[Top] [All Lists]

[CQ-Contest] CT vs. N1MM

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: [CQ-Contest] CT vs. N1MM
From: Peter Dougherty <w2irt@comcast.net>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2006 23:40:10 -0400
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
At 09:29 PM 10/18/2006, you wrote:

>I have used CT for contesting since I bought my first copy in Dayton in
>1987. I have not kept up with developments in the N1MM contest software at
>all. So now, 19 years later, I am wondering what the pro's/con's of each
>package are. Has anyone published a comparison? Is it time to change?

N1MM is probably the best piece of contesting software you'll ever 
use. Not only is it immensely powerful, but support is first-rate, 
it's completely free to use, it can network for multi-multi in a 
breeze, supports distributed databases (in case one machine crashes 
you won't lose the log), it has amazing documentation and it boasts a 
featureset to die for. It also has built-in voice and CW keying, and 
most importantly, you can get it up and running and start using it 
with a very shallow learning curve.

Put another way, if Tom decided to charge $100 a year for it, I'd pay 
it, not bat an eyelash and *still* consider it a bargain.

If you have a relatively modern PC I'd say give it a try. Download 
the install (version 5.7.2), then apply the latest updater, load the 
most recent help and cty.dat files and give it a whirl. Create a fake 
contest, go run Europe or stateside for an hour and check out the 
features it has, explore menus, etc. Sure it will take a while to 
master, but to get a contest configured and running takes very little effort.

Personally, my favourite feature is what they call ESM mode (Enter 
Sends Message). Once properly configured and tested you can run an 
entire CW or even SSB contest with only your ENTER button and a few 
mouse clicks (S&P) or typing only callsigns (if running).



CQ-Contest mailing list

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>