Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 [2]   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Which Tranceiver has best computer interfacing?  (Read 3268 times)
W8JX
Member

Posts: 5478




Ignore
« Reply #15 on: June 15, 2014, 07:02:13 AM »

Tj - I'm afraid you missed the point entirely.  The Omni VI is light years away from being a modern rig from a CAT standpoint.  Take a look at the Orion II, still a bit out of date, but that hardware has scores of CAT functions more than you'd ever use.  I haven't seen anyone document a comparison of the current rigs because most of them are that way.  What I recommend is for you to obtain the CAT programming reference for ANY of the current rigs and look through it to see if you can figure out how you'd possibly use each function.  The vast majority of the functions are interesting, but not of much use for the average operator.  But, if you're truly interested in completely controlling the rig remotely, then you'd need software that implemented the entire set of available CAT commands for the rig in question.  It's highly unlikely that you'll find ANY software for ANY rig that supports every CAT command that the hardware supports. 

Floyd: Once again, and hopefully the last time... I am not asking about the software. I am fully aware that there are many and not everyone does everything. You have failed to understand my question. I am asking for input on the transceivers themselves. Some may be missing the ability to do one or more needed things that the current user of these radios are more aware of than I, hence my question. If you do not have an observation or opinion of a particular radio, then you really have no useful response to my question. Please do not hijack this thread further and attempt to impose what you think I am looking for. Thank you.

Tj, K4TFJ

As i said earlier, Kenwood set the standard many years ago with built in RS-232 and 590 and new 990 have a USB interface too that can handle audio as well for digi s well as a 232 for old timers.
Logged

--------------------------------------
Entered using a  WiFi Win 8.1 RT tablet or a Android tablet using 4G/LTE or WiFi.
N0IU
Member

Posts: 1253


WWW

Ignore
« Reply #16 on: June 15, 2014, 07:36:47 AM »

I am asking for input on the transceivers themselves.

Please do not hijack this thread further and attempt to impose what you think I am looking for. Thank you.

With all due respect, you are not giving us one single solitary shred of help in terms of what else you are looking for in a radio. Do you have a budget in mind? I already suggested the Icom line of radios, but the ones with USB connections run from about $1700 to over $10,000. Are there other specs you are looking for? I mean the computer just provides the interface, but it is the radio that does all of the "heavy lifting".

If you are just going to give us a fairly generic question with no other qualifications, then you shouldn't be surprised when you get answers all across the board. If you don't like someone's answer (like this one for instance), then just ignore it, but don't call someone out when they are just trying to determine what your ultimate goal is.
Logged
K4TFJ
Member

Posts: 31




Ignore
« Reply #17 on: June 15, 2014, 05:32:36 PM »

I have an Icom IC-7410 and it (as well as the other Icom rigs that have a USB interface) works well with HRD and other programs like the N1MM contest logger as well as MMTTY.

The only 2 things that you can not do via the USB connection is "real" CW and FSK RTTY.

Scott, as shown from your previous post, you had no problem understanding my question, and THANK YOU, by the way. You told me what you liked about the rig in regards to its interfacing, and you told me what it was not capable of. This answered my hardware question, with hardware answers.

The other gentleman preferred to tell me about software... not once.. but twice. I do apologize for seeming a bit gruff about it. I have seen other threads get hijacked and did not wish mine to be one of them. I rarely post, because I do a lot of research on my own. I don't ask a ba-jillion  questions hoping someone else will do all the leg work. But once in a while I need the opinions of people that are actually using the radios I don't have access to.

Tj, K4TFJ
« Last Edit: June 15, 2014, 05:35:47 PM by K4TFJ » Logged
K4TFJ
Member

Posts: 31




Ignore
« Reply #18 on: June 15, 2014, 05:35:24 PM »

As i said earlier, Kenwood set the standard many years ago with built in RS-232 and 590 and new 990 have a USB interface too that can handle audio as well for digi s well as a 232 for old timers.

John, Thank you. I have had similar responses via private messages that lean in this direction also.

Tj, K4TFJ
Logged
KA5PIU
Member

Posts: 446




Ignore
« Reply #19 on: June 17, 2014, 07:17:40 PM »

Hello.

As far as interfacing, that is very broad.
I like the FT-897 as it is possible to entirely operate the radio from a computer and it is a normal radio.
It does HF, VHF and UHF but it is only an average HF radio.
It is portable but no talkie.
So, it is a mobile that can run on batteries and be totally computer controlled.
Logged
Pages: Prev 1 [2]   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!