[Top] [All Lists]

[TRLog] TR vs. CT features (a wish)

Subject: [TRLog] TR vs. CT features (a wish)
From: (Jim Kulp)
Date: Wed, 22 Dec 1999 07:23:59 -0500
This is exactly what I would wish also.....Thanks for verbalizing it.....I end
up making a paper one that I scratch off as we Jim   K3SW

Mark Beckwith wrote:

> It was suggested:
>   Of
> significantly more value to me, for instance, would be arranging the
> multiplier list (for domestic contests) in columns by call area instead of
> in straight alphabetical order.  For me, at least, processing the info that
> way is about 10 times more intuitive than searching a straight alphabetical
> list of abbreviations.  Plus, (I think everybody USED to do this but it is
> now a lost art), when (S&P) you hear a W9 and you see you don't need any
> W9s, you can spin the knob sooner.  This is possible when mults are
> presented as described above, but not possible at present, because in the
> time it takes to search the list for Il, In and Wi, you may as well have
> copied his whole call and exchange and checked it the "old-fashioned way."
> This is something I miss from the pencil-and-paper days.
> Yes, I understand all the reasons that this is difficult to implement, but
> that does not make the concept any less of a good idea.  Yes it would take
> effort on Tree's part.  This is why I bring it up in this context.  No
> offense intended, but compared to the first wish above, I hope Tree will
> apply his limited resources to the most important things first, as many
> have said before on this reflector.
> (Boy will I feel stupid if this has already been implemented since the last
> time I mentioned it.)
> Mark, N5OT
> "Sometimes an amplifier just makes your signal louder."
> --
> FAQ on WWW:     
> Submissions:    
> Administrative requests:
> Problems:       
> Feature Wishlist:

FAQ on WWW:     
Administrative requests:
Feature Wishlist:

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