[TenTec] Orion and O II Firmware Update?

[Rick Denney]

waltk8cv4612amos at att.net writes...

> IF you watch what is being upgraded or put into the software it is fringe
> stuff ! The basic cw and ssb works fine as is !

Once again I find it instructive to clarify the issues from the
perspective of professional software development.

Clearly, the OII and the K3 were designed to fulfill a different set
of requirements. When people argue about features without clarifying
those requirements, understanding will not come easily.

There are issues of software maintenance, and two different models of
maintenance. From my own experience designing traffic management
systems (i.e., traffic signals, etc.), I know that much custom
software will have a series of bugs that will be resolved through
testing and use. The more complicated the system, the more inevitable
are those bugs.

The question is, how do you manage the resolution of bugs, the
addition of features, and the corrections to designs that don't
fulfill the intended requirements? In our world, we use strict
configuration management. When a change is contemplated, it is
reviewed by a change control board and analyzed for potential side
effects in great detail. When revisions fly around in a hurry, fixing
one thing often results in breaking something else. Everyone who does
software for a living has had to make the transition from hobbyist
coding, where you fix bugs as they appear including the ones you
accidentally caused with another fix, to commercial coding, where the
product has to demonstrably fulfill requirements in rigorous testing.

Judging from what I read from Orion owners, Ten Tec has been going
through this transition.

Elecraft follows a different model--and the changes fly. As long as
the software coding team maintains strict change control, they will
probably minimize those side effects. But at some point, they will
have to declare that the software fulfills all their intended
requirements and has all the features that they intend to provide, and
then reduce their effort to fixing bugs only. That will assuredly
happen when they want to develop a new model, as they will surely have
to do when Sherwood Labs finds another radio on the market with 1.2 dB
better dynamic range, etc. This may happen early if one key person has
a health problem, or gets divorced and takes an industry job, or
decides to retire, or goes under a bus. Then, the change control will
have to shift to a new model. Ten Tec has already made that shift to
corporate software management, it would seem, (as have most of the
other major manufacturers). They apparently feel that releasing
software without rigorous testing violates the lessons of the past. I
don't really know--it's just how it seems to me from my distant view.
Maybe they haven't made that shift fully, and are still feeling their
way through it, trying to understand and develop their new rules as
they go.

Neither approach is right or wrong. They are just designed around
different requirements. If people think about their requirements
carefully, there is no need for debate. For example, some people don't
want to upgrade software routinely. They just want the radio to
work--playing with software isn't part of their hobby. For other
people, playing with the software is part of their hobby and fun in
its own right. I don't think one could argue that in nearly any
realistic home operating environment, either choice presents any
serious limitations. I would prefer an Orion for the shack, probably,
because I like the user interface approach. I would probably prefer
the K3 for a radio that I would use in the field, such as for Field
Day, because it's smaller and simpler. And so on.

Several of the local operators in my club have both, and use both.
Both are still in the dreaming stage for me, but I don't think I'd
turn either one down if someone gave it to me!

Rick, KR9D