Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +subject:/^(?:^\s*(re|sv|fwd|fw)[\[\]\d]*[:>-]+\s*)*\[WriteLog\]\s+Operational\s+Characteristics\s+of\s+WL\s+on\s+CW\s*$/: 17 ]

Total 17 documents matching your query.

1. [WriteLog] Operational Characteristics of WL on CW (score: 1)
Author: gw3njw@onetel.net.uk (Clive Whelan)
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 20:10:38 -0000
with other programs such as CT. Not true of those progs. e.g.. TR ( SD?) that use the intelligent enter key. iow there exists a separate S&P mode which avoids all that pfaffing around. imo Having to
/archives//html/WriteLog/2002-12/msg00052.html (8,245 bytes)

2. [WriteLog] Operational Characteristics of WL on CW (score: 1)
Author: gbaron@charter.net (Gil Baron)
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 15:25:28 -0600
I have to agree with Clive here. There is no reasonable explanation of why this cannot be done with WriteLog too. One of the few ways that it lags TR. Nevertheless, it is still a better program to us
/archives//html/WriteLog/2002-12/msg00055.html (9,936 bytes)

3. [WriteLog] Operational Characteristics of WL on CW (score: 1)
Author: w2cs@bellsouth.net (Gary Ferdinand W2CS)
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 18:25:40 -0500
I would dispute this a bit. In my experience TRLog did not get confused as to which mode it was in. Rather, it was the OPERATOR who got confused, especially in the wee hours of the morning. But, ove
/archives//html/WriteLog/2002-12/msg00056.html (11,253 bytes)

4. [WriteLog] Operational Characteristics of WL on CW (score: 1)
Author: jimsmith@shaw.ca (Jim Smith)
Date: Wed, 04 Dec 2002 17:20:59 -0800
What follows is from memory. There may be mistakes in the particulars with which one could find fault. Please view this as a cry for help, not a point by point criticism of WL. .... For S&P it's not
/archives//html/WriteLog/2002-12/msg00062.html (11,946 bytes)

5. [WriteLog] Operational Characteristics of WL on CW (score: 1)
Author: jeflanders@comcast.net (Jerry Flanders)
Date: Thu, 05 Dec 2002 03:10:10 +0000
In my ini file, I have it set up so that when I hit ENTER, WL logs the QSO (only - no buffers are transmitted). When I hit the big "+" key on the far right side of the keyboard, my "QSL + QRZ" is sen
/archives//html/WriteLog/2002-12/msg00068.html (14,127 bytes)

6. [WriteLog] Operational Characteristics of WL on CW (score: 1)
Author: wa9als@starband.net (WA9ALS - John)
Date: Wed, 4 Dec 2002 22:12:56 -0500
Me too, mostly. I think you need to turn off "Enter sends exch/QRZ". Here's one way to do things: RUNNING: 1. Hit INS to send exchange to callsign last highlighted. 2. Hit "+" to send QRZ message an
/archives//html/WriteLog/2002-12/msg00069.html (9,295 bytes)

7. [WriteLog] Operational Characteristics of WL on CW (score: 1)
Author: eric@k3na.org (Eric Scace K3NA)
Date: Thu, 5 Dec 2002 20:58:44 -0600
Hi Jim -- WL will, in its current incarnation, do what you want while running. Go to the Entry pull down menu and select "Enter sends Exchange/QRZ". When this menu entry is checked (on), WL will do t
/archives//html/WriteLog/2002-12/msg00076.html (11,492 bytes)

8. [WriteLog] Operational Characteristics of WL on CW (score: 1)
Author: jimsmith@shaw.ca (Jim Smith)
Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 00:06:11 -0800
Well, thanks everyone for your time and trouble, both here and direct. It's going to take me a little while to digest all this. One thing that seems to come through is that WL users have learned to a
/archives//html/WriteLog/2002-12/msg00078.html (9,936 bytes)

