Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

question for the LoTW

Expand Messages
  • FireBrick
    It s become apparent that some people have been uploading their entire logs, even if previously uploaded. This is unnecessary unless the additional uploads had
    Message 1 of 22 , Jan 24, 2007
      It's become apparent that some people have been uploading their entire logs,
      even if previously uploaded.
      This is unnecessary unless the additional uploads had more complete or
      corrected location/zone/ data.

      But I have the opposite question.
      Depending on how much operating I've done, I tend to upload a couple times a
      week.

      Is this too much and also causing a drag on the system.
      I usually do this in early weekday mornings, and have not noticed any delay
      in my upload being accepted.

      What's the consensus on this.

      I do it so that in case of computer malfunction, I'm safe, even though I
      backup so often as to be almost anal. (ok...not almost, I am anal about
      backing up).

      So as Bill O'Reilly says' "What say you people". "I'll give you the last
      word!"


      -----------------------------------------------------
      "The steady state of disks is full.
      -----------------------------------------------------

      Bill H. in Chicagoland
      webcams at http://76.16.160.118:8080/
      weather at http://hhweather.webhop.org
    • Don
      I have all ready had to use LoTW as my back-up log due to a fairly recent hard drive crash, since then, I upload at the end of each day that I am on the air,
      Message 2 of 22 , Jan 24, 2007
            I have all ready had to use LoTW as my back-up log due to a fairly recent hard drive crash, since then, I upload at the end of each day that I am on the air, and just the new contacts that had not previously been uploaded.
            While that may seem to be too often, it serves as my log back-up, and the uploads take very little time.  having worked for a local interenet company, I know that that is how bandwith sharing is accomplished , a lot of people on the network at one time, but actual data transfer (web pages) is in small bursts, its the big file transfers that tend to clog things up.
        Don
        Ke7ffm  
         
        ----- Original Message -----
        From: FireBrick
        Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 12:35 PM
        Subject: [ARRL-LOTW] question for the LoTW

        It's become apparent that some people have been uploading their entire logs,
        even if previously uploaded.
        This is unnecessary unless the additional uploads had more complete or
        corrected location/zone/ data.

        But I have the opposite question.
        Depending on how much operating I've done, I tend to upload a couple times a
        week.

        Is this too much and also causing a drag on the system.
        I usually do this in early weekday mornings, and have not noticed any delay
        in my upload being accepted.

        What's the consensus on this.

        I do it so that in case of computer malfunction, I'm safe, even though I
        backup so often as to be almost anal. (ok...not almost, I am anal about
        backing up).

        So as Bill O'Reilly says' "What say you people". "I'll give you the last
        word!"

        ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- -----
        "The steady state of disks is full.
        ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- -----

        Bill H. in Chicagoland
        webcams at http://76.16. 160.118:8080/
        weather at http://hhweather. webhop.org

      • Dave AA6YQ
        A daily upload should be fine. DXKeeper can automatically upload each QSO to eQSL.cc as it is logged, completely eliminating the need for the user to ever
        Message 3 of 22 , Jan 24, 2007
          A daily upload should be fine.

          DXKeeper can automatically upload each QSO to eQSL.cc as it is logged,
          completely eliminating the need for the user to ever think about uploading.
          I thought about providing this option for LotW, but decided against it to
          avoid overloading the LotW server.

          For what it's worth, optimizing LotW to accept batches of QSOs rather than
          individual QSOs in real-time was a design error. Any system that depends on
          good behavior from its users is on shaky ground; its not that users are
          malicious, they are simply ignorant of what constitutes good and bad
          behavior.

          73,

          Dave, AA6YQ

          -----Original Message-----
          From: FireBrick [mailto:w9ol@...]
          Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 2:36 PM
          To: LoTW List
          Subject: question for the LoTW


          It's become apparent that some people have been uploading their entire logs,

          even if previously uploaded.
          This is unnecessary unless the additional uploads had more complete or
          corrected location/zone/ data.

          But I have the opposite question.
          Depending on how much operating I've done, I tend to upload a couple times a

          week.

          Is this too much and also causing a drag on the system.
          I usually do this in early weekday mornings, and have not noticed any delay
          in my upload being accepted.

          What's the consensus on this.

          I do it so that in case of computer malfunction, I'm safe, even though I
          backup so often as to be almost anal. (ok...not almost, I am anal about
          backing up).

          So as Bill O'Reilly says' "What say you people". "I'll give you the last
          word!"


          -----------------------------------------------------
          "The steady state of disks is full.
          -----------------------------------------------------

          Bill H. in Chicagoland
          webcams at http://76.16.160.118:8080/
          weather at http://hhweather.webhop.org
        • alsopb@gloryroad.net
          Dave, You obviously are not a contester who makes thousands of QSO s during a contest. I doubt any of them would be interested in uploading their contacts
          Message 4 of 22 , Jan 24, 2007
            Dave,

            You obviously are not a contester who makes thousands of QSO's during a
            contest. I doubt any of them would be interested in uploading their
            contacts real time to LOTW.

            It appears to me that contesters are the biggest users of LOTW. Thus
            optimizing for the batch mode was the correct thing to do.

            73 de Brian/K3KO

            Dave AA6YQ wrote:
            >
            > For what it's worth, optimizing LotW to accept batches of QSOs rather than
            > individual QSOs in real-time was a design error. Any system that depends on
            > good behavior from its users is on shaky ground; its not that users are
            > malicious, they are simply ignorant of what constitutes good and bad
            > behavior.
            >
            > 73,
            >
            > Dave, AA6YQ
            >
            > -----Original Message-----
            > From: FireBrick [mailto:w9ol@...]
            > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 2:36 PM
            > To: LoTW List
            > Subject: question for the LoTW
            >
            >
            > It's become apparent that some people have been uploading their entire logs,
            >
            > even if previously uploaded.
            > This is unnecessary unless the additional uploads had more complete or
            > corrected location/zone/ data.
            >
            > But I have the opposite question.
            > Depending on how much operating I've done, I tend to upload a couple times a
            >
            > week.
            >
            > Is this too much and also causing a drag on the system.
            > I usually do this in early weekday mornings, and have not noticed any delay
            > in my upload being accepted.
            >
            > What's the consensus on this.
            >
            > I do it so that in case of computer malfunction, I'm safe, even though I
            > backup so often as to be almost anal. (ok...not almost, I am anal about
            > backing up).
            >
            > So as Bill O'Reilly says' "What say you people". "I'll give you the last
            > word!"
            >
            >
            > -----------------------------------------------------
            > "The steady state of disks is full.
            > -----------------------------------------------------
            >
            > Bill H. in Chicagoland
            > webcams at http://76.16.160.118:8080/
            > weather at http://hhweather.webhop.org
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
            > Yahoo! Groups Links
            >
            >
            >
            >
            >
          • Rod WC7N
            WOW thousandSSSS of contacts..... Again WOW Rod WC7N ... From: To: Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 4:45 PM
            Message 5 of 22 , Jan 24, 2007
              WOW thousandSSSS of contacts..... Again WOW

              Rod WC7N

              ----- Original Message -----
              From: <alsopb@...>
              To: <ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com>
              Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 4:45 PM
              Subject: Re: [ARRL-LOTW] RE: question for the LoTW


