Vinnie S. wrote:
On 14 Dec 2007 05:07:09 GMT, Steveo wrote:

Anyone reading this ever try one?

Rave reviews:

http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/947

These eham reviews are great. They are all by users.

Vinnie S.

Yeah that's a handy site for reviews, my friend ended up buying that 718 so
we'll see how well he likes it.

Jay in the Mojave wrote:
Hello Steveo:

I believe any ham radio is a significant improvement over a CB radio.

Jay in the Mojave


True dat Jay, he ended up buying it for $400 so hopefully he will like it.

Scott in Baltimore wrote:
I believe any ham radio is a significant improvement over a CB radio.


Certainly not the 2 meter CB crowd...
Hello Scott:

No I am talking about the radios not the people. I see people from both
sides of the fence I keep at arms length.

I get no end of humor when I say a "Ten-4" or "I am back out" or "Get
your knee's in the breeze" on one certain 2 meter repeater. Many have
thanked me for my informal type radio lingo. The greatest is "Ten-4 ....
over and out" it just drives em nuts.

Jay in the Mojave

Hello Steveo:

Ask your friend there how he like the radio, and ask him if it has the
DSP and digital IF filters.

Jay in the Mojave


Steveo wrote:

Yeah that's a handy site for reviews, my friend ended up buying that 718 so
we'll see how well he likes it.

On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 05:15:50 -0800, Jay in the Mojave
wrote:

|This is managements fault for not having a separate group test and
|evaluate the radio before production. And there is no excuse for this as
|there are way too many fat, over stuffed, self centered, arrogant,
|unemployed hams out there that can test the radios before production.
|
|--------------

you are right that it is management's fault but for the wrong reasons.
I have worked on projects where the senior manager has defined a major
portion of the look and feel of a product and no matter how much human
engineering has told them that thngs need to change, they don't. Get a
senior manager that has enough time and respect and given enough power
can lead to egos that in the end can produce a lousy product.

james

james wrote:
On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 05:15:50 -0800, Jay in the Mojave
wrote:

|This is managements fault for not having a separate group test and
|evaluate the radio before production. And there is no excuse for this as
|there are way too many fat, over stuffed, self centered, arrogant,
|unemployed hams out there that can test the radios before production.
|
|--------------

you are right that it is management's fault but for the wrong reasons.
I have worked on projects where the senior manager has defined a major
portion of the look and feel of a product and no matter how much human
engineering has told them that thngs need to change, they don't. Get a
senior manager that has enough time and respect and given enough power
can lead to egos that in the end can produce a lousy product.

james

Hello James:

Management is in charge and has the responsibility to make the best, or
most profitable product possible. The "Buck" stops with management
period. If Management turns their back on human engineering, there is
some major wrong things happening.

Aircraft Cockpit button-ology and fast and accurate pilot response times
is a must for combat pilot and aircraft to preform with the required
edge. The aircraft manufactures have what is called a "Cockpit
Committee" Where the chief test pilot chairs the committee with customer
pilots and such to audit, refine, reject, throw out, have made better,
......ect ect. To make the aircraft a workable weapon. If the software
guys had there way it would take 106 button pushes to perform the
simplest things. The Cockpit Committee has the authority to make the
hardware designers and software engineering groups make the aircraft
work with the right stuff.

I just bought a new type scanner for trunk tracking, and general all
round monitoring. What a different way of doing things. I had to relearn
a few things. But still the scanner radio is user hostile. But if a
complex combat cockpit can be made to be user friendly, then so can a
radio.

Many amateur radios are way too complicated as the manufacture leans on
the hardware designers and software guys to make it all work with less
buttons then on my shirt. A sad mistake.

My 2M 440 HT here feed to Mr. Band saw, was done after normal operating.
http://www.a1antennas.com/humor2.html

I didn't get a picture of my Yause FT 2600 2M radio with the fire ax
resting thru it in a tree stump.

