Marshall...
If you are asking what source of info I used to draw my conclusions that the
big boys have moved on...well I can't say there is one defacto standard
document I used to establish this viewpoint. However, go look at the
equipment setups listed when scores are posted. Hum...that might tend to
lead you to a new idea. Still try8ing to find your call on the top 10 list.
Can you point me to something on this?
I personally discredit most ARRL equipement reviews as crap at best. You
want to hang your hat on Fox-in the - henhouse testing than be my guest.
Let's not deviate from the original purpose of my breaking wind here. I
think it was something to do with TenTec, I either love my radio and your a
whiner, Or...you are a whiner because TenTec left the customer in the cold.
Either why...let's get back on subject as this thread has lost its
entertainment value.
On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 2:20 PM, Marshall Stewart <marsh@ka5m.net> wrote:
> Douglas,
>
> You made a statement that "If it (the ORION II) was such a great and
> finished product then why did most if not all of the Ham Radio's Top
> contest-DX operators bail on TenTec?". I was just curious to know what
> source of information you based your statement on. Also, I was curious to
> know if your source also included information on what transceivers "top
> contest-DX operators" were bailing to. I find it telling that you did not
> respond to either question.
>
> The article in NCJ did not come out of a fiery bush onto a tablet of stone,
> but the author did cite ARRL Lab test data. A reasonable person might
> consider that more than just "opinion".
>
> Marsh
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tentec-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:tentec-bounces@contesting.com]
> On Behalf Of Douglas Shock
> Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 12:34 PM
> To: tentec@contesting.com
> Subject: [TenTec] Fwd: Final Firmware O2
>
> Well, I think it is the authors responsibility to not show BIAS so I take
> his review not as fact but as his opinion. If you choose to use this
> authors
> "opinion" as fact then more power to you. Secondly, do you place yourself
> in the ranks of ON4UN and company?
>
> Listen, I am just stating what I see as fact in my small meaningless little
> world. I "Personally" disagree with TenTecs product management. I am not
> going to debate my own opinion with you or anybody else as this reflector
> wore me down years ago.
>
> So take your jab, have the last word...whatever it takes to ensure "you"
> are
> happy.
>
>
> On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 11:10 AM, Marshall Stewart <marsh@ka5m.net> wrote:
>
> > Douglas,
> >
> > What is your source of information for your following statement?
> >
> > "If it was such a great and finished product then why did most if not all
> > of
> > the Ham Radio's Top contest-DX operators bail on TenTec?"
> >
> > What did they bail to?
> >
> > The National Contest Journal July/August 2009 Volume 37 Number 4 contains
> > an
> > extensive article on "Choosing an HF Radio for Serious Contesting and
> > DXing". Of the four (4) transceivers the author picks, the Ten-Tec ORION
> > II
> > is one of them.
> >
> > I'm not convinced that I've ever missed a DX or contest QSO that I could
> > have worked if I had been using something better than my ORION II.
> >
> > 73,
> > Marsh, KA5M
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: tentec-bounces@contesting.com [mailto:
> tentec-bounces@contesting.com]
> > On Behalf Of Douglas Shock
> > Sent: Wednesday, November 11, 2009 10:02 AM
> > To: Scott Harwood; Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment
> > Subject: Re: [TenTec] Final Firmware O2
> >
> > Whiners? Do you really feel that was required Scott? So your level of
> > expectation on a delivered product is different than others. I personally
> > find no fault in OI-OII owners holding TenTec's feet to the fire on the
> > marketing campaign they used for both radios. that hardly makes me a
> > whiner.
> > If it was such a great and finished product then why did most if not all
> of
> > the Ham Radio's Top contest-DX operators bail on TenTec? Maybe they knew
> > something you don't?
> >
> > Sure, in its base form it is a fair radio. But face the facts man...you
> > really believe they got the firmware right? And to release a beta with
> > enhancements that in themselves are broke but no fixes and then are never
> > heard from again? Sounds like the joke is on the operator if you support
> > this business practice.
> >
> > So drive on if you still drink the TenTec coolaid or just find it
> necessary
> > to defend your spent monies. But respect the rights of others homie...
> >
> > Hiding behind your keyboard with big mouth and no accountability is not a
> > good thing.
> >
> >
> >
> > On Wed, Nov 11, 2009 at 7:25 AM, Scott Harwood
> > <scotthsr@earthlink.net>wrote:
> >
> > > I couldn't have said it better, Dennis.
> > >
> > > Good job. I hope enough "whiners" read it.
> > >
> > > Palstar does have great stuff. I have two tuners. They could improve
> on
> > > answering emails, though.
> > >
> > > Scott K4VWK
> > >
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > >From: Dennis OConnor <ad4hk2004@yahoo.com>
> > > >Sent: Nov 11, 2009 8:37 AM
> > > >To: tentec@contesting.com
> > > >Subject: [TenTec] Final Firmware O2
> > > >
> > > >Hmmm, some of you need to cut back on the coffee...
> > > >
> > > >The O2 is a fine radio, well positioned in the upper reaches of ham
> > radio
> > > transceivers...
> > > >The biggest whine I see is that they are not producing enough firmware
> > > changes to make you happy..
> > > >It appears that some believe the K3 radio with its rapid parade of
> > > firmware revisions is somehow superior because it needs frequent
> revising
> > -
> > > this does not bespeak superior, to me; adaptable maybe, a secondary
> hobby
> > in
> > > it's own right, but not necessarily superior......
> > > >
> > > >Then I read the moaning about the O2 sweep; and they didn't do this,
> > they
> > > didn't do that, etc...
> > > >Last time I checked the ads the K3 does not have a sweep screen...
> But
> > > somehow, not having a sweep screen makes it the superior radio, because
> > > Orion is not upgrading its sweep screen fast enough - the logic of that
> > > escapes me...
> > > >If you want a radio with a fancy sweep screen get a Pro III...
> > > >If you want an even fancier sweep screen get an LP PAN for your Orion
> /
> > > K3...
> > > >
> > > >If you want an even fancier radio get one of the $11K to $13K models
> > from
> > > the land of the rising sun - but don't expect the factory to answer the
> > > phone and put the technician that built and aligned your radio on the
> > phone
> > > to talk you through a problem - which both Orion and Elecraft do
> > > routinely...
> > > >
> > > >I happen to have the O2... I have looked hard at the K3 with the more
> > > capable sub receiver - as recently as 2 weeks ago... But, the less
> > > desirable ergonomics of the radio outweigh the receiver advantage and I
> > > opted to stay with the Orion for the third year... The O2 has the best
> > > combination of receiver and ergonomics I have found in 45 years of ham
> > > radio...
> > > >
> > > >Lastly, I am thrilled to have Ten Tec and Elecraft slugging it out in
> > the
> > > ham radio arena... A vast improvement over the import radios that have
> > > dominated the ham business for some time..
> > > >And while I am mentioning US companies, let me point out that PALSTAR
> > > acquired the Commander amplifiers and has put considerable time,
> > innovation,
> > > and money, into improving those amps until they appear to me, to be the
> > best
> > > amps in the business... They now have a complete line of tuners,
> meters
> > and
> > > high quality amps... You could do a lot worse than spend your ham
> > dollars
> > > with them - and drive that amp with a new O2 or K3...
> > > >
> > > >denny / k8do
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >_______________________________________________
> > > >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
> >
> >
> _______________________________________________
> 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
|