In article , "Dee Flint" wrote:

"J. D. B." wrote in message
...
John,

Just get on digital modes. Don't worry about CW. Digital is where the
fun is and the copy is much better.

A buddy of mine in St. Louis and I experimented with low power and various
digital modes last night on 40 meters. CW was marginal. The best was
DominoEX with FEC - just about 100% all the time and it also has a second
channel to display additional information.

CW can be fun at times, but maybe it's not your thing. Let the stone-age
hams continue with CW, and move up and on to the digital modes.

MultiPSK, while a bit cluttered and ugly, is a great program you can use.
MixW is cleaner looking and very good, but not as many capabilities in the
program.

Move on and start having fun.


You just don't get it do you. There are conditions for each mode that will
make that mode "the best". Every mode has its place. That goes for voice,
all the multiplicity of digital modes and yes CW. Last night you had the
best luck with DominoEx. Another night RTTY might be better. Another
night, voice might be more intelligible. Yet another night will favor CW.

Based on what I've read about DominoEX, it is a form of Multi-Frequency
Shift Keying. This variation looks to be more robust than others, however,
anything that can compromise FSK and MFSK has the potential to compromise
DominoEX. It will merely be a matter of the degree of severity needed
before it becomes unusable.

Just because something is old doesn't make it useless or stone age. Pencils
have been around far longer and are still highly useful.

Dee, N8UZE


Very well put. Every mode is useful, important and valuable in different
situations. What's unfortunate, is that the only modes the anti-CW crowd
wants and supports are "Lazy Mode" and "Retard mode"

Hymie

Hymie wrote:
In article , "Dee Flint" wrote:


Dee, N8UZE


Very well put. Every mode is useful, important and valuable in different
situations. What's unfortunate, is that the only modes the anti-CW crowd
wants and supports are "Lazy Mode" and "Retard mode"
wrong again

Hymie

On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 00:49:00 GMT, (Hymie)
wrote:

Very well put. Every mode is useful, important and valuable in different
situations. What's unfortunate, is that the only modes the anti-CW crowd
wants and supports are "Lazy Mode" and "Retard mode"

Even those who tout digital modes - they want to buy an interface and
software and "be" on digital. Then they wonder why the signal they're
hearing, that sounds just like the digital mode they use, doesn't work
on their setup. Maybe because a PSK program won't decode SSTV?

Reminds me of the GPRS "exerts" who can't understand why changing the
"code" on their radios doesn't eliminate the interference from the guy
next door.

The anti-CW crowd wants no code and a written test you can memorize
the answers to. It's their "right" to be on the air, isn't it? Even
if they need 2 more clues to be totally clueless?

Al Klein wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 00:49:00 GMT, (Hymie)
wrote:

Very well put. Every mode is useful, important and valuable in different
situations. What's unfortunate, is that the only modes the anti-CW crowd
wants and supports are "Lazy Mode" and "Retard mode"

Even those who tout digital modes - they want to buy an interface and
software and "be" on digital. Then they wonder why the signal they're
hearing, that sounds just like the digital mode they use, doesn't work
on their setup. Maybe because a PSK program won't decode SSTV?

learn what you are tlaking about psk31 sounds very little like sstv and
most of the programs that can demolate it show you a spectrograhand
they look nothing alike

there is some time confusion in wether that sgnal BPSK 31 or QPSK31 but
the marvels of Windows wallo me to run the output of the sound card
interface to at least 2 program so it can be worked out

you just want to bash any ham that doesnot follow your morse fetish

Reminds me of the GPRS "exerts" who can't understand why changing the
"code" on their radios doesn't eliminate the interference from the guy
next door.

