Re: [Dx4win] Fwd: Re: Updates on a more positive note!
I have always considered myself as a loyal and satisfied user of DX4WIN! I have probably been responsible for 25 or more fellow DXers choosing DX4WIN over other possible logging programs. I dread the thought of ever changing to some other new method of maintaining the heart of my DX History. With that being said I have a hard time understanding how the good and bad feedback that has been offered by many long time DX4win supporters has deteriorated to the level of personal attacks against each other. I think my biggest frustration & disappointment in regard to DX4win was best stated by Kostas SV1DPI when he said: " The bad thing for me (worst than not updating) is that Paul, the author of the program, does not say to us his thoughts for all these. I would like to hear his opinion, even it is something like "dx4win is my last priority and I don't think I will update it the next 30 years"(I hope not saying it)..." There may be many good reasons for Paul not taking update action, BUT in my opinion absolutely NO reason for not communicating with his customers! He owes us that! My personal wish list still has the QRZ.com XML interface update near the top. Still Hoping! 73 Bill N4NX - Original Message - From: "Lou Dietrich" To: "DX4WIN Reflector" Sent: Sunday, January 5, 2014 12:23:06 PM Subject: [Dx4win] Fwd: Re: Updates To: Ernie Ernie and Group, I run HDSDR and DX4WIN all the time...simply use LPB2, a free software offered by Larry N8LPYou can have HDSDR, DX4WIN, N1MM and anything else you want to linked to your rigit works great... The rest of your post can be added to our joint 'wish list'Hi Hi...along with updated rig files or movement to OmniRig...along with an update Submission Sheet showing LOTW, Hard QSL or EQSL (EQSL yuck!, sorry, editorial comment!) Even the Report Generator is missing simple drop down indicators under Report/ Action, Modes and Bands, showing different selections. This was reported and not acted upon by Paul many versions ago...multiple rotor controls...two (or more) telnet sessions...WWV numbers on the Map Screen or on top of the QSO windows...simple integration of digital programs, MMTTY/2Tone, better PSK31 integration... DX4WIN is a remarkably simple, stable but outdated piece of software. Paul did a great job with it many years ago but alas, now it just flounders in limbo with little support or enhancement from him. If it wasn't for Jim AD1C's tremendous support, I would have moved off this archaic platform a long time ago. There is little or no reason why AD1C's enhancements were not embraced, supported and incorporated by Paul. We, dear fellow DX4WIN users, are 'caught' in an trap...move off to another and abandon what we have learned ...or stick with DX4WIN and hope someone will get this platform back on the track. Flaming each other does little or nothing to enhance or move this topic forward. 73/ Regards Lou N2TU On 1/5/2014 10:24 AM, Ernie wrote: > > Important to me: > > 1. Omnirig support so that I can run HDSDR and DX4Win connected to my > rig at the same time. > 2. Easy way to add additional satellite names myself > 3. Easy way to add mode names myself > > Ernie W8EH > > __ > DX4WIN mailing list > Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/dx4win > Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm > Post: mailto:DX4WIN@mailman.qth.net > > This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net > Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html > __ DX4WIN mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/dx4win Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:DX4WIN@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html __ DX4WIN mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/dx4win Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:DX4WIN@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Re: [Dx4win] Fwd: Re: Updates on a more positive note!
Hi, Thank you Bill for a civil restart of this discussion! We are expecting guests in a little while, so let me be brief: 1. I read the reflector 2. Folks who want to use DXLab please do so! 3. When I saw the enormous of email traffic a few month ago when LoTW had problems I realized it was much better to have a clear delineation between DX4WIN and LoTW. Is saving a few mouse clicks worth my effort and support time afterwards? 4. I wrote a pretty cool regular expression to retrieve the QRZ info, but also realized that the page was constructed to make this difficult for commercial reasons. Have to rethink that. 5. The user has the same tools as I have to construct a radio file because it is part of DX4WIN. Even debugging the interface is part of it. So if YOU have a radio that is not supported by the program, you stand a much better chance to get a working interface going than I can without that radio. (There are still users who believe I have every radio ever made in my shack!) 6. OmniRig: Has evaluated to a powerful system, using text files to describe the interface similar to what DX4WIN does. The problem for me is that OmniRig is event driven, DX4WIN polls the radio. 7. Multiple rotators: Should this be multiple serial ports and you select the rotator or something smarter (band, or band segment driven with possible override). How may users have multiple rotators? 8. I have a pretty long list of things to do, unfortunately it does not indicate when / how to do this. Happy New Year! --Paul, KK4HD PS I hope we can keep these discussions civilized. The history of this reflector goes back many years, and today seems to be the first time things are getting slightly out of hand. Please avoid personal attacks. On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 2:34 PM, WILLIAM wrote: > > I have always considered myself as a loyal and satisfied user of DX4WIN! I > have probably been responsible for 25 or more fellow DXers choosing DX4WIN > over other possible logging programs. I dread the thought of ever changing > to some other new method of maintaining the heart of my DX History. With > that being said I have a hard time understanding how the good and bad > feedback that has been offered by many long time DX4win supporters has > deteriorated to the level of personal attacks against each other. > > I think my biggest frustration & disappointment in regard to DX4win was > best stated by Kostas SV1DPI when he said: > > > " The bad thing for me (worst than not updating) is that Paul, the author > of the program, does not say to us his thoughts for all these. I would > like to hear his opinion, even it is something like "dx4win is my last > priority and I don't think I will update it the next 30 years"(I hope > not saying it)..." > > There may be many good reasons for Paul not taking update action, BUT in > my opinion absolutely NO reason for not communicating with his customers! > He owes us that! > > My personal wish list still has the QRZ.com XML interface update near the > top. > > Still Hoping! > > 73 > Bill N4NX > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > From: "Lou Dietrich" > To: "DX4WIN Reflector" > Sent: Sunday, January 5, 2014 12:23:06 PM > Subject: [Dx4win] Fwd: Re: Updates > > > > > > > > > > > To: Ernie > > > > Ernie and Group, > > I run HDSDR and DX4WIN all the time...simply use LPB2, a free software > offered by Larry N8LPYou can have HDSDR, DX4WIN, N1MM and anything > else you want to linked to your rigit works great... > > The rest of your post can be added to our joint 'wish list'Hi > Hi...along with updated rig files or movement to OmniRig...along with an > update Submission Sheet showing LOTW, Hard QSL or EQSL (EQSL yuck!, > sorry, editorial comment!) > > Even the Report Generator is missing simple drop down indicators under > Report/ Action, Modes and Bands, showing different selections. This was > reported and not acted upon by Paul many versions ago...multiple rotor > controls...two (or more) telnet sessions...WWV numbers on the Map Screen > or on top of the QSO windows...simple integration of digital programs, > MMTTY/2Tone, better PSK31 integration... > > DX4WIN is a remarkably simple, stable but outdated piece of software. > Paul did a great job with it many years ago but alas, now it just > flounders in limbo with little support or enhancement from him. If it > wasn't for Jim AD1C's tremendous support, I would have moved off this > archaic platform a long time ago. There is little or no reason why > AD1C's enhancements were not embraced, supported and incorporated by Paul. > > We, dear fellow DX4WIN users, are 'caught' in an trap...move off to > another and abandon what we have learned ...or stick with DX4WIN and > hope someone will get this platform back on the track. > > Flaming each other does little or nothing to enhance or move this topic > forward. > > 73/ Regards > > Lou N2TU > > > On 1/5/2014 10:24 AM, Ernie wrote: > > > > Important to me: > > > > 1. Omnirig support s
Re: [Dx4win] Fwd: Re: Updates on a more positive note!
Well said, Paul ! 73! Ken Kopp - K0PP k...@arrl.net On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Paul van der Eijk wrote: > Hi, > > Thank you Bill for a civil restart of this discussion! > > We are expecting guests in a little while, so let me be brief: > > 1. I read the reflector > > 2. Folks who want to use DXLab please do so! > > 3. When I saw the enormous of email traffic a few month ago when LoTW had > problems I realized it was much better to have a clear delineation between > DX4WIN and LoTW. Is saving a few mouse clicks worth my effort and support > time afterwards? > > 4. I wrote a pretty cool regular expression to retrieve the QRZ info, but > also realized that the page was constructed to make this difficult for > commercial reasons. Have to rethink that. > > 5. The user has the same tools as I have to construct a radio file because > it is part of DX4WIN. Even debugging the interface is part of it. So if YOU > have a radio that is not supported by the program, you stand a much better > chance to get a working interface going than I can without that radio. > (There are still users who believe I have every radio ever made in my > shack!) > > 6. OmniRig: Has evaluated to a powerful system, using text files to > describe the interface similar to what DX4WIN does. The problem for me is > that OmniRig is event driven, DX4WIN polls the radio. > > 7. Multiple rotators: Should this be multiple serial ports and you select > the rotator or something smarter (band, or band segment driven with > possible override). How may users have multiple rotators? > > 8. I have a pretty long list of things to do, unfortunately it does not > indicate when / how to do this. > > Happy New Year! > > --Paul, KK4HD > > PS I hope we can keep these discussions civilized. The history of this > reflector goes back many years, and today seems to be the first time things > are getting slightly out of hand. Please avoid personal attacks. > > > > On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 2:34 PM, WILLIAM wrote: > > > > > I have always considered myself as a loyal and satisfied user of DX4WIN! > I > > have probably been responsible for 25 or more fellow DXers choosing > DX4WIN > > over other possible logging programs. I dread the thought of ever > changing > > to some other new method of maintaining the heart of my DX History. With > > that being said I have a hard time understanding how the good and bad > > feedback that has been offered by many long time DX4win supporters has > > deteriorated to the level of personal attacks against each other. > > > > I think my biggest frustration & disappointment in regard to DX4win was > > best stated by Kostas SV1DPI when he said: > > > > > > " The bad thing for me (worst than not updating) is that Paul, the author > > of the program, does not say to us his thoughts for all these. I would > > like to hear his opinion, even it is something like "dx4win is my last > > priority and I don't think I will update it the next 30 years"(I hope > > not saying it)..." > > > > There may be many good reasons for Paul not taking update action, BUT in > > my opinion absolutely NO reason for not communicating with his customers! > > He owes us that! > > > > My personal wish list still has the QRZ.com XML interface update near the > > top. > > > > Still Hoping! > > > > 73 > > Bill N4NX > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > > From: "Lou Dietrich" > > To: "DX4WIN Reflector" > > Sent: Sunday, January 5, 2014 12:23:06 PM > > Subject: [Dx4win] Fwd: Re: Updates > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: Ernie > > > > > > > > Ernie and Group, > > > > I run HDSDR and DX4WIN all the time...simply use LPB2, a free software > > offered by Larry N8LPYou can have HDSDR, DX4WIN, N1MM and anything > > else you want to linked to your rigit works great... > > > > The rest of your post can be added to our joint 'wish list'Hi > > Hi...along with updated rig files or movement to OmniRig...along with an > > update Submission Sheet showing LOTW, Hard QSL or EQSL (EQSL yuck!, > > sorry, editorial comment!) > > > > Even the Report Generator is missing simple drop down indicators under > > Report/ Action, Modes and Bands, showing different selections. This was > > reported and not acted upon by Paul many versions ago...multiple rotor > > controls...two (or more) telnet sessions...WWV numbers on the Map Screen > > or on top of the QSO windows...simple integration of digital programs, > > MMTTY/2Tone, better PSK31 integration... > > > > DX4WIN is a remarkably simple, stable but outdated piece of software. > > Paul did a great job with it many years ago but alas, now it just > > flounders in limbo with little support or enhancement from him. If it > > wasn't for Jim AD1C's tremendous support, I would have moved off this > > archaic platform a long time ago. There is little or no reason why > > AD1C's enhancements were not embraced, supported and incorporated by > Paul. > > > > We, dear fellow DX4WIN users, are 'caught'
Re: [Dx4win] Fwd: Re: Updates on a more positive note!
