I'll agree that CT was the pioneer, and showed us the way to computer logging,
at least as far as commercialized, computer-logging-for-non-computer-geek
programs go.
But I think it also showed Tree what needed to be improved, in particular the
flexibility of the exchange field (you don't need to enter even SS exchanges in
perfect sequence and you don't have to tab between fields), in the use of the
one key EVERY OTHER piece of software uses to implement commands (ENTER) and a
simple one-touch tap of ESC to escape from logging the QSO. (F12? Alt-W? What's
that about?)
I love the use of ENTER. Want to send a CQ? Hit ENTER. Want to send your call
while S&Ping? Hit ENTER. Want to send the exchange after typing in the call?
Hit ENTER. Want to send acknowledgement and log the QSO? Hit ENTER. Want to go
back to CQing? Hit ENTER.
Add to that dead-simple networking, smart exchanges (it knows, for example, to
change the sequence in sprint depending who you are in the QSO), LPT1 paddle
input, footswitch input, PTT out, easy SO2R capability and that it will run on
almost any DOS machine still alive, including the DOS emulators of newer
machines and I think that unless you really need to use a windows product, TR
is king.
I still use CT in portable operations and respect the software, the designer
and the evolution of the product. But TR is superior.
I know I'll get return e-mail exhorting me to try WL, but if I'm happy with
what I've got, why do I need spend the cash?
I'll admit, however, that as good a contest logger as TR is, it's not good as a
general QSO logger. Perhaps that's a reason to go to WL?
73, kelly
ve4xt
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|