[TenTec] Waiting for Transceiver Nirvana

[Keith Lodahl]

Those of us who are content to be somewhat behind the curve are the
benefactors of the rapid change in "state of the art."  I bought my Jupiter
from a ham who decided to get an Orion.  He gave me a good price on a good
rig.  I expect if I ever have an Orion it will be because I got a good price
from a ham about to step up to the Orion's replacement.  As for the expense
of the latest and greatest, there has always been a high price for the early
adoptors of any new technology.  For some the price will be prohibitive, and
for others it will seem inexpensive.  I tend to be in the former group.  I
feel I am fiscally conservative.  My kids tell me I am cheap.

Keith Lodahl
KB9NUM NNN0ACS NNN0GCE ONE
President, Rock River Radio Club
ARRL Official Emergency Station
ARRL Public Information Officer
ARRL Volunteer Examiner
kb9num at charter.net

> -----Original Message-----
> From: tentec-bounces at contesting.com
> [mailto:tentec-bounces at contesting.com]On Behalf Of John Rippey
> Sent: Friday, November 28, 2003 7:18 AM
> To: tentec at contesting.com
> Subject: [TenTec] Waiting for Transceiver Nirvana
>
>
> While waiting for zero hour of the CQ WW CW contest, these thoughts occur
> on the recent postings re software-driven base station rigs.
>
> 1.  They are (with the odd exception of the IC-746PRO) damnably
> expensive.
> If it's not the chips that make them so, then it is the humungous
> engineering effort needed to make them work well.
>
> 2.  If Moore's law still prevails, then any chip chosen for a
> software-driven radio will be replaced in 18 months by one that
> is half as
> costly and that has twice the computing power. Ergo, much more so
> than with
> the analog rigs we know and love, rapid obsolescence of the latest and
> greatest software-driven rig is a given.
>
> 3.  Because the ham market is downscale with regard to pricing, we do not
> see the performance in ham market software-driven transceivers that is
> available up-market. Compromises in ham gear necessarily are made: in
> selection of chips, and in their engineering, to meet the ham
> market price
> point (ICOM obviously will be testing the upper limits of the ham market
> with its IC-7800). There are all kinds of compromises in the ICOM
> PROs, and
> so also in the ORION, hence the discussions on this and other reflectors.
>
> 4. Therefore, while we may like to think we are seeing in the latest rigs
> the absolute latest and greatest--we aren't, and we won't. After
> all, we're
> radio amateurs.
>
> 5.  The bad news is that as advances in this genre gradually trickle down
> to hams, the resulting rigs will be expensive (by ham standards), their
> performance will be markedly better than their predecessors, and we'll
> repeatedly have to dig into our pocketbooks to pay for that
> performance if
> we just cannot live without the next new thing.
>
> In short, chasing after transceiver nirvana is going to be an expensive
> fling. I may opt out.
>
> 73,
> John, W3ULS
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
>