I'm still no wiser :)
What was his reason for omitting mention of TT?
Steve G3TXQ
On 16/11/2011 21:59, Richards wrote:
> HERE IS THE REPLY I RECEIVED FROM AUTHOR DOUG GRANT CONFIRMING MY
> OBSERVATION ON WHY TT WAS NOT MENTIONED...
>
> NOW FELLERS... Don't we have enough problems promoting TT gear without
> imposing our own limitations based on speculation or innuendo ...?
>
> HAPPY DAYS --- LOVING MY TT STATION GEAR !!
>
> I HOPE YOU AND I ARE A PART OF HAM RADIO'S FUTURE.
>
> ============================= James - K8JHR ======================
>
>
> Hello, James -
>
> Your assumption is correct...my point in that section of the article
> was simply to point out that we have some "newcomer" manufacturers in
> the U.S. I did not have time or space to turn the article into a
> buyer's guide, exhaustively listing all manufacturers, and that was
> not the point of the article.
>
> The article was written mostly for engineers who may have been hams
> long ago, lost touch with the hobby and might want to get back in.
> Such individuals would have never heard of the newcomers.
>
> There was absolutely no intent to slight TenTec in any way. They have
> been a solid manufacturer for a long time and I have a lot of respect
> for their products. The Orion brought high-performance receiver
> technology back to the forefront of transceiver design, and the new
> Eagle seems to hold its own against the K3 and TS590 in price, size,
> and receiver performance (even making the Rob Sherwood Top 10!).
>
> My apologies to anyone who might have interpreted the article as being
> negative in any way towards TenTec or their role in the future of ham
> radio.
>
> I hope TenTec is around for a good long time, and continues to develop
> successful products that hams will want to buy in the future.
>
> You have my permission to forward this response (in its entirety,
> along with your original email to me) to the TT list.
>
> 73,
>
> Doug Grant K1DG
>
> ===================================================================
>
>
>
> On 11/16/2011 2:01 PM, Dalton McCrary wrote:
>> That is a very good question. I saw that yesterday and wondered the same
>> thing.
>>
>> 73,
>> Dalton - W4WUQ
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Steve Hunt<steve@karinya.net>
>> To: Discussion of Ten-Tec Equipment<tentec@contesting.com>
>> Sent: Wed, November 16, 2011 12:41:21 PM
>> Subject: [TenTec] Why no mention of TT?
>>
>> Subject says it all!
>>
>> http://www.edn.com/article/519742-Ham_radio_in_the_21st_century.php
>>
>> Steve G3TXQ
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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
|