Amen! -Original Message- From: dx4win-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto:dx4win-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Ken G Kopp Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2014 3:24 PM To: Dx4win@Mailman.Qth.Net Subject: Re: [Dx4win] Fwd: Re: Updates on a more positive note! Well said, Paul ! 73! Ken Kopp - K0PP k...@arrl.net On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Paul van der Eijk wrote: > Hi, > > Thank you Bill for a civil restart of this discussion! > > We are expecting guests in a little while, so let me be brief: > > 1. I read the reflector > > 2. Folks who want to use DXLab please do so! > > 3. When I saw the enormous of email traffic a few month ago when LoTW had > problems I realized it was much better to have a clear delineation between > DX4WIN and LoTW. Is saving a few mouse clicks worth my effort and support > time afterwards? > > 4. I wrote a pretty cool regular expression to retrieve the QRZ info, but > also realized that the page was constructed to make this difficult for > commercial reasons. Have to rethink that. > > 5. The user has the same tools as I have to construct a radio file because > it is part of DX4WIN. Even debugging the interface is part of it. So if YOU > have a radio that is not supported by the program, you stand a much better > chance to get a working interface going than I can without that radio. > (There are still users who believe I have every radio ever made in my > shack!) > > 6. OmniRig: Has evaluated to a powerful system, using text files to > describe the interface similar to what DX4WIN does. The problem for me is > that OmniRig is event driven, DX4WIN polls the radio. > > 7. Multiple rotators: Should this be multiple serial ports and you select > the rotator or something smarter (band, or band segment driven with > possible override). How may users have multiple rotators? > > 8. I have a pretty long list of things to do, unfortunately it does not > indicate when / how to do this. > > Happy New Year! > > --Paul, KK4HD > > PS I hope we can keep these discussions civilized. The history of this > reflector goes back many years, and today seems to be the first time things > are getting slightly out of hand. Please avoid personal attacks. > > > > On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 2:34 PM, WILLIAM wrote: > > > > > I have always considered myself as a loyal and satisfied user of DX4WIN! > I > > have probably been responsible for 25 or more fellow DXers choosing > DX4WIN > > over other possible logging programs. I dread the thought of ever > changing > > to some other new method of maintaining the heart of my DX History. With > > that being said I have a hard time understanding how the good and bad > > feedback that has been offered by many long time DX4win supporters has > > deteriorated to the level of personal attacks against each other. > > > > I think my biggest frustration & disappointment in regard to DX4win was > > best stated by Kostas SV1DPI when he said: > > > > > > " The bad thing for me (worst than not updating) is that Paul, the author > > of the program, does not say to us his thoughts for all these. I would > > like to hear his opinion, even it is something like "dx4win is my last > > priority and I don't think I will update it the next 30 years"(I hope > > not saying it)..." > > > > There may be many good reasons for Paul not taking update action, BUT in > > my opinion absolutely NO reason for not communicating with his customers! > > He owes us that! > > > > My personal wish list still has the QRZ.com XML interface update near the > > top. > > > > Still Hoping! > > > > 73 > > Bill N4NX > > > > > > > > > > > > > > - Original Message - > > > > From: "Lou Dietrich" > > To: "DX4WIN Reflector" > > Sent: Sunday, January 5, 2014 12:23:06 PM > > Subject: [Dx4win] Fwd: Re: Updates > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > To: Ernie > > > > > > > > Ernie and Group, > > > > I run HDSDR and DX4WIN all the time...simply use LPB2, a free software > > offered by Larry N8LPYou can have HDSDR, DX4WIN, N1MM and anything > > else you want to linked to your rigit works great... > > > > The rest of your post can be added to our joint 'wish list'Hi > > Hi...along with updated rig files or movement to OmniRig...along with an > > update Submission Sheet showing LOTW, Hard QSL or EQSL (EQSL yuck!, > > sorry, editorial comment!) > > > > Even the Report Generator is
Re: [Dx4win] Fwd: Re: Updates on a more positive note!
Paul tnx for reply. I appreciate it. 1.Either we like it or not, qrz is a standard. So I believe that dx4win must support it. 2. Abt 2 rotors. Is difficult someone has one rotor for hf antenna and one for 6m antenna? This is my case. Computer control of rotors is cheap today. I bought and assembled an ERC kit (easy rotor control) and it supports 2 rotors in one com. It costs me abt 60 euros, that is abt 70 dollars. Not a big deal. Finally don't forget digital support, rst and modes, clusters, etc. In any case we feel more safe when you reply to us. Now at least, I can reply to anyone he is asking easier user interface for lotw... (by the way I have written a number of articles in Greek to help other fellows to use lotw. A programmer found them in the web and asked me to help him. He wrote a routine for another logging program to make upload and download to lotw easier. Trying this software I didn't see any problems. The last lotw software returns messages in every case...) 73 Kostas, SV1DPI __ DX4WIN mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/dx4win Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:DX4WIN@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Re: [Dx4win] Fwd: Re: Updates on a more positive note!
