographic to my site.
> >
>
>

Scott en Aztl=E1n wrote:
> On 11 Dec 2004 08:23:01 -0800, "GPSMike" >
> wrote:
>
> >You may
> >want to contact your insurance company and see how much you'll save
on
> >your premiums by installing the vehiclelocate.net GPS tracking
device.
>
> I already have a LoJack in two of my cars, and one of them has an
> alarm. None of these devices gets me any discount from State Farm.
> Somehow I doubt yours would, either.
>
> --
> Sloth Kills!
> http://www.geocities.com/slothkills/

Wouldn't hurt to call and ask
http://vehiclelocate.net/sub_main.ph...on=3Dinsurance

LoJack is antiquated technology. The biggest problem with LoJack is
that the municipality you live in has to carry the tracking system in
their squad cars. Some cities don't want to add that to their police
fleet. Secondly, you're at the mercy of them having someone available
to actively search for your car. If they're short on officers (which
many times they are) you're stuck there waiting for them to get around
to it.
Third, the Lojack system is essentially a triangulation device ONLY
used for theft recovery. It does not offer remote disabling or start.
Speed reporting, and active tracking. The only advantage LoJack has is
the marketing. I compare it to VHS vs. Beta or Minidisc vs. CD.
With the vehiclelocate system all you do is call the police, report the
car stolen and tell them precisely where it's at. They get to recover
the car, and nab the car theif. They have a bit more of an incentive
if they can get a conviction out of it as wel. Also, you wouldn't have
to have a "live" laptop in your car to track the stolen one. Would you
really want to put yourself in the way of a car theif? Seriously think
about that one.

Scott en Aztl=E1n wrote:
> On 11 Dec 2004 08:23:01 -0800, "GPSMike" >
> wrote:
>
> >You may
> >want to contact your insurance company and see how much you'll save
on
> >your premiums by installing the vehiclelocate.net GPS tracking
device.
>
> I already have a LoJack in two of my cars, and one of them has an
> alarm. None of these devices gets me any discount from State Farm.
> Somehow I doubt yours would, either.
>
> --
> Sloth Kills!
> http://www.geocities.com/slothkills/

Wouldn't hurt to call and ask
http://vehiclelocate.net/sub_main.ph...on=3Dinsurance

LoJack is antiquated technology. The biggest problem with LoJack is
that the municipality you live in has to carry the tracking system in
their squad cars. Some cities don't want to add that to their police
fleet. Secondly, you're at the mercy of them having someone available
to actively search for your car. If they're short on officers (which
many times they are) you're stuck there waiting for them to get around
to it.
Third, the Lojack system is essentially a triangulation device ONLY
used for theft recovery. It does not offer remote disabling or start.
Speed reporting, and active tracking. The only advantage LoJack has is
the marketing. I compare it to VHS vs. Beta or Minidisc vs. CD.
With the vehiclelocate system all you do is call the police, report the
car stolen and tell them precisely where it's at. They get to recover
the car, and nab the car theif. They have a bit more of an incentive
if they can get a conviction out of it as wel. Also, you wouldn't have
to have a "live" laptop in your car to track the stolen one. Would you
really want to put yourself in the way of a car theif? Seriously think
about that one.

Daniel J. Stern wrote:

> Your ignorance notwithstanding, posting advertisements to chartered
> newsgroups is a kind of spamming. Usenet is not your litterbox or
> billboard, so knock it off.

With all due respect Daniel, this post was a reply to someones original
post about their site. It didn't work, I stepped in. It's not like I'm
posting something completely irrelvent like the image of Mother Mary on
a 10 year old piece of toast. This usenet was about GPS tracking. I
utilized it. It's not like I took anything over either. The last post
that was made on this was back in September of 1998. As indicated he



>ian Sep 2 1998, 12:00 am show options
>Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
>From: "ian" >
>Date: 1998/09/02
>Subject: Teen Driver Alert
>Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
>original | Report Abuse



>Matthew Powell wrote in message >...
>ian wrote in message


>...
>>Good for him, now he can do as he pleases as long as he does as he is
told
>>as far as the law and other rules apply, go for it Lane.
> Exactly. How would you feel, if someone put a bumper sticker with a
number
>on *your car* - a number that woulod let anyone call and report
anything
you
>did?


