On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 12:57 PM, bill <n...@arrl.net> wrote: > ...their usual leapfrog technology... > > ============ Seems to me that a new design would only be justified if it added some missing functionality. But at least for me, the current radio does everything I would want it to do. The only additional feature that would help me would be if it would put Bouvet on the air.
It used to be that radios were judged on sensitivity and selectivity. Those measures topped out decades ago, and everyone started looking at dynamic range, and then close-in dynamic range. At this point, further improvements in that spec probably aren't going to be noticed in most practical situations. Maybe the next frontier is in noise reduction, I dunno. But really, when you talk about the next Elecraft transceiver, the K4 or whatever, you have to ask what it's gonna have that you haven't already got. And then after you come up with something (e.g. simultaneous two-band receive & panadaptor) you have to ask if it really justifies a new design, or it's just gilding the lily. 73, Tony KT0NY ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:Elecraft@mailman.qth.net This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html Message delivered to arch...@mail-archive.com