There must be peace, I have tried many log, ur5eqf, N1MM, Swisslog, winlog32, DXBase, ham radio deluxe, win-eqf and dx4wim among others, and always return to dx4wim. I do not know why but yes, if I would like the topic of digital and easiest way to adapt competitions, diplomas or trophies in each country be improved.If it is true that you could do something else but as discussed in the previous post, that would be very good, as paul says. Sebastián Gámez Hernández E A 8 O G 73´S 2014/1/5 Charlie Cunningham > Amen! > > -Original Message- > From: dx4win-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto: > dx4win-boun...@mailman.qth.net] > On Behalf Of Ken G Kopp > Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2014 3:24 PM > To: Dx4win@Mailman.Qth.Net > Subject: Re: [Dx4win] Fwd: Re: Updates on a more positive note! > > Well said, Paul ! > > 73! > > Ken Kopp - K0PP > k...@arrl.net > > > On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Paul van der Eijk > wrote: > > > Hi, > > > > Thank you Bill for a civil restart of this discussion! > > > > We are expecting guests in a little while, so let me be brief: > > > > 1. I read the reflector > > > > 2. Folks who want to use DXLab please do so! > > > > 3. When I saw the enormous of email traffic a few month ago when LoTW had > > problems I realized it was much better to have a clear delineation > between > > DX4WIN and LoTW. Is saving a few mouse clicks worth my effort and support > > time afterwards? > > > > 4. I wrote a pretty cool regular expression to retrieve the QRZ info, but > > also realized that the page was constructed to make this difficult for > > commercial reasons. Have to rethink that. > > > > 5. The user has the same tools as I have to construct a radio file > because > > it is part of DX4WIN. Even debugging the interface is part of it. So if > YOU > > have a radio that is not supported by the program, you stand a much > better > > chance to get a working interface going than I can without that radio. > > (There are still users who believe I have every radio ever made in my > > shack!) > > > > 6. OmniRig: Has evaluated to a powerful system, using text files to > > describe the interface similar to what DX4WIN does. The problem for me is > > that OmniRig is event driven, DX4WIN polls the radio. > > > > 7. Multiple rotators: Should this be multiple serial ports and you select > > the rotator or something smarter (band, or band segment driven with > > possible override). How may users have multiple rotators? > > > > 8. I have a pretty long list of things to do, unfortunately it does not > > indicate when / how to do this. > > > > Happy New Year! > > > > --Paul, KK4HD > > > > PS I hope we can keep these discussions civilized. The history of this > > reflector goes back many years, and today seems to be the first time > things > > are getting slightly out of hand. Please avoid personal attacks. > > > > > > > > On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 2:34 PM, WILLIAM wrote: > > > > > > > > I have always considered myself as a loyal and satisfied user of > DX4WIN! > > I > > > have probably been responsible for 25 or more fellow DXers choosing > > DX4WIN > > > over other possible logging programs. I dread the thought of ever > > changing > > > to some other new method of maintaining the heart of my DX History. > With > > > that being said I have a hard time understanding how the good and bad > > > feedback that has been offered by many long time DX4win supporters has > > > deteriorated to the level of personal attacks against each other. > > > > > > I think my biggest frustration & disappointment in regard to DX4win was > > > best stated by Kostas SV1DPI when he said: > > > > > > > > > " The bad thing for me (worst than not updating) is that Paul, the > author > > > of the program, does not say to us his thoughts for all these. I would > > > like to hear his opinion, even it is something like "dx4win is my last > > > priority and I don't think I will update it the next 30 years"(I hope > > > not saying it)..." > > > > > > There may be many good reasons for Paul not taking update action, BUT > in > > > my opinion absolutely NO reason for not communicating with his > customers! > > > He owes us that! > > > > > > My personal wish list still has the QRZ.com XML interface update near > the > > > top. > > > > > > Still Hoping! &g
Re: [Dx4win] Fwd: Re: Updates on a more positive note!
I agree Kostas. After 4 years we NOW know , thanks to Paul, there will be NO LOTW Updates to DX4WIN and additional rig files. Would like to make a positive suggestion for Paul while he is still "listening"On the DX4WIN Home Page provide a Link that allows user's to see what is up and coming and NOT up and coming for future versions of the program if there are going to be any future versions. Communication from Paul must take place. On 1/5/2014 4:08 PM, Kostas SV1DPI wrote: Paul tnx for reply. I appreciate it. 1.Either we like it or not, qrz is a standard. So I believe that dx4win must support it. 2. Abt 2 rotors. Is difficult someone has one rotor for hf antenna and one for 6m antenna? This is my case. Computer control of rotors is cheap today. I bought and assembled an ERC kit (easy rotor control) and it supports 2 rotors in one com. It costs me abt 60 euros, that is abt 70 dollars. Not a big deal. Finally don't forget digital support, rst and modes, clusters, etc. In any case we feel more safe when you reply to us. Now at least, I can reply to anyone he is asking easier user interface for lotw... (by the way I have written a number of articles in Greek to help other fellows to use lotw. A programmer found them in the web and asked me to help him. He wrote a routine for another logging program to make upload and download to lotw easier. Trying this software I didn't see any problems. The last lotw software returns messages in every case...) 73 Kostas, SV1DPI __ DX4WIN mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/dx4win Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:DX4WIN@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html __ DX4WIN mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/dx4win Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:DX4WIN@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Re: [Dx4win] Fwd: Re: Updates on a more positive note!
