>Billy ... think you should go back to TR ....
>You are having too many problems with WriteLog ...
>
> K1VV
Hello Bob, (didn't see any "smilies", so guess you are serious)
Sure it's an option but ... not a positive one to consider.
I don't think so ... re-read what I said about WL on RTTY and CW ... also
check with the several NEW WL users that I have been helping to get up
and running with WL. Sure TR, as well as NA, and WF1B are options
that I have here to use. But I am spending my time with WL for now.
One local here had given up several times, just trying to get WL and his rig
to work together ... should he go "back to TR also" ?
Another had to go to a different sound card, but he's up and running now
also FB and very pleased with WL.
I just heard back from another new user, for whatever reason WL gave a
JA QSO in his log a ? <nope it was not a Mult> so I fixed that and solved
the problem for now as to his ARRL 10m log.
Now another local says WL now won't let him save his ARRL 10m log
as a CABRILLO file ... I told him to save it as a ADIF and send it to
me and I'll take a look at it ... which I will do.
Many of you on here have helped me by answering my questions and
working with the specifics of my setup here, and as I have posted
before, I am grateful and thankful for your help.
Why are these issues occurring ? Should they not be addressed ?
Or Bob ... because they are having problems, should they return
back to another program ?
On the other hand ... if this is the "next TR, or TR on Windows", or "top
tier contest software" ... why not ask for the bar to be raised ?
Why should we not ask for or discuss the areas that a program could be
improved in ? Is that not the purpose of this email reflector ?
If this is as good as WL is going to get ... then W5XD or K5DJ simply
need to state so, there are certainly other alternatives to consider
certainly. We need to also consider these guys have other vocations than
just WL, and that's a factor to also consider as to time for improvements.
NOTE: ... No other program that I've looked at seems to have the
potential that WL does ... N1MM is working on something, and
several others, outside of the USA have similar programs.
So should we "sit and wait" ? Can not WL users drive this by sharing
ideas and desires ?
What is occurring is that several folks are responding privately to me with
concerns that "no one is listening" to the suggestions being made on here.
That's a "lose lose" for everyone involved.
If it gets to where a new user is afraid to make a posting on here for fear
of being told "go back to TR" or the unspoken message is you must be a
dummy to be having problems ... folks something has gone wrong ... very
wrong here.
Re-read my posts ... I still think the variable here is the sound card, as
to some will work better than others, despite the ratings.
I think the data given (excluding K9JY's site) directly from WL regarding
the use of sound cards is very lacking as to content and value. If you are
a Windows programmer, it might be sufficient, if not ... then it may be a
struggle. Look back in the archives as to the number of posts on the
topic of setting up the sound card for SSB.
Some one made a suggestion that we as a group, improve upon
the provided written material, I think that's a great idea. Any technical
writers on here to help drive that idea to reality ?
TR DOES have a 'learning curve' also ... but Tree is there with support
and the TR provided written material is updated on a regular basis.
There's options in TR that I have nary a clue to, or see any need for,
yet others swear by them. Can WL not offer similar flexibility ? Just
because YOU might be satisfied with the current options, what about
others ?
Certainly TR and N6TR have also set a very high bar or standard as
to how that software is supported. There's nothing wrong with that.
Scot's (K9JY) site is a tremendous resource, especially with the sound
card data he posted there today, but that does not overcome the lack
of information provided directly from WL. Why didn't WL include such
information as part of the package ?
The solution to solid CW keying with Windows is the W5XD box,
which adds other features. But some have asked for improvements
to that unit also ... and the response has been ?
My point remains that if the basic sound card can't provide the same
level or quality of <voice> keying as the W5XD box does for CW, then
provide something that does ... I don't see folks fussing about having
to buy the W5XD box for the very best in CW keying ...
Let's face it ... WL has the potential to be the next standard, as it
is already Windows based, covers multiple modes, and allows the
op to customize the screen to suit individual desires, and to use
that same setup, with the same commands for ALL modes. Not a
bad package indeed !
But it requires a learning curve of it's own. Different from TR's, but still
there. Add the problem of this being a Windows based application
and the curve may never be low. What's different today is the lack of
positive two-way feedback between the users and supporters with
needed continued improvements in documentation.
Did you catch the word positive ? I hope so, as that's what I am
pushing for and toward. I hope you are also.
73 Billy AA4NU
|