| NC1T |
Rating:      |
2014-04-03 | |
| very useful |
Time Owned: 3 to 6 months. |
| Somewhat of a steep learniing curve at least for me. I post all qso's to qrz, great also after new logbook update. I use a mac and got aether program to convert to adif files. I uploaded my qrz log to LOTW and low and behold I had DXCC in CW and mixed waiting for me. I would have never used the paper method to go after the awards. So I have to give it a big thumbs up the arrl lotw support folks were very patient, as I placed numerous calls to get it right. After you get the hang of it uploading is a breeze, I agree with the KL7 poster who I worked and confirmed within 24 hours that it would be nice if more overseas hams used the system but, I cann't complain. Stick with it and you will be glad you did. |
|
| ON6SX |
Rating:      |
2014-04-02 | |
| Happy that it exist |
Time Owned: more than 12 months. |
I use LoTW a few years,never problems with it.
Even after a total computer crash i had no problems to fix LoTW again.
I got a lot of qsl from people who has no bureau.
Nice work ARRL!
|
|
| SY1AKE |
Rating:      |
2014-04-02 | |
| Exists & works 100% |
Time Owned: 6 to 12 months. |
| Exists,works 100% and we confirm our QSOs. |
|
| KU8V |
Rating:     |
2014-04-02 | |
| Please, people! Be grateful you have LoTW |
Time Owned: more than 12 months. |
Yes, it is not instantaneous to set up. Yes, it takes some reading and forethought to implement it. If it was instantaneous, without the postcard process and file authentication, people would be complaining that the system is too easy to cheat.
Without LoTW, I would never have taken the time and postage to request and collect paper cards (especially to exotic locales) and then collate them and send them in. I would never have gotten certified WAS and DXCC, and that is a big reward for me personally.
It takes maybe one minute to export entries from my log program (HRD), convert it to the authenticated file, and upload it to LoTW.
It's a little difficult to understand all the wailing and complaining about the program and the system. I am grateful for it, and appreciate ARRL having it - a BIG contribution to the hobby. |
|
| WD0M |
Rating:      |
2014-04-02 | |
| Easy to Use - Works Great! |
Time Owned: more than 12 months. |
I've been a user since its inception. Easy to install, great help from ARRL if needed, and the DX Lab interface makes it seamless to log and upload QSO information. I have 323 worked, and 297 confirmed through LOTW. Can't beat it.
----------------------
Earlier 5-star review posted by WD0M on 2007-05-12
I do NOT work in computers professionally - I was a liberal arts major - journalism - and using LOTW is a piece of cake. I'm astounded that so many computer geeks profess not to be able to handle this simple program.
I've never had one issue - I signed up - got the necessary data from ARRL - and it worked from the very start. I use MiLog logging software, which makes it very simple to upload your log to LOTW. Doing it manually is so easy I can't believe a computer professional would tell the world they can't handle it.
I've been using it ever since this ARRL feature started....and it's easy. I'd love the "return rate" to be higher, but I average about 17 percent return on every QSO I've uploaded.
73,
Joe
WDØM
----------------------
Earlier 5-star review posted by WD0M on 2007-01-04
I've been using LOTW since inception. It provides excellent service, serves as a repository for my decades of QSOs, and QSL confirmation is quick and easy. Renewing your certificate is easy as can be - IF you follow the instructions. I've done it several times now, with numerous old callsigns. My only desire for improvement is that others would put their logs on LOTW as well. My compliments to the DX crews that do!
----------------------
Earlier 5-star review posted by WD0M on 2004-11-19
I signed up for LOTW when it first began, and have uploaded logs from near day one. Every time I've had a problem, the ARRL LOTW staff have answered my e-mail questions (and there have been few of them) within hours, and sometimes with minutes. The process is an easy one to master. I'm not an engineer, and my bachelor's degree is in journalism. If a liberal arts guy can figure it out, anyone can.
So far, I have only an 11 percent return on LOTW, despite putting in 11,000 QSOs. I personally prefer the paper QSL, but it's an easy thing to do to export your log into an ADIF file, sign it using the TQSL program, then uploading the TQ8 file it generates to the LOTW site.
It's interesting to upload a QSO from hours ago, and see that it is confirmed through LOTW because the other guys you've worked did the same thing. "Instant Gratification".
