eHam

eHam Forums => Computers And Software => Topic started by: KB1NXE on July 08, 2009, 11:40:55 AM



Title: HRD 5.0
Post by: KB1NXE on July 08, 2009, 11:40:55 AM
Ham Radio Deluxe 5.0 is out as a Beta and available for download.  There have been many improvements to this software and it's value continues to increase.

For those who don't keep up with Rig Control Software, this FREEWARE (Donations welcomed) collection of programs gives you the most comprehensive station control in one package you could ever imagine.  To list:

Rig Control
Logging Software with contest submission and award analysis
Digital Mode Software
DX Spotter
Satellite Tracking
Rotator Control
Solar weather and prediction
Automated updates and information collection

One of the benefits of the new logging software is it allows you to place the log file on a computer and share that file out to several operators.  Great for club station, contests or even if you have multiple rigs and computers (like I do)  Logging allows you to enter the call, (and with a subscription to QRZ or loaded on your computer) check the call and populate all the fields automatically.  With some rigs, it'll read your S meter and complete the RST.  The Logging software, the digital software and the rig control all interface with one another giving you unprecedented control over all aspects of your station.

This is software written for Amateurs by Amateurs.  It's an international effort, and very well written.  Certainly worth the download and the price is as always - free.  Find it at www.ham-radio-deluxe.com


Title: HRD 5.0
Post by: AA6YQ on July 09, 2009, 01:07:58 PM
Jim KB1NXE, I've not yet looked at HRD 5, though I have noticed the flurry of traffic its produced on multiple reflectors. Since you're clearly quite familiar with it, perhaps you could answer these questions:

Does it enable a user to

- display frequency-dependent settings for devices like tuners and amplifiers?

- define buttons and sliders that control the active transceiver via CAT commands?

- rapidly search the more than 80 or so web-based sources of QSL information (e.g. online country-specific callbooks)?

- perform a callbook lookup on a group of logged QSOs en masse (e.g. after a contest)?

- generate progress reports for the DXCC, TopList, Challenge, VUCC, Marathon, WAS, WAC, IOTA, WAZ, WPX, USA-CA, Canadaward, DOK, WAE, WAB, DDFM, SRR, RDA, WAJA, JCC, JCG, or AJA awards?

- automatically identify unconfirmed QSOs whose confirmation would advance DXCC or WAZ award progress?

- directly print QSL cards and labels from logged QSOs?

- directly print addresses on envelopes or on envelope labels from logged QSOs?

- automatically identify confirmed-but-unverified QSOs and generate the required DXCC submission paperwork?

- rapidly synchronize (upload and download) with LotW?

- accurately modify many logged QSOs simultaneously (without requiring the user to edit ADIF files)?

- collect DX spots from multiple clusters simultaneously, and combine spots of the same DX station into a single entry showing when the station was first spotted and most recently spotted?

- provide comprehensive spot filtering -- including by spotting station location?

- identify spotted DX stations known to participate in LotW or in eQSL's Authenticity Guaranteed program?

- identify and audibly announce DX spots "needed" for DXCC or WAZ?

- QSY the transceiver and antenna to a DX spot in a single gesture (including setting the transceiver to the correct split)?

- generate point-and-click propagation forecasts using a modern prediction engine (e.g. VOACAP or ICEPAC)?

- monitor the NCDXV/IARU HF beacon network to assess actual propation?

    73,

        Dave, AA6YQ


Title: HRD 5.0
Post by: KB1NXE on July 10, 2009, 08:32:30 PM
Wow, lot's of questions.  I'll answer them below if I can.

Does it enable a user to

- display frequency-dependent settings for devices like tuners and amplifiers?
No.  But then, it's rig control software, not amplifier or tuner control software.

- define buttons and sliders that control the active transceiver via CAT commands?
Yes, as long as those sliders and buttons have rig specific commands to control them at the rig.  Most of the obvious one's are included in the default setting for a particular rig.  You can add others if you wish and almost all of them are pre-configured.  For instance, for an Icom IC-756 PIII, there are pre-configure menu items to add sliders for TX and RX bass and treble.

- rapidly search the more than 80 or so web-based sources of QSL information (e.g. online country-specific callbooks)?
No.  QRZ Online/Offline seems to be it's mainstay.

- perform a callbook lookup on a group of logged QSOs en masse (e.g. after a contest)?
No, does it during log entry.

- generate progress reports for the DXCC, TopList, Challenge, VUCC, Marathon, WAS, WAC, IOTA, WAZ, WPX, USA-CA, Canadaward, DOK, WAE, WAB, DDFM, SRR, RDA, WAJA, JCC, JCG, or AJA awards?
Yes, via the log analysis feature.

- automatically identify unconfirmed QSOs whose confirmation would advance DXCC or WAZ award progress?
Not 100% sure of your question.  I believe you want real time log analysis based upon whether or not you have a confirmed QSO.  If that's the case, then no.  In the log, while using the spotter window, if the entity in the spotter is in your log (dup) or the prefix is in your log, it will identify it differently (dup = a plus sign and check mark, you have the prefix it's just a check mark).  If you have not worked the prefix before, it is marked with a 'X'.

- directly print QSL cards and labels from logged QSOs?
Does address labels.

- directly print addresses on envelopes or on envelope labels from logged QSOs?
Never tried, but as it does labels, it should be capable.

- automatically identify confirmed-but-unverified QSOs and generate the required DXCC submission paperwork?
No.

- rapidly synchronize (upload and download) with LotW?
Creates ADIF files to wash through TQSL to create the TQ8 file.

- accurately modify many logged QSOs simultaneously (without requiring the user to edit ADIF files)?
No, but not sure why you would need this...

- collect DX spots from multiple clusters simultaneously, and combine spots of the same DX station into a single entry showing when the station was first spotted and most recently spotted?
Yes.  It also displays the DX spots on a rather neat slide rule by frequency

- provide comprehensive spot filtering -- including by spotting station location?
Yes.  You must build your own filters

- identify spotted DX stations known to participate in LotW or in eQSL's Authenticity Guaranteed program?
No.  But is that information accurately identified in spotter reports?  As a LotW participant, I know of no way to 'declare myself' authentic.

- identify and audibly announce DX spots "needed" for DXCC or WAZ?
Yes.  Also capable of alerting via cell phone text message or E-Mail.

- QSY the transceiver and antenna to a DX spot in a single gesture (including setting the transceiver to the correct split)?
Double click on the DX Spot entry will QSY and change mode, but not set up a split as that may or may not be available in the DX entry.  Also, they are working on adding the feature to rotate your antenna while you QSY.  It will also initiate the log entry if you do make contact and therefore just may need to update times (single click).

- generate point-and-click propagation forecasts using a modern prediction engine (e.g. VOACAP or ICEPAC)?
No.  It is built in - however.