>I got one Its called a license plate?

>Reply

>Details: Show quoted text | View source | Unwrap Lines | Forward




> GPSMike Dec 10, 10:39 pm show options



So I took a stab to see if anyone would reply. I was shocked that
someone did. I really don't see the need for anyone to get their
knickers in a twist over this.
Anyone have anything positive to say?

Daniel J. Stern wrote:

> Your ignorance notwithstanding, posting advertisements to chartered
> newsgroups is a kind of spamming. Usenet is not your litterbox or
> billboard, so knock it off.

With all due respect Daniel, this post was a reply to someones original
post about their site. It didn't work, I stepped in. It's not like I'm
posting something completely irrelvent like the image of Mother Mary on
a 10 year old piece of toast. This usenet was about GPS tracking. I
utilized it. It's not like I took anything over either. The last post
that was made on this was back in September of 1998. As indicated he



>ian Sep 2 1998, 12:00 am show options
>Newsgroups: rec.autos.driving
>From: "ian" >
>Date: 1998/09/02
>Subject: Teen Driver Alert
>Reply | Reply to Author | Forward | Print | Individual Message | Show
>original | Report Abuse



>Matthew Powell wrote in message >...
>ian wrote in message


>...
>>Good for him, now he can do as he pleases as long as he does as he is
told
>>as far as the law and other rules apply, go for it Lane.
> Exactly. How would you feel, if someone put a bumper sticker with a
number
>on *your car* - a number that woulod let anyone call and report
anything
you
>did?


>I got one Its called a license plate?

>Reply

>Details: Show quoted text | View source | Unwrap Lines | Forward




> GPSMike Dec 10, 10:39 pm show options



So I took a stab to see if anyone would reply. I was shocked that
someone did. I really don't see the need for anyone to get their
knickers in a twist over this.
Anyone have anything positive to say?

Scott en Aztl=E1n wrote:
> On 11 Dec 2004 14:36:44 -0800, "GPSMike" >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >Bill 2 wrote:
> >
> >> You see the roofs of buildings, not very useful unless you are
planning on
> >> flying to your car in a helicopter. Maps will indicate major
landmarks, and
> >> will indicate cross streets, etc. A map and address / coordinates
is
> >> sufficient, the photo is a bit of a gimmick.
> >
> >Isn't any feature a bit of a gimmick?
>
> Not really. I think the street map with the vehicle's location marked
> on it is an essential component to the tool - not gimmicky at all.
>
> Now, your aerial photos aren't nearly as gimmicky as that Keyhole
> thingee that Google sells (http://keyhole.com/). The whole flying
> through the air and zooming in and out effects are straight out of
> Hollywood. Hey - maybe you could license the Keyhole engine for your
> vehicle tracking service!
>
> >If you don't like photos then noone says you have to use it.
>
> Except the cost of the photos is an integral part of the monthly
> service price. You are paying for it even if you don't use it.
>
> If you really want to see whether people feel the aerial photos are
> useful, trying offering them as a separate tier of service that
people
> pay extra for and see how many people opt for it.
>
> >Other than that, do you like the product?
>
> Yes. At $574, the hardware is pretty reasonably priced, especially
> compared to some other units I've seen (which top $1000), and the
> feature set is pretty complete. The OBD-II and door lock interfaces
> are a nice touch. The monthly service is a tad pricey, however, when
> you consider that you can get unlimited Internet access via GPRS for
> $19.95/month from T-Mobile. Now, I understand part of that cost is
for
> your servers and all the software you wrote, but I can see the
> potential for the monthly charges to add up really quickly,
especially
> if you're checking up on your teenagers a lot.
>
> --
> Sloth Kills!
> http://www.geocities.com/slothkills/