              > Dave,
              >
              > You obviously are not a contester who makes thousands of QSO's during a
              > contest. I doubt any of them would be interested in uploading their
              > contacts real time to LOTW.
              >
              > It appears to me that contesters are the biggest users of LOTW. Thus
              > optimizing for the batch mode was the correct thing to do.
              >
              > 73 de Brian/K3KO
              >
              > Dave AA6YQ wrote:
              >>
              >> For what it's worth, optimizing LotW to accept batches of QSOs rather
              >> than
              >> individual QSOs in real-time was a design error. Any system that depends
              >> on
              >> good behavior from its users is on shaky ground; its not that users are
              >> malicious, they are simply ignorant of what constitutes good and bad
              >> behavior.
              >>
              >> 73,
              >>
              >> Dave, AA6YQ
              >>
              >> -----Original Message-----
              >> From: FireBrick [mailto:w9ol@...]
              >> Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 2:36 PM
              >> To: LoTW List
              >> Subject: question for the LoTW
              >>
              >>
              >> It's become apparent that some people have been uploading their entire
              >> logs,
              >>
              >> even if previously uploaded.
              >> This is unnecessary unless the additional uploads had more complete or
              >> corrected location/zone/ data.
              >>
              >> But I have the opposite question.
              >> Depending on how much operating I've done, I tend to upload a couple
              >> times a
              >>
              >> week.
              >>
              >> Is this too much and also causing a drag on the system.
              >> I usually do this in early weekday mornings, and have not noticed any
              >> delay
              >> in my upload being accepted.
              >>
              >> What's the consensus on this.
              >>
              >> I do it so that in case of computer malfunction, I'm safe, even though I
              >> backup so often as to be almost anal. (ok...not almost, I am anal about
              >> backing up).
              >>
              >> So as Bill O'Reilly says' "What say you people". "I'll give you the last
              >> word!"
              >>
              >>
              >> -----------------------------------------------------
              >> "The steady state of disks is full.
              >> -----------------------------------------------------
              >>
              >> Bill H. in Chicagoland
              >> webcams at http://76.16.160.118:8080/
              >> weather at http://hhweather.webhop.org
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >> Yahoo! Groups Links
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >>
              >
              >
              >
              > Yahoo! Groups Links
              >
              >
              >
              >
            • Dave Bernstein
              Contesters may well upload more QSOs to LotW than other users, but they probably generate fewer upload batches than other users; they typically upload one
              Message 6 of 22 , Jan 24, 2007
                Contesters may well upload more QSOs to LotW than other users, but
                they probably generate fewer upload batches than other users; they
                typically upload one large batch at the conclusion of each contest.

                Let's assume that you're right. Based on this revelation, I and
                several other developers of logging applications optimized for DXers
                and general operators conclude that we can increase the convenience
                of our applications to our users by automatically uploading each QSO
                to LotW as its logged; after all, this would be just a drop in the
                bucket compared to the load generated by contesters. The upload can
                be implemented as a low-priority background process, thereby
                minimizing any performance impact on the user's PC.

                As a result, the LotW server becomes swamped because of the overhead
                of accepting a connection, uploading a file, decrypting the file, and
                closing the connection is now amortized over 1 QSO instead of the
                current N -- except immediately after contests, when the large
                uploads increase its efficiency (but dramatically reduce its response
                time).

                The LotW team can't tolerate this effective reduction in capacity, so
                they modify the LotW code to refuse to accept QSOs uploaded in a
                batch containing fewer than 4 QSOs. This pushes LotW support for WAC
                from 2008 to 2009.

                We logging application developers won't be overcome so easily; we
                modify our applications to automatically upload a batch of 4 QSOs
                after each logged QSO -- the new QSO, and 3 bogus QSOs with TE1ST
                that our applications will automatically ignore when downloading from
                LotW. Effective LotW server capacity drops again, and the LotW team
                has to waste more time figuring a way to protect their servers. LotW
                support for WAC moves out to 2010.

                Does this still sound like the right design?

                A more appropriate design would

                -- efficiently upload, accept, and match a single QSO, returning the
                results to the user in real-time (eliminating the current
                repetitive "are they accepted?" transactions and often eliminating
                the "is it confirmed?" transaction).

                -- accept a batch of uploaded QSOs, schedule this batch for low-
                priority background processing, and return the results to the user
                when complete (eliminating the current need for repetitive "are they
                accepted?" transactions).

                73,

                Dave, AA6YQ



                73,

                Dave, AA6YQ

                --- In ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com, alsopb@... wrote:
                >
                > Dave,
                >
                > You obviously are not a contester who makes thousands of QSO's
                during a
                > contest. I doubt any of them would be interested in uploading
                their
                > contacts real time to LOTW.
                >
                > It appears to me that contesters are the biggest users of LOTW.
                Thus
                > optimizing for the batch mode was the correct thing to do.
                >
                > 73 de Brian/K3KO
                >
                > Dave AA6YQ wrote:
                > >
                > > For what it's worth, optimizing LotW to accept batches of QSOs
                rather than
                > > individual QSOs in real-time was a design error. Any system that
                depends on
                > > good behavior from its users is on shaky ground; its not that
                users are
                > > malicious, they are simply ignorant of what constitutes good and
                bad
                > > behavior.
                > >
                > > 73,
                > >
                > > Dave, AA6YQ
                > >
                > > -----Original Message-----
                > > From: FireBrick [mailto:w9ol@...]
                > > Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 2:36 PM
                > > To: LoTW List
                > > Subject: question for the LoTW
                > >
                > >
                > > It's become apparent that some people have been uploading their
                entire logs,
                > >
                > > even if previously uploaded.
                > > This is unnecessary unless the additional uploads had more
                complete or
                > > corrected location/zone/ data.
                > >
                > > But I have the opposite question.
                > > Depending on how much operating I've done, I tend to upload a
                couple times a
                > >
                > > week.
                > >
                > > Is this too much and also causing a drag on the system.
                > > I usually do this in early weekday mornings, and have not noticed
                any delay
                > > in my upload being accepted.
                > >
                > > What's the consensus on this.
                > >
                > > I do it so that in case of computer malfunction, I'm safe, even
                though I
                > > backup so often as to be almost anal. (ok...not almost, I am anal
                about
                > > backing up).
                > >
                > > So as Bill O'Reilly says' "What say you people". "I'll give you
                the last
                > > word!"
                > >
                > >
                > > -----------------------------------------------------
                > > "The steady state of disks is full.
                > > -----------------------------------------------------
                > >
                > > Bill H. in Chicagoland
                > > webcams at http://76.16.160.118:8080/
                > > weather at http://hhweather.webhop.org
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > > Yahoo! Groups Links
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                > >
                >
              • alsopb@gloryroad.net
                Dave, I can t see any benefit to the real time QSO upload . Instant gratification? It depends upon both ends of a QSO being real time . Again you re
                Message 7 of 22 , Jan 25, 2007
                  Dave,

                  I can't see any benefit to the "real time QSO upload". Instant
                  gratification? It depends upon both ends of a QSO being "real time".

                  Again you're pushing for something that is a low probability event.
                  This is the same reason the ADIF people rejected your suggested mods to
                  ADIF file format.

                  BTW have you ever created an ADIF file for 10K QSO's. It is really
                  bloated. It doesn't need more fields for even greater bloat. You know
                  not everybody in this world is broadband.