- monitor the NCDXV/IARU HF beacon network to assess actual propation?
It's software and can't monitor anything.  It compiles data on space weather and displays that information for your own interpretation.  You do set it to gather the information for the sources you wish.


Well, for free software, it seems to almost grant all your wishes.  Why don't you try it out and see if you agree.  It won't cost you a thing and if you know of a better package for the same price, please let the rest of us know.

I also hope many of your questions were rhetorical. This is free software and a volunteer effort by other hams.  This is not software produced by some multi-employee software sweatshop.  It's an effort of other Hams offered as a labor of love for free to the rest of us.


Title: HRD 5.0
Post by: AA6YQ on July 10, 2009, 09:23:02 PM
>>>AA6YQ comments below

- display frequency-dependent settings for devices like tuners and amplifiers?

No.  But then, it's rig control software, not amplifier or tuner control software.

>>>Many hams use tuners and/or amplifiers, and most of these are not PC-controlled. The usual solution is to work out the setting for each frequency, and scribble them on a piece of paper that is taped to the tuner or amplifier, and falls off every couple of weeks. The alternative is to use a transceiver control application that lets you specify your tuner and and amplifier settings for each frequency range, so that the transceiver control application can use its knowledge of the transceiver's current frequency to display the correct tuner and/or amplifier settings.


- perform a callbook lookup on a group of logged QSOs en masse (e.g. after a contest)?

No, does it during log entry.

>>>Performing a QRZ.com lookup over the internet before logging each QSO is often too time-consuming during a contest or when you're on the pointy end of a pileup.


- automatically identify unconfirmed QSOs whose confirmation would advance DXCC or WAZ award progress?

Not 100% sure of your question.  I believe you want real time log analysis based upon whether or not you have a confirmed QSO.  If that's the case, then no.  In the log, while using the spotter window, if the entity in the spotter is in your log (dup) or the prefix is in your log, it will identify it differently (dup = a plus sign and check mark, you have the prefix it's just a check mark).  If you have not worked the prefix before, it is marked with a 'X'.

>>>The desired function is "generate outgoing QSL cards for every unconfirmed QSO that if confirmed would advance my DXCC/Challenge or WAZ award progress. To do this, the user must be able to specify his or her DXCC award objectives and WAZ award objectives (e.g. pursuing 5BDXCC but not challenge, pursuing WAZ mode awards but not WAZ band awards) as well as maintaining realtime award status for entities, entity-modes, entity-bands, zones, zone-modes, zone-bands, and zone-band-modes.

>>>Accurately highlighting and announcing needed spots also requires the same knowledge of award objectives and award progress. From your response above, it sounds like this information is only available at the level of entities worked.


- directly print QSL cards and labels from logged QSOs?
Does address labels.

>>>Address labels aren't QSL cards.


- rapidly synchronize (upload and download) with LotW?
Creates ADIF files to wash through TQSL to create the TQ8 file.

>>>Manually uploading to TQSL does not provide a way to update one's log to reflect the acceptance of uploaded QSOs by LotW, or to reflect the confirmation of QSOs by LotW.


- accurately modify many logged QSOs simultaneously (without requiring the user to edit ADIF files)?

No, but not sure why you would need this...

>>>There are countless examples:

- add 1 hour to the start time of each QSO made during the FOOBAR contest because someone set the timezone incorrectly on the PC you used during the contest

- compute the BAND_RX for each QSO that specifies an RX frequency

- set the station callsign to N6YBG for all QSOs made between 1990-03-15 and 1990-06-22

- set my location to "Wayland, Massachusetts" for all QSOs made between 1997-06-15 and 2009-07-11

- etc.


- collect DX spots from multiple clusters simultaneously, and combine spots of the same DX station into a single entry showing when the station was first spotted and most recently spotted?

Yes.  It also displays the DX spots on a rather neat slide rule by frequency

>>>If 701DX is spotted on 7001 and then is spotted on 7005, does the "slide rule" show one entry for 701DX or two?


- provide comprehensive spot filtering -- including by spotting station location?

Yes.  You must build your own filters

>>>Recent answers on the HRD reflector indicate that filtering is done by the Cluster. This precludes defining a filter like "hide all 6m spots not posted by stations within 250 miles of my QTH".


- identify spotted DX stations known to participate in LotW or in eQSL's Authenticity Guaranteed program?

No.  But is that information accurately identified in spotter reports?  As a LotW participant, I know of no way to 'declare myself' authentic.

>>>To declare yourself an LotW participant, visit

http://www.hb9bza.net/lotw/

>>>HB9BZA collects logs containing LotW confirmations, and uses these to maintain a database of known LotW participants. Such a database can be used to identify spotted stations known to participate in LotW.

>>>eQSL provides a similar database containing the callsigns of participants of its Authenticity Guaranteed (AG) program; only QSOs with AG members "count" towards CQ magazine awards like WAZ or WPX.


- generate point-and-click propagation forecasts using a modern prediction engine (e.g. VOACAP or ICEPAC)?

No.  It is built in - however.

>>>VOACAP and ICEPAC are well-calibrated for HF propagation prediction.


- monitor the NCDXV/IARU HF beacon network to assess actual propation?

It's software and can't monitor anything.  It compiles data on space weather and displays that information for your own interpretation.  You do set it to gather the information for the sources you wish.

>>>Software can command a transceiver to monitor the IARU/HF beacon frequencies -- by band, by location, or by any other combination -- to rapidly allow the user to assess actual propagation.


Well, for free software, it seems to almost grant all your wishes.  

>>>Your answers are mostly "no".


Why don't you try it out and see if you agree.  It won't cost you a thing and if you know of a better package for the same price, please let the rest of us know.

>>>The answer to every one of those questions for DXLab is "yes", and has been for years (with the exception of realtime award tracking for WAZ, which was added last month). The DXLab Suite is entirely  free, and available via www.dxlabsuite.com


I also hope many of your questions were rhetorical.

>>>No, they were a response to your claim that "The Logging software, the digital software and the rig control all interface with one another giving you unprecedented control over all aspects of your station."

>>>There is nothing wrong with promoting the virtues of an application you use and appreciate. Claiming that it provides "unprecedented control", however, prompted my Socratic response.

    73,

        Dave, AA6YQ


Title: HRD 5.0
Post by: KB1NXE on July 11, 2009, 08:54:52 AM
Bob,

   Thank you.  I guess I wasn't misinterpreting the tone of the questions.

   FWIW, I have tried DXSuite and found it very cumbersome.  Unloaded it from my PC.  The UI was way to complicated and not well thought out in my humble opinion.  I like the look and feel of HRD much, much more.

   I make my living in IT, so software that I feel is daunting must be for the true Uber Geeks.  Not for the average or casual user.  I also don't like spending a dozen hours configuring software.  I'd rather spend 11 of those hours making contacts.