I use Logger 32 (freeware) which has an excellent capability to export LOTW (or eQSL) QSOs, then import the file from LOTW (or eQSL) to match up the electronic QSLs in your log. Doesn't get much easier. |
|
| W9FI |
Rating:      |
2014-04-01 | |
| Very efficient with the right companion software |
Time Owned: more than 12 months. |
I had been using LOTW sparingly for several years, but that's changed now that I've found some software that really exploits its strengths. For the past few months I've been using it with DXLab's DXKeeper and the results have been nothing short of extraordinary. A strong performer (LOTW) has been made even more effective by using another program that interfaces well with it. If you don't like the DXLab suite, then find another piece of software that works well with it; something that will allow you to select QSOs for submission with a single mouse click, and which will upload the batch to the LOTW database with another click. Once you get the process down you'll be able to painlessly update QSOs. It puts the whole QSL confirmation process into high gear.
I've been able to use this "new-to-me" process to drastically speed up my QSL confirmations, and to significantly lower my QSLing costs. The confirmation process can be amazingly quick. For example, I worked a station in Afghanistan a few days ago, electronically logged the QSO, and immediately uploaded it to LOTW. Three hours later I had a confirmation credit waiting in my inbox. That's extraordinary. I chase a country for 25 years, finally log a QSO in the morning, and get a guaranteed confirmation before lunchtime.
Using the older QSL-card method, that confirmation would have cost me a few bucks to get the necessary foreign postage stamps (his manager is in eastern Europe), to send the card and the SASE to his manager, and to await his reply. The return QSL would have taken several weeks at a minimum to get, not to mention the extra time necessary to file the endorsement paperwork at the DXCC desk. If you work somebody who updates his QSOs quickly, LOTW can streamline this process from weeks or months down to hours or less.
I'm at that point in my ham career where I'm looking for a secure, rapid confirmation of the QSO and not for the QSL card itself. LOTW fits my needs perfectly. If I really want the card I'll send one via the bureau and expect to see a reply in a year or so.
In summary, LOTW has been one of the best services that the ARRL has ever done. Now that I'm using it frequently, I can't imagine doing without it. |
|
| K7LA |
Rating:     |
2014-04-01 | |
| It's Getting There, Slowly |
Time Owned: more than 12 months. |
I won't echo some of the previous complaints that have been documented. On a positive note, LoTW interfaces with DX4WIN logging program easily. TQSL v2.0 has gone a long way to simplify the upload process. My experience with LoTW has been relatively painless, but I enjoy using Clublog a lot more for DX related matters.
The ARRL needs to address the issue of getting overseas hams more involved in using LoTW and the key to that would be foreign language support. Start with the big three (French, German and Spanish) then branch out to Japanese and Mandarin. Surely there are enough IARU member associations and academics that could assist on these materials. 73 de K7LA, ARRL VE |
|
| N0AG |
Rating:   |
2014-04-01 | |
| LOTW...It's a love-hate relationship |
Time Owned: more than 12 months. |
Really don't know how anyone can give it a 5/5. It's kind of the Obamacare site of the Ham radio world i.e. A great idea & a fantastically poor IT implementation. I, myself have been on & off the site. The ARRL has an extraordinary ability to take a simple concept and make it so user complex as to make it almost unusable. (See ARRL.org) Would you like to see a user friendly website? Go to Amazon.com
OK. So how to fix it? If anyone should have the ability to figure out if one is a legitimate amateur radio operator it should be the ARRL.
1.)Make it SIMPLE.
2.) Have a one time sign up process.
3.) Implement a ARRL OQRS system i.e. become the worlds QSL Buro, an online conduit for QSLing.
Just my 2 cents...I think that just like Obamacare, LOTW will eventually morph into something like the goal was originally intended to be.
73, NØAG |
|
| K7JBQ |
Rating:      |
2014-04-01 | |
| Follow instructions |
Time Owned: 6 to 12 months. |
I've had it up to here with folks bitching about how difficult LOTW is.
If you can follow instructions to the letter, in sequence, LOTW is easy. If you can't, or won't, you shouldn't be using software.
73,
Bill |
|
| KK8ZZ |
Rating:  |
2014-04-01 | |
| disaster for ARRL |
Time Owned: more than 12 months. |
| LOTW has proven to be cumbersome, obtuse to use, confusing to many, and probably a major PR disaster to ARRL (I'm a Life Member). While I've deciphered it and made it work, Google it and see the comments. Some hams feel trapped between wanting to qualify for awards and the cumbersome interface that requires them. Surprisingly, or not, many hams are NOT computer savvy and have a very difficult time with LOTW.... ARRL really made a mistake here... perhaps later versions will correct it. |
|