All, We have FINALLY heard from Paulthat is a good thingand it sounds like he has a portion of our wish list. A few comments though 1. Did you see any inclination or willingness to incorporate them into DX4WIN? 2. Although it is unlikely he would have every rig produced, it should be noted that I, for one, attempted to develop a rig file for the FT3000...sent many messages to him for assistance...and never heard back. I had a Yaesu 'demo' FT3000 shipped to me and it sat here for months awaiting assistance and nothing...this was a while after his personal moveyes, the rig files are rather basic but how DX4WIN handles these files are hard coded and cannot be user defined or changed. I have quite a bit of documentation in this issueas do others. We are/ were willing to work with him but the effort hasn't been reciprocal. 3. LOTW isn't going away...or GlobalQsl...or EQSLincorporating easy interface to these systems seeming would be a selling point for DX4WIN. Without them, DX4WIN is severely lacking. 4. As in number 3, QRZ.Com is here to stay...and most of your users access it routinely. Paul, this isn't an attack on you...and regrettably there has been some severe tone between a few users...hopefully, we can get back on a more positive, productive track. However, this thread is an indication of the frustration of your loyal, paid users. We want DX4WIN to succeed but there needs to be some indication that DX4WIN is alive and well...and will be supported and improved. Yes... we could all move to a different platform ...we have a number of other choices...but we have been sticking with DX4WIN but without finite information from you, Paul, we've been in an informational vacuum. Paul, incorporating user input and enhancing DX4WIN appears to be a win/win situation. We look forward for more information as to the direction and future of DX4WIN. 73 Lou N2TU On 1/5/2014 3:44 PM, Charlie Cunningham wrote: Amen! -Original Message- From: dx4win-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto:dx4win-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Ken G Kopp Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2014 3:24 PM To: Dx4win@Mailman.Qth.Net Subject: Re: [Dx4win] Fwd: Re: Updates on a more positive note! Well said, Paul ! 73! Ken Kopp - K0PP k...@arrl.net On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Paul van der Eijk wrote: Hi, Thank you Bill for a civil restart of this discussion! We are expecting guests in a little while, so let me be brief: 1. I read the reflector 2. Folks who want to use DXLab please do so! 3. When I saw the enormous of email traffic a few month ago when LoTW had problems I realized it was much better to have a clear delineation between DX4WIN and LoTW. Is saving a few mouse clicks worth my effort and support time afterwards? 4. I wrote a pretty cool regular expression to retrieve the QRZ info, but also realized that the page was constructed to make this difficult for commercial reasons. Have to rethink that. 5. The user has the same tools as I have to construct a radio file because it is part of DX4WIN. Even debugging the interface is part of it. So if YOU have a radio that is not supported by the program, you stand a much better chance to get a working interface going than I can without that radio. (There are still users who believe I have every radio ever made in my shack!) 6. OmniRig: Has evaluated to a powerful system, using text files to describe the interface similar to what DX4WIN does. The problem for me is that OmniRig is event driven, DX4WIN polls the radio. 7. Multiple rotators: Should this be multiple serial ports and you select the rotator or something smarter (band, or band segment driven with possible override). How may users have multiple rotators? 8. I have a pretty long list of things to do, unfortunately it does not indicate when / how to do this. Happy New Year! --Paul, KK4HD PS I hope we can keep these discussions civilized. The history of this reflector goes back many years, and today seems to be the first time things are getting slightly out of hand. Please avoid personal attacks. On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 2:34 PM, WILLIAM wrote: I have always considered myself as a loyal and satisfied user of DX4WIN! I have probably been responsible for 25 or more fellow DXers choosing DX4WIN over other possible logging programs. I dread the thought of ever changing to some other new method of maintaining the heart of my DX History. With that being said I have a hard time understanding how the good and bad feedback that has been offered by many long time DX4win supporters has deteriorated to the level of personal attacks against each other. I think my biggest frustration & disappointment in regard to DX4win was best stated by Kostas SV1DPI when he said: " The bad thing for me (worst than not updating) is that Paul, the author of the program, does not say to us his thoughts for all these. I wou
Re: [Dx4win] Fwd: Re: Updates on a more positive note!