Jim


Title: HRD 5.0
Post by: KB1NXE on July 11, 2009, 09:35:09 AM
Dave,  AA6YQ,

  Thanks for living the dream and keeping the reputation and name of Mass residents alive...


Title: HRD 5.0
Post by: AA6YQ on July 11, 2009, 11:26:33 AM
K0BT wrote "A Socratic discussion usually involves a debate. This looked more like an ambush...

Both apps are good. Each has its place and supporters. There is no need to prove one is superior."

There was no claim of superiority in my response, nor was there any critique of HRD, whose author I work with and respect.

KB1NXE asserted that HRD provides "unprecedented control over all aspects of your station". I posed a set questions whose answers demonstrate otherwise, and provided follow-up where his responses were unclear. This is hardly an ambush.

   73,

        Dave, AA6YQ


Title: HRD 5.0
Post by: AA6YQ on July 11, 2009, 11:29:07 AM
KB1NXE wrote "Thanks for living the dream and keeping the reputation and name of Mass residents alive..."

Descending to personal attacks only highlights the weakness of your position.

   73,

       Dave, AA6YQ


Title: HRD 5.0
Post by: KB1NXE on July 11, 2009, 05:59:09 PM
What attack?  Just like there was no ambush.


Title: HRD 5.0
Post by: KB1NXE on July 11, 2009, 06:30:40 PM
In all fairness to DX Lab Suite of programs, yes it does do all of the things mentioned by AA6YQ.  In MY OPINION, it's UI (User Interface) is not up to the standards of HRD and therefore, I claim HRD to be without peer.

Using an Icom IC-756 Pro III, I was daunted by all the various setting, knobs and subscriptions (yes, registration is required on many of the web sites feeding data to DX Lab) that needed twiddling in DX Lab.  As compared to HRD, which requires less configuring and selecting of options.  This makes it IN MY OPINION more desirable to the casual user.  This is why I deemed it unprecedented.  HRD also has features I prefer and are not available in DX Lab (like the bandscope on the rig control  screen).

As with any thing, the choice is yours.  I was trying to aide fellow HAMs and that has seemed to ruffled the feathers of another HAM.  Oh well.  Can't make everyone happy.


Title: HRD 5.0
Post by: AA6YQ on July 11, 2009, 06:45:57 PM
KB1NXE wrote "What attack? Just like there was no ambush."

You still claim that being asked to answer a set of straightforward questions of the form "Does HRD do X?" constitutes an ambush?

Suppose before responding, you had taken the step of Googling my callsign and discovered my involvement in transceiver control software development. How would that have changed your answers to those questions?

    73,

       Dave, AA6YQ


Title: HRD 5.0
Post by: AA6YQ on July 11, 2009, 07:26:36 PM
KB1NXE wrote "In all fairness to DX Lab Suite of programs, yes it does do all of the things mentioned by AA6YQ. In MY OPINION, it's UI (User Interface) is not up to the standards of HRD and therefore, I claim HRD to be without peer."

The statement you made in your original post was "The Logging software, the digital software and the rig control all interface with one another giving you unprecedented control over all aspects of your station." Your claim is clearly based on functionality not user interface.


KB1NXE wrote "Using an Icom IC-756 Pro III, I was daunted by all the various setting, knobs and subscriptions (yes, registration is required on many of the web sites feeding data to DX Lab) that needed twiddling in DX Lab."

Your claim that registration is required is an outright lie. The DXLab distribution site at www.dxlabsuite.com requires no registration of any kind, as anyone can easily verify. No registration is required to download, install, upgrade, or run any DXLab application. There is also no advertising of any kind (other than that generated by QRZ.com in one embedded browser window), and there are no requests for contributions. DXLab does support expedited access to QRZ.com for those with a data access subscription, as does HRD.

Configuring DXLab to run a ProIII requires

1. setting a "Radio Model" selector to "IC-756ProIII"

2. selecting the serial port to which the transceiver is connected, and setting its baud rate, word length, parity, and stop bits

3. setting DTR or RTS to "always on" if your CI-V interface uses either of those signals as a power source

These are the same configuration steps required by HRD and every other competent transceiver control application. It is true that DXLab provides many additional options -- the ability to run with the radio's "CI-V Tranceive" option enabled (required by certain amplifer and antenna controller configurations), or the ability to obtain both VFOs from the transceiver before logging a QSO (to compensate for a deficiency in the Icom CI-V instruction set) -- but all such advanced options default on installation to benign states that users can ignore.


KB1NXE wrote "As compared to HRD, which requires less configuring and selecting of options. This makes it IN MY OPINION more desirable to the casual user. This is why I deemed it unprecedented."

In the absence of controlled A vs B user testing, UI discussions are subjective. Had your original post focused on what you consider to be HRD's advantages in this area, there would have been no need to respond. Your original statement, however, was "The Logging software, the digital software and the rig control all interface with one another giving you unprecedented control over all aspects of your station." -- which contains no reference to UI whatsoever, and remains demonstrably false.

   73,

       Dave, AA6YQ


Title: HRD 5.0
Post by: KB1NXE on July 12, 2009, 02:17:05 PM
Grow up


Title: HRD 5.0
Post by: N0AZZ on August 04, 2009, 06:56:39 PM
Well I have tried them all over the last 3 years using HRD and DX Lab newest vers. and betas in the end I decided to buy a program. After a lot of research the decision was made from eham reviews and talking to other hams at the ARC that I belong to I purchased Logic8 and I have been using it for some time. This is something I should have done long ago this is a great program for what I use it for I really like the seamless uploading, downloading of LOTW and eQSL and all features with this program it does truly have it all IMHO.

73
Fred
N0AZZ


Title: HRD 5.0
Post by: KC4GFW on August 09, 2009, 12:45:07 PM
HRD has zero LoTW integration. To upload a log file in HRD as it now you have create a .adif file in HRD, go to your TQSL program, find the the file you created, sign it and create a .tq8 file. Login in to LoTW account through your web browser and upload your .tq8 file.

I would say DXLab is much easier.


Title: HRD 5.0
Post by: KB1NXE on August 20, 2009, 06:35:08 AM
HRD ver 5 is still in Beta and will - according to the developers - include LoTW integration.  It is on their To Do list.


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: AB7TJ on March 25, 2010, 08:17:12 PM
And as of today 25-March-2010 "IT STILL IS" on the TO DO LIST.


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: TF3CY on April 05, 2010, 05:38:22 AM
Hi all

well I must say that this is a very sad thread imho.

I work for a company that makes computer software, but I'm a network engineer so I don't have a professional point of view on the GUI/interface etc.

In my work, there are lot's of commercially available software that cost tens of thousands of dollars and then amazing open source software, and it I'm always amazed that there are people out there that spend their time and effort making software that really works in the real world without getting any money for it.

