Touche!! Patrick..... I enjoy using your program. Rick W3BI
----- Original Message ---- From: Patrick Lindecker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [email protected] Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 2:00:03 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK Hello Frank and all, I don't think Multipsk deserves all these mails. However thanks to all who present, in a better way that I could do it, this program. >Here's a screenshot of what I get to stare at for hours on end: http://evokefrank. googlepages. com/psk31qso Notice the full screen waterfall (with spectrum analysis), the quick access to other components of a QSO like instant logging, and the... You are right. It is very nice and Simon is talented. But nobody oblige you to use a program. You can simply uninstall it and that's all. It reminds me this saying "Vouloir le beurre, l'argent du beurre et la crémière" which means "to want the butter, the money of the butter and the lady who sells the butter". 73 Patrick ----- Original Message ----- From: Tooner To: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 4:23 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK --- In digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com, Sholto Fisher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > MultiPSK has a lot more in it than just the ALE Frank. That's cool, and I can appreciate that. I've played with most of the common digital modes software and have to say MultiPSK has a lot of 'meat' to it. However, as a casual HF digital modes user, and my particular setup, MultiPSK doesn't do anything more for me than what I'm using. > ... rather than wasting it on making the program look like something Microsoft developed. True, but there's something to be said about having a clean layout. Here's a screenshot of what I get to stare at for hours on end: http://evokefrank. googlepages. com/psk31qso Notice the full screen waterfall (with spectrum analysis), the quick access to other components of a QSO like instant logging, and the ability to separate the program windows for optimal layouts. There's plenty more, but that can be discovered (detailed signal analysis, etc.) by the more industrious. Not that this is a feature comparison, as much as a visual representation. If a user unfamiliar with either program compared the two, which do you think would be more appealing? The difference in 'abilities' is minor for all most the most active hams. Maybe even then. Also, if one wants the full features of MultiPSK (like the spectrum analyzer or oscilloscope) you'll have to fork up $45.00). > It's kinda like homebrewing a qrp radio... True, as the creator of the QRP rig. As a hand-me-down it might not hold the same feelings. I think it's more like the hard-core DOS or CW guys that refuse to let go of to what they're accustomed. Technology requires that one adapts often and adapts quickly. There are always some drawback to letting go of what worked for so long, but the benefits usually (or eventually) outweigh the disadvantages. Digital TV isn't as good as analog, but now I have 400 channels of junk instead of six! 8-) > Who cares what it looks like it's how well it does the job There's a lot to be said for looks and ease-of-use! I'd much rather have the best of both worlds Meanwhile, what 'job' does MultiPSK do for you personally? Or, if someone else wants to pipe in with their answer. This shouldn't turn into a Fords-vs-Chevys battle, but I am interested in the exchange of opinions and information. I reserve the right to adapt and change my mind with new information! ;) 73. Frank K2NCC http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/radiointer ference/ ____________________________________________________________________________________ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
