Of course, I
> suppose I was spoiled. When I first started using CT, I carried around
> a piece of paper with half a dozen keys listed, and their usage ("F1",
> "+", etc.) After a while, I didn't need it. Even using TR with just
> the serial port connected for keying (and nothing else), I found that
> the key I was using most often was Alt-H. Unfortunately, this was not
> always helpful.
Well I am not a programmer, just a user. When I have started using TR few
years ago the key I was using most often was ENTER. TR does all the thinking
for you then. That is very handy in the contest when you tired. And I do not
mind preparing cfg file and test it prior to the contest. What I really
value is the flexibility that TR gives. There is always a choice and you can
do the same thing in more than one way. But if you want to use that
flexibility to a full extend you shall be prepared to ran into the
complexity of the program. Having said that I know a boy here 14 years old
who came to our club station and worked in the contest using TR with not a
single question asked. He just kept pressing ENTER and typing in calls and
exchange numbers. The two mode concept (RUN and S&P) really takes time to
get used to (especially if you are CT user) but then it is greatly
simplified by automatic switching to S&P mode when you change the freq.
(faster then 1khz per second and configurable) or back to RUN mode when
pressing ENTER and the call window is empty.
> TR can do a lot of things. A very large number of things! Most of them
> are things I don't want to do, and we didn't want to do them during
> Field Day.
Then just keep pressing ENTER and prepare your cfg file in such a way that
you do not notice that TR can do a lot more then you need.
>
> I wanted to put a space before a CW message. It took half an hour to
> find that one out from the documentation (it's underline, not hyphen,
> apparently).
I wonder what was the reason for putting a space in front of CW message?
We wanted to do a floppy disk backup. Only five minutes
> for that (v. good!), although the message telling us that the log had
> been backed to floppy up was completely wrong (it's obvious to any
> programmer that the floppy is "A:"). I guess I'm too old to memorize
> the whole manual now, so it would be nice to have an on-line searchable
> help document.
>
> However, almost everything about the allocation of keys to program
> functions in TR is difficult to learn and confusing.
I do not mind constructive criticism but can you be more specific?
> things, and it was hard. I have no problem learning how to do difficult
> things, but when there is a better way, we should use it. I have no
> sympathy with the attitude that says, " I managed to learn this, and it
> took a lot of effort, so you should go through the same effort that I
> did."
Actually what was really difficult was running the pile up and dupe checking
at a rate of 150-200 on CW in pre -TR era. Leaning what TRlog can do was
pleasure and educational. I still discover some tricks built into TR logic
even after several years of extensive use and that is exactly what I like
about the program.
>
> Because TR can do almost everything, there are going to be keys which
> make it carry out all these myriad functions. Letters and number are
> already in use, but it makes sense to represent all the other functions
> with single characters (or, at least, Ctrl and Alt characters). Of
> course, we won't remember the 60 or so possibilities in the middle of
> the night, so there are two choices: either have a comprehensive HELP
> system that will remind you; or, (as some programs do) have an
> alternative which accepts commands in the callsign field, where
> English-like words do the same thing (e.g. SOUND, FASTDUMP, etc.) Given
> this is the method of choice in TR, shouldn't Alt-H tell you anything
> you want to know?
No, that is a contest program. There is no time to study in the contest. Do
all your study and training before the contest and the manual will not slow
you down much.
I realize that TR is very sparing of memory (good),
> but if you're desperate, you'll surely let TR scan slowly through a disk
> file for you to find out how to do something?
>
> Perhaps the main bone of contention I have is that TR is "NOT modeless."
> This is computer-speak for "TR does different things when the same key
> is depressed, depending on the circumstances." Or, to put it another
> way, "Unless you're paying REALLY close attention, TR will do something
> you don't expect each time you press the same key." Perhaps TR users
> are paying close attention at all times (sorry, I don't fall into this
> category). If you're trying to find a place to call CQ, or tuning a
> dead band for a multiplier, your mind will be otherwise engaged. My
> instinct is that you will then try to get your contest logging program
> to do your will, almost certainly without benefit of the thought
> process. If the F1 key is somehow connected in your mind with "CQ" and
> the F4 key with "send my callsign" you have a chance of doing the right
> thing. If you have to decide "switch to S&P" or "switch to Run mode"
> then press Enter, you've used too many valuable neurons. I suppose I'm
> in a minority here.
It is even simpler with TR - just press ENTER. TR knows when call CQ and
when send your call if you configure it properly prior to the contest and
tested the configuration.
> I lost track in FD of the number of times I pressed ESC to stop CW
> sending, but found I had pressed it one time too many. Oh -- seem to
> have deleted a QSO, oops, now I've switched mode (I now know this can
> be turned off). Then Space appears to do several different things,
> which do not seem to be switchable off. I suppose I should have
> expected TAB to do something weird. Of course, Enter does almost
> everything (but hardly ever the thing I wanted).
Well you either work in the contest or study the program. You should expect
things like you have described when you are trying to combine both. Did you
ever try to fly jet plain in a combat without any training? Why expect
better result with the software you are not familiar with.
> What am I saying? Maybe it's this: the interface devised by K1EA is
> not great, but it's not THAT bad. Progress would be made by taking it
> and improving it. K8CC did not do a very good job of this, but tried.
> CT has an overwhelming advantage: you can use it after a few minutes
> learning, CW or phone. It's impossible to say the same about TR, as our
> club found out at the weekend.
Sorry about your club. The poll on SM3CER site shows that over 50% of
contesters use TR and the number is growing.
> Several things:
> (1) It didn't crash or freeze. This is a MAJOR advantage, and makes me
> want to continue studying TR in the hope of mastering the way it works.
> (2) It does everything. No question about it. When I feel strong
> enough to join a multi-multi team again, I KNOW the best choice will be
> TR. For a single-operator, single-radio station, it's doubtful.
Try single op 2 radio. No it does not do everything but it does a lot more
then others.
There is a pretty long wish list exists (check on the home page).
> (3) It sends good CW. I can change speed instantly. Great!
> (4) The support is unparalleled. Bugs seem to be fixed instantly. And
> the author/bug-fixer is a contester. Excellent!
>
> Nonetheless, the bottom line is that I'm somewhat disappointed with TR.
> For no very good reason, it takes simple functions and makes them
> complicated. Additional functionality (beyond what you can learn in ten
> minutes) requires a major investment in reading and experimenting, and
> quite a bit of knowledge of MSDOS (surely a rare commodity these days).
> I've heard it said that "anything worthwhile takes a bit of effort."
> True -- but I want my effort to go into improving my rig and putting up
> new antennas.
Actually IMHO investing into operating skill (including mastering the
software) is the best value for money. All the rest follows.
> I hope you'll accept my comments in the spirit in which they're
> intended -- that is, the experience of a newbie, who REALLY wanted to
> find that TR was wonderful. I'm still in two minds as to which program
> to use for the IOTA contest, so please try to convince me ..........
> 73,
>
> Ed, N0ED / G3SQX
73,
Igor, UA9CDC
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/FAQ/trlog
Submissions: trlog@contesting.com
Administrative requests: trlog-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-trlog@contesting.com
Feature Wishlist: http://web.jzap.com/n6tr/trwish.html
|