So I will say it's great that there is software like this available for free for us.

And now it's comes to the HRD versus DXlabs. I think this comes down personal preferences. some would say that HRD  adheres better to the UI standards in Windows, and DXlab is littlebit esoteric. But as with all software you must learn how to use it and you come to appreciate all the bells and whistles, or perhaps you move on due to lack of features.

For some operators a linux console with 100 commands to control everything would be fine, then some people will find the DXlabs with so many features best, or like for me, a casual operator that logs 100qso's per month HRD is perfect for me...

so, I'm okay bashing commercially made applications, but you can't really criticise freeware/open source - you can either move on, or help the developer.

73 de TF3CY
Benni


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: KL7IPV on April 10, 2010, 07:49:52 PM
Good summation, Benni.


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: N5VIU on April 25, 2010, 02:19:43 PM
I have a yaesu FT-2000D.  I ran HRD 5.0 beta and have not been able to get it to work.  I hit the connect button and it goes through start up but comes up with the error unable to read frequency.  Has anyone had this problem. 


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: F1HKN on April 26, 2010, 08:42:31 AM
Let HRD choose the com port and the right speed by itself, after several tries, the connection will set correctly. Dont forget to check the model of transceiver. Personnaly, i use HRD with a TS2000 kenwood without any problem, either on my shack PS with a serial com port (on PCI card) with a classic DB9 F/F cable or on my laptop with a DB9F/USB converter. And don't forget also to set properly the PPT switching in the options menu (NONE, if you use an external soundcard like signalink or so on).
best 73's de Leon F1HKN


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: AD6KA on May 02, 2010, 04:50:28 PM
"- add 1 hour to the start time of each QSO made during the FOOBAR contest because someone set the time zone incorrectly on the PC you used during the contest."

Been there, done that......nice feature.

After a 39 hour, 4 aircraft trip to 5R8,
followed by a 2 hour nap, I setup my gear
and began working the pileups. I got to about
QSO #250 before I realized my laptop
was still set to Los Angeles time. DOH!


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: VE3PLO on May 02, 2010, 10:31:14 PM
N5VIU: read my post in this section "Topic: FT-450 and HRD 4.0 - can't get it to run, serial/usb problem?"



Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: AH6RR on June 01, 2010, 09:48:16 AM
"rapidly synchronize (upload and download) with LotW?
Creates ADIF files to wash through TQSL to create the TQ8 file"

 As for HRD there is a app done by WD5EAE called HRD Utilities that does this with one click of the mouse it will upload and convert all contacts to TQ8 and down load all of the LoTW. I like the UI on HRD much better than DXlab UI and the DM780 is a great digital program too boot.
WD5EAE has 2 versions of the HRD Utilities one for HRD 4 and one for HRD 5 and they can be found here.
http://wd5eae.org/Software.html  oh it also does eQSL too but HRD does eQSL automaticaly if the right box is checked.

Roland AH6RR


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: K2ZS on February 27, 2011, 09:41:24 AM
Ham Radio Deluxe 5.0 is out as a Beta and available for download.  There have been many improvements to this software and it's value continues to increase.

For those who don't keep up with Rig Control Software, this FREEWARE (Donations welcomed) collection of programs gives you the most comprehensive station control in one package you could ever imagine.  To list:

Rig Control
Logging Software with contest submission and award analysis
Digital Mode Software
DX Spotter
Satellite Tracking
Rotator Control
Solar weather and prediction
Automated updates and information collection

One of the benefits of the new logging software is it allows you to place the log file on a computer and share that file out to several operators.  Great for club station, contests or even if you have multiple rigs and computers (like I do)  Logging allows you to enter the call, (and with a subscription to QRZ or loaded on your computer) check the call and populate all the fields automatically.  With some rigs, it'll read your S meter and complete the RST.  The Logging software, the digital software and the rig control all interface with one another giving you unprecedented control over all aspects of your station.

This is software written for Amateurs by Amateurs.  It's an international effort, and very well written.  Certainly worth the download and the price is as always - free.  Find it at www.ham-radio-deluxe.com

Since you seem so well informed on it may I ask why it won't connect to my TS-690S? I have posted requests for help on the HRD forum and gotten no replies. Any help would be appreciated.



Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: W8JX on February 27, 2011, 05:02:52 PM

Since you seem so well informed on it may I ask why it won't connect to my TS-690S? I have posted requests for help on the HRD forum and gotten no replies. Any help would be appreciated.


Well for starters you have to make sure that baud rate and parity of radio and serial port are the same. Also you must use a null modem serial cable too.   


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: K2ZS on February 27, 2011, 05:12:52 PM
So since the only baud rate for the TS-690 in HRD is 4800 I have to drop the hardware settings rate for my com port to 4800 as well? By default it's 9600 bps, data bits: 8, parity: none, stop bits: 1, and flow control: none. Will just dropping the bits per second to 4800 work?

As far as the cable goes it's a commercially made (West Mountain) cable that works with all other logging programs, what do you mean by null modem, will this cable not work?

Thank you by the way for replying, I've been trying for years to get some sort of answer...


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: W8JX on February 27, 2011, 05:49:40 PM
So since the only baud rate for the TS-690 in HRD is 4800 I have to drop the hardware settings rate for my com port to 4800 as well? By default it's 9600 bps, data bits: 8, parity: none, stop bits: 1, and flow control: none. Will just dropping the bits per second to 4800 work?

Hardware flow rates must match. If 690 is default to 4800, your com port must be set to same.  I would try default 8N1 (8 bit no parity and one stop bit) with no flow control. If that does not work try hardware flow control.

As far as the cable goes it's a commercially made (West Mountain) cable that works with all other logging programs, what do you mean by null modem, will this cable not work?

A Null Modem cable is a DB9 (orDB25) serial cable with two pins/wires crossed vs a standard serial cable.  It can be in cable or in a adapter on end of cable but it MUST be present.

Thank you by the way for replying, I've been trying for years to get some sort of answer...

Glad to be of help. Sometimes things just fall through cracks.


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: K2ZS on February 27, 2011, 07:56:31 PM
Thanks...

I am aware of what a null modem cable is I just find it odd that this is the only software that requires one. Not sure if I want to re-tool every time I want to use N1MM or TRX Manager. I actually have a null modem cable on hand but I need a gender changer or I'll just make a new cable...

Thanks for your help


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: W8JX on February 27, 2011, 08:29:33 PM
Thanks...

I am aware of what a null modem cable is I just find it odd that this is the only software that requires one. Not sure if I want to re-tool every time I want to use N1MM or TRX Manager. I actually have a null modem cable on hand but I need a gender changer or I'll just make a new cable...

