TenTec
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [TenTec] Ten-Tec the SSB company?

To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Ten-Tec the SSB company?
From: Dennis Jones <k6rcl@cox.net>
Reply-to: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Mon, 21 Jun 2010 12:20:22 -0700
List-post: <tentec@contesting.com">mailto:tentec@contesting.com>
AMEN,
DJ  K6RCL


On Jun 21, 2010, at 11:50 AM, d.e.warnick@comcast.net wrote:

>
>
> This one has been beaten to death and back on this reflector  
> recently. John has even given the reasoning from TenTec .
>
>
>
> Many times when I tell a fellow ham that I use a TenTec  ----- the  
> first resp[onse is 'Oh, you must be a CW operator'. I am, but I  
> also  use SSB, RTTY and PSK, but the name TenTec is only associated  
> with CW. They always have and always will provide great CW with QSK  
> as only they can. However, they have also provided great phone and  
> digital modes, though they are not known for it. The term 'the SSB  
> compayny' is an attempt to get some recognition for that. After  
> all, if TenTec were to sell only to CW ops and not phone or digital  
> ops, their market would be greatly diminished. It is to the  
> advantage of all of us that they expand that coverage by letting  
> everyone know that they are excellent in other modes. If they grow  
> that way, they may have greater resources to devote to all modes,  
> CW included. So, let's support them, rather than this constant  
> bickering over every little detail that doesn't cater to our  
> particular wants and wishes.
>
>
>
> There, I couldn't push delete againh without saying my piece. If  
> you don't agree, just hit delete. I respect that, too
>
>
>
> Dave
>
> WA3MKB
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Martin" <martin@ok1rr.com>
> To: tentec@contesting.com
> Sent: Monday, June 21, 2010 2:24:50 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
> Subject: [TenTec] Ten-Tec the SSB company?
>
> It struck me dumb to see the 'Ten-Tec, the SSB company'. Our late Al
> Kahn, K4FW, must turn in his grave...
>
> Should it be a response to the no-code expansion? What's the TT's
> strategy for the future? With lack of support of Orion (565), some  
> less
> sophisticated solutions (no memory tuner in 565, some software
> glitches...) will TT also leave the tradition of great CW features?
>
> 73
> Martin, OK1RR
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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

_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec

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