Archive
 
 
  Topic: Couple of ideas (3 replies)
#1     Thu Dec 28, 2006 11:14 am
WB2IVU
Surprise AZ
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2
Subject: Couple of ideas

How about adding these bands 6/2/440 to the "transceiver"?

Also how about a bandwith saver (such as the vonage phone system has) disguised as a selectable filter?
__________________
#2     Fri Dec 29, 2006 5:50 pm
W0SDG
Apple Valley MN
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 101
Subject:

I have no idea what Doug's plans are for additional bands, but I fail to see any reason to add any more then what is already on the CQ100? There is sooooooo much available unused space now. It's all the same anyway, just labeled as bands with no difference in any of them.. Let's fill up what we have before any more are added. I guess if someone could point out the advantage, I am open to changing my opinion but I haven't seen anything so far that would..

Steve - W0SDG
__________________
#3     Mon Jan 08, 2007 10:22 pm
WB2IVU
Surprise AZ
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Posts: 2
Subject: Ideas

Steve, lets assume as you say "its all the same", then why did Dough add the 80 - 10 meter "bands" in the first place? Maybe it made him feel better?

How come you did not adress my question about a bandwith saver as some Voip telephone systems have? It could be disguised as a selectable filter.
__________________
#4     Tue Jan 09, 2007 10:14 am
W0SDG
Apple Valley MN
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 101
Subject: Re: Ideas


WB2IVU wrote:
Steve, lets assume as you say "its all the same", then why did Dough add the 80 - 10 meter "bands" in the first place? Maybe it made him feel better?

How come you did not adress my question about a bandwith saver as some Voip telephone systems have? It could be disguised as a selectable filter.



To address your first question, why do you feel he needs to add any more bands then already is allocated? I feel it would be better to add "features" to the rig rather then more bands because there are more then enough channels as it is. 80 - 10 meters is the basic structure of HF rigs. What do you intend to accomplish with additional band segments? As I originally said, I fail to see the need, so please explain your idea behind your suggestion and maybe clear up some points I am missing.

As far as your second question, that would be up to Doug to answer this part of your suggestion. This is a technical question requiring a technical answer. Sounds like an idea that might be an advantage, if needed, but I have nothing to offer on this subject, not knowing any of the technical reasons, etc.

My bottom line thinking here is that Doug has offered the Ham community an internet solution to communicate, that is simple to accomplish, using current technology. Bells and whistles are not needed, nor are any more talk channels beneficial, at least for some time. Keeping it simple and and less of a programming headache, I think, is also a goal of Dougs. Features like logging, channel memories, tuning features, etc., are probably what is needed more then more channels/bands. If your filtering idea is something that would improve the performance, then by all means, I hope it is considered.

Steve - W0SDG
__________________




Copyright ©2013 Cormac Technologies Inc.