Seth, Brent beat me to the rebuttal, and I agree with him wholeheartedly. I too still use my Skalnate Pleso charts (purchased at the Hansen Planetarium in the early '70's and laminated for me by an old friend, woot!), along with the Millenium Star Atlas when I need to go deeper. I'm firmly in Jim's camp. The fewer electronic gizmos I have to take into the field translates into more time spent at the eyepiece, and less time screwing with technology that just doesn't save me any time. It's just a different way to go, and much less satisfying (and more energy-hungry). It also messes with your night vision- even when the screen is so dark and red that you can't see a damned thing on there anyway. Actually, the fewer items I take observing (period) almost always means fewer distractions and more time observing. I'm not a Luddite. I use technology every day, including 3-D design software (the same program most NASA contractors use to design space hardware- Solidworks-), but it's just not needed at the telescope unless one has a personality that demands it, or is perhaps imaging with hardware that requires a computer to manage the required tasks. Such technology is not intrinsically more efficient for the visual observer across the board. I still haven't found a good high-tech alternative that actually works for me better than paper charts and atlases. Like telescopes themselves, the best *informational medium* is the one you'll use most and are most comfortable with.