[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] CT vs. N1MM

To: cq-contest@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CT vs. N1MM
From: Bill Turner <dezrat@copper.net>
Date: Thu, 19 Oct 2006 10:29:41 -0700
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>

On Wed, 18 Oct 2006 23:40:10 -0400, Peter Dougherty
 <w2irt@comcast.net> wrote:

>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.

------------ REPLY FOLLOWS ------------

I agree with nearly everything Peter says, but he doesn't mention one
thing I have noticed over the years: N1MM is prone to bugs. Many times
I have seen a new release cause something to not work which was
working right in previous releases. Many new releases are done to fix
something broken by a previous release. I'm not a programmer and I
don't know why this is so, but it is.

I also use WriteLog and find it is far more stable. I should point out
that almost 100% of my contesting is on RTTY and the above may not be
the case for CW or SSB. 

Twice in the last year I have gotten so frustrated with N1MM that I
changed back to WriteLog right in the middle of a contest. Think about
that one! WriteLog has always done the job with no bugs I know of.

Bottom line: I prefer N1MM for its features, but I keep WriteLog handy
just in case. 

Bill, W6WRT
CQ-Contest mailing list

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