                  I also don't think you've done very many uploads to LOTW. Over the past
                  years since the inception of LOTW I've done several hundered- both small
                  (about 10) and large (thousands) uploads. The response is very good.
                  The smaller ones get into the system in a few seconds (after upload).
                  Sometimes larger ones are spooled (especially contest weekends or when
                  system maintenance is being done) and delayed up to hours. So spooling
                  already exists. When not spooled it is only a matter of a minute or two
                  for the larger files to get into the system.

                  I see nothing wrong in having a system that works well for users
                  supplying the bulk of its contents. Apparently you do because of some
                  kind of personal crusade.

                  I don't think the system was ever intended to be a Bank of America
                  transaction oriented system.

                  Anyhow, apparently the LOTW system is running quite a bit below capacity
                  now.

                  THEIR PROBLEM IS GETTING MORE USERS NOT THROUGHPUT. Instant
                  gratification isn't the issue. Acceptance by "not invented here" types
                  is. So is the clumsy setup by the user. If they had a setup WIZARD to
                  handle the mess, there also would be more users. If money is to be
                  spent on anything (doubtful), such a WIZARD would the the biggest bang/buck.

                  I'm sure they would be ecstatic to have so many users that response time
                  becomes an issue.

                  73 de Brian/K3KO

                  Dave Bernstein wrote:
                  > Contesters may well upload more QSOs to LotW than other users, but
                  > they probably generate fewer upload batches than other users; they
                  > typically upload one large batch at the conclusion of each contest.
                  >
                  > Let's assume that you're right. Based on this revelation, I and
                  > several other developers of logging applications optimized for DXers
                  > and general operators conclude that we can increase the convenience
                  > of our applications to our users by automatically uploading each QSO
                  > to LotW as its logged; after all, this would be just a drop in the
                  > bucket compared to the load generated by contesters. The upload can
                  > be implemented as a low-priority background process, thereby
                  > minimizing any performance impact on the user's PC.
                  >
                  > As a result, the LotW server becomes swamped because of the overhead
                  > of accepting a connection, uploading a file, decrypting the file, and
                  > closing the connection is now amortized over 1 QSO instead of the
                  > current N -- except immediately after contests, when the large
                  > uploads increase its efficiency (but dramatically reduce its response
                  > time).
                  >
                  > The LotW team can't tolerate this effective reduction in capacity, so
                  > they modify the LotW code to refuse to accept QSOs uploaded in a
                  > batch containing fewer than 4 QSOs. This pushes LotW support for WAC
                  > from 2008 to 2009.
                  >
                  > We logging application developers won't be overcome so easily; we
                  > modify our applications to automatically upload a batch of 4 QSOs
                  > after each logged QSO -- the new QSO, and 3 bogus QSOs with TE1ST
                  > that our applications will automatically ignore when downloading from
                  > LotW. Effective LotW server capacity drops again, and the LotW team
                  > has to waste more time figuring a way to protect their servers. LotW
                  > support for WAC moves out to 2010.
                  >
                  > Does this still sound like the right design?
                  >
                  > A more appropriate design would
                  >
                  > -- efficiently upload, accept, and match a single QSO, returning the
                  > results to the user in real-time (eliminating the current
                  > repetitive "are they accepted?" transactions and often eliminating
                  > the "is it confirmed?" transaction).
                  >
                  > -- accept a batch of uploaded QSOs, schedule this batch for low-
                  > priority background processing, and return the results to the user
                  > when complete (eliminating the current need for repetitive "are they
                  > accepted?" transactions).
                  >
                  > 73,
                  >
                  > Dave, AA6YQ
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > 73,
                  >
                  > Dave, AA6YQ
                  >
                  > --- In ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com, alsopb@... wrote:
                  >
                  >>Dave,
                  >>
                  >>You obviously are not a contester who makes thousands of QSO's
                  >
                  > during a
                  >
                  >>contest. I doubt any of them would be interested in uploading
                  >
                  > their
                  >
                  >>contacts real time to LOTW.
                  >>
                  >>It appears to me that contesters are the biggest users of LOTW.
                  >
                  > Thus
                  >
                  >>optimizing for the batch mode was the correct thing to do.
                  >>
                  >>73 de Brian/K3KO
                  >>
                  >>Dave AA6YQ wrote:
                  >>
                  >>>For what it's worth, optimizing LotW to accept batches of QSOs
                  >
                  > rather than
                  >
                  >>>individual QSOs in real-time was a design error. Any system that
                  >
                  > depends on
                  >
                  >>>good behavior from its users is on shaky ground; its not that
                  >
                  > users are
                  >
                  >>>malicious, they are simply ignorant of what constitutes good and
                  >
                  > bad
                  >
                  >>>behavior.
                  >>>
                  >>> 73,
                  >>>
                  >>> Dave, AA6YQ
                  >>>
                  >>>-----Original Message-----
                  >>>From: FireBrick [mailto:w9ol@...]
                  >>>Sent: Wednesday, January 24, 2007 2:36 PM
                  >>>To: LoTW List
                  >>>Subject: question for the LoTW
                  >>>
                  >>>
                  >>>It's become apparent that some people have been uploading their
                  >
                  > entire logs,
                  >
                  >>>even if previously uploaded.
                  >>>This is unnecessary unless the additional uploads had more
                  >
                  > complete or
                  >
                  >>>corrected location/zone/ data.
                  >>>
                  >>>But I have the opposite question.
                  >>>Depending on how much operating I've done, I tend to upload a
                  >
                  > couple times a
                  >
                  >>>week.
                  >>>
                  >>>Is this too much and also causing a drag on the system.
                  >>>I usually do this in early weekday mornings, and have not noticed
                  >
                  > any delay
                  >
                  >>>in my upload being accepted.
                  >>>
                  >>>What's the consensus on this.
                  >>>
                  >>>I do it so that in case of computer malfunction, I'm safe, even
                  >
                  > though I
                  >
                  >>>backup so often as to be almost anal. (ok...not almost, I am anal
                  >
                  > about
                  >
                  >>>backing up).
                  >>>
                  >>>So as Bill O'Reilly says' "What say you people". "I'll give you
                  >
                  > the last
                  >
                  >>>word!"
                  >>>
                  >>>
                  >>>-----------------------------------------------------
                  >>>"The steady state of disks is full.
                  >>>-----------------------------------------------------
                  >>>
                  >>>Bill H. in Chicagoland
                  >>>webcams at http://76.16.160.118:8080/
                  >>>weather at http://hhweather.webhop.org
                  >>>
                  >>>
                  >>>
                  >>>
                  >>>
                  >>>
                  >>>Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >>>
                  >>>
                  >>>
                  >>>
                  >>>
                  >>
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                • Dave Bernstein
                  ... Dave, I can t see any benefit to the real time QSO upload . Instant gratification? ... the QSO to LotW and determines that LotW has accepted that uploaded
                  Message 8 of 22 , Jan 25, 2007
                    >>>AA6YQ comments below

                    --- In ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com, alsopb@... wrote:

                    Dave,

                    I can't see any benefit to the "real time QSO upload". Instant
                    gratification?

                    >>>No - automation. If clicking the Log button automatically uploads
                    the QSO to LotW and determines that LotW has accepted that uploaded
                    QSO, then the user need never perform those actions manually. In
                    contrast, a DXKeeper user today must remember to periodically
                    click "upload to LotW" and "SyncLotWQSOs".


