I'm biased - I work on the N1MM project - but I think there is no comparison.
N1MM really took off from where TR Log stopped, which was really a quantum step
forward over CT, particularly on CW.
A critical difference is that both TR and N1MM programs are "modal' - that is,
they work differently (and intuitively) for running and S&P. When you are
running, you type a station's call and hit Enter. The program sends the other
station's call and your exchange to him. You copy his exchange, hit Enter
again, and the program logs the QSO and sends TU QRZ...
In S&P mode, the same keystrokes are used, but the result is different. Type
the call and hit Enter, and your call is sent. If the station answers you copy
your exchange and hit Enter again, and it sends your exchange to him and logs
the QSO. Couldn't be simpler.
I read Mal's complaint about complexity. From my own experience doing user
support, most of the problems result from people trying to DO really
complicated things with the software, like SO2R with one or both radios
operating split, or experimenting with advanced capabilities and getting fouled
For a beginner, you really need only 2 or 3 windows open - the Entry window,
the Check window, and the Log. Then you can add things as you become
comfortable, and if you get tangled up, it's just a matter of renaming the
simple .ini file and starting over.
73, Pete N4ZR
At 12:31 PM 10/18/2006, Warren Rothberg 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?
>Thanks for your input.
>p.s. By the way, my setup is XP SP2 with dual monitors.
>No virus found in this outgoing message.
>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.4/480 - Release Date: 17-Oct-06
>CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest mailing list