Writing a survey can be a complicated task. The questions need to be carefully written to gather the information wanted, while keeping the number of questions reasonable. With "check the most appropr
Author: "Geoffrey S. Mendelson" <gsm@mendelson.com>
Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2008 10:48:49 +0300
Just to stir things up a bit, I really wonder if anything below 20m and CW is really needed in a low end radio these days. With many new or at least new to HF hams out there, there is IMHO a demand f
Let's see, you're really saying, in addition to CW, there is also not need for SSB below 20 meters in order to obtain a lower price rig, and because no one can put antennas up for those bands. Yep, t
Yes It would be nice if an entry level radio was available for say something under $500. Oh it wouldn't have all the whistles and bells, certainly not 160M - 6M coverage and maybe not all the modes,
I would not mind paying for new firmware that increased performance or functionality. However I do not feel obligated to pay for "bug" fixes. Today you can upgrade the program in your digital camera
In reading through the comments about the survey, I found it interesting that several that complained about the survey in one way or another also were the same ones voicing objections to the various
In 1960, $3,000.00 from 2007 is worth: $428.57 using the Consumer Price Index $527.56 using the GDP deflator $335.24 using the value of consumer bundle $362.57 using the unskilled wage $190.63 using
agreed about entry level costs - I've recycled used gear, even sold to a beginner with the promise to buy it back if he upgraded in a year-- guess what, I shared TT stuff K8BBM ______________________
I also clicked "open source"! I'd still like to see the "real time" band scope on my Orion2 upgraded to real time, better NR, a variable HW NB, forget the SW NB, items on color screen using more colo
But there are great rigs for under $500. Back in the early 60's when we got our novice tickets, we went to used gear to save on cost. There were new rigs, but other than Heathkit CW-only rig, they we
Pretty close to my thoughts. I'll take a first-class bandscope, or , get rid of it and apply the resources for other things. I never use it right now, and I don't use NR for the same reason. If there
Why not a Heathkit or Drake TR4? Used for < $300. Maybe they will learn something.... Maybe they will even get interested in electronics like I did... Maybe they will have fun getting it going... The
I agree with the few recent posts regarding a usable rig for $500 or less. I mean the equivalent to a Elecraft K2 or Ten-Tec Argonaut V, CW and SSB, 80-10 meters, 5-10 watts, for $500 or less. And I
I'm wondering how accurate this survey will be. After all, they are pretty much focused on the Ten Tec crowd. If I didn't own a Ten Tec or even cared about them, I wouldn't have visited their web sit
Martin Ewing AA6E writes... I'm not sure there is an ideal approach--each strategy for paying for ongoing software development has strengths and weaknesses. Volunteers are excellent for identifying n
Bill Ames writes... Sometimes the distinction between bugs and the lack of an important feature is obvious. But not always. That's where published functional requirements would provide clarity. New r
Gary, See page 23 in the May QST. The Ten Tec ad this month shows the genealogy of the Ten Tec line in 10-year increments, showing a picture of a PM1 (1968), a Triton IV (1978), a Corsair II (1988),
The only true measure of the value of something would be how many hours would you have worked in 1960 to purchase something compared to how many hours you'd have to work today to obtain a like device
Thanks for the info, Bernie. I'll have to check out the May issue. Since it isn't out yet, I'm assuming that you are referring to the ARRL web site? Gary, N7HTS ______________________________________
Gary, Got mine in the mailbox yesterday. 73, Bernie In a message dated 4/17/2008 10:59:03 A.M. Central Daylight Time, n7hts@bresnan.net writes: Thanks for the info, Bernie. I'll have to check out the