                    It depends upon both ends of a QSO being "real time".

                    >>>Not true, Brian. You can upload your QSOs and verify their
                    acceptance independent of their confirmation by your QSO partner.


                    Again you're pushing for something that is a low probability event.

                    >>>The question that began this thread was Bill W9OL's "is it okay to
                    upload each day?". Once a day is not a low probability event.


                    This is the same reason the ADIF people rejected your suggested mods
                    to ADIF file format.

                    >>>Since you are not a member of the ADIF development community and
                    have participated in none of its discussions over the years, I'd be
                    interested in how you know that.


                    BTW have you ever created an ADIF file for 10K QSO's. It is really
                    bloated. It doesn't need more fields for even greater bloat. You
                    know not everybody in this world is broadband.

                    >>>I have been involved with LotW since it entered beta test; at that
                    time, my primary log contained ~15K QSOs, and I uploaded them en
                    masse.

                    >>>ADIF was designed to enable amateurs to move QSOs from one logging
                    application to another -- typically via disk files. It was the ARRL's
                    decision to use it as the representation for information being
                    uploaded to and downloaded from LotW -- probably because it
                    immediately enables most logging applications to at least support
                    uploading. Yes, text-oriented representations are "big" compared with
                    encoded representations, but I think the LotW development team made
                    the correct tradeoff. The uptake of broadband across the general
                    population is rising faster than most expected; among hams, the
                    uptake is probably even faster.


                    I also don't think you've done very many uploads to LOTW.

                    >>>How could you possibly know that? I upload QSOs from my primary
                    log at least weekly. All of my QSOs from FJ/AA6YQ, KP2/AA6YQ, and
                    KH6/AA6YQ were immediately uploaded. Given the large numbers of LotW
                    users among the DXLab user community, I am constantly informed of the
                    issues that LotW users encounter.

                    Over the past years since the inception of LOTW I've done several
                    hundered- both small (about 10) and large (thousands) uploads. The
                    response is very good.

                    >>>Then you've been lucky. There have been many multi-day LotW
                    outages, and there have been many times when uploaded QSOs have not
                    been accepted for days.

                    The smaller ones get into the system in a few seconds (after upload).
                    Sometimes larger ones are spooled (especially contest weekends or
                    when system maintenance is being done) and delayed up to hours. So
                    spooling already exists. When not spooled it is only a matter of a
                    minute or two for the larger files to get into the system.

                    >>>"Spooling" is a term typically reserved for the batch processing
                    of printer requests.

                    I see nothing wrong in having a system that works well for users
                    supplying the bulk of its contents. Apparently you do because of
                    some kind of personal crusade.

                    >>>I have long been on a personal crusade for high-quality, easy-to-
                    use software. Nothing improves without criticism; aim low, and you'll
                    hit the ground every time. Defensiveness is not a constructive
                    response.

                    I don't think the system was ever intended to be a Bank of America
                    transaction oriented system.

                    >>>LotW was far more concerned with security than useability. With
                    enough development resources, this tradeoff might have worked out
                    okay. With barely enough resources to operate the system, the impact
                    on user uptake is obvious.

                    Anyhow, apparently the LOTW system is running quite a bit below
                    capacity now.

                    >>>On what data do you base this conclusion?

                    THEIR PROBLEM IS GETTING MORE USERS NOT THROUGHPUT. Instant
                    gratification isn't the issue. Acceptance by "not invented here"
                    types is. So is the clumsy setup by the user. If they had a setup
                    WIZARD to handle the mess, there also would be more users. If money
                    is to be spent on anything (doubtful), such a WIZARD would the the
                    biggest bang/buck.

                    >>>I have spent a large amount of time providing a fully-automated
                    easy-to use interface to LotW within DXlab. While I would have
                    preferred a different design, this hasn't stopped me from providing
                    comprehensive support for the current system.

                    >>>A wizard to cover the initial registration and re-registration
                    scenarios would indeed be helpful. When will you have it ready?

                    73,

                    Dave, AA6YQ
                  • Dave Bernstein
                    ... Dave, I can t see any benefit to the real time QSO upload . Instant gratification? ... the QSO to LotW and determines that LotW has accepted that uploaded
                    Message 9 of 22 , Jan 25, 2007
                      >>>AA6YQ comments below

                      --- In ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com, alsopb@... wrote:

                      Dave,

                      I can't see any benefit to the "real time QSO upload". Instant
                      gratification?

                      >>>No - automation. If clicking the Log button automatically uploads
                      the QSO to LotW and determines that LotW has accepted that uploaded
                      QSO, then the user need never perform those actions manually. In
                      contrast, a DXKeeper user today must remember to periodically
                      click "upload to LotW" and "SyncLotWQSOs".


                      It depends upon both ends of a QSO being "real time".

                      >>>Not true, Brian. You can upload your QSOs and verify their
                      acceptance independent of their confirmation by your QSO partner.


                      Again you're pushing for something that is a low probability event.

                      >>>The question that began this thread was Bill W9OL's "is it okay to
                      upload each day?". Once a day is not a low probability event.


                      This is the same reason the ADIF people rejected your suggested mods
                      to ADIF file format.

                      >>>Since you are not a member of the ADIF development community and
                      have participated in none of its discussions over the years, I'd be
                      interested in how you reached this conclusion. Incidentally, several
                      logging applications have implemented these as private (non-
                      interchangeable) tags.


                      BTW have you ever created an ADIF file for 10K QSO's. It is really
                      bloated. It doesn't need more fields for even greater bloat. You
                      know not everybody in this world is broadband.

                      >>>Yes. I have been involved with LotW since it entered beta test; at
                      that time, my primary log contained ~15K QSOs, and I uploaded them en
                      masse.

                      >>>ADIF was designed to enable amateurs to move QSOs from one logging
                      application to another -- typically via disk files. It was the ARRL's
                      decision to use it as the representation for information being
                      uploaded to and downloaded from LotW -- probably because it
                      immediately enables most logging applications to at least support
                      uploading. Yes, text-oriented representations are "big" compared with
                      encoded representations, but I think the LotW development team made
                      the correct tradeoff. A new representation optimized for compactness
                      would have created a nasty chicken-and-egg scenario between support
                      from logging application developers and users; by choosing ADIF, the
                      ARRL eliminated a potentially showstopping impediment to LotW
                      adoption by immediately accepting uploads from tools already in
                      users' hands.

                      >>>The uptake of broadband across the general population is rising
                      faster than most observers predicted. Music, VOIP, games, and video
                      will continue to drive this trends. Even if hams are late adopters,
                      their kids aren't.


                      I also don't think you've done very many uploads to LOTW.

                      >>>There's no way for you to know that, and you are wrong. I upload
                      QSOs from my primary log at least weekly. All of my FJ/AA6YQ,
                      KP2/AA6YQ, and KH6/AA6YQ QSOs have been uploaded; in aggregate,
                      that's more than 20K QSOs. Given the large numbers of LotW users
                      among the DXLab user community, I am made continuously aware of the
                      issues that LotW users encounter.


                      Over the past years since the inception of LOTW I've done several
                      hundered- both small (about 10) and large (thousands) uploads. The
                      response is very good.

                      >>>Then you've been lucky. There have been many multi-day LotW
                      outages, and there have been many times when uploaded QSOs have not
                      been accepted for days.