With due respect to all little change is going to occur which I am sorry to say. We have FINALLY heard from Paul and aware of the direction DX4WIN is taking. Well boys I have supported Paul and DX4WIN speaking to others informing them what a great dx logging program it is and quite frankly I cannot do that any longer especially after what Paul had to say today. Therefore I downloaded and installed LOGGER 32 and like all new programs there is quite a learning curve but I will be much further ahead in another month than I will be with DX4WIN five years from now. Have been loyal to DX4WIN but it's over. Some will be happy there will no longer see any more posts from n4dsp! LOL. Hate to see such a great dx logging program coming to it's end and it's troublesome. Made the ARRL Honor Roll with this program from my first contact to #334. Paul,SELL THE COMPANY. Respectfully, john / n4dsp of On 1/5/2014 5:04 PM, Lou Dietrich wrote: All, We have FINALLY heard from Paulthat is a good thingand it sounds like he has a portion of our wish list. A few comments though 1. Did you see any inclination or willingness to incorporate them into DX4WIN? 2. Although it is unlikely he would have every rig produced, it should be noted that I, for one, attempted to develop a rig file for the FT3000...sent many messages to him for assistance...and never heard back. I had a Yaesu 'demo' FT3000 shipped to me and it sat here for months awaiting assistance and nothing...this was a while after his personal moveyes, the rig files are rather basic but how DX4WIN handles these files are hard coded and cannot be user defined or changed. I have quite a bit of documentation in this issueas do others. We are/ were willing to work with him but the effort hasn't been reciprocal. 3. LOTW isn't going away...or GlobalQsl...or EQSLincorporating easy interface to these systems seeming would be a selling point for DX4WIN. Without them, DX4WIN is severely lacking. 4. As in number 3, QRZ.Com is here to stay...and most of your users access it routinely. Paul, this isn't an attack on you...and regrettably there has been some severe tone between a few users...hopefully, we can get back on a more positive, productive track. However, this thread is an indication of the frustration of your loyal, paid users. We want DX4WIN to succeed but there needs to be some indication that DX4WIN is alive and well...and will be supported and improved. Yes... we could all move to a different platform ...we have a number of other choices...but we have been sticking with DX4WIN but without finite information from you, Paul, we've been in an informational vacuum. Paul, incorporating user input and enhancing DX4WIN appears to be a win/win situation. We look forward for more information as to the direction and future of DX4WIN. 73 Lou N2TU On 1/5/2014 3:44 PM, Charlie Cunningham wrote: Amen! -Original Message- From: dx4win-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto:dx4win-boun...@mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Ken G Kopp Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2014 3:24 PM To: Dx4win@Mailman.Qth.Net Subject: Re: [Dx4win] Fwd: Re: Updates on a more positive note! Well said, Paul ! 73! Ken Kopp - K0PP k...@arrl.net On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Paul van der Eijk wrote: Hi, Thank you Bill for a civil restart of this discussion! We are expecting guests in a little while, so let me be brief: 1. I read the reflector 2. Folks who want to use DXLab please do so! 3. When I saw the enormous of email traffic a few month ago when LoTW had problems I realized it was much better to have a clear delineation between DX4WIN and LoTW. Is saving a few mouse clicks worth my effort and support time afterwards? 4. I wrote a pretty cool regular expression to retrieve the QRZ info, but also realized that the page was constructed to make this difficult for commercial reasons. Have to rethink that. 5. The user has the same tools as I have to construct a radio file because it is part of DX4WIN. Even debugging the interface is part of it. So if YOU have a radio that is not supported by the program, you stand a much better chance to get a working interface going than I can without that radio. (There are still users who believe I have every radio ever made in my shack!) 6. OmniRig: Has evaluated to a powerful system, using text files to describe the interface similar to what DX4WIN does. The problem for me is that OmniRig is event driven, DX4WIN polls the radio. 7. Multiple rotators: Should this be multiple serial ports and you select the rotator or something smarter (band, or band segment driven with possible override). How may users have multiple rotators? 8. I have a pretty long list of things to do, unfortunately it does not indicate when / how to do this. Happy New Year! --Paul, KK4HD PS I hope we can keep these discussions civilized. The history of this refle
Re: [Dx4win] Fwd: Re: Updates on a more positive note!
I understand in this last email that DX4WIN died about updates, what you have is what you get. is that, please clearly confirm this. thanks Sebastián Gámez Hernández E A 8 O G 73´S 2014/1/5 n4dsp > With due respect to all little change is going to occur which I am sorry > to say. > We have FINALLY heard from Paul and aware of the direction DX4WIN is > taking. > Well boys I have supported Paul and DX4WIN speaking to others informing > them what a great dx logging program it is and quite frankly I cannot do > that > any longer especially after what Paul had to say today. Therefore I > downloaded > and installed LOGGER 32 and like all new programs there is quite a > learning curve > but I will be much further ahead in another month than I will be with > DX4WIN > five years from now. Have been loyal to DX4WIN but it's over. Some will be > happy there will no longer see any more posts from n4dsp! LOL. Hate to see > such a great dx logging program coming to it's end and it's troublesome. > Made the ARRL Honor Roll with this program from my first contact to #334. > > Paul,SELL THE COMPANY. > > Respectfully, > john / n4dsp > > > of > > On 1/5/2014 5:04 PM, Lou Dietrich wrote: > >> All, >> >> We have FINALLY heard from Paulthat is a good thingand it sounds >> like he has a portion of our wish list. >> >> A few comments though >> >> 1. Did you see any inclination or willingness to incorporate them into >> DX4WIN? >> 2. Although it is unlikely he would have every rig produced, it should be >> noted that I, for one, attempted to develop a rig file for the >> FT3000...sent many messages to him for assistance...and never heard back. I >> had a Yaesu 'demo' FT3000 shipped to me and it sat here for months awaiting >> assistance and nothing...this was a while after his personal moveyes, >> the rig files are rather basic but how DX4WIN handles these files are hard >> coded and cannot be user defined or changed. I have quite a bit of >> documentation in this issueas do others. We are/ were willing to work >> with him but the effort hasn't been reciprocal. >> 3. LOTW isn't going away...or GlobalQsl...or EQSLincorporating easy >> interface to these systems seeming would be a selling point for DX4WIN. >> Without them, DX4WIN is severely lacking. >> 4. As in number 3, QRZ.Com is here to stay...and most of your users >> access it routinely. >> >> Paul, this isn't an attack on you...and regrettably there has been some >> severe tone between a few users...hopefully, we can get back on a more >> positive, productive track. >> >> However, this thread is an indication of the frustration of your loyal, >> paid users. We want DX4WIN to succeed but there needs to be some indication >> that DX4WIN is alive and well...and will be supported and improved. >> >> Yes... we could all move to a different platform ...we have a number of >> other choices...but we have been sticking with DX4WIN but without finite >> information from you, Paul, we've been in an informational vacuum. Paul, >> incorporating user input and enhancing DX4WIN appears to be a win/win >> situation. We look forward for more information as to the direction and >> future of DX4WIN. >> >> 73 >> >> Lou N2TU >> >> >> >> On 1/5/2014 3:44 PM, Charlie Cunningham wrote: >> >>> Amen! >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: dx4win-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto:dx4win-bounces@ >>> mailman.qth.net] >>> On Behalf Of Ken G Kopp >>> Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2014 3:24 PM >>> To: Dx4win@Mailman.Qth.Net >>> Subject: Re: [Dx4win] Fwd: Re: Updates on a more positive note! >>> >>> Well said, Paul ! >>> >>> 73! >>> >>> Ken Kopp - K0PP >>> k...@arrl.net >>> >>> >>> On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Paul van der Eijk >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Thank you Bill for a civil restart of this discussion! >>>> >>>> We are expecting guests in a little while, so let me be brief: >>>> >>>> 1. I read the reflector >>>> >>>> 2. Folks who want to use DXLab please do so! >>>> >>>> 3. When I saw the enormous of email traffic a few month ago when LoTW >>>> had >>>> problems I realized it was much better to have a clear delineation >>>> between >>>> DX4WIN and LoTW. Is saving a few mous
Re: [Dx4win] Fwd: Re: Updates on a more positive note!
