I agree entirely with Brent (almost). There's no way one will learn the night sky without spending time star-hopping - with planisphere and unaided eye, binoculars, or a telescope. An added benefit is the myriad treasures one happens upon quite by chance while one is hunting a specific target. A couple years ago I came upon, quite by chance, a fabulous deal on a Celestron Ultima 2000, a "go-to" model capable of both alt-az and equatorial operation. I bought the scope mainly for it's optical quality but also for use at public star parties. There are two advantages for me: the scope is lighter and more compact than either of my Newtonians and I can more quickly find objects so that people waiting don't get bored and go away. "Oh, you've never seen a quadruple star? Well give me 30 seconds and I can show you one." I still use my Newtonians or my refractor for serious personal observing. Except for these and maybe other marginal advantages, I find that the go-to phenomenon is gimmicky and discourages beginners, especially, from simply scanning the sky to see what one may find. I am especially puzzled why the manufacturers promote their GPS models over all others. After all, how much trouble is it to align a scope on a couple of stars? Kim A. Hyatt, AIA SL&A Architects 331 South Rio Grande, Suite 304 Salt Lake City, Utah 84101 801.322.5550 x122