Jim,
I would suggest that you don't need 4 com ports any longer and should
consider using Ethernet instead for your CT network. Granted, it is a bit
more trouble to set up, but once it's working, you're done.
The Ethernet card uses one interrupt, so that leaves plenty for other
activities.
So, those computers with two ports are able to handle your rig interfacing
and also connecting a TNC or some other serial device.
To run Ethernet with CT's DOS version, you need K1TTT's NETTSR program which
you can download from his website.
If you can run Windows, you can use CTWin which has built-in network
capability. I understand several multi-ops have recently changed to using
CTWin very successfully.
73,
N5NJ
----- Original Message -----
From: "k4oj" <k4oj@tampabay.rr.com>
To: <jjreisert@alum.mit.edu>; <cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 2:19 PM
Subject: [CQ-Contest] MS DOS and Flea Market tips wanted
> AD1C mentions the CompUSA house brand mother board is set up for two
> Comm Ports with unique IRQs...that is nice but I want more....
>
> What I am wondering is - were there mass produced PC's which
> automatically came with 3 or 4 comm ports? To me those are what I wish
> every position had at my place - this is kind of a re-hash - but in the
> past we have talked about who sells cards to add the extra comm ports...
> did a manufacturer IBM/Dell/Gatway/Whoever produce four comm port
> machines with non conflicting IRQs on as contract for some industry?
>
> With the older machines about to become un-supported my Microsoft, IF
> there was an industry that had purchased computers in bulk that had 4
> comm ports on them I would love to meet one of their Sustems guys and
> slip him a greenback or two.... undoubtedly this stuff is going to be
> replaced (if it hasn't already) and not to have to sub contract out
> adding the extra comm ports to a two port machine would be just ducky -
> I am more than content with DOS based logging software - I have not been
> sold on Windows based stuff at all - as far as I can see the DOS based
> programs do all I could ever want and I have some scores to prove that!
>
> 1 - I need a comm port to interface with the network (even when I am
> single op I have two computers running for redundancy and my ease at
> SO2R - not to mention it makes an excellent back up - the one time
> recently I did not do this the logging computer crashed and I lost the
> first night of the ARRL Ten Meter contest due to it)
>
> 2 - I need a comm port to interface with the network (ptional - can go
> LOOP network and only need one for netowrking - but it seems the LINK
> option always boots right up versus the loop where it takes work to set
> up system parameters in the autoexec files wheras I have a box full of
> null modem adaptors!)
>
> 3 - I need a comm port to interface with the packet spot sucker - this
> can be on one computer in the network since once it gets into one
> machine that info is shared through the network
>
> 4 - I need a comm port to interface with the rig - this is as far as I
> am concerned MANDATORY - if you have not automated your station yet - DO
> IT! No more tranmistting into the wrong antenna and hosing the linear
> at ) Dark 30. I actually switch the antennas by driving the automated
> boxes directly from the transciever so I can enjoy the switching even
> when the computer is off)
>
> ... TO ME an ideal find would be a computer like a low end Pentium 100
> some odd megaherz with 4 comm ports ready to be used.... as I mentioned
> at some positions in a multi-multi we can get by with two minimum (rig
> and network) - but I like the idea of finding a half dozen of these soon
> to be extinct puppies looking for a contest home where they only have to
> compute for a few weekends each year!
>
> ANYONE KNOW OF AN INDUSTRY THAT USED SUCH A MACHINE (bunch of them) that
> I should look at as a possible source for "ideal" station ocmputers?
>
> 73,
>
> Jim, K4OJ
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>From KØHB" <K0HB@ARRL.ORG Wed Nov 27 00:38:36 2002
From: KØHB" <K0HB@ARRL.ORG (KØHB)
Subject: [CQ-Contest] CQWW - are signal reports optional?
References: <20021126225833.ONZS28019.pop015.verizon.net@[127.0.0.1]>
Message-ID: <00df01c295ad$61dc3ee0$df62fea9@bigguy>
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob Naumann - N5NJ" <n5nj@gte.net>
>
> Never mind that the CQ Log Sheets had space for other than a 599 report, we
never sent a different one anyway.
>
Speak for yourself, white man. Kemo Sabe been sending occasional 59(something
other than 9) for crappy signals, as required by the rules. Some of those
chirpy/drifty CO signals can cover three bands during a single exchange. :-)
With all kind wishes,
ô¿ô 73, de Hans, K0HB
--
RadioSport Minnesota http://www.W0AA.org
|