[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [CQ-Contest] CT vs. N1MM

To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>, "Pete Smith" <n4zr@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CT vs. N1MM
From: "Rex Maner" <k7qq@netzero.net>
Date: Fri, 20 Oct 2006 02:13:22 -0000
List-post: <mailto:cq-contest@contesting.com>
Quack Says

I'm also biased toward NA in that if I accidently hit the wrong key eg    \ 
in   NA  nothing happens,  in  N1MM all kinds of goofey stuff happens and I 
end up off the freq I was running on and have even had to totally shut down 
the porgram and re-start to get going again.  Just FAT Finger stuff but it 
is something that I have to be aware of how to get out of the problem.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Pete Smith" <n4zr@contesting.com>
To: <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, October 19, 2006 2:38 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] CT vs. N1MM

> 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 up.
> 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.
>>Warren, W4WR
>>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
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest


No virus found in this incoming message.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.408 / Virus Database: 268.13.7/488 - Release Date: 10/19/2006

CQ-Contest mailing list

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