To each his own, but for me the problems Mark outlines are not even close to
sufficient to make me return the radio. I knew going in that the Orion is a
cutting-edge product, but any significant advantage I can get in contesting
is more than worth the occasional inconvenience. In the all-important RX
area, the Orion is unmatched. Many contesters spend tens of thousands on
towers and antennas to be able to work one more layer of weak stations
underneath the noise. The Orion's ability to dig these stations out in the
presence of strong signals is a bargain. Even a 4-stack can't do that!
I am sometimes frustrated by minor bugs or ease-of-use features that still
need to be implemented. But having run software companies for nearly 30
years, I know these things take time. Just like the early days of logging
programs, I'm willing to work with the developers and wait for
gratification. As long as Ten Tec remains committed to improving the Orion
firmware, I'm solidly in their camp.
73, Dick WC1M
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Mark Erbaugh [mailto:mark@microenh.com]
> Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 2:26 PM
> To: tentec@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [TenTec] Orion issues
>
>
> Dave,
>
> I returned my Orion during the 30 day evaluation period.
>
> I will say first that I felt the receiver and transmitter
> performance were truly top notch.
>
> That said, why did I return the Orion?
>
> For me it was the lack of polish to the product. In my
> opinion, the product that was being sold (in August, at
> least), was, at best, very early beta test quality. I develop
> (and test) software for a living so I'm probably more picky
> than others might be. In just the first few hours playing
> with the radio, and without even trying, I found several
> areas where the radio did not perform as documented. One of
> them I mentioned this morning: by going into Binaural Rx mode
> and then changing the audio routing, it was possible to get
> into a mode where there was no audio from the radio,
> requiring you to go back into Bin Rx and undo what you had done.
>
> There were other places where the user interface just didn't
> seem as polished as one would expect. For example, there were
> a couple of places where a display element would pop up over
> the screen, but when it went away, it didn't completely erase itself.
>
> There was at least one area where I feel that the hardware
> design was short changed. One of the widely touted features
> is that you can select which audio (main or sub) goes to
> which output (speaker, headphone left, headphone right).
> However, there is no way to select which audio output goes to
> the aux jack on the back of the radio (for digital
> connection) and the audio that goes to that connection is not
> related directly any of the other output routing choices. In
> fact, with some audio routings, it is possible that no audio
> is routed to the aux jack. I discussed this with Gary B. at
> TenTec and he said that there was no hardware to control the
> audio routing to the aux jack. There are two audio output
> pins on the AUX jack. Apparently, each one is directly
> connected to one of the two DACs in the Orion.
>
> I also found that the user interface was cumbersome in
> places. There are some functions that one uses frequently
> that required going to the menu to change.
>
> For a standard of comparison, I use the Icom 756 (and it's
> progeny). After a very short learning curve, the interface
> becomes second nature. Things just seem to be set up to be
> used in real life operating. Granted, I only had the Orion a
> few weeks, but that wasn't happening with its interface. I
> know some people might say that I didn't give the radio a
> chance and that it is so different that it takes a long time
> to get used to, but I feel that I pretty much understood how
> things worked (or didn't work) for me.
>
> There were also a couple of real big negatives for me:
>
> 1) The spectrum scanning display was very poorly done. On
> the 756, when you narrowed the scan width, the resolution (
> in terms of frequency point per horizontal division ) got
> finer. On the Orion, the resolution stayed the same, the
> vertical lines of signal strength became wider and wider
> bars. I also was disappointed that the spectrum scope only
> works with the main receiver and thus can't be used for
> general coverage reception (I do some SWL in addition to being a ham).
>
> 2) The voice recorder (DVR) is a joke. There are two
> 'permanant' memories that are remembered when the radio is
> powered off. These can only record a message of about 4.5
> seconds (as opposed to 15 for the 756 Pro). Also, to 'save'
> these memories, after you record them, takes around 25
> seconds. Finally, there is no way to adjust the playback
> level other than to re-record.
>
> Granted, these are trivial features in the scope of the
> transceiver, but I feel that if you're going to do something
> in a product, you must do it well. I probably would have had
> better feelings about the Orion if these two features hadn't
> been included at all, as opposed to having them done poorly.
>
> I think TenTec is working out some of the issues and I
> appreciate the fact that to get the latest features, I would
> just have to download an update. With the 756 I would have to
> buy a new radio (Pro, then Pro II).
>
> I will also mention an issue about the firmware updates.
> Again, I realize the complexity of a major software project
> (which basically is what the Orion has become for TT), but
> there were an update during the period that I had the radio.
> On that update, certain bugs were fixed and new features were
> added, but some features that had worked were now broken.
> This is likely in any software project, but I found some of
> these in just a matter of minutes working with the Orion
> after the udpate. I can't believe that this would have passed
> any kind of QC testing and I have to asume the the updates
> were being released without such testing. You can see
> comments on the reflector today where folks have stayed at an
> older revision because certain things that mattered to them
> were worse after the update.
>
> The bottom line for me was that I didn't feel like I wanted
> to pay $3.5K (I got the internal tuner) to be a beta tester.
> In a year or so, when the bugs are worked out, I may wind up
> buying another one. As I said, I really liked both the
> receiver and transmitter.
>
> Mark
>
>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Dave Sublette" <k4to@arrl.net>
> To: "Ten Tec Reflector" <tentec@contesting.com>
> Sent: Friday, January 09, 2004 10:36 AM
> Subject: [TenTec] Orion issues
>
>
> > Good morning all,
> >
> > I have been subscribed to this reflector for less than a week. I
> > signed up because I am the owner of an OMNI VI+ and I am
> contemplating
> > the purchase of an Orion. Just this morning I noticed two people
> > mention in passing that they had once owned an Orion but no
> longer had
> > one.
> >
> > Without trying to stir up controversy, I am curious to know
> the reason
> > that you chose to sell your Orion. I have looked at one at
> the Ten Tec
> > factory and have read the specs. I am aware that there have
> been mods
> > made to the operating system based on customer suggestions and bugs
> > that have been discovered. To further my education, I'd
> like to know
> > why someone would want to get rid of their Orion. I don't
> want to know
> > any personal or financial problem details. If it was for either of
> > those reasons, just say so and I will understand.
> >
> > If I continue to have an interest in the Orion, you will be
> seeing a
> > posting for my OMNI VI+ for sale in less than six months.
> >
> > Thanks and 73,
> >
> > Dave, K4TO
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > TenTec mailing list
> > TenTec@contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
> >
>
>
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|