Archive
 
 
  Topic: CQ100 vs Echolink (4 replies)
#1     Thu Apr 10, 2008 9:07 pm
KI4ETJ
Atlanta GA
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 11
Subject: CQ100 vs Echolink

Hello All
Im wondering the views about ECHOLINK vs CQ100 ..
A little history here I got my call to try ECHOLINK and was not aware of CQ100 at that time... I preceeded to see all the neg comments about ECHOLINK on many Messages Boards.. I just recently found CQ100 which I love and All I hear on CQ 100 is praise. Which I agree with .. My question or que is I rarely see neg comments about CQ100 but still see a lot of neg comments about ECHOLINK. Basically they are the same ..VOIP.. I like both ECHOLINK and CQ100 they both are simular and both different. CQ 100 allows u to lurk and just listen where ECHOLINK publish u when connected..

Anyway? Im seeking thoughts as to why alot of CQ100 users accept and praise cq100(even a lot of EXTRAs) and dont support ECHOLINK..?

IM not trying to start a long discussion just want ur option on CQ 100 VS ECHOLINK..

73
KI4ETJ
Have a great Day..
:D
__________________
#2     Fri Apr 11, 2008 4:14 am
G4OBB
Oxford UK
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 39
Subject: cq100 v echolink

Both systems are good. E/link has some issues with ports having to be opened on routers etc, but I gather that from last Sept , with the new e/link download you can access from most wi fi hotspots....with e/link you can access repeaters ,which in a sense represents "real" radio ,but conversley , cq100 seems more real..it's all rather interesting. I do a fair bit of real hf radio ,but I very much enjoy these computer based programmes ,they are fun ,and it's certainly easier to convey information that on real HF ,with all the qsb ,qrm and all else..
I want to try using a vodafone usb modem ( aircard) but I am not sure if e/link will work with this. cq100 certainly does. I tried a friends "3" data modem and tho it worked on cq100 ,it wouldn't weork with e/link so if anyone else has got a usb aircard working on e/link here in the UK ,i'd like to hear from them.....73/s Des
__________________
#3     Sun Apr 20, 2008 6:07 pm
LU1DF
Buenos Aires
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 1
Subject: cq100 v echolink

I think that you forget what is the biggest advantage of Echolink vs CQ100, and it is that is a FREE software.
I know in the US some say that $32 is not too much, but when you think that in many countries of the world people make less than US$1/day then it is not possible to spend this kind of money in this hobby. For example my club dues in LU Land are US$3/yr can you imagine how many years of my Radio club I can pay with 1 yr of CQ100?? So guess why I had a Link in Echolink for 5 years now and I'm not in CQ100. Plus you can talk from the HT and you can't with CQ100. Probably there are more BIG diferences in favour of Echolink. :? I know of many Hams around the world that used the trial period and can't afford the $32. sorry guys I don't agree with charging money for the hobby.
73 & DX, LU1DF
__________________
#4     Sun Apr 20, 2008 9:55 pm
KB8PNE
Akron, Ohio
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Posts: 2
Subject:

Well I have played with echolink for a while now and there are advantages like the ability of connecting it to a remote station, but you cannot find a simpler to use interface than cq100. I like the idea of scanning the bands without the need to connect and reconnect to servers. I do travel at times and I have not found a hotel wifi yet that did not work with cq100 but many do not allow echolink to port through. I think the $32 a year is more than fair. Keep up the good work QSONET.
__________________
#5     Tue Sep 23, 2008 9:48 pm
KB0OXD
Denver, Colorado
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 19
Subject:

Hi everyone:

KB8PNE wrote:
I do travel at times and I have not found a hotel wifi yet that did not work with cq100 but many do not allow echolink to port through. I think the $32 a year is more than fair. Keep up the good work QSONET.

That said though, I do think that the ecomony of each country should e taken into consideration when setting the price (If there is to be one set at all in the future).

In other words, what may be considered "fair" here in the U.S. may be considered as ECONOMICALLY BARBARIC to Hams in Third World & other struggling countries. As such, I think until this issue is addressed, this problem will be CQ100's achillies heel and the only cure may be to not charge anything at all for it.

The same goes for its TV spinoff QSO TV as well.

Sad as it is, but them's just the way the world economy works folks. Simple as that.

Just my opinion...

Cheers & 73 :D
__________________




Copyright ©2013 Cormac Technologies Inc.