The anti-CW crowd wants no code and a written test you can memorize
the answers to. It's their "right" to be on the air, isn't it? Even
if they need 2 more clues to be totally clueless?
it is our right and everybody else right that any restriction to our
access to public spectrum be "neccisary and proper" (one of 3 clauses
in the constitution that give the power to regulate the airwave to the
govet at all) otherwise the 10 reserving all right and power to the
sates or the people applies modifing that is the thrid place where the
consititution of US touches on this issue mby making the constitution
and the TREATIES made the supreme law of the land

according the Govt lost the POWER to impose Morse Code test on the ARS
unless it can be justified under some other powere of the Constitution

I find it interesting that the ProCode tes crowd has such disrespect
for that document

Al Klein wrote:
On Sun, 16 Jul 2006 00:49:00 GMT, (Hymie)
wrote:

Very well put. Every mode is useful, important and valuable in different
situations. What's unfortunate, is that the only modes the anti-CW crowd
wants and supports are "Lazy Mode" and "Retard mode"

Even those who tout digital modes - they want to buy an interface and
software and "be" on digital. Then they wonder why the signal they're
hearing, that sounds just like the digital mode they use, doesn't work
on their setup. Maybe because a PSK program won't decode SSTV?

Reminds me of the GPRS "exerts" who can't understand why changing the
"code" on their radios doesn't eliminate the interference from the guy
next door.

The anti-CW crowd wants no code and a written test you can memorize
the answers to. It's their "right" to be on the air, isn't it? Even
if they need 2 more clues to be totally clueless?

There's a world of difference between technical electronics knowledge
and ability to decipher code. One has absolutely nothing to do with the
other. FWIW, I don't even have a ham license anymore. I don't care
about the code, whether it lives or dies. If you enjoy brass pounding,
then do it.

Just don't equate that ability with another that is not even slightly
related.

jak

Proof:


"an_old_friend" wrote in
ups.com:

it is our right and everybody else right that any restriction to our
access to public spectrum be "neccisary and proper" (one of 3 clauses
in the constitution that give the power to regulate the airwave to the
govet at all) otherwise the 10 reserving all right and power to the
sates or the people applies modifing that is the thrid place where the
consititution of US touches on this issue mby making the constitution
and the TREATIES made the supreme law of the land

according the Govt lost the POWER to impose Morse Code test on the ARS
unless it can be justified under some other powere of the Constitution

I find it interesting that the ProCode tes crowd has such disrespect
for that document

On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 11:55:28 -0500, jakdedert
wrote:

There's a world of difference between technical electronics knowledge
and ability to decipher code.

Considering that someone with absolutely no knowledge of electronics
can memorize enough to pass the test in about 8 hours, there's no
longer any real test of anything but the ability to memorize.

FWIW, I don't even have a ham license anymore.

Then, as the courts would say, you have no standing in the matter.

Al Klein wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 11:55:28 -0500, jakdedert
wrote:

There's a world of difference between technical electronics knowledge
and ability to decipher code.

Considering that someone with absolutely no knowledge of electronics
can memorize enough to pass the test in about 8 hours, there's no
longer any real test of anything but the ability to memorize.
whta is needed and why?

FWIW, I don't even have a ham license anymore.

Then, as the courts would say, you have no standing in the matter.

nope he has full standing he is an american that means the FCC is
suposed serve not the ARS but the people of the USA.

the problem with you procoders is that you think the ARS owns the
bandwidth not the poeple of the USA

Al Klein wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 11:55:28 -0500, jakdedert
wrote:

There's a world of difference between technical electronics knowledge
and ability to decipher code.

Considering that someone with absolutely no knowledge of electronics
can memorize enough to pass the test in about 8 hours, there's no
longer any real test of anything but the ability to memorize.

FWIW, I don't even have a ham license anymore.

Then, as the courts would say, you have no standing in the matter.

Ahh...but I did, once, at 15 years old; and I've picked up a fair amount
of electronics knowledge as well...proving that one has little to do
with the other.

jak

jakdedert wrote:
Al Klein wrote:
On Mon, 17 Jul 2006 11:55:28 -0500, jakdedert
wrote:

There's a world of difference between technical electronics knowledge
and ability to decipher code.

Considering that someone with absolutely no knowledge of electronics
can memorize enough to pass the test in about 8 hours, there's no
longer any real test of anything but the ability to memorize.

FWIW, I don't even have a ham license anymore.

Then, as the courts would say, you have no standing in the matter.

Ahh...but I did, once, at 15 years old; and I've picked up a fair amount
of electronics knowledge as well...proving that one has little to do
with the other.
you still do don't let this bozo tell you otherwise (unless you are an
ilgeal alien or something)

jak