On Sun, 08 May 2005 12:23:14 -0700, Roy Lewallen
wrote:



As one of the "other people", I find it kind of insulting. Do you really
think his is a valid point of view, that everyone else should jump up
and implement his great idea, while this anonymous person's job is to
tell us what we should do?

I really do think that a caustic comment was appropriate.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL


I don't know about the 'caustic comment', but I believe the OP has a
serious lack of understanding about both manufacturing and marketing.
The radios we use today are extremely complex and sophisticated.
Keeping everything from interacting and interfering with each other
inside seems to be a challenge for engineers. How much more a
challenge would a radio as he suggested be? Also, from a marketing
stand point, has he noticed how Kenwood and Icom connections are so
very different? The manufacturers don't want users using many outside
options. And what about the cost of adding all those connections for
the competitors to add modules? Who gets to pay for all that? If you
do get one, how do you know it won't draw too much current and burn up
something else, interact with another component causing RFI, or
what-have-you?

If there should be progress, it should be in the software operation of
these rigs. I believe there is much progress there, although in
regards to the 706 line, Icom does have some room for improvement.

just my opinion...

Buck
--
For what it's worth.