Absolutely George... not to mention: does the Orion contain full-time
100% dual receive? (I honestly never got past the display thing-and, not
having the $$$ anyway-haven't pursued it.) At THOSE prices, I'd spend my
money on the Yaesu FT-1000 which DOES. If 100% of the operation of
modern radios REQUIRES the use of the display, how could they scrimp on
it? It totally mystifies me-which is the source of all my irritation...
I do SO truly WANT Ten-Tec to succeed... and to see as huge a mistake as
I perceive this to be... it just really pisses me off.
73 Ed Tanton N4XY <n4xy@earthlink.net>
Ed Tanton N4XY
189 Pioneer Trail
Marietta, GA 30068-3466
website: http://www.n4xy.com
All emails <IN> & <OUT> checked by
Norton AntiVirus with AutoProtect
LM: ARRL QCWA AMSAT & INDEXA;
SEDXC NCDXA GACW QRP-ARCI
OK-QRP QRP-L #758 K2 (FT) #00057
from George, W5YR...
///snip
As I posted once before, you spend 99% of your time before a radio
looking at the front panel. If it offends you in any way, it will become
a continuing source of disappointment, no matter how well the radio
might play. One poster said that appearance didn't matter since he was
going to computer-control the Orion and never even look at the panel.
Well, I spent about 1-1/2 years driving a Kachina with a computer
display for a panel, and when I got the Icom 756PRO and got back to a
real radio with real controls and a really well-done LCD display, I felt
like I had come home again. I still have the Kachina and the IC-765 I
had before that and still use them both frequently. But, I enjoy using
the PRO much more than I ever did either of the other two.
Cosmetics do matter - in the long run. I cannot find any reasonable
justification for not making a radio look as good as it plays. Even
though each of us has a different notion as to what looks "good" there
are enough different designs out there by now for the basic likes and
dislikes of the marketplace to have been determined.
Your Heathkit analogy is quite appropriate here. I had a full
wall-to-wall Heathkit KW station in the early 70's and I probably could
hear and work as many stations as anyone with my little TH6DXX and 50 ft
tower in the city, but I always felt inferior to the Collins boys
because of the cheap appearance of the green boxes.
I wish the Orion well, but I sure don't understand why the design is
retroactive to the mid-90's in a leading-edge product. Compare the
architecture of the RX340 to that of the Orion and then ponder what it
is that those added narrow roofing filters are really doing that makes
it superior to the 340 - a receiver-only that already sells for $700
more than the Orion is priced . . . differentiation in the marketplace?
Or a way to actually lower the price at the cost of more components,
etc.? Subtle transmitter considerations?
|