Dear Chano, That is exactly what n4dsp wants you to believe. He wrote many messages today stating that interfacing to LoTW should be fully automated and that I should sell the company. There will be new versions in the future, but I want to figure out what new features make sense in terms of effort, interest of the users but most importantly the support required. --Paul, KK4HD On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 7:16 PM, CHANO - EA8OG wrote: > I understand in this last email that DX4WIN died about updates, what you > have is what you get. is that, please clearly confirm this. thanks > > Sebastián Gámez Hernández > E A 8 O G > 73´S > > > 2014/1/5 n4dsp > > > With due respect to all little change is going to occur which I am sorry > > to say. > > We have FINALLY heard from Paul and aware of the direction DX4WIN is > > taking. > > Well boys I have supported Paul and DX4WIN speaking to others informing > > them what a great dx logging program it is and quite frankly I cannot do > > that > > any longer especially after what Paul had to say today. Therefore I > > downloaded > > and installed LOGGER 32 and like all new programs there is quite a > > learning curve > > but I will be much further ahead in another month than I will be with > > DX4WIN > > five years from now. Have been loyal to DX4WIN but it's over. Some will > be > > happy there will no longer see any more posts from n4dsp! LOL. Hate to > see > > such a great dx logging program coming to it's end and it's troublesome. > > Made the ARRL Honor Roll with this program from my first contact to #334. > > > > Paul,SELL THE COMPANY. > > > > Respectfully, > > john / n4dsp > > > > > > of > > > > On 1/5/2014 5:04 PM, Lou Dietrich wrote: > > > >> All, > >> > >> We have FINALLY heard from Paulthat is a good thingand it sounds > >> like he has a portion of our wish list. > >> > >> A few comments though > >> > >> 1. Did you see any inclination or willingness to incorporate them into > >> DX4WIN? > >> 2. Although it is unlikely he would have every rig produced, it should > be > >> noted that I, for one, attempted to develop a rig file for the > >> FT3000...sent many messages to him for assistance...and never heard > back. I > >> had a Yaesu 'demo' FT3000 shipped to me and it sat here for months > awaiting > >> assistance and nothing...this was a while after his personal > moveyes, > >> the rig files are rather basic but how DX4WIN handles these files are > hard > >> coded and cannot be user defined or changed. I have quite a bit of > >> documentation in this issueas do others. We are/ were willing to > work > >> with him but the effort hasn't been reciprocal. > >> 3. LOTW isn't going away...or GlobalQsl...or EQSLincorporating easy > >> interface to these systems seeming would be a selling point for DX4WIN. > >> Without them, DX4WIN is severely lacking. > >> 4. As in number 3, QRZ.Com is here to stay...and most of your users > >> access it routinely. > >> > >> Paul, this isn't an attack on you...and regrettably there has been some > >> severe tone between a few users...hopefully, we can get back on a more > >> positive, productive track. > >> > >> However, this thread is an indication of the frustration of your loyal, > >> paid users. We want DX4WIN to succeed but there needs to be some > indication > >> that DX4WIN is alive and well...and will be supported and improved. > >> > >> Yes... we could all move to a different platform ...we have a number of > >> other choices...but we have been sticking with DX4WIN but without finite > >> information from you, Paul, we've been in an informational vacuum. Paul, > >> incorporating user input and enhancing DX4WIN appears to be a win/win > >> situation. We look forward for more information as to the direction and > >> future of DX4WIN. > >> > >> 73 > >> > >> Lou N2TU > >> > >> > >> > >> On 1/5/2014 3:44 PM, Charlie Cunningham wrote: > >> > >>> Amen! > >>> > >>> -Original Message- > >>> From: dx4win-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto:dx4win-bounces@ > >>> mailman.qth.net] > >>> On Behalf Of Ken G Kopp > >>> Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2014 3:24 PM > >>> To: Dx4win@Mailman.Qth.Net > >&
Re: [Dx4win] Fwd: Re: Updates on a more positive note!