You make an excellent point (actually a couple) I see about your costs
associated. Now if the cost of the service or the cost of the
equipment changed with the recent addition (Nov 1st) of the satellite
photos, then you'd be spot on. But there wasn't an increase in service
costs associated with the additional features. When you compare some
of the other service costs associated with similar items, you'll find
they're within a dollar or two so as time goes on, the costs will
eventually work their way down. Plus considering that the service
begins at a base $8.50 per month, it's moitivation enough to call your
insurance company to see what kind of break they can give you. Or
heck, shop around and see who can compete price/discount. Never hurts
or costs anything to call and ask

Scott en Aztl=E1n wrote:
> On 11 Dec 2004 14:36:44 -0800, "GPSMike" >
> wrote:
>
> >
> >Bill 2 wrote:
> >
> >> You see the roofs of buildings, not very useful unless you are
planning on
> >> flying to your car in a helicopter. Maps will indicate major
landmarks, and
> >> will indicate cross streets, etc. A map and address / coordinates
is
> >> sufficient, the photo is a bit of a gimmick.
> >
> >Isn't any feature a bit of a gimmick?
>
> Not really. I think the street map with the vehicle's location marked
> on it is an essential component to the tool - not gimmicky at all.
>
> Now, your aerial photos aren't nearly as gimmicky as that Keyhole
> thingee that Google sells (http://keyhole.com/). The whole flying
> through the air and zooming in and out effects are straight out of
> Hollywood. Hey - maybe you could license the Keyhole engine for your
> vehicle tracking service!
>
> >If you don't like photos then noone says you have to use it.
>
> Except the cost of the photos is an integral part of the monthly
> service price. You are paying for it even if you don't use it.
>
> If you really want to see whether people feel the aerial photos are
> useful, trying offering them as a separate tier of service that
people
> pay extra for and see how many people opt for it.
>
> >Other than that, do you like the product?
>
> Yes. At $574, the hardware is pretty reasonably priced, especially
> compared to some other units I've seen (which top $1000), and the
> feature set is pretty complete. The OBD-II and door lock interfaces
> are a nice touch. The monthly service is a tad pricey, however, when
> you consider that you can get unlimited Internet access via GPRS for
> $19.95/month from T-Mobile. Now, I understand part of that cost is
for
> your servers and all the software you wrote, but I can see the
> potential for the monthly charges to add up really quickly,
especially
> if you're checking up on your teenagers a lot.
>
> --
> Sloth Kills!
> http://www.geocities.com/slothkills/


You make an excellent point (actually a couple) I see about your costs
associated. Now if the cost of the service or the cost of the
equipment changed with the recent addition (Nov 1st) of the satellite
photos, then you'd be spot on. But there wasn't an increase in service
costs associated with the additional features. When you compare some
of the other service costs associated with similar items, you'll find
they're within a dollar or two so as time goes on, the costs will
eventually work their way down. Plus considering that the service
begins at a base $8.50 per month, it's moitivation enough to call your
insurance company to see what kind of break they can give you. Or
heck, shop around and see who can compete price/discount. Never hurts
or costs anything to call and ask

Richard Ness wrote:

> He didn't bring to your attention that you are a spammer.
>
> Another word of advice to take heed of:
> Be very careful when spamming. Complaints will get you shut
> down VERY quickly

How strange. None of GPSMike's posts appear here at all...

8-)

> "GPSMike" > wrote in message oups.com...
>
>>Why do you say that? I don't take any offense to what he stated on my
>>product or it's features. He did present it in a rather interesting
>>manner, and he brought up a rather valuable concern about the satellite
>>imagery and how it's used. If anything his comments assisted me.
>>Anyone who helps me, is indeed a friend
>>
>
>
>