--- Rob Atkinson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
<snip>
> It was
> apparent that the typical
> ham, or typical ten tec customer at least, wanted a front
> panel and knobs.
> I do not now if, and for how long, that will affect their
> future product designs.
The Pegasus does (did) have significantly more potential in
it than was ever exploited. Yes the N4PY software does a lot
of neat stuff (and I like it a lot), but it never really
escaped the knobs and buttons paradigm completely (despite
some of my best lobbying efforts). The same could be said for
the Callsign software package. In any case, it is now largely
moot, the Flex models have so much more potential in them
than the Pegasus does (did) simply because of the fundamental
architecture differences. Never mind the fact that they are
excellent packages "as is" today.
And based on my observations a good many of those who like(d)
the Pegasus are now here. No doubt further lessening the
likelihood of a follow-on model for the Pegasus from TT.
> My admittedly subjective assesment of Kenwood's
> computer-run box
> verson of the the TS-2000, is that it also did not do very
> well in sales, compared to the front panel rig.
It is a text book example of how not to design a PC driven
radio. Never mind the total lack of interest from Kenwood
from a marketing perspective. Also the supplied software was
rather ho-hum to boot. And then to top it off new versions of
software with truly new enhancements were far and few
between, if any. They apparently thought that what they
original wrote was a "finished product" and didn't need any
follow-on development. If that is the attitude a radio
manufacturer takes with their "SDR" radios, then they deserve
to fail in the market place. A successful SDR is never
"finished".
> Regardless of the opinion here, and this is
> a niche group, the major manufacturers seem to believe that
> for the time being,
> the vast majority of hams want traditional rigs. To me,
> that is the reason why
> there have not been any PC box-rigs from Elecraft, TT, SGC,
> Hiberling or the JA companies.
Just as it is hard for many end users to approach it all with
an open mind, and have no preconceived notions of how a radio
is "supposed" to look and work (user control wise), it also
hard for established manufactures to do the same. And if you
are a manufacturer who's had decades of success applying the
mass consumer electronics bells and whistles "knobetry" to
ham radio gear, then you will fail to see the potential of a
totally different approach. One that can only be afforded by
what PC's and their related technologies can bring into the
radio game. But as time goes on the Flex approach will become
less and less of a niche, having months of order backlog
would seem to suggest that is the case.
> It seems that Flex-Radio knows the limits of
> this market, given the forthcoming 5000D.
It will be interesting to watch the comparative customer
uptake of the various flavors of the 5000. I personally don't
have a need to use knobs for tuning around the band all. Just
for fun every now and then, sure, but a "need", no way. In
fact if I really want to zip around a lot they are just plain
cumbersome to use. And then to have a panadapter showing me
all those signals that I can't really get to quickly because
of a knob (no point and click) would be just plain
frustrating.
Duane
N9DG
____________________________________________________________________________________
Pinpoint customers who are looking for what you sell.
http://searchmarketing.yahoo.com/
_______________________________________________
FlexRadio mailing list
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/
FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/
