Thanks for taking the time for your detailed response John. I do have a couple
of questions / comments below:
> I expect several will chime in to defend WL in a Networked environment.
That's understandable, and expected. However, if I'm going to set up a network
of say, 8 to 12 networked computers at a serious DXpedition multi-op, I have to
anticipate any and all problems in advance, and be prepared to handle them 24x7
during the contest. This explanation as background for my hesitancy.
> As far as restarting all the "stuff", this just takes practice. I suppose
> making a list of what to do would be good if you have guestops that aren't
> familiar with what to do.
I would agree, if the task was a less demanding environment, but I am certain
that a chorus of "Why aren't we using old, reliable CT instead of this flashy
windows thing" would resound from the multi-multi shack in the middle of
Antigua, perhaps with steel drum accompaniment.
;-)
>But once you get used to it, you should be able to restart WL, DX Telnet, and
>get the networking going again in less than a minute or 2.
At literally from 500 to 1000 or more qsos per hour, this delay can be a major
problem.
Also, why do you need to use DX Telnet in addition to the built-in telnet
access capability? I think the built-in TCP/IP cluster access works perfectly,
and I love, love, love, the way the bandmap looks and works. Smooth, smooth,
smooth.
The user interface is excellent. However, I would like to see the bandmap
locked to the right side of the logging screen rather than a seperate window.
> I'm not sure WL needs to improve the way this is handled. It's very good at
> recovering QSOs and updating the logs etc.
These features are some of those attracting me to consider making the change.
> Gobble! Gobble!
Agreed! Happy Thanksgiving to our U.S. friends.
|