All of these discussions seem to point out that there is need for operator
control and knowlege to properly operate the radio.
For some users, the sun may rise and set on AM, but others are using the radio
for moon bounce, 160 m CW contesting, transverter, etc.
And when a feature is
I vote for giving the operator control rather than giving the software control.
It is part of the adventure of the hobby to own a piece of gear that is
complex enough that it is a challenge to us to squeeze out the last ounce of
performance. I vote for having thousands of permutations and
Kenneth Waites wrote:
I vote for giving the operator control rather than giving the software
control. It is part of the adventure of the hobby to own a piece of gear
that is complex enough that it is a challenge to us to squeeze out the
last ounce of performance. I vote for having
Julian,
My cynicism is showing here, but I do believe that many people want all
the 'bells and whistles' even if they will never use them. The result
is that we end up with a radio or software that many complain about
'because it is too hard to use'. It is difficult to impossible for all
4 matches
Mail list logo