                      The smaller ones get into the system in a few seconds (after upload).
                      Sometimes larger ones are spooled (especially contest weekends or
                      when system maintenance is being done) and delayed up to hours. So
                      spooling already exists. When not spooled it is only a matter of a
                      minute or two for the larger files to get into the system.

                      >>>"Spooling" is a term typically applied to the batch processing of
                      printer requests.


                      I see nothing wrong in having a system that works well for users
                      supplying the bulk of its contents.

                      >>>I assume you are referring to contesters. If contesters are LotW's
                      primary users, why has the ARRL focused on connecting LotW to the
                      DXCC desk's award tracking system, and shown no progress toward
                      automated scoring or submissions for ARRL contests?


                      Apparently you do because of some kind of personal crusade.

                      >>>My crusade for high-quality, easy-to-use software began long
                      before LotW's conception. Nothing improves without criticism; aim
                      low, and you'll hit the ground every time. Defensiveness is not a
                      useful response; I encounter much more of it from "LotW supporters"
                      than from the LotW development team.


                      I don't think the system was ever intended to be a Bank of America
                      transaction oriented system.

                      >>>The ARRL was far more concerned with security than useability.
                      With enough development resources, this tradeoff might have worked
                      out okay. With barely enough resources to operate the system, the
                      negative impact on user uptake is obvious.


                      Anyhow, apparently the LOTW system is running quite a bit below
                      capacity now.

                      >>>On what data do you base this conclusion?


                      THEIR PROBLEM IS GETTING MORE USERS NOT THROUGHPUT. Instant
                      gratification isn't the issue. Acceptance by "not invented here"
                      types is.

                      >>>I have spent a large amount of time providing a fully-automated
                      easy-to-use interface to LotW within DXlab. While I would have
                      preferred a different design, this hasn't stopped me from providing
                      comprehensive support for LotW.


                      So is the clumsy setup by the user. If they had a setup WIZARD to
                      handle the mess, there also would be more users. If money is to be
                      spent on anything (doubtful), such a WIZARD would the the biggest
                      bang/buck.

                      >>>A wizard to cover the setup and renewal scenarios would indeed be
                      helpful. When will you have one ready for testing, Brian?

                      73,

                      Dave, AA6YQ
                    • Mike(W5UC) & Kathy(K5MWH)
                      One of you wrote: a DXKeeper user today must remember to periodically click upload to LotW and SyncLotWQSOs . While you gentlemen continue your pissing
                      Message 10 of 22 , Jan 26, 2007
                        One of you wrote:
                        a DXKeeper user today must remember to periodically
                        click "upload to LotW" and "SyncLotWQSOs".

                        While you gentlemen continue your pissing contest, please let me ask
                        a question. Does DX Lab support both cabrillo and ADIF? I enjoy
                        participating in some of the contests sponsored by the League (both
                        VHF & DX), but they only allow uploading of logs in cabrillo
                        (fortunately the LOTW creators were smart enough to support both) ,
                        and my logging program only supports ADIF, therefore I don't send in
                        logs. I need a SIMPLE way to get the output of my logging software
                        from ADIF to cabrillo. (and NO, I don't want to change logging software)

                        73,
                        Mike, W5UC

                        "age & treachery will overcome youth & skill"
                        http://www.suddenlink.net/pages/w5uc/
                      • Mike(W5UC) & Kathy(K5MWH)
                        One of you wrote: a DXKeeper user today must remember to periodically click upload to LotW and SyncLotWQSOs . While you gentlemen continue your pi(ss)ing
                        Message 11 of 22 , Jan 26, 2007
                          One of you wrote:
                          a DXKeeper user today must remember to periodically
                          click "upload to LotW" and "SyncLotWQSOs".

                          While you gentlemen continue your pi(ss)ing contest, please let me ask a question.  Does DX Lab support both cabrillo and ADIF? Is there a DX logging program that does? I enjoy participating in some of the contests sponsored by the League (both VHF & DX), but they only allow uploading of logs in cabrillo (fortunately the LOTW creators were smart enough to support both) , and my logging program only supports ADIF, therefore I don't submit logs. I need a SIMPLE way to get the output of my logging software from ADIF to cabrillo. (and NO, I don't want to change logging software)

                          73,
                          Mike, W5UC

                          "age & treachery will overcome youth & skill"
                          http://www.suddenlink.net/pages/w5uc/

                        • Dave Bernstein
                          DXKeeper supports Cabrillo generation for 20+ contests. See http://www.dxlabsuite.com/dxkeeper/Help/Contesting.htm 73, Dave, AA6YQ ... ask ... in ... software)
                          Message 12 of 22 , Jan 28, 2007
                            DXKeeper supports Cabrillo generation for 20+ contests. See

                            http://www.dxlabsuite.com/dxkeeper/Help/Contesting.htm

                            73,

                            Dave, AA6YQ





                            --- In ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com, "Mike(W5UC) & Kathy(K5MWH)"
                            <w5uc@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > One of you wrote:
                            > a DXKeeper user today must remember to periodically
                            > click "upload to LotW" and "SyncLotWQSOs".
                            >
                            > While you gentlemen continue your pissing contest, please let me
                            ask
                            > a question. Does DX Lab support both cabrillo and ADIF? I enjoy
                            > participating in some of the contests sponsored by the League (both
                            > VHF & DX), but they only allow uploading of logs in cabrillo
                            > (fortunately the LOTW creators were smart enough to support both) ,
                            > and my logging program only supports ADIF, therefore I don't send
                            in
                            > logs. I need a SIMPLE way to get the output of my logging software
                            > from ADIF to cabrillo. (and NO, I don't want to change logging
                            software)
                            >
                            > 73,
                            > Mike, W5UC
                            >
                            > "age & treachery will overcome youth & skill"
                            > http://www.suddenlink.net/pages/w5uc/
                            >
                          • Joe Subich, W4TV
                            Mike, For converting ADIF to Cabrillo, try: http://www.ka5wss.com/Software/LogConv/Documentation/matrix.htm Inexpensive but depending on the contest (and
                            Message 13 of 22 , Jan 28, 2007
                              Mike,

                              For converting ADIF to Cabrillo, try:
                              http://www.ka5wss.com/Software/LogConv/Documentation/matrix.htm

                              Inexpensive but depending on the contest (and cabrillo format) it
                              may be what you need. The problem with Cabrillo is that it is not
                              a "standard" format - each contest has a different format depending
                              on the exchange and the sponsors' whims.

                              It is also possible to use Excel to manually convert ADIF to
                              Cabrillo (or vice versa) with a little work. Once you have the
                              format for a contest you can use it in subsequent years or modify
                              it slightly for similar contests.