__ DX4WIN mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/dx4win Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:DX4WIN@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Re: [Dx4win] Fwd: Re: Updates on a more positive note!
Hi Dick, Thank you for your personal note! I copy the reflector on my reply; it may be educational. Well I beat you in number of years developing commercial software. (since 1976) What some, and may you too, do not appreciate is the wide scale of computer experience DX4WIN users have. In my regular job, most of our users have a masters or phd or are students working towards it. So there is a certain level of expectation what your customer understands. This is not the case with DX4WIN users. We had users who do not recall the difference between a left mouse click or a right mouse click and put me on the phone with their son or spouse who 'knows computers'. Some do not recall that they bought the program already, and try to purchase a license over and over again. Some of my users love to get me on the phone just for the chit chat. etc. So from my perspective, minimizing support is important, especially when this happens in the evening hours or in the weekend. I want a user to be able to figure out how its done without having to ask me. --Paul, KK4HD http://www.dx4win.com __ DX4WIN mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/dx4win Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:DX4WIN@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
Re: [Dx4win] Fwd: Re: Updates on a more positive note!
I'm amazed at the tone of voice in these e-mails. It was sometime in the late 80's or early 90's when I met Paul and became "Customer 0" for DX4WIN. How many one-man amateur radio software products do you know of that are still offered after over 20 years? I am currently using Logger32, because it offers features that I need which DX4WIN does not, but DX4WIN remains on my PC. If Paul decides to release a version that has these things, I will certainly be back. If not, then I wish him a happy retirement and lots more time for the grandkids. 73, Pete N4ZR Check out the Reverse Beacon Network at http://reversebeacon.net, blog at reversebeacon.blogspot.com. For spots, please go to your favorite ARC V6 or VE7CC DX cluster node. On 1/5/2014 7:16 PM, CHANO - EA8OG wrote: I understand in this last email that DX4WIN died about updates, what you have is what you get. is that, please clearly confirm this. thanks Sebastián Gámez Hernández E A 8 O G 73´S 2014/1/5 n4dsp With due respect to all little change is going to occur which I am sorry to say. We have FINALLY heard from Paul and aware of the direction DX4WIN is taking. Well boys I have supported Paul and DX4WIN speaking to others informing them what a great dx logging program it is and quite frankly I cannot do that any longer especially after what Paul had to say today. Therefore I downloaded and installed LOGGER 32 and like all new programs there is quite a learning curve but I will be much further ahead in another month than I will be with DX4WIN five years from now. Have been loyal to DX4WIN but it's over. Some will be happy there will no longer see any more posts from n4dsp! LOL. Hate to see such a great dx logging program coming to it's end and it's troublesome. Made the ARRL Honor Roll with this program from my first contact to #334. Paul,SELL THE COMPANY. Respectfully, john / n4dsp of On 1/5/2014 5:04 PM, Lou Dietrich wrote: All, We have FINALLY heard from Paulthat is a good thingand it sounds like he has a portion of our wish list. A few comments though 1. Did you see any inclination or willingness to incorporate them into DX4WIN? 2. Although it is unlikely he would have every rig produced, it should be noted that I, for one, attempted to develop a rig file for the FT3000...sent many messages to him for assistance...and never heard back. I had a Yaesu 'demo' FT3000 shipped to me and it sat here for months awaiting assistance and nothing...this was a while after his personal moveyes, the rig files are rather basic but how DX4WIN handles these files are hard coded and cannot be user defined or changed. I have quite a bit of documentation in this issueas do others. We are/ were willing to work with him but the effort hasn't been reciprocal. 3. LOTW isn't going away...or GlobalQsl...or EQSLincorporating easy interface to these systems seeming would be a selling point for DX4WIN. Without them, DX4WIN is severely lacking. 4. As in number 3, QRZ.Com is here to stay...and most of your users access it routinely. Paul, this isn't an attack on you...and regrettably there has been some severe tone between a few users...hopefully, we can get back on a more positive, productive track. However, this thread is an indication of the frustration of your loyal, paid users. We want DX4WIN to succeed but there needs to be some indication that DX4WIN is alive and well...and will be supported and improved. Yes... we could all move to a different platform ...we have a number of other choices...but we have been sticking with DX4WIN but without finite information from you, Paul, we've been in an informational vacuum. Paul, incorporating user input and enhancing DX4WIN appears to be a win/win situation. We look forward for more information as to the direction and future of DX4WIN. 73 Lou N2TU On 1/5/2014 3:44 PM, Charlie Cunningham wrote: Amen! -Original Message- From: dx4win-boun...@mailman.qth.net [mailto:dx4win-bounces@ mailman.qth.net] On Behalf Of Ken G Kopp Sent: Sunday, January 05, 2014 3:24 PM To: Dx4win@Mailman.Qth.Net Subject: Re: [Dx4win] Fwd: Re: Updates on a more positive note! Well said, Paul ! 73! Ken Kopp - K0PP k...@arrl.net On Sun, Jan 5, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Paul van der Eijk wrote: Hi, Thank you Bill for a civil restart of this discussion! We are expecting guests in a little while, so let me be brief: 1. I read the reflector 2. Folks who want to use DXLab please do so! 3. When I saw the enormous of email traffic a few month ago when LoTW had problems I realized it was much better to have a clear delineation between DX4WIN and LoTW. Is saving a few mouse clicks worth my effort and support time afterwards? 4. I wrote a pretty cool regular expression to retrieve the QRZ info, but also realized that the page was constructed to make this difficult for commercial reasons. Have to rethin
