Mail Archive Search: <+subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Writelog\s+vs\.\s+N1MM\s*$/>

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[CQ\-Contest\]\s+Writelog\s+vs\.\s+N1MM\s*$/: 18 ]

Total 18 documents matching your query.

1. [CQ-Contest] Writelog vs. N1MM (score: 1): Author: Kevin Stockton <n5dx2005@yahoo.com>; Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 08:30:40 -0700 (PDT); Are their any contesters out there that have experimented with both Writelog and N1MM? If so, which did you prefer? I've been using N1MM and it is a great program, but some people have decided to g; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-09/msg00070.html (7,080 bytes)
2. Re: [CQ-Contest] Writelog vs. N1MM (score: 1): Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>; Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 12:43:59 -0400; You'll probably get more answers if you ask this question on the Writelog reflector. I was using Writelog before N1MM came out. The main reason I stuck with Writelog is that it works very well for ev; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-09/msg00071.html (10,492 bytes)
3. Re: [CQ-Contest] Writelog vs. N1MM (score: 1): Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>; Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 13:49:22 -0400; I have used both, though the last time I used Writelog seriously in a contest was almost 6 years ago - how time flies when you're having fun. Just about then I discovered N1MM, then in version 3.xx -; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-09/msg00074.html (10,043 bytes)
4. Re: [CQ-Contest] Writelog vs. N1MM (score: 1): Author: "Alfred Frugoli" <ke1fo@arrl.net>; Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 18:05:02 -0400; I don't believe this is correct. I know folks are using dxdoublers with success and I believe if it's not already there, MK2R protocol support is coming. 73 de Al, KE1FO -- Visit my amateur radio con; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-09/msg00078.html (8,106 bytes)
5. Re: [CQ-Contest] Writelog vs. N1MM (score: 1): Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>; Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 18:13:20 -0400; I could definitely be wrong about it, but my recollection is that Writelog supports boxes like dxdoubler via the LPT port. That's not a great solution for me, and it may not fully support the stereo; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-09/msg00079.html (8,689 bytes)
6. Re: [CQ-Contest] Writelog vs. N1MM (score: 1): Author: "Vitor, PY2NY (Gmail)" <py2ny.vitor@gmail.com>; Date: Thu, 4 Sep 2008 19:57:23 -0300; I used WL years ago, and from 2005 only N1MM. Very happy with that. I know that WinTest are going fine, but I am really OK with N1MM. My full endorsement to what Pete said... PY2NY, Vitor -- Original; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-09/msg00080.html (11,985 bytes)
7. Re: [CQ-Contest] Writelog vs. N1MM (score: 1): Author: "Rich K2WR" <k2wr@njdxa.org>; Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 22:08:26 -0400; In my experience, N1MM equals the legendary CW sending performance of CT and WriteLog does not. Those who started computer logging with CT will remember that the "type ahead" capability of CT enabled; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-09/msg00084.html (8,822 bytes)
8. Re: [CQ-Contest] Writelog vs. N1MM (score: 1): Author: "Tom Osborne" <w7why@verizon.net>; Date: Thu, 04 Sep 2008 20:27:57 -0700; Hi All I am using N1MM with the DXD and it switches everything--receive and tranmit audio for SSB, CW and RTTY. It is on the LPT port, though. 73 Tom W7WHY ___________________________________________; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-09/msg00085.html (8,476 bytes)
9. Re: [CQ-Contest] Writelog vs. N1MM (score: 1): Author: "hank k8dd" <k8dd@arrl.net>; Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2008 00:01:16 -0400; The latest version of Writelog supports port switching with the WinkeyerUSB. 73 Hank K8DD -- 'Never argue with an idiot. They drag you down to their level then beat you with experience.' -anon -- ___; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-09/msg00086.html (9,767 bytes)
10. Re: [CQ-Contest] Writelog vs. N1MM (score: 1): Author: Henk Remijn PA5KT <pa5kt@remijn.net>; Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2008 08:04:53 +0200; I am not a user of writelog. I was also interesting in this so I looked at the website to give it a try. Unfortunately the website has not been updated for a while. There is no trial version availabl; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-09/msg00087.html (9,394 bytes)
11. Re: [CQ-Contest] Writelog vs. N1MM (score: 1): Author: "Steve Lott" <lottsphoto@gmail.com>; Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2008 05:08:25 -0500; I have used both I am very happy with N1MM I use automated switching of transmit radio/rcvr with a MK2R+ from microham without any lpt ports as mentioned WL has not been updated in some time N1MM alt; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-09/msg00088.html (9,643 bytes)
12. Re: [CQ-Contest] Writelog vs. N1MM (score: 1): Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>; Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2008 06:46:13 -0400; For those of you worried about obsolescence, as fewer and fewer new computers include an LPT port, Piexx (www.piexx.com) makes a port translator that connects to a USB port and provides all of the st; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-09/msg00089.html (9,421 bytes)
13. Re: [CQ-Contest] Writelog vs. N1MM (score: 1): Author: Barry <w2up3@verizon.net>; Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2008 09:21:57 -0400; And for the record, I do NOT want to see you in your cheerleader's outfit :.) 73, Barry, W2UP _______________________________________________ CQ-Contest mailing list CQ-Contest@contesting.com http://; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-09/msg00091.html (8,642 bytes)
14. Re: [CQ-Contest] Writelog vs. N1MM (score: 1): Author: Mark Perrin <mperrin@ordata.com>; Date: Fri, 05 Sep 2008 08:49:34 -0700; WL has been updated regularly over the years, and the most recent update was in past couple of weeks. I use it for RTTY contesting and love it. 73, Mark N7MQ _________________________________________; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-09/msg00097.html (11,191 bytes)
15. [CQ-Contest] Writelog vs. N1MM (score: 1): Author: "Rick Mintz" <Rmintz@Rochester.rr.com>; Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2008 12:20:50 -0400; I stay with Writelog. N1MM is great for CW and Phone contesting but it lacks features that I want/need for RTTY. Since RTTY is 90% of my contesting, I will stick with WL. Here is why. N1MM does not..; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-09/msg00098.html (8,747 bytes)
16. Re: [CQ-Contest] Writelog vs. N1MM (score: 1): Author: "Dick Green WC1M" <wc1m@msn.com>; Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2008 20:56:42 -0400; It's true that Writelog continues to be updated on a regular basis. That said, there are a lot of things N1MM does that Writelog does not. Does this affect my ability to contest effectively? I don't; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-09/msg00106.html (12,761 bytes)
17. Re: [CQ-Contest] Writelog vs. N1MM (score: 1): Author: Henk Remijn PA5KT <pa5kt@remijn.net>; Date: Sat, 06 Sep 2008 21:26:37 +0200; The website doesnt look like its an updated and a supported program. Might be an idea for the programmer to update his website. Henk Mark Perrin schreef: _____________________________________________; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-09/msg00118.html (11,779 bytes)
18. Re: [CQ-Contest] Writelog vs. N1MM (score: 1): Author: Pete Smith <n4zr@contesting.com>; Date: Sun, 07 Sep 2008 11:09:23 -0400; Dick, this is pretty easy to make happen in MM. For example, if you want to resume CQ on your run radio immediately after calling someone on your S&P radio, you do that by defining the S&P F4 key as; /archives//html/CQ-Contest/2008-09/msg00127.html (10,191 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 18
Page: [1]