                              73,

                              ... Joe, W4TV



                              > -----Original Message-----
                              > From: ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com
                              > [mailto:ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Mike(W5UC) &
                              > Kathy(K5MWH)
                              > Sent: Friday, January 26, 2007 9:10 AM
                              > To: ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com
                              > Subject: Re: [ARRL-LOTW] Re: question for the LoTW
                              >
                              >
                              > One of you wrote:
                              > a DXKeeper user today must remember to periodically
                              > click "upload to LotW" and "SyncLotWQSOs".
                              >
                              > While you gentlemen continue your pissing contest, please let me ask
                              > a question. Does DX Lab support both cabrillo and ADIF? I enjoy
                              > participating in some of the contests sponsored by the League (both
                              > VHF & DX), but they only allow uploading of logs in cabrillo
                              > (fortunately the LOTW creators were smart enough to support both) ,
                              > and my logging program only supports ADIF, therefore I don't send in
                              > logs. I need a SIMPLE way to get the output of my logging software
                              > from ADIF to cabrillo. (and NO, I don't want to change
                              > logging software)
                              >
                              > 73,
                              > Mike, W5UC
                              >
                              > "age & treachery will overcome youth & skill"
                              > http://www.suddenlink.net/pages/w5uc/
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              > Yahoo! Groups Links
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                              >
                            • Mike(W5UC) & Kathy(K5MWH)
                              ... Ok, so what happens if I convert my ADIF output to Cabrillo and submit it for the Cw 160 contest. Again thanks to all who sent info. BV7 has a quick & easy
                              Message 14 of 22 , Jan 29, 2007
                                At 08:50 AM 1/28/2007, you wrote:
                                >each contest has a different format depending
                                >on the exchange and the sponsors' whims.

                                Ok, so what happens if I convert my ADIF output to Cabrillo and
                                submit it for the Cw 160 contest.

                                Again thanks to all who sent info. BV7 has a quick & easy system for
                                doing the conversion. However, as indicated in the above question
                                I'm wondering if all of the info wanted by the CQ contest folks will
                                be provided. I did a couple of conversions, and the state or DX
                                prefix does for the just finished 160 meter contest not show up in
                                the converted file.

                                73,
                                Mike, W5UC




                                "age & treachery will overcome youth & skill"
                                http://www.suddenlink.net/pages/w5uc/
                              • Gerry Hohn
                                Mike, Contest specific (and general header requirements) for Cabrillo are at: http://www.kkn.net/~trey/cabrillo/ Gerry VE6LB ... From: Mike(W5UC) &
                                Message 15 of 22 , Jan 29, 2007
                                  Mike,

                                  Contest specific (and general header requirements) for Cabrillo are at:
                                  http://www.kkn.net/~trey/cabrillo/

                                  Gerry VE6LB

                                  ----- Original Message -----
                                  From: "Mike(W5UC) & Kathy(K5MWH)" <w5uc@...>
                                  To: <ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com>
                                  Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 12:19 PM
                                  Subject: RE: [ARRL-LOTW] Re: question for the LoTW


                                  > At 08:50 AM 1/28/2007, you wrote:
                                  >>each contest has a different format depending
                                  >>on the exchange and the sponsors' whims.
                                  >
                                  > Ok, so what happens if I convert my ADIF output to Cabrillo and
                                  > submit it for the Cw 160 contest.
                                  >
                                  > Again thanks to all who sent info. BV7 has a quick & easy system for
                                  > doing the conversion. However, as indicated in the above question
                                  > I'm wondering if all of the info wanted by the CQ contest folks will
                                  > be provided. I did a couple of conversions, and the state or DX
                                  > prefix does for the just finished 160 meter contest not show up in
                                  > the converted file.
                                  >
                                  > 73,
                                  > Mike, W5UC
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > "age & treachery will overcome youth & skill"
                                  > http://www.suddenlink.net/pages/w5uc/
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                  > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                  >
                                  >
                                  >
                                • Mike(W5UC) & Kathy(K5MWH)
                                  Thanks Gerry: I looked at the data on cabrillo formats and all I can say is that it s a good thing I m not seriously interested in contesting. My 93 year old
                                  Message 16 of 22 , Jan 29, 2007
                                    Thanks Gerry:

                                    I looked at the data on cabrillo formats and all I can say is that it's a good thing I'm not seriously interested in contesting.  My 93 year old mother has a saying:  "that's too much sugar for a dime"

                                    I just like to casually participate in various contests, but I'm not gonna spend 8-10 bucks each to register all the variations of N3FJP's software just to send in a log for 25-100 contacts.  I may go take a second look at some of the freebie software previously mentioned here and see if that will work for my casual contest activity.  My current logging program apparently will not export the necessary info to satisfy the contesting format(or maybe the ADIF to cabrillo conversion that I'm using won't import the necessary info), so possibly I can export a file from my contest logger in ADIF and import the data into my primary electronic log.  Beyond that; screw-em, they just don't get a log from me, and my contest activity won't be preserved for all posterity.  Oh man, I hate it when that happens.

                                    73,
                                    Mike, W5UC
                                    At 01:47 PM 1/29/2007, you wrote:


                                    Mike,

                                    Contest specific (and general header requirements) for Cabrillo are at:
                                    http://www.kkn.net/~trey/cabrillo/

                                    Gerry VE6LB

                                    ----- Original Message -----
                                    From: "Mike(W5UC) & Kathy(K5MWH)" <w5uc@...>
                                    To: < ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com>
                                    Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 12:19 PM
                                    Subject: RE: [ARRL-LOTW] Re: question for the LoTW

                                    > At 08:50 AM 1/28/2007, you wrote:
                                    >>each contest has a different format depending
                                    >>on the exchange and the sponsors' whims.
                                    >
                                    > Ok, so what happens if I convert my ADIF output to Cabrillo and
                                    > submit it for the Cw 160 contest.
                                    >
                                    > Again thanks to all who sent info. BV7 has a quick & easy system for
                                    > doing the conversion. However, as indicated in the above question
                                    > I'm wondering if all of the info wanted by the CQ contest folks will
                                    > be provided. I did a couple of conversions, and the state or DX
                                    > prefix does for the just finished 160 meter contest not show up in
                                    > the converted file.
                                    >
                                    > 73,
                                    > Mike, W5UC
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > "age & treachery will overcome youth & skill"
                                    > http://www.suddenlink.net/pages/w5uc/
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >
                                    > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                    >
                                    >
                                    >


                                    No virus found in this incoming message.
                                    Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                                    Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.12/655 - Release Date: 1/28/2007 1:12 PM

                                    "age & treachery will overcome youth & skill"
                                    http://www.suddenlink.net/pages/w5uc/

                                  • Dave-GVK
                                    Mike: Look at KA5WSS software log converter. I use this to convert to various needed formats. http://www.ka5wss.com/Software/LogConv/ or Google search on his
                                    Message 17 of 22 , Jan 29, 2007
                                      Mike:
                                      Look at KA5WSS software log converter. I use this to convert to various needed formats.
                                      http://www.ka5wss.com/Software/LogConv/ or Google search on his call.
                                       
                                      Dave, K8GVK
                                       
                                      ----- Original Message -----
                                      Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 4:45 PM
                                      Subject: Re: [ARRL-LOTW] Re: question for the LoTW

                                      Thanks Gerry:

                                      I looked at the data on cabrillo formats and all I can say is that it's a good thing I'm not seriously interested in contesting.  My 93 year old mother has a saying:  "that's too much sugar for a dime"

                                      I just like to casually participate in various contests, but I'm not gonna spend 8-10 bucks each to register all the variations of N3FJP's software just to send in a log for 25-100 contacts.  I may go take a second look at some of the freebie software previously mentioned here and see if that will work for my casual contest activity.  My current logging program apparently will not export the necessary info to satisfy the contesting format(or maybe the ADIF to cabrillo conversion that I'm using won't import the necessary info), so possibly I can export a file from my contest logger in ADIF and import the data into my primary electronic log.  Beyond that; screw-em, they just don't get a log from me, and my contest activity won't be preserved for all posterity.  Oh man, I hate it when that happens.

