Windoze can do it... we use N1MM in the contest with 45 wpm direct keying, without problems on fast machines. Of course cwdaemon for linux is even better...
Rein PA0R > Hello, > > Keying directly gives possibility to put a true keyer in parallel to the > computerized keying, this to be able to either type letters or key the letters > according to the feeling of the day. > > However, in hard keying , if the speed is not too much fast (<=25 wpm), > computerized dashes ans dots are OK but the precision of the duration being > limited under Windows, very fast keying will be not very good (as far as i > know). > > 73 > Patrick > > Selon DANNY DOUGLAS <n...@comcast.net>: > > > NO- AFCW is NOT better, and if you use it, half your contacts with tell you > > they hear some audio getting into your keying. I used it a few times, early > > on, and that is the results. Remember, you also will be using SSB, versus > > continus wave keying signals, and thus outputting less RF signal. Stay away > > from it, if at all possible. I hadnt gotten that far with FLDIGI, but if it > > uses only AFCW, Im gone. > > > > > > Danny Douglas > > N7DC > > ex WN5QMX ET2US WA5UKR ET3USA SV0WPP VS6DD N7DC/YV5 G5CTB > > All 2 years or more (except Novice). Short stints at: DA/PA/SU/HZ/7X/DU > > CR9/7Y/KH7/5A/GW/GM/F > > Pls QSL direct, buro, or LOTW preferred, > > I Do not use, but as a courtesy do upload to eQSL for those who do. > > Moderator > > DXandTALK > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/DXandTalk > > Digital_modes > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digital_modes/?yguid=341090159 > > > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: James French > > To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com > > Sent: Wednesday, December 30, 2009 4:43 PM > > Subject: [digitalradio] AFCW and keyed cw programs > > > > > > > > I have used a couple of programs for generating cw and have found that I > > prefer a 'direct' keyed method (MixW) compared to the AFCW that some > > programs > > use (FlDigi). Running Linux BTW here. > > > > Was wondering why some programs used direct keying of the radio and others > > have gone the AFCW method? Is there something that I am missing here that > > makes AFCW a better choice or is it just a program writer/designer choice? > > > > Doing AFCW just doesn't 'sound' right to me when I am doing cw compared to > > the 'old' method. > > > > Are there any linux distroed programs that will do the direct keyed > > method? > > I > > haven't found any yet..:( MixW crashes when I try to run it in WINE here. > > > > James W8ISS > > > > > > > > > > > ------------------------------------ > > Suggested frequencies for calling CQ with experimental digital modes = > 3584,10147, 14074 USB on your dial plus 1000Hz on waterfall. > > Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at > http://www.obriensweb.com/sked > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > -- http://pa0r.blogspirit.com ------------------------------------ Suggested frequencies for calling CQ with experimental digital modes = 3584,10147, 14074 USB on your dial plus 1000Hz on waterfall. Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Pages at http://www.obriensweb.com/sked Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: digitalradio-dig...@yahoogroups.com digitalradio-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: digitalradio-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
