Yes they did in terms of it's development. After I've called them, I've gotten answers like "We'll see what we can do, but we will make no commitment" In my experience, these have been answers of lack of forsight, and pure just not caring. Icom surely nows there are blind hams that use these radios. You can take the Mark II and the other radios that have speech synthesizer modules as proof. It is not fair that a ham who is blind should be excluded like that. If Icom is unwilling to make the provision, thena blind ham who buys a d-star radio needs to know how they might make the radio more accessible.
_____ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ray T. Mahorney Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2009 6:03 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: 880 vs 800 (was: Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Signal Distance) your comment suggests that yet again Icomm missed the boat as far as accessibility of the new radios. ----- Original Message ----- From: "justin Mann " <[email protected] <mailto:w9fyi%40cox.net> > To: <dstar_digital@ <mailto:dstar_digital%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com> Sent: Monday, May 18, 2009 00:13 Subject: RE: 880 vs 800 (was: Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Signal Distance) Your argument about having to program your radio driving 70mph down the road sure bolsters my case that icom oughtta be putting a voice module in both their hts, and mobile rigs. _____ From: dstar_digital@ <mailto:dstar_digital%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com [mailto:dstar_digital@ <mailto:dstar_digital%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Tony Langdon Sent: Sunday, May 17, 2009 4:53 PM To: dstar_digital@ <mailto:dstar_digital%40yahoogroups.com> yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: 880 vs 800 (was: Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Signal Distance) ------------------------------------ Please TRIM your replies or set your email program not to include the original message in reply unless needed for clarity. ThanksYahoo! Groups Links [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