Thanks for your help

It is not the software per say but rather hardware that needs the null modem to handshake properly. It roots go back to old modem days when serial was used to link computers together for file transfer and the crossover was needed to talk to a modem.


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: AA6YQ on February 27, 2011, 10:13:57 PM
Thanks...

I am aware of what a null modem cable is I just find it odd that this is the only software that requires one. Not sure if I want to re-tool every time I want to use N1MM or TRX Manager. I actually have a null modem cable on hand but I need a gender changer or I'll just make a new cable...

Thanks for your help

If your cable works with N1MM and TRX Manager, it will work correctly with HRD or any other correctly-configured transceiver control application. The radio and application must be configured to use the same baud rate.

A "null modem" cable is required to directly connect the serial ports of two PCs, or when connecting a PC's serial port to a device whose RXD and TXD pins are reversed.

    73,

         Dave, AA6YQ


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: W8JX on February 28, 2011, 05:24:21 AM

A "null modem" cable is required to directly connect the serial ports of two PCs

Yes I stand corrected on this part.

or when connecting a PC's serial port to a device whose RXD and TXD pins are reversed.
 

and every Kenwood radio I have ever controlled with a PC required a null modem cable or adapter


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: AA6YQ on February 28, 2011, 02:16:09 PM
and every Kenwood radio I have ever controlled with a PC required a null modem cable or adapter

and since K2ZS has stated that the cable he's using to connect his PC to his TS-690 works correctly with two other transceiver control applications, then there are only two possibilities:

1. his TS-690 is an exception to your "all Kenwood radios have their RxD and TxD pins reversed" assertion

or

2. the cable K2ZS is using is wired with RxD and TxD reversed

Either way, K2ZS does not need a new cable. He just needs someone knowledgeable in HRD to give him a straight answer on configuration.



Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: W8JX on February 28, 2011, 04:35:40 PM
Not really no rocket science here and you are mudding water here. He stated early on that it appeared default port baud rate was wrong (9600) and software and comm port hardware baud rate MUST match radio or it will not talk. Before we make more out of it than there is you must verify setting as I stated earlier on before you muddied water


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: AA6YQ on February 28, 2011, 05:02:27 PM
Not really no rocket science here and you are mudding water here. He stated early on that it appeared default port baud rate was wrong (9600) and software and comm port hardware baud rate MUST match radio or it will not talk. Before we make more out of it than there is you must verify setting as I stated earlier on before you muddied water

Informing K2ZS that he didn't need to purchase a new cable did not muddy the water - it corrected an erroneous conclusion he had reached in response to comments made here. Since his existing cable works with other transceiver control applications, he can use that same cable with HRD. Leading him off into the "null modem cable" weeds was not helpful; it only served to lengthen the problem resolution time.






Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: W8JX on March 01, 2011, 05:18:46 AM
Not really no rocket science here and you are mudding water here. He stated early on that it appeared default port baud rate was wrong (9600) and software and comm port hardware baud rate MUST match radio or it will not talk. Before we make more out of it than there is you must verify setting as I stated earlier on before you muddied water

Informing K2ZS that he didn't need to purchase a new cable did not muddy the water - it corrected an erroneous conclusion he had reached in response to comments made here. Since his existing cable works with other transceiver control applications, he can use that same cable with HRD. Leading him off into the "null modem cable" weeds was not helpful; it only served to lengthen the problem resolution time.


If you read back to were I jumped in he states that he uses other logging programs not other rig control programs or rigs with current cable and he further states he was not aware of need for a null modem cable. If he had clearly stated that he had R/C' ed other rigs their would have been no discussion of a null modem cable as he would have had it.  Rather than trying to ask him for more clarification you decided to muddy it up a bit.


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: AA6YQ on March 01, 2011, 08:23:23 AM
If you read back to were I jumped in he states that he uses other logging programs not other rig control programs or rigs with current cable and he further states he was not aware of need for a null modem cable. If he had clearly stated that he had R/C' ed other rigs their would have been no discussion of a null modem cable as he would have had it.  Rather than trying to ask him for more clarification you decided to muddy it up a bit.

K2ZS said "As far as the cable goes it's a commercially made (West Mountain) cable that works with all other logging programs", and then mentioned N1MM and TRX Manager explicitly, both of which include transceiver control. No additional clarification was needed, as his current cable is obviously fine. Your claim that pointing this out was "muddying the waters" is ludicrous, but if you want to mumble on about null modem cables, have at it. At this point, you're unlikely to do any harm.


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: W8JX on March 01, 2011, 08:32:45 AM
If there was harm it was you. Again "Logging Programs" as I use no cable with my logging program. Unlike you I do not "assume" anything here and deal with what was said. (from working in R&D for many years you deal with know facts not assumptions)  No mention of HRD control of other radios here only logging programs so no real clarity here. BTW where were you earlier when he was looking for help? You dove in later to muck it up a bit and just do not know when to quit.


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: AA6YQ on March 01, 2011, 08:58:32 AM
If there was harm it was you. Again "Logging Programs" as I use no cable with my logging program. Unlike you I do not "assume" anything here and deal with what was said. (from working in R&D for many years you deal with know facts not assumptions)  No mention of HRD control of other radios here only logging programs so no real clarity here. BTW where were you earlier when he was looking for help? You dove in later to muck it up a bit and just do not know when to quit.

N1MM and TRX Manager are logging applications that employ transceiver control; if K2ZS's cable works with those applications, it will work with HRD, or at least get to the point where HRD crashes due to a driver incompatibility.

I didn't respond to K2ZS's initial request for help because I don't use HRD; I only intervened when you erroneously led him to believe that a new cable was required.

I'll quit when you stop distorting the facts.


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: W8JX on March 01, 2011, 05:56:53 PM
Your done doing CYA yet? Bet not. Hopefully original poster is up and running now. 


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: AA6YQ on March 01, 2011, 06:36:57 PM
Your done doing CYA yet? Bet not. Hopefully original poster is up and running now. 

There's nothing to cover. The facts are clear, as is the conclusion: K2ZS doesn't need a new cable, despite your leading him to conclude otherwise.


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: KB1NXE on March 03, 2011, 06:37:57 PM
W8JX,

   It's not worth it to argue with Dave.  He splits a hair finer than anyone I have ever met.  Just go back to the beginning of this post and see how he set a trap for me.  At the time I did not know he was the author of DX Suite and fell right into it.  He's very proud of DX Suite (as he should be).  Arguing with him is kinda like a greased pig at a county fair.  Sooner or later you have to accept you won't catch the pig, and he kinda likes being chased...;)


K2ZS,

   I will agree with Dave that if the cable is working on other programs it should work with HRD as well.  Dave does say you may experience a driver crash, but since you are using a serial cable and did not state if the computer serial port is a native port or a USB converter, this MAY be a problem.  Since you are not having issues with other software, I doubt it will be an issue.  HRD does not provide drivers for the serial connection.  A huge assumption by Dave. 