                                      73,
                                      Mike, W5UC
                                      At 01:47 PM 1/29/2007, you wrote:


                                      Mike,

                                      Contest specific (and general header requirements) for Cabrillo are at:
                                      http://www.kkn.net/~trey/cabrillo/

                                      Gerry VE6LB

                                      ----- Original Message -----
                                      From: "Mike(W5UC) & Kathy(K5MWH)" <w5uc@...>
                                      To: < ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com>
                                      Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 12:19 PM
                                      Subject: RE: [ARRL-LOTW] Re: question for the LoTW

                                      > At 08:50 AM 1/28/2007, you wrote:
                                      >>each contest has a different format depending
                                      >>on the exchange and the sponsors' whims.
                                      >
                                      > Ok, so what happens if I convert my ADIF output to Cabrillo and
                                      > submit it for the Cw 160 contest.
                                      >
                                      > Again thanks to all who sent info. BV7 has a quick & easy system for
                                      > doing the conversion. However, as indicated in the above question
                                      > I'm wondering if all of the info wanted by the CQ contest folks will
                                      > be provided. I did a couple of conversions, and the state or DX
                                      > prefix does for the just finished 160 meter contest not show up in
                                      > the converted file.
                                      >
                                      > 73,
                                      > Mike, W5UC
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > "age & treachery will overcome youth & skill"
                                      > http://www.suddenlink.net/pages/w5uc/
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >
                                      > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                      >
                                      >
                                      >


                                      No virus found in this incoming message.
                                      Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                                      Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.12/655 - Release Date: 1/28/2007 1:12 PM

                                      "age & treachery will overcome youth & skill"
                                      http://www.suddenlink.net/pages/w5uc/

                                    • Gerry
                                      Mike Why not try N1MM. It s very user friendly and free. It s a contesting program and covers pretty well all of them. It exports Cabrillo and ADIF (to import
                                      Message 18 of 22 , Jan 29, 2007
                                         
                                        Mike
                                         
                                        Why not try N1MM. It's very user friendly and free. It's a contesting program and covers pretty well all of them. It exports Cabrillo and ADIF (to import into N3FJP).
                                         
                                        I use Logger32 as my total logging program and N1MM http://pages.cthome.net/n1mm/ as my contesting toll. After the contest, I send my Cabrillo file to the contest folks and import my ADIF to Logger32. Then I export ADIF from Logger32 to LoTW. Likely you could send your ADIF directly from N1MM but never have done that as I want my total records kept in L32.
                                         
                                        Gerry
                                        VE6LB/VA6XDX
                                        ARRL DXCC Card Checker
                                        VE/VA6 QSL Bureau Team
                                        (403) 251-6520
                                        ve6lb (at) rac.ca
                                        www.qsl.net/ve6lb/
                                        ----- Original Message -----
                                        Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 2:45 PM
                                        Subject: Re: [ARRL-LOTW] Re: question for the LoTW

                                        Thanks Gerry:

                                        I looked at the data on cabrillo formats and all I can say is that it's a good thing I'm not seriously interested in contesting.  My 93 year old mother has a saying:  "that's too much sugar for a dime"

                                        I just like to casually participate in various contests, but I'm not gonna spend 8-10 bucks each to register all the variations of N3FJP's software just to send in a log for 25-100 contacts.  I may go take a second look at some of the freebie software previously mentioned here and see if that will work for my casual contest activity.  My current logging program apparently will not export the necessary info to satisfy the contesting format(or maybe the ADIF to cabrillo conversion that I'm using won't import the necessary info), so possibly I can export a file from my contest logger in ADIF and import the data into my primary electronic log.  Beyond that; screw-em, they just don't get a log from me, and my contest activity won't be preserved for all posterity.  Oh man, I hate it when that happens.

                                        73,
                                        Mike, W5UC
                                        At 01:47 PM 1/29/2007, you wrote:


                                        Mike,

                                        Contest specific (and general header requirements) for Cabrillo are at:
                                        http://www.kkn.net/~trey/cabrillo/

                                        Gerry VE6LB

                                        ----- Original Message -----
                                        From: "Mike(W5UC) & Kathy(K5MWH)" <w5uc@...>
                                        To: < ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com>
                                        Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 12:19 PM
                                        Subject: RE: [ARRL-LOTW] Re: question for the LoTW

                                        > At 08:50 AM 1/28/2007, you wrote:
                                        >>each contest has a different format depending
                                        >>on the exchange and the sponsors' whims.
                                        >
                                        > Ok, so what happens if I convert my ADIF output to Cabrillo and
                                        > submit it for the Cw 160 contest.
                                        >
                                        > Again thanks to all who sent info. BV7 has a quick & easy system for
                                        > doing the conversion. However, as indicated in the above question
                                        > I'm wondering if all of the info wanted by the CQ contest folks will
                                        > be provided. I did a couple of conversions, and the state or DX
                                        > prefix does for the just finished 160 meter contest not show up in
                                        > the converted file.
                                        >
                                        > 73,
                                        > Mike, W5UC
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > "age & treachery will overcome youth & skill"
                                        > http://www.suddenlink.net/pages/w5uc/
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >
                                        > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                        >
                                        >
                                        >


                                        No virus found in this incoming message.
                                        Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                                        Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.12/655 - Release Date: 1/28/2007 1:12 PM

                                        "age & treachery will overcome youth & skill"
                                        http://www.suddenlink.net/pages/w5uc/

                                      • Mike(W5UC) & Kathy(K5MWH)
                                        Gerry, thanks. I downloaded it and will take a look. I think someone previously suggested that software and I can t remember anything about it. Anyway I ll
                                        Message 19 of 22 , Jan 29, 2007
                                          Gerry, thanks.  I downloaded it and will take a look.  I think someone previously suggested that software and I can't remember anything about it.  Anyway I'll take a look.

                                          73,
                                          Mike, 5UC
                                          At 04:01 PM 1/29/2007, you wrote:
                                          Mike
                                           
                                          Why not try N1MM. It's very user friendly and free. It's a contesting program and covers pretty well all of them. It exports Cabrillo and ADIF (to import into N3FJP).
                                           
                                          I use Logger32 as my total logging program and N1MM http://pages.cthome.net/n1mm/ as my contesting toll. After the contest, I send my Cabrillo file to the contest folks and import my ADIF to Logger32. Then I export ADIF from Logger32 to LoTW. Likely you could send your ADIF directly from N1MM but never have done that as I want my total records kept in L32.
                                           
                                          Gerry
                                          VE6LB/VA6XDX
                                          ARRL DXCC Card Checker
                                          VE/VA6 QSL Bureau Team
                                          (403) 251-6520
                                          ve6lb (at) rac.ca
                                          www.qsl.net/ve6lb/
                                          ----- Original Message -----
                                          From: Mike(W5UC) & Kathy(K5MWH)
                                          To: ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com
                                          Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 2:45 PM
                                          Subject: Re: [ARRL-LOTW] Re: question for the LoTW

                                          Thanks Gerry:

                                          I looked at the data on cabrillo formats and all I can say is that it's a good thing I'm not seriously interested in contesting.  My 93 year old mother has a saying:  "that's too much sugar for a dime"

                                          I just like to casually participate in various contests, but I'm not gonna spend 8-10 bucks each to register all the variations of N3FJP's software just to send in a log for 25-100 contacts.  I may go take a second look at some of the freebie software previously mentioned here and see if that will work for my casual contest activity.  My current logging program apparently will not export the necessary info to satisfy the contesting format(or maybe the ADIF to cabrillo conversion that I'm using won't import the necessary info), so possibly I can export a file from my contest logger in ADIF and import the data into my primary electronic log.  Beyond that; screw-em, they just don't get a log from me, and my contest activity won't be preserved for all posterity.  Oh man, I hate it when that happens.

