> then you'd better figure out how to use it on cells
> phones. I doubt we'd pull anyone from the gaming
> community...
Already done:
http://www.cinahazegh.com/2006/05/30/the-amazing-morse-code-keyboard/
73 de Bob - KØRC in MN
----- Original Message -----
From: "Julius Fazekas" <phriendly1@yahoo.com>
To: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>; <n6tj@sbcglobal.net>;
<cq-contest@contesting.com>
Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 2:19 PM
Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] SKIMMER = BUMMER
> To the best of my knowledge, even tho' CW readers have
> been around for years, few, serious or even
> semi-serious contesters use the technology.
>
> For that matter, how many folks in the general ham
> public use the technology with any frequency? Some
> learners? Some casual operators?
>
> Why not use on-line SDR transceivers for contesting?
> Heck it's just you and your computer/software... no
> need to build an arcane antenna system, buy the latest
> $10K rig, we'll just use the latest "technology".
>
> If you think using skimmer is going to attract new
> young contesters because it's the latest greatest,
> then you'd better figure out how to use it on cells
> phones. I doubt we'd pull anyone from the gaming
> community...
>
> 73,
> Julius
>
>
> --- "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com> wrote:
>
>>
>> Jim,
>>
>> > No matter how one chooses to parse the words, one
>> of the
>> > unique, intrinsic, and abject joys of amateur
>> radio, in
>> > general, and contesting in particular, is the
>> beauty of
>> > our ability to COPY signals and call signs.
>>
>> I'm sorry you feel that way but the "copy by ear"
>> train left
>> the station many years ago. Not only is CW decoding
>> integral
>> to Writelog, Amateur radio has not required that
>> skill as an
>> entry requirement for nearly ten years. To deny
>> those who
>> lack your particular skill set and dedication the
>> ability
>> to participate in a significant portion of contests
>> would
>> go a long way toward hastening the demise of
>> contesting -
>> at least CW contesting.
>>
>> Machine copy, whether it be Skimmer, the WriteLog
>> decoder
>> or one of the other stand alone decoders will be
>> used by
>> an every larger portion of CW contest entrants as
>> the "old
>> time" operators disappear. Do we lose something in
>> the
>> drift to machine copy? Yes. However that's not the
>> issue.
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> ... Joe, W4TV
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> > -----Original Message-----
>> > From: n6tj@sbcglobal.net
>> [mailto:n6tj@sbcglobal.net]
>> > Sent: Friday, April 25, 2008 12:01 PM
>> > To: Joe Subich, W4TV; 'Sandy Taylor';
>> cq-contest@contesting.com
>> > Subject: SKIMMER = BUMMER
>> >
>> >
>> > No matter how one chooses to parse the words, one
>> of the
>> > unique, intrinsic,
>> > and abject joys of amateur radio, in general, and
>> contesting
>> > in particular,
>> > is the beauty of our ability to COPY signals and
>> call signs.
>> >
>> > To settle for less, and to have someone /
>> something do it
>> > for you, is
>> > simply foolish and contributes little more to our
>> beloved
>> > pastime, other
>> > than to demonstrate that someone can build the
>> technology.
>> > Just because we
>> > can build a nuclear weapon, does that mean we
>> should use it?
>> > I hope not.
>> >
>> > For those poor souls who need crutches to (1) copy
>> morse code
>> > and (2) think
>> > they've either 'leveled the playing field' or
>> proved
>> > anything, please go
>> > spend some quality time learning CW skills, and
>> practice, practice,
>> > practice. You can do it, and we, and you, will be
>> so very
>> > glad that you
>> > did.
>> >
>> > Thank you very much
>> >
>> > 73
>> >
>> > Jim Neiger N6TJ
>> >
>> >
>> > ----- Original Message -----
>> > From: "Joe Subich, W4TV" <w4tv@subich.com>
>> > To: "'Sandy Taylor'" <ve4xt@mts.net>;
>> <cq-contest@contesting.com>
>> > Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 10:14 PM
>> > Subject: Re: [CQ-Contest] Rule Change Debate on
>> Skimmer
>> >
>> >
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >> C'mon Joe, it's completely ludicrous to say
>> Skimmer breaks no new
>> > >> ground. Since when has there been anything,
>> other than
>> > packet, that
>> > >> tells you who is on and where they are.
>> > >
>> > > The only thing Skimmer does is present the data
>> in a
>> > different format.
>> > > It's certainly not the first CW decoder -
>> they've been
>> > around for 15
>> > > maybe 20 years. It's certainly not the first
>> panadapter - they've
>> > > been around for 40? years. It's certainly not
>> the first broadband
>> > > receiver - they've been around for 80 years.
>> However, skimmer
>> > > combines those elements along with a little
>> thought and a lot of
>> > > programmer ingenuity to present the information
>> in a very usable
>> > > format.
>> > >
>> > > Skimmer doesn't do anything that the operator
>> can't do (the
>> > operator
>> > > can scan the band and copy every signal he
>> encounters) but skimmer
>> > > does it faster and more efficiently but with
>> less accuracy.
>> > Putting a
>> > > skimmer on the 2nd radio simply makes that radio
>> more
>> > efficient. It's
>> > > the CW equivalent to some of the multiple
>> channel PSK
>> > software - for
>> > > example the "broadband decode" feature of
>> WinWarbler that will even
>> > > fill a local bandmap during a PSK contest (what
>> few there are).
>> > >
>> > > Skimmer breaks no new ground ... of that there
>> is no doubt if you
>> > > bother to pay attention to technology. Slimmer
>> simply applies
>> > > existing technology in a new area. The
>> existence of WinWarbler's
>> > > "broadband decode" feature for nearly two years
>> has shown what is
>> > > possible. CW Skimmer has applied that to CW and
>> I don't
>> > think it will
>> > > be that soon before another clever programmer
>> does the same with
>> > > traditional RTTY. Phone will take a little
>> longer because analog
>> > > voice is just a bit more complicated to decode
>> than any of
>> > the digital
>> > > (including CW) signals but it will happen at the
>> amateur
>> > level - I'm
>> > > sure it is already happening on the
>> government/professional level.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > >> -----Original Message-----
>> > >> From: Sandy Taylor [mailto:ve4xt@mts.net]
>> > >> Sent: Thursday, April 24, 2008 11:10 PM
>> > >> To: 'Joe Subich, W4TV';
>> k-zero-hb@earthlink.net;
>> > >> cq-contest@contesting.com
>> > >> Subject: RE: [CQ-Contest] Rule Change Debate on
>> Skimmer
>> > >>
>> > >>
>> > >> C'mon Joe, it's completely ludicrous to say
>> Skimmer breaks no new
>> > >> ground. Since when has there been anything,
>> other than
>> > packet, that
>> > >> tells you who is on and where they are.
>> > >>
>> > >> All the other examples you cite still require
>> the operator to have
>> > >> done SOMETHING. Skimmer doesn't.
>> > >>
>> > >> I can only guess you're saying such
>> preposterous things to
>> > stir the
>> > >> pot a bit. I can't imagine you're being the
>> least
> === message truncated ===
>
>
> Julius Fazekas
> N2WN
>
> Tennessee Contest Group
> TnQP http://www.tnqp.org/
>
> Elecraft K2/100 #3311
> Elecraft K2/100 #4455
> Elecraft K3/100 #366
> _______________________________________________
> CQ-Contest mailing list
> CQ-Contest@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
>
_______________________________________________
CQ-Contest mailing list
CQ-Contest@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/cq-contest
|