   I do not have any direct experience with the TS-690.  So I tend to stay away from things I can't directly test and verify in my shack.  But I do see HRD includes it into the list of predefined rigs.  If the system works with your other software, I might suggest opening the config of that software and write down all the pertinent settings.  Set up HRD the exact same way, and it should work.  To eliminate the bickering, you can reach me off net at my call at arrl.net

Jim


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: AA6YQ on March 03, 2011, 09:30:45 PM
W8JX,

   It's not worth it to argue with Dave.  He splits a hair finer than anyone I have ever met.  Just go back to the beginning of this post and see how he set a trap for me.  At the time I did not know he was the author of DX Suite and fell right into it.  He's very proud of DX Suite (as he should be).  Arguing with him is kinda like a greased pig at a county fair.  Sooner or later you have to accept you won't catch the pig, and he kinda likes being chased...;)


You initiated this thread by claiming that the new release of HRD provided "unprecedented control over all aspects of your station." I disagreed with this claim; to expose its lack of credibility, I posed a set of questions in response. Would your answers to those questions have been different had you known me to be the author of DXLab? How, exactly, was this a "trap"? Since your answers to most of the questions I posed about HRD's capabilities were "no", how was this "splitting hairs"?

K2ZS,

I will agree with Dave that if the cable is working on other programs it should work with HRD as well.  

First you characterize my intervention as "hair-splitting"; then you agree with it.

Dave does say you may experience a driver crash, but since you are using a serial cable and did not state if the computer serial port is a native port or a USB converter, this MAY be a problem.  Since you are not having issues with other software, I doubt it will be an issue.  HRD does not provide drivers for the serial connection.  A huge assumption by Dave.  

I made no assumption. I simply qualified the assertion that "if the cable is working on other programs it should work with HRD as well" with the possibility that HRD might crash if it were incompatible with the cable's USB driver if the cable employed a USB interface.

To eliminate the bickering, you can reach me off net at my call at arrl.net

Correcting blatant errors or false claims is not bickering. Being childishly defensive when errors in your post are corrected is not bickering either, but it's equally annoying.

Everybody makes mistakes, and some of them occur in public forums. When that happens, simply acknowledge the error and move on; no one is keeping score.


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: W8JX on March 04, 2011, 04:43:06 AM
And some get a buzz out of being a PITA.


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: KB1NXE on March 04, 2011, 06:11:10 AM
Dave,

  No where did I address you.  I addressed W8JX and K2ZS.  Please refrain from responding to comments I leave for others.  Your opinion is unwanted by me.  If I address a comment to you, feel free to comment or answer.  Thank You.

Jim


W8JX,

   It's not worth it to argue with Dave.  He splits a hair finer than anyone I have ever met.  Just go back to the beginning of this post and see how he set a trap for me.  At the time I did not know he was the author of DX Suite and fell right into it.  He's very proud of DX Suite (as he should be).  Arguing with him is kinda like a greased pig at a county fair.  Sooner or later you have to accept you won't catch the pig, and he kinda likes being chased...;)


You initiated this thread by claiming that the new release of HRD provided "unprecedented control over all aspects of your station." I disagreed with this claim; to expose its lack of credibility, I posed a set of questions in response. Would your answers to those questions have been different had you known me to be the author of DXLab? How, exactly, was this a "trap"? Since your answers to most of the questions I posed about HRD's capabilities were "no", how was this "splitting hairs"?

K2ZS,

I will agree with Dave that if the cable is working on other programs it should work with HRD as well.  

First you characterize my intervention as "hair-splitting"; then you agree with it.

Dave does say you may experience a driver crash, but since you are using a serial cable and did not state if the computer serial port is a native port or a USB converter, this MAY be a problem.  Since you are not having issues with other software, I doubt it will be an issue.  HRD does not provide drivers for the serial connection.  A huge assumption by Dave.  

I made no assumption. I simply qualified the assertion that "if the cable is working on other programs it should work with HRD as well" with the possibility that HRD might crash if it were incompatible with the cable's USB driver if the cable employed a USB interface.

To eliminate the bickering, you can reach me off net at my call at arrl.net

Correcting blatant errors or false claims is not bickering. Being childishly defensive when errors in your post are corrected is not bickering either, but it's equally annoying.

Everybody makes mistakes, and some of them occur in public forums. When that happens, simply acknowledge the error and move on; no one is keeping score.



Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: AA6YQ on March 04, 2011, 03:48:07 PM
Dave,

  No where did I address you.  I addressed W8JX and K2ZS.  Please refrain from responding to comments I leave for others.  Your opinion is unwanted by me.  If I address a comment to you, feel free to comment or answer.  Thank You.


When you post falsehoods or distortions, I will correct them whether you like it or not.


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: KB1NXE on March 04, 2011, 05:38:29 PM
I rest my case.

Dave,

  No where did I address you.  I addressed W8JX and K2ZS.  Please refrain from responding to comments I leave for others.  Your opinion is unwanted by me.  If I address a comment to you, feel free to comment or answer.  Thank You.


When you post falsehoods or distortions, I will correct them whether you like it or not.


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: AA6YQ on March 04, 2011, 05:56:47 PM
When you post falsehoods or distortions, I will correct them whether you like it or not.

I rest my case.

Your case that false claims and distortions should be "protected" from corrective responses? That case should be shredded, not rested.


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: PJ2BVU on March 05, 2011, 09:01:13 AM
Dave,

  No where did I address you.  I addressed W8JX and K2ZS.  Please refrain from responding to comments I leave for others.  Your opinion is unwanted by me.  If I address a comment to you, feel free to comment or answer.  Thank You.

Jim
As far as I understand it this forum is public and anyone can post whatever he wishes. No one gets banned on Eham contrary to some other reflectors. Sometimes it can get nasty or totally unrelated to the subject but I guess it is the price to pay for freedom of information. Correcting misinformation is for the good of everyone. If someone wants to have a private discussion on a specific subject Eham is surely not the right place to post.

Regarding HRD vs DXLabs: both programs are very good and I think it is a question of personal taste.
When I started evaluation logging programs one of the first was HRD and I was really impressed by the UI, the graphics ...
When I discovered DXLabs it looked like a Windows 3.1 program with an overwhelming set of features. But it is not one program but a set of programs and one can start only with DXKeeper, which I did. I liked very much the features and support and used it for several years. After that I started to add more programs from the suite. Doing so make it a lot easier to set up and is a lot less overwhelming as it first appeared.