                                          73,
                                          Mike, W5UC
                                          At 01:47 PM 1/29/2007, you wrote:


                                          Mike,

                                          Contest specific (and general header requirements) for Cabrillo are at:
                                          http://www.kkn.net/~trey/cabrillo/

                                          Gerry VE6LB

                                          ----- Original Message -----
                                          From: "Mike(W5UC) & Kathy(K5MWH)" <w5uc@...>
                                          To: < ARRL-LOTW@yahoogroups.com>
                                          Sent: Monday, January 29, 2007 12:19 PM
                                          Subject: RE: [ARRL-LOTW] Re: question for the LoTW

                                          > At 08:50 AM 1/28/2007, you wrote:
                                          >>each contest has a different format depending
                                          >>on the exchange and the sponsors' whims.
                                          >
                                          > Ok, so what happens if I convert my ADIF output to Cabrillo and
                                          > submit it for the Cw 160 contest.
                                          >
                                          > Again thanks to all who sent info. BV7 has a quick & easy system for
                                          > doing the conversion. However, as indicated in the above question
                                          > I'm wondering if all of the info wanted by the CQ contest folks will
                                          > be provided. I did a couple of conversions, and the state or DX
                                          > prefix does for the just finished 160 meter contest not show up in
                                          > the converted file.
                                          >
                                          > 73,
                                          > Mike, W5UC
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > "age & treachery will overcome youth & skill"
                                          > http://www.suddenlink.net/pages/w5uc/
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >
                                          > Yahoo! Groups Links
                                          >
                                          >
                                          >


                                          No virus found in this incoming message.
                                          Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                                          Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.12/655 - Release Date: 1/28/2007 1:12 PM

                                          "age & treachery will overcome youth & skill"
                                          http://www.suddenlink.net/pages/w5uc/


                                          No virus found in this incoming message.
                                          Checked by AVG Free Edition.
                                          Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.17.12/655 - Release Date: 1/28/2007 1:12 PM

                                          "age & treachery will overcome youth & skill"
                                          http://www.suddenlink.net/pages/w5uc/

                                        • Clark L. Stewart
                                          Mike, If you already paid N3FJP the download price for AC Log, then you paid him $19. You can get ALL the rest of his software for ALL the contests he
                                          Message 20 of 22 , Jan 29, 2007
                                            Mike,

                                            If you already paid N3FJP the download price for AC Log, then you
                                            paid him $19. You can get ALL the rest of his software for ALL the
                                            contests he supports for just an additional $20 since he gives you credit
                                            for the amount you have already paid! Where else can you find such a
                                            deal? I counted some 41 specific contest logging programs on his website
                                            so that's one heck of a bargain. That's less than half a buck per contest
                                            logging program!

                                            The full package is called "N3FJP's Software Package." Just drop
                                            Scott an email at

                                            snkdavis@...

                                            and he will tell you how much you need to send him in order to
                                            upgrade to the full package.

                                            You can read the upgrade details here:

                                            <http://www.n3fjp.com/PackageUpgrade.htm>

                                            I am not affiliated with Scott in any way, I just think he offers a
                                            heck of a lot of great (and easy to use) software. Then too, if you
                                            already use AC Log, you will be familiar with all the contest specific
                                            logging programs he offers because they all look and feel the same.

                                            Do you think you can afford to invest twenty bucks so that your
                                            contest activity is preserved for the ages? I hope so. I'd hate for all
                                            that effort to be lost. And, you might find you actually do more
                                            contesting because of it.


                                            Clark, W8TN




                                            At 03:45 PM 1/29/2007 -0600, you wrote:
                                            >Thanks Gerry:
                                            >
                                            >I looked at the data on cabrillo formats and all I can say is that it's a
                                            >good thing I'm not seriously interested in contesting. My 93 year old
                                            >mother has a saying: "that's too much sugar for a dime"
                                            >
                                            >I just like to casually participate in various contests, but I'm not gonna
                                            >spend 8-10 bucks each to register all the variations of N3FJP's software
                                            >just to send in a log for 25-100 contacts. I may go take a second look at
                                            >some of the freebie software previously mentioned here and see if that
                                            >will work for my casual contest activity. My current logging program
                                            >apparently will not export the necessary info to satisfy the contesting
                                            >format(or maybe the ADIF to cabrillo conversion that I'm using won't
                                            >import the necessary info), so possibly I can export a file from my
                                            >contest logger in ADIF and import the data into my primary electronic
                                            >log. Beyond that; screw-em, they just don't get a log from me, and my
                                            >contest activity won't be preserved for all posterity. Oh man, I hate it
                                            >when that happens.
                                            >
                                            >73,
                                            >Mike, W5UC
                                          • Mike(W5UC) & Kathy(K5MWH)
                                            Thanks Clark. As a package deal with credit that might be a worthwhile effort. I ll investigate. For me, serious contesting is cherry picking what I
                                            Message 21 of 22 , Jan 29, 2007
                                              Thanks Clark. As a package deal with credit that might be a
                                              worthwhile effort. I'll investigate.

                                              For me, serious contesting is cherry picking what I want/need and
                                              going inside and getting snuggled up to that old woman I sleep
                                              with. Maybe this will help you-all understand my reluctance to put a
                                              buncha funds into this. It may cost me a few bucks more as I think I
                                              bought AC Log when it was 15 bucks.

                                              JV I wish I had found the pile-up on ND. I need to work only ND & RI
                                              to have worked them all on 160. There was a reference to a RI stn on
                                              VE7CC but I never could find him.

                                              Thanks again gents.

                                              73,
                                              Mike, W5UC
                                              At 04:42 PM 1/29/2007, you wrote:

                                              >Mike,
                                              >
                                              >If you already paid N3FJP the download price for AC Log, then you
                                              >paid him $19. You can get ALL the rest of his software for ALL the
                                              >contests he supports for just an additional $20 since he gives you credit
                                              >for the amount you have already paid!

                                              "age & treachery will overcome youth & skill"
                                              http://www.suddenlink.net/pages/w5uc/
                                            • John Bastin
                                              ... One of the highlights of the 160 contest for me was when NT0V from ND found me calling CQ and called me, with 4 minutes left in the contest...:-) 73, John
                                              Message 22 of 22 , Jan 30, 2007
                                                On Jan 29, 2007, at 6:19 PM, Mike(W5UC) & Kathy(K5MWH) wrote:

                                                > JV I wish I had found the pile-up on ND. I need to work only ND & RI
                                                > to have worked them all on 160. There was a reference to a RI stn on
                                                > VE7CC but I never could find him.

                                                One of the highlights of the 160 contest for me was when NT0V from ND
                                                found me calling CQ and called me, with 4 minutes left in the
                                                contest...:-)

                                                73,


                                                John Bastin K8AJS
                                                bastinj@...
                                              Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.