At 2/26/2009 08:05 AM, R. Kevin Stover wrote: >Everybody should be using a Winkey to key CW.
Why? >Some people will deny that keying directly from an serial port >controlled by windows causes keying errors. When we ran DOS, the >applications could have unfettered access to the ports. You could also >easily harness the system clock and use it rather than the OS to supply >the timing for CW. It was easy to background a process like sending CW >knowing you had control of the port when you needed it. Not so with >Windows98 and up. XP is especially bad. > >Ever had an application or the OS grab a hold of a USB, serial or >parallel port and not let go when the application or process terminated? >It never happened in DOS. > >One question for the doubters. If a winkey like device isn't necessary >to send properly timed CW, why do several hardware manufacturers, Micro >Ham, US Interface, Rig Expert, and nearly all general and contest >logging applications support it? Just to make K1EL rich? Because many hams today like to buy neat gadgets, many times without understanding what they do. I key my K3 direct from my XP PC using the serial line. I run speeds in the 30+ wpm. I can achieve rates of over 200+ Q/hour, and I have a very good UBN record. Applications support it because the interfaces are out there. There are situations in which you may actually need such a device, but a properly outfitted PC can support direct keying. I use N1MM, CT, DxBase and other programs with no problems. Just because something exists, doesn't make it necessary. Existence is not proof of necessity, and I don't even play a lawyer on TV. Everyone is free to decide for themselves what is necessary for their particular situation. ______________________________________________________________ Elecraft mailing list Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm Post: mailto:[email protected] This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