What I really like is the support which is excellent. For example, LotW support was introduced almost as soon as LotW and each operation is a one click operation. I also follow the TT Eagle Yahoo group and no one has been able to use HRD with the Eagle, they also do not get any feedback on that problem. DXLab supports the Eagle, no one from the Yahoo group used DXLab so there is no guarantee that it will work out of the box but if there is a problem I am sure it will be fixed as soon as someone discovers it.
HRD support used to be very good but since Simon started to work on SDRs HRD seems to be on the back burner. Like DXlabs, HRD is also free so no one should complain of missing features or bugs. Dave and Simon deserve all our praise.
DXLabs or HRD? Your choice.

Jean-Claude PJ2BVU


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: AA6YQ on March 05, 2011, 01:22:43 PM
Dave,

  No where did I address you.  I addressed W8JX and K2ZS.  Please refrain from responding to comments I leave for others.  Your opinion is unwanted by me.  If I address a comment to you, feel free to comment or answer.  Thank You.

Jim
As far as I understand it this forum is public and anyone can post whatever he wishes. No one gets banned on Eham contrary to some other reflectors. Sometimes it can get nasty or totally unrelated to the subject but I guess it is the price to pay for freedom of information. Correcting misinformation is for the good of everyone. If someone wants to have a private discussion on a specific subject Eham is surely not the right place to post.

Regarding HRD vs DXLabs: both programs are very good and I think it is a question of personal taste.
When I started evaluation logging programs one of the first was HRD and I was really impressed by the UI, the graphics ...
When I discovered DXLabs it looked like a Windows 3.1 program with an overwhelming set of features. But it is not one program but a set of programs and one can start only with DXKeeper, which I did. I liked very much the features and support and used it for several years. After that I started to add more programs from the suite. Doing so make it a lot easier to set up and is a lot less overwhelming as it first appeared.

What I really like is the support which is excellent. For example, LotW support was introduced almost as soon as LotW and each operation is a one click operation. I also follow the TT Eagle Yahoo group and no one has been able to use HRD with the Eagle, they also do not get any feedback on that problem. DXLab supports the Eagle, no one from the Yahoo group used DXLab so there is no guarantee that it will work out of the box but if there is a problem I am sure it will be fixed as soon as someone discovers it.
HRD support used to be very good but since Simon started to work on SDRs HRD seems to be on the back burner. Like DXlabs, HRD is also free so no one should complain of missing features or bugs. Dave and Simon deserve all our praise.
DXLabs or HRD? Your choice.

Jean-Claude PJ2BVU


Thanks, Jean-Claude, but this thread is not about HRD vs. DXLab. Nowhere in this thread have I denigrated HRD; it's a fine application. As you know, Simon HB9DRV and I have invested considerable energy in ensuring that our applications interoperate, and many users take advantage of this capability.

This thread started with KB1NXE's July 2009 post claiming that the newly released HRD 5 provided "unprecedented control over all aspects of your station". In response, I posted a set of questions about HRD 5's station control capabilities. KB1NXE's response to most of these questions was "no". I then pointed out that the answers to all of these questions for DXLab was "yes", and had been so for years.

Instead of simply responding "thanks, I didn't know that", KB1NXE instead chose to claim he was "trapped" because he didn't know I was the author of DXLab. Despite having been asked on several occasions, he has yet to explain how that knowledge would have changed his answers to the questions I posed, or in any way changed the outcome of the discussion. The fact is that he made an exuberant but blatantly inaccurate claim - most likely out of ignorance - and continues to whine about having this publicly exposed.

KB1NXE's post should have been a red flag for anyone actually familiar with HRD 5, for as I later learned from its users, HRD 5 was when initially released a step backwards in functionality from HRD 4. HRD 5's primary objective was to eliminate the "all functionality in one big executable" limitation that was constraining HRD 4's development. Thus HRD 5 did not offer "unprecedented control" in comparison to HRD 4, much less in comparison to DXLab or other station automation applications.

In summary, this thread is not about HRD vs DXLab, it's about what happens when you publicly post claims that aren't true. As I've suggested, the best course of action is to simply admit your mistake and move on.



Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: PJ2BVU on March 05, 2011, 04:26:35 PM
Hi Dave, I read this thread from the start to be sure what it was all about and I am sorry if I did not express myself correctly. I just had the impression that after your first post some took it as HRD vs DXlab. As I indicated it these are 2 fine programs and I know that you have been cooperating - HRD Bridge has been out for a long time for example. In the end it is a personal choice.

Regarding the unprecedented control I totally agree with you that HRD 5 is not the one.
I guess when someone loves a program he tends to be biased, I know that I am, but this is not an excuse not to recognize our own mistakes.

I would not be able to tell which program offers unprecedented control as I do not know what is out there. I started briefly with Logger32, played with HRD (not V5 but something like V2-V3) and discovered DXLab which I have been using since then. I participated in some contests some years back and for that I used N1MM.

Thanks to Dave and Simon for their high quality software.

De Jean-Claude PJ2BVU


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: 9A2QP on March 05, 2011, 04:37:20 PM
Hello to all users of HRD. This is an outstanding free software, I use it already for two years and I am very satisfaction.I have CAD control over two stations connected TS480SAT-USB port and FT100D-COM port, and only when needed, resuming what I want working condition. DM780 is perfect and there are many modes of communication which is nice. With one big thank you for such good software.
 73 all of 9A2QP-Joe


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: KB1NXE on March 07, 2011, 07:43:54 AM
OK Dave, this one is for you.  I've held off in doing this, because I wasn't "Keeping Score", but you appear to.  Since you keep referring to a post a year and a half old.  So, this is necessary.

The word unprecedented was my opinion.  I'm entitled to that.  I tried your application, and I didn't like it.  I found it cumbersome, the user interface wasn't to my liking, and for lack of a better word, I didn't like the 'feel'.  The same went with N1MM's logging system, and several other rig control and logging applications available.  HRD version 4.1 did it for me, but not quite.  When version 5 was released it did have many improvements that I appreciated and felt did it better than any other (including your application), hence the use of the word unprecedented.  Something you seemed to be totally hung up on.  When I compare DXLAB to HRD, HRD is way ahead in many ways IN MY OPINION.  HRD BLOWS DXLAB AWAY IN MY OPINION.  So the use of the word unprecedented is JUSTIFIED IN MY OPINION.  I WILL NOT APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.  GET OVER IT.

So, there you go.  I expressed my opinion.  Guess what buddy?  I AM ALLOWED TO DO JUST THAT.  Since I am not a paid author for any publication, anything I write is the sole expression of MY THOUGHTS AND UNDERSTANDINGS.

Also, I was not the one who initially used the term or thought 'Trapped' (I believe the word 'ambushed' was first used).  Another person expressed his opinion that you seemed to have done that.  About that time I became aware of your role in DXLab.  So, the observation of the another person was a very fitting statement and I agreed.  Wow, a third party read what had transpired and had an opinion that differed from yours.  And that seems to be the underlying current to this thread.  YOU DO NOT LIKE PEOPLE WHO'S OPINION IS DIFFERENT THAN YOURS.  They have a word for that.

