----- Original Message -----
From: "Len Umina" <umina@theuminas.com>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2005 04:28
Subject: [TenTec] ORION II
> I was at Dayton and "sold" on the fact that Orion was "upgradeable". I
> ordered one on the spot.
>
> It has been pretty dissapointing. Yes, the roofing filters blow away
> everything else, and I've got everything else except the 7800 and 9000 (so
> far). After LOTS of comparisons, measurements, and experience with the
> radio, I'd have to say I'd be seriously surprised if the radio meets any
of
> the original design/marketing/advertising goals, and apparently quite a
few
> very technical people have made siimilar statements in the past. This
> doesn't make the radio unusable, and Tentec has continued to sell them and
> generated a loyal following, even if a lot of that (apparently) was on the
> hope that the bugs would be worked out and the radio upgraded through the
> magic of software.
>
> My personal observation is that the firmware in the Orion is very
poor.Poor ? or just needs some tlc and redesisn
> Many functions don't work,
EXAMPLE ?
don't work right, or are very cumbersome compared EXAMPLE PLEASE
> to 'state of the art', and this has been very well documented.
Where?
I also
> believe the Orion HAS the processing power to implement what the manual
> claims they deliver, but the software is not properly structured to take
> full advantage of the architecture. Using the Harvard architecture is an
> ART, and there are very few practitioners, and certainly none at Tentec.
(I
> can tell, because some of the comments with the upgrade releases wreak of
> the Princeton/CISC/Brute Force approach, but I didn't write this to attack
> their engineering prowess so lets drop it here.)
! you can tell CISC, Risk, Harvard frm afar.
>
> Someone said in this thread that Tentec had no choice but to use modern
> DSP's etc to upgrade the hardware and produce the ORION II.
>
> Well, folks, that doesn't sit to well with me for any subject EXCEPT the
> color display change!
>
> For example:
>
> The HF spectrum is still the HF spectrum. CW is still CW. SSB modulation
> is still SSB Modulation. A "REAL TIME BANDSCOPE" is still a "REAL TIME
> BANDSCOPE". "Noise Reduction" is still "Noise Reduction".
>
> The implementation of these features isn't rocket science. It's been done
> in software since the late 1980's or before. It's been inexpensive since
> the 1990's, and consumer technology since then.
>
> The point is, that the ORIGINAL AND CURRENTLY MARKETED "FEATURES" of the
> ORION still have not been delivered to the market. If Tentec couldn't
> deliver these features with the processor they chose and the architecture
> they desiged 3 years ago then they had no right to make the claims they
did
> and lead the marketplace to believe that things would work as promised
with
> an eventual software upgrade.
>
> If for some technical reason (like they underestimated the amount of
> storage) or they really did need more CPU power, then a CPU relpacement
> board would fix the problem.
TYpical situation for inexperienced people doind embedde dystems. Things
like "linear taper" vs "log taper" are
> so trivial to fix for a software guru it would shock you. Fixing the
> control slugishness, modifying objects, whpch objcrs
and updating the display driver are
> all straightforward. There is no magic. Somerimes the problem is majic
If the memory is there, the CPU
> power is sufficient, and the program is properly structured for a realtime
> application, it's simple crank turning. It takes time, talent, and money
to
> pay it.
>
> That said, and the real reason I posted this is that Tentec is in
dangerous
> waters at this point. The Orion can be easily demonstrated NOT to deliver
> the features it's been advertised to contain, and many of us have emails
> from Tentec staff admitting to exactly that. Hams a a very tolerant, very
> forgiving group, and we all like the fact that Tentec remains one of a
> handful of U.S. radio manufacturers, so we're perhaps a bit more tolerant.
> But tolerance does have limits. If Tentec can't deliver software that
> actually causes the hardware to function as claimed, and their only choice
> is a new platform, and there is no path to it for current users, then they
> will be put out of business. Recent laws governing corporate disclosures
> and liability will put all of their officers and many key employees
> personally at risk. That is the world we live in.
>
> It won't happen because hams will stop buying ORION II's or give up on the
> company. They will probably get more custoemrs for the ORION II than they
> had for the ORION, if it does deliver. What will kill Tentec will be the
> consumer lawsuits.
>
> In over a dozen states Tentec's coporate integrity could be challenged
under
> consumer protection laws that have been on the books, are regularly
> enforced, and have been upheld by the Courts. One major victory (or even
> one major fight for that matter) and Tentec will be a footnote in the
> history of radio manufacturers.
>
> All its going to take is ONE person to push the issue.
>
> My radio (like many others) was delivered in June with a manual, revision
3
> dated February 2005, which clearly says, "The main receiver on the Orion
is
> equipped with a real-time band sweep display". Is there anyone out there
> who would say this is a true statement? It is not, in fact it's not even
> close to being true.
>
> As I reviewed the manual over the past few weeks, there were many similar
> claims. I chose this one as it's probably the one least likely to be
> misunderstood or challenged. The concept of real-time can always be
debated
> of course, but most engineers or professional witnesses would likely agree
> to permit "percieved realtime". Again, the Orion isn't even close. The
756
> might be considered "preceieved realtime" for a human interface by
example.
> The Orion? Never, and it's demonstrable to even a non-techie.
>
> Based on the enormous amount of material already floating around the
> internet concerning the Orion's dirty little secrets, it's also possible
> that someone is going to attempt to enforce the ARRL advertising policy
> against Tentec. This is trivial though by comparison.
>
> Tentec is at a crossroad. They've published, sold, and delivered products
> in states and across state lines. The "issues" have been tolerated by a
> supportive customer base of well-wishers who are thankful that Tentec
> exists, and hope that it, like Amateur Radio, will be here 100 years from
> now (I'm in that group). Failure to recognize the liability they've
created
> for themselves, however could be fatal.
>
> I therefore strongly ENCOURAGE Tentec to make some clear statements about
> the future for Orion customers, and then to quickly deliver on them. If
the
> ORION Platform can't deliver on the claims made in the past, then Tentec
> needs to admit it, and offer some kind of compromise to the customer base
> (ie an upgraded CPU board boasting MORE features than originally
> contemplated at a discounted price) and move on.
>
> If version 2 firmware does that then fine, however I'm betting it does not
> or Tentec would be using the older procesors in the Orion II and putting
the
> price difference in the bank.
>
> The approach I'm sggesting would be a tremendous public relations win for
> Tentec.
>
> This is going to be a very interesting year!
>
> 73,
> Len
> WT6G
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|