Jay in the Mojave

On Thu, 20 Dec 2007 18:01:43 -0800, Jay in the Mojave
wrote:

|james wrote:
| On Fri, 14 Dec 2007 05:15:50 -0800, Jay in the Mojave
| wrote:
|
| |This is managements fault for not having a separate group test and
| |evaluate the radio before production. And there is no excuse for this as
| |there are way too many fat, over stuffed, self centered, arrogant,
| |unemployed hams out there that can test the radios before production.
| |
| |--------------
|
| you are right that it is management's fault but for the wrong reasons.
| I have worked on projects where the senior manager has defined a major
| portion of the look and feel of a product and no matter how much human
| engineering has told them that thngs need to change, they don't. Get a
| senior manager that has enough time and respect and given enough power
| can lead to egos that in the end can produce a lousy product.
|
| james
|
|Hello James:
|
|Management is in charge and has the responsibility to make the best, or
|most profitable product possible. The "Buck" stops with management
|period. If Management turns their back on human engineering, there is
|some major wrong things happening.
|
|==================

Sometimes mangers,as well as engineers, fall in love to much with
their designs and are very short sighted. They feel their designs are
better than others. This is kind of what I tried to get across. In the
end the management team is often held responsible for final decisions
on designs as their sucesses and failures.


|Aircraft Cockpit button-ology and fast and accurate pilot response times
|is a must for combat pilot and aircraft to preform with the required
|edge. The aircraft manufactures have what is called a "Cockpit
|Committee" Where the chief test pilot chairs the committee with customer
|pilots and such to audit, refine, reject, throw out, have made better,
|.....ect ect. To make the aircraft a workable weapon. If the software
|guys had there way it would take 106 button pushes to perform the
|simplest things. The Cockpit Committee has the authority to make the
|hardware designers and software engineering groups make the aircraft
|work with the right stuff.
|
|=================

Comparing consumer electronics to military hardware is not very
appropriate. Military hardware has the luxury of larger budgets and
one customer. Consumer Electronics is a design for an average of many
different users.


|I just bought a new type scanner for trunk tracking, and general all
|round monitoring. What a different way of doing things. I had to relearn
|a few things. But still the scanner radio is user hostile. But if a
|complex combat cockpit can be made to be user friendly, then so can a
|radio.
|
|Many amateur radios are way too complicated as the manufacture leans on
|the hardware designers and software guys to make it all work with less
|buttons then on my shirt. A sad mistake.
|
|===================

I have been on the desing of electronics where one has to do a lot
with three or four buttons. It becomes a blend of software and
hardware to acheive the desired goal. Sometimes there is no correct or
incorrect solutions. There are just means of accomplishing a goal.
What one finds objectionable others may find acceptable. It then
becomes finding the happy middle.

To me the most significant use of a small number of buttons is in text
messaging on cell phones. What ended up was the ITAP system of text
communications that took advantage of the limitations of hardware
design in a telephone keypad.

james

james wrote:

Sometimes mangers,as well as engineers, fall in love to much with
their designs and are very short sighted. They feel their designs are
better than others. This is kind of what I tried to get across. In the
end the management team is often held responsible for final decisions
on designs as their sucesses and failures.




Comparing consumer electronics to military hardware is not very
appropriate. Military hardware has the luxury of larger budgets and
one customer. Consumer Electronics is a design for an average of many
different users.


james


Hello James:

Sure some heads swell and arrogant egos soar. But those self center me
first types wanting a star placed next to their name will be at the cost
of reduced sales. Kind of like mangers who want only to emphasizer their
important and stardom at the expense of work crews. The real sin here is
their higher up mangers can't or don't see this. So the "Boys Club" is
in work.

The comparison of military electronic/systems to consumer electronics is
a great analogy. By this I mean if the mind bending operation of
cockpits can be made user friendly so can ham radios, scanners, cell
phones ect. The overly complex design of these consumer radios will soon
choke the manufactures in sales. Aircraft Customers appoint a "Prim
Contractor" to do all the finger pointing and take all the customers
product heat. Just try to point the finger at say tires and rims when
you buy them from separate stores. So it appears consumer electronics
manufactures lack a good product testing program, incorporating human
engineering, user friendly button-ology, and just plain common sense.

Ham radios, scanners, cell phones, and even my rice cooker can be made
much simpler to operate. The cost need not equal the button-ology in
functions times dollars, as in aircraft. But a hand full of
distinguished radio enthusiasts as I mentioned early, who could take one
of the radios as payment for their testing. So a inexpensive testing
process can be done quit quickly and easy.

Well got to haul....

