From: Jeff Anderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2006 Time: 06:38:49
>The functional similarity between "Max AGC Gain" and the familiar "RF Gain" >control raises an interesting question - is it better give a control a name >that accurately represents what it does in the code (such as "Max AGC Gain") >but that may be confusing to anyone who hasn't read the manual (or have a >PHD in Gizmotronics), or to give the control a name that represents the >control's function in terms that the user is familiar with and lends itself >to an intuitive understanding of how to use the control? "Max AGC Gain" is >more accurate from the point of view of the code itself, but (at least to >me) "RF Gain" is more intuitive. > Using the word "Max" in the name implies to me that this is a fixed level. How 'bout calling it "AGC Threshold" instead? To me, this implies I have some control over the point where AGC cuts in. A big incoming signal requires a lower threshold, so I turn the control down, just like an RF Gain control. And, as I understand it, the name "AGC Threshold" would relate exactly what the software actually does. 73 Ian, G3NRW _______________________________________________ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com