9. [WriteLog] Operational Characteristics of WL on CW (score: 1)
Author: n5nj@gte.net (Bob Naumann - N5NJ)
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 05:52:49 -0600
I'm very interested in all of this as I am trying to adopt Writelog as my primary contest logging program. Back in the days of 8088's, there were essentially only two methods of computer logging, whi
/archives//html/WriteLog/2002-12/msg00079.html (15,516 bytes)

10. [WriteLog] Operational Characteristics of WL on CW (score: 1)
Author: eric@k3na.org (Eric Scace K3NA)
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 06:49:50 -0600
Hi Jim -- I can't figure out where the "extra keystroke" is that you are discussing. (You must understand that I have never used TRlog.) Assuming one doesn't make any typing mistakes, the sequence fo
/archives//html/WriteLog/2002-12/msg00080.html (12,036 bytes)

11. [WriteLog] Operational Characteristics of WL on CW (score: 1)
Author: carsten.steinhoefel@web.de (Carsten Steinhöfel)
Date: Fri, 6 Dec 2002 13:52:11 +0100
Hi guys, first let me tell that WL worked flawlessly in the CQWW as PJ4W. I did not notice any big slowdown in saving QSOs after 4600QSOs. It was taking about half a second late in the contest but th
/archives//html/WriteLog/2002-12/msg00081.html (18,597 bytes)

12. [WriteLog] Operational Characteristics of WL on CW (score: 1)
Author: n1eu@hotmail.com (Barry N1EU)
Date: Fri, 06 Dec 2002 08:34:37 -0500
(apologies for coming late to the discussion) I'm in accord with Gary's original posting. Writelog could fairly easily add the simple logic to detect whether you're in run or s&p mode. "Enter sends E
/archives//html/WriteLog/2002-12/msg00083.html (8,518 bytes)

13. [WriteLog] Operational Characteristics of WL on CW (score: 1)
Author: jimsmith@shaw.ca (Jim Smith)
Date: Sat, 07 Dec 2002 02:13:02 -0800
Hi Eric, First of all, I only got back into the game a couple of years ago or so. Last contest I was in before that was in the 60s. While my contesting skills are improving, I wouldn't class myself a
/archives//html/WriteLog/2002-12/msg00094.html (15,408 bytes)

14. [WriteLog] Operational Characteristics of WL on CW (score: 1)
Author: wa9als@starband.net (WA9ALS - John)
Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 07:24:22 -0500
you?" Hi Jim - My first reaction to this was why would you want to log the Q before you knew you had the TU message from the other guy? However, I can see your point that almost all of the time you
/archives//html/WriteLog/2002-12/msg00096.html (9,321 bytes)

15. [WriteLog] Operational Characteristics of WL on CW (score: 1)
Author: w2cs@bellsouth.net (Gary Ferdinand W2CS)
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 22:48:19 -0500
Thanks to you all I'm now running a test setup with 2 computers (XP and 98) each running an image of WL. But I just ran aground on how best to use PFkeys on CW When contesting I'm usually either runn
/archives//html/WriteLog/2002-11/msg00599.html (8,415 bytes)

16. [WriteLog] Operational Characteristics of WL on CW (score: 1)
Author: eric@k3na.org (Eric Scace K3NA)
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 23:08:57 -0500
You have the process correct. For S&P, it's not any different than what you would have done with other programs such as CT. You'll really want to have S&P work this way. There are many situations whe
/archives//html/WriteLog/2002-11/msg00600.html (9,344 bytes)

17. [WriteLog] Operational Characteristics of WL on CW (score: 1)
Author: gbaron@charter.net (Gil Baron)
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 2002 22:28:22 -0600
You could also look at the other accelerator keys. Perhaps they would be a method. You cod also turn off the Enter Key sends Exch in ENTRY and only hit enter to log the call, not needing CTL-ENTER bu
/archives//html/WriteLog/2002-11/msg00601.html (10,007 bytes)


This search system is powered by Namazu