"Aggreous" should be "egregious". A top-notch reflector demands top-notch
spelling
Ron
K3MIY
-----Original Message-----
From: tentec-bounces@contesting.com
[mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com]On Behalf Of Rob Atkinson, K5UJ
Sent: Tuesday, July 24, 2007 1:31 PM
To: tentec@contesting.com
Cc: tc@arrl.org
Subject: [TenTec] [Orion] "Technical Correspondence", August 2007 issue
Hi Grant,
>When did the Technical Correspondence column become a personal outlet for
>marketing material??
Any "marketing" was for the Orion. The author went out of his way to praise
Ten Tec and the Orion not once, but twice. He wrote that he wants to _own_
an Orion. An excerpt about Ten Tec: "They are a top-notch company and the
radio looks to be marvelous. I wish I had one."
>I don't care who's right or not (although the distinction drawn between
>what
>is SDR and what isn't is completely falacious),
I'm not sure what you mean. Oh, you mean drawing a distinction between the
Orion and a real SDR has no merit?
>but this is truly bad form.
>Aggregeous. Is the next step a Ten-Tec rebuttal?
Perhaps the letter could have been in another column or tagged onto the end
of a future Product Review section. What is Ten Tec going to rebut?
Everything in the letter was truthful unless you don't think Ten Tec is a
"top-notch company." Maybe Ten Tec should rebut that part.
>I suggest that software authors or hardware developers or others who wish
>to
>take a swipe at someone elses product
You mean like this?-- "I hope to own [an Orion] before too long." Yep,
that's a real swipe. I wonder what Frank Brickle, the author of the letter,
says when he likes a product. I am outraged that he didn't say he wants to
use his Orion for a pillow when he goes to sleep at night.
>be compelled to buy "advertising"
>space to do so. I hope we don't see any more of this kind of thing
>permitted, from ANY vendor or developer of ANY product.
Frank Brickle took issue with something in the Orion product review
pertaining to the way in which the Orion and the Flex Radios were developed.
He pointed out that the Ten Tec firmware is not open source, which is
true. Is there a problem with amplifying something that is the truth?
Over the years I've noticed that all editorial responses that are some
variation on, "how dare you publish that" or, "shouldn't have been
permitted" have no real basis for objection--the complainant just didn't
like what he read and didn't want to see it. If Ten Tec wants to complain,
they could try saying that Frank Brickle is a serious threat to national
security. That tactic has been working fairly well against the truth in
politics for the past six or seven years.
73,
rob / k5uj
_________________________________________________________________
http://imagine-windowslive.com/hotmail/?locale=en-us&ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migratio
n_HM_mini_2G_0507
_______________________________________________
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
|