Jay in the Mojave

On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 04:43:41 -0800, Jay in the Mojave
wrote:

|james wrote:
|
| Sometimes mangers,as well as engineers, fall in love to much with
| their designs and are very short sighted. They feel their designs are
| better than others. This is kind of what I tried to get across. In the
| end the management team is often held responsible for final decisions
| on designs as their sucesses and failures.
|
|
|
|
| Comparing consumer electronics to military hardware is not very
| appropriate. Military hardware has the luxury of larger budgets and
| one customer. Consumer Electronics is a design for an average of many
| different users.
|
|
| james
|
|
|Hello James:
|
|Sure some heads swell and arrogant egos soar. But those self center me
|first types wanting a star placed next to their name will be at the cost
|of reduced sales. Kind of like mangers who want only to emphasizer their
|important and stardom at the expense of work crews. The real sin here is
|their higher up mangers can't or don't see this. So the "Boys Club" is
|in work.
|
|The comparison of military electronic/systems to consumer electronics is
|a great analogy. By this I mean if the mind bending operation of
|cockpits can be made user friendly so can ham radios, scanners, cell
|phones ect. The overly complex design of these consumer radios will soon
|choke the manufactures in sales. Aircraft Customers appoint a "Prim
|Contractor" to do all the finger pointing and take all the customers
|product heat. Just try to point the finger at say tires and rims when
|you buy them from separate stores. So it appears consumer electronics
|manufactures lack a good product testing program, incorporating human
|engineering, user friendly button-ology, and just plain common sense.
|
|Ham radios, scanners, cell phones, and even my rice cooker can be made
|much simpler to operate. The cost need not equal the button-ology in
|functions times dollars, as in aircraft. But a hand full of
|distinguished radio enthusiasts as I mentioned early, who could take one
|of the radios as payment for their testing. So a inexpensive testing
|process can be done quit quickly and easy.
|
|Well got to haul....
|
|Jay in the Mojave
|---------------------

I would agree that manufacturers have gone wild with dedicated
microprocessors. Cars today have upwards to 20 of the little buggars
on board. I have seen commercial 2-way radios have as many as 7
microprossors. Buying a generic processor and programming it to do
what you want is faster to market than a new dedicated ASIC for each
product. SO with all those processors on board software engineers tend
to go a bit overboard. Easy to sell features that are emplemented in
software with minimal hardware than try and event the wheel all over
again.

james

james wrote:
On Sat, 22 Dec 2007 04:43:41 -0800, Jay in the Mojave
wrote:

|james wrote:
|
| Sometimes mangers,as well as engineers, fall in love to much with
| their designs and are very short sighted. They feel their designs are
| better than others. This is kind of what I tried to get across. In the
| end the management team is often held responsible for final decisions
| on designs as their sucesses and failures.
|
|
|
|
| Comparing consumer electronics to military hardware is not very
| appropriate. Military hardware has the luxury of larger budgets and
| one customer. Consumer Electronics is a design for an average of many
| different users.
|
|
| james
|
|
|Hello James:
|
|Sure some heads swell and arrogant egos soar. But those self center me
|first types wanting a star placed next to their name will be at the cost
|of reduced sales. Kind of like mangers who want only to emphasizer their
|important and stardom at the expense of work crews. The real sin here is
|their higher up mangers can't or don't see this. So the "Boys Club" is
|in work.
|
|The comparison of military electronic/systems to consumer electronics is
|a great analogy. By this I mean if the mind bending operation of
|cockpits can be made user friendly so can ham radios, scanners, cell
|phones ect. The overly complex design of these consumer radios will soon
|choke the manufactures in sales. Aircraft Customers appoint a "Prim
|Contractor" to do all the finger pointing and take all the customers
|product heat. Just try to point the finger at say tires and rims when
|you buy them from separate stores. So it appears consumer electronics
|manufactures lack a good product testing program, incorporating human
|engineering, user friendly button-ology, and just plain common sense.
|
|Ham radios, scanners, cell phones, and even my rice cooker can be made
|much simpler to operate. The cost need not equal the button-ology in
|functions times dollars, as in aircraft. But a hand full of
|distinguished radio enthusiasts as I mentioned early, who could take one
|of the radios as payment for their testing. So a inexpensive testing
|process can be done quit quickly and easy.
|
|Well got to haul....
|
|Jay in the Mojave
|---------------------

I would agree that manufacturers have gone wild with dedicated
microprocessors. Cars today have upwards to 20 of the little buggars
on board. I have seen commercial 2-way radios have as many as 7
microprossors. Buying a generic processor and programming it to do
what you want is faster to market than a new dedicated ASIC for each
product. SO with all those processors on board software engineers tend
to go a bit overboard. Easy to sell features that are emplemented in
software with minimal hardware than try and event the wheel all over
again.

james

Hello James:

Well I didn't know all that about the processors and such.

I am sure the radio buying public is growing aware of the button-ology
being user friendly or hostile. I know I am.

I bought a scanner that uses a different way to program it, I am
learning. But not impressed with it.

Merry Christmas.

Jay in the Mojave

Kreedialtials:
Not 2 many