Now I have a question...why couldn't there be a real hardware control panel
for the Pegasus, connected only with a serial cable or maybe a modem. This
would be ideal for mobile and for the remote operation you reference.
The control panel could convert operator input to commands that the Pegasus
would understand. Could be used with or without a computer.
I'd think this would be the best mobile rig ever. Control panel could be
small and easy to mount, yet have full features of a big rig. And
installation could be easy with only power, a serial connection, and audio
being necessary.
Travis
-----Original Message-----
From: ac5aa@juno.com <ac5aa@juno.com>
To: tentec@contesting.com <tentec@contesting.com>
Cc: k2uxe@ibm.net <k2uxe@ibm.net>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Date: Saturday, July 17, 1999 11:32 AM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] Pegasus - the litmus test
>
>I'd say quite the contrary. I work in the computer industry and use
>computers all day long at work and at home. I test the latest stuff -
>things most users will never see or use, and I have somewhat of a sense
>of what GUI's can do and where they are limited. My opinion, and we all
>have one I suppose, is that for what computers do well, I will use them
>(i.e., logging, packetcluster, rig control, RTTY controller, PSK, QSL
>info, etc.) For what they don't yet do well, I will avoid them (virtual
>control of a rig). I consider virtual control as being an ergonomic
>compromise. It's fine if you want a new toy, or you need to use a rig
>that way. An example of this would be running a remote station because
>your subdivision won't allow antennas. However, that's a rich man's
>answer to the problem - not many of us can afford to sink the costs of
>renting another property for antennas and then running a fairly expensive
>remote station! For that application, it provides an alternative to
>stealth antennas and neighborhood RFI problems. But for me, for chasing
>DX or contesting, I prefer to have both hands on the rig at all times.
>Directly on the controls - instant response. One on the PBT or offset
>tuning, one on the RIT and RIT/XIT switch to position myself in the
>pileup. Grabbing for the mouse, finding the mouse cursor on the screen,
>clicking back and forth between controls would just add one more layer of
>gorp to have to contend with. After all, with the computer you are
>reduced by necessity to changing one and only one control at a time.
>Besides, I have my logger and packetcluster (DX4WIN) running almost full
>screen - where will the computer rig control go? Another monitor to buy
>and find a place for on the desk? (Yes, I know, the right solution to
>this is a software package that provides all function in one place.)
>
>I see this generation of rigs as an evolutionary stage - we will
>eventually get to the point where either they are as easy to use as the
>traditional rigs, or they will become an evolutionary dead end. Only the
>future will tell us that. In the meantime, I plan to use what fits my
>needs, and I'm sure others will do the same, whether it's the virtual
>front end, or glowing plastic & aluminum. That's my story and I'm
>sticking with it!
>
> 73, Duane AC5AA
>
>
>On Fri, 16 Jul 1999 20:39:03 -0700 "Tom Scott" <tscott@eni.net> writes:
>>
>>Well it seems pretty clear that Ten-Tec has succeeded in creating the
>>definitive litmus test for Ham radio traditionalists versus what we
>>might
>>call modernists, with precious few of us falling in between.
>>
>
>Duane A. Calvin, AC5AA
>Austin, Texas
>ac5aa@juno.com -or- ac5aa@earthlink.net
>Day: dacalvin@us.ibm.com
>
>--
>FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm
>Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
>Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
>Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
>Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
>
--
FAQ on WWW: http://www.contesting.com/tentecfaq.htm
Submissions: tentec@contesting.com
Administrative requests: tentec-REQUEST@contesting.com
Problems: owner-tentec@contesting.com
Search: http://www.contesting.com/km9p/search.htm
|