There was absolutely no steps backwards in HRD functionality from V4 to V5.  Indeed, there were many advances.  For example: the inclusion of features like eQSL automatic updating.  But of course you checked that out, didn't you?  NO?  The users you 'heard' from must not have learned enough about the system to correctly exploit the features would be my guess.  But then, your hearsay was all the research you invested or needed, obviously.

I have helped dozens of people get up and running on HRD V5.  I have assisted dozens more with problems they have had and assisted them in using and understanding the HRD applications.  I do have a very good understanding of HRD and its features.  I tend to stay away from threads I have no direct knowledge in (like how do I get HRD to work with my TenTec, etc) or cannot duplicate (since I don't work the satellites, I don't have any experience with HRD SAT or Az/El rotors).  Since you seemed to have very little HRD experience, there is no need for you to offer anything new on HRD.

So, Big Man, give it a rest.  Unless I specifically address you, please stay away from me and anything I post.  Unless you have something positive to contribute, plonk me, PLEASE!



Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: AA6YQ on March 07, 2011, 11:16:18 PM
OK Dave, this one is for you.  I've held off in doing this, because I wasn't "Keeping Score", but you appear to.  Since you keep referring to a post a year and a half old.  So, this is necessary.

The word unprecedented was my opinion.  I'm entitled to that.  I tried your application, and I didn't like it.  I found it cumbersome, the user interface wasn't to my liking, and for lack of a better word, I didn't like the 'feel'.  The same went with N1MM's logging system, and several other rig control and logging applications available.  HRD version 4.1 did it for me, but not quite.  When version 5 was released it did have many improvements that I appreciated and felt did it better than any other (including your application), hence the use of the word unprecedented.  Something you seemed to be totally hung up on.  When I compare DXLAB to HRD, HRD is way ahead in many ways IN MY OPINION.  HRD BLOWS DXLAB AWAY IN MY OPINION.  So the use of the word unprecedented is JUSTIFIED IN MY OPINION.  I WILL NOT APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.  GET OVER IT.

So, there you go.  I expressed my opinion.  Guess what buddy?  I AM ALLOWED TO DO JUST THAT.  Since I am not a paid author for any publication, anything I write is the sole expression of MY THOUGHTS AND UNDERSTANDINGS.


Nowhere in this thread have I challenged your preference for HRD over DXLab. Your remarks above are irrelevant to the discussion.

You can indeed post anything you like. You can post that 1+1 equals 11. But when you post something that's incorrect, expect someone to point out the error in your post. You claimed that "HRD 5 provides unprecedented station control" -- a testable assertion. I tested it by assembling a list of station control capabilities long-supported by DXLab and asking you whether HRD 5 supported those capabilities. Your responses were mostly "no". Thus your claim that "HRD 5 provides unprecedented station control" was demonstrably false.

Also, I was not the one who initially used the term or thought 'Trapped' (I believe the word 'ambushed' was first used).  Another person expressed his opinion that you seemed to have done that.  About that time I became aware of your role in DXLab.  So, the observation of the another person was a very fitting statement and I agreed.  Wow, a third party read what had transpired and had an opinion that differed from yours.  And that seems to be the underlying current to this thread.  YOU DO NOT LIKE PEOPLE WHO'S OPINION IS DIFFERENT THAN YOURS.  They have a word for that.

You've been asked multiple times to explain exactly how the above proceedings constituted an "ambush" or "trap". So far, your only response has been "someone else said it was a trap too"; that's not an explanation.

You continue to evade the fundamental point: DXLab supports a long list of station control capabilities that HRD 5 does not. This fact does not mean that DXLab is "better" than HRD; some users have little interest in those capabilities, or consider other factors to be more important. All it means is that your claim that "HRD 5 provides unprecedented station control" is false.


There was absolutely no steps backwards in HRD functionality from V4 to V5.  Indeed, there were many advances.  For example: the inclusion of features like eQSL automatic updating.  But of course you checked that out, didn't you?  NO?  The users you 'heard' from must not have learned enough about the system to correctly exploit the features would be my guess.  But then, your hearsay was all the research you invested or needed, obviously.

The loss of an integrated Mapper with its azimuthal map view from V4 to V5 was a significant step backwards: http://forums.ham-radio.ch/showthread.php?15418-I-Miss-Mapper!!! (http://forums.ham-radio.ch/showthread.php?15418-I-Miss-Mapper!!!)

The loss of CDROM callbook support from V4 to V5 was a significant step backwards; http://forums.ham-radio.ch/showthread.php?19230-HamCall-CD-Issue-Was-No-Callbook (http://forums.ham-radio.ch/showthread.php?19230-HamCall-CD-Issue-Was-No-Callbook)

http://forums.ham-radio.ch/showthread.php?21197-DM780-Difference-in-HRD-V4.1-Beta-vs.-V5-beta (http://forums.ham-radio.ch/showthread.php?21197-DM780-Difference-in-HRD-V4.1-Beta-vs.-V5-beta)

http://forums.ham-radio.ch/showthread.php?16041-An-old-feature-returned (http://forums.ham-radio.ch/showthread.php?16041-An-old-feature-returned)

http://forums.ham-radio.ch/showthread.php?21514-Seriously-Considering-Going-Back-to-v4.0 (http://forums.ham-radio.ch/showthread.php?21514-Seriously-Considering-Going-Back-to-v4.0)

Are posts from HRD users in the HRD Support Forums hearsay?

Unless I specifically address you, please stay away from me and anything I post.  Unless you have something positive to contribute, plonk me, PLEASE!

When you post falsehoods or distort facts, I will correct them. Count on it.


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: KB1NXE on March 08, 2011, 12:57:31 PM
Then I hope you are prepared for the stalking charges and the law suit that follows.


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: AA6YQ on March 08, 2011, 02:02:48 PM
Then I hope you are prepared for the stalking charges and the law suit that follows.

Responding to public posts on the internet is not stalking.

When you're deep in a hole, the first step towards escape is to stop digging.

 


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: KB1NXE on March 08, 2011, 04:15:34 PM
Check paragraph 'f'.  AND FOR THE FINAL TIME - DO NOT ADDRESS ANY COMMUNICATION TO ME EVER.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/lxii/644/644-4.htm


Title: RE: HRD 5.0
Post by: AA6YQ on March 08, 2011, 09:13:23 PM
Check paragraph 'f'.  AND FOR THE FINAL TIME - DO NOT ADDRESS ANY COMMUNICATION TO ME EVER.

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/lxii/644/644-4.htm

No judge or jury would consider responses to public posts on the internet to be "communication" as referenced in that statute. You have no control over who responds to your public posts, and you're certainly not gaining any credibility here by making threats and issuing orders like an over-tired two-year-old.