I agree with Dick concerning the CW Interface.
I was happily using it with DXB 2002. So I became rather perturbed after
I "upgraded" to DXB 2004 to find that it would no longer work. I tried
the all the tips suggested on this reflector, and finally gave up and
started using CWDecoderXP.
Jim N4AL
Dick Barron wrote:
> I have put in many frustrating hours trying to make the cw interface work.
> It doesn't really work! There are several paragraphs of apologia contained
> in the help file that in essesence states that even if you could get an
> interface that worked, it would be limited significantly due to limitations
> in windows. Other users have found that if you run mmtty minimized the cw
> interface will work. Why should that be a prerequisite to operation of a
> advertised dxbase capability. I presently use two freeware windows
> programs, N1MM and Hamlogger, that have excellent cw machine interfaces that
> have none of the windows problems alluded to in the dxbase help file.
> Instead, DXBASE provides interfaces with other hardware cw interfaces that
> cost more than the DXBASE software. The freeware programs also provide some
> of these interfaces. I have been a long user of dxbase, and will probably
> continue to use it due to the really strong report mangement system
> capability that is imbedded within the logging database (way to go Joe). So,
> after all of the above, I recommend that the next version of DXBASE contain
> a working cw interface in line with the current "industry standard".
>
> Dick Barron
> WY4Q
>
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Dxbase mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/dxbase
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[email protected]
>
