[WriteLog] What should change in WriteLog w.r.t. this review?

[Larry L Lindblom]

1. My first logging program was NA which I stuck with until Wlog was in
Version 9.27(?).  I found the transition to Wlog to be almost painless.  
It appears to me the author of the review cut his eye teeth on TR and
wants something almost identical to how it works.  I have no objection to
what he prefers as long as I can still have it my way.  BTW, the N0NI
station used TR for a year or two and I developed a strong dislike of TR
because invariably I'd do something and wind up in the wrong "mode." 
Evidently the programs attempts to read my mind failed miserably.

2. Band map zooming is not a big issue with me.  Again if this can be
done in such a way that I can have it my way, no objection.

3. As to the windows I can dock or float them, so I don't know why he
deducted points for that.

4. Please no real time updates.  Let up update when I want.  Maybe this
could be done like some of the software programs that allow you to turn
on auto update if you want. But, still give you the option of doing
manual updates. 

5. I see no problem with the way country and multiplier files are
updated.

This reminds me of some of what we are going through at work with a
database redesign.  The users have tons of data available but the
interface/display is not what some of them want.  Solution do it in a way
where the user can customize the DB interface to work the way they think
it should and display what they want.  Let all the end user have it their
way any maybe all will be happy and sing in perfect harmony;-)

73 W0ETC

On Thu, 5 Feb 2004 02:29:59 -0000 "W. Wright, W5XD" <w5xd at writelog.com>
writes:
> I am interested in what current WriteLog users think might be changed 
> in
> WriteLog with respect to the comparison in this review:
> 
> http://www.pvrc.org/Newsletters/feb04.pdf   (scroll down to page 8)
> 
> The specific points I wonder if I should pursue further are:
> 
> 1. The reviewer thinks that "modes" in the program are good. That 
> the
> program should change its response to certain keystrokes based on 
> whether it
> is in the S&P mode or the Run mode. It has been my opinion for a 
> very long
> time that modes cause more problems than they solve?
> 
> 2. zooming of the bandmap. how useful is this to you?
> 
> 3. The reviewer takes away points from WL because its windows can be 
> docked
> instead of floating on the desktop. Surely I should not remove this 
> feature
> from WL?
> 
> 4. The review takes away points from WL because we don't update the 
> software
> in real time during contest weekends and "updates come out 
> infrequently". I
> have been reasonably happy with our beta test/release process 
> (which
> routinely catches a number of bugs before they go out to thousands 
> of
> users), but that process pretty much guarantees that from a request 
> to a
> commercial release is a minimum of 4 to 6 weeks as that's how long 
> it takes
> to get through the beta test process. Would users really prefer that 
> the
> beta tests be publically available?
> 
> 5. The reviewer had 3 or 4 month old information regarding the way 
> we manage
> the country files and multiplier files, so his specific complaints 
> are
> inaccurate, but it still raises the question of how that should be 
> done. The
> WriteLog FULL distributions have copies of those files that were 
> current
> when the distribution was created, and the UPGRADE distributions do 
> NOT have
> the files at all. This means that you have to download the new 
> files, and
> you get notices on writelog at contesting.com when they change. I don't 
> think
> its a good idea to embed those files in the UPGRADE installs because 
> I think
> there should be exactly one way for a user to get the latest files 
> and some
> users don't upgrade right before the contest, and some users upgrade 
> their
> software, but not necessarily to the most recent version (and so 
> would get
> old files if the UPGRADE had them).
> 
> I invite email comments to any or all of the above, either direct or 
> on the
> reflector. I personally value thoughtful answers the most (and 
> prettymuch
> ignore flames and my-dog-is-better-than-your-dog comments) and I try 
> to
> thoughtfully consider recommendations. However, I don't promise any 
> action
> or even a response to any email (and I confess that I am guilty as 
> charged
> in the review of not answered 100% of all email queries I get--I 
> have no
> excuse.)
> 
> Thanks for your consideration,
> Wayne, W5XD
> 
> _______________________________________________
> WriteLog mailing list
> WriteLog at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/writelog
> WriteLog on the web:  http://www.writelog.com/
> 
>