Think that it all depends if you are a kind of keyboard "Clapton"
(God!), or if you type like a monkey (me !)... but for the second
category, it sure helps compensate typing slowlyness.
Btw Forgot to mention some error message which appear from time to
time, but can't remember exactly in which circumstances... so need to
test again (someone else probably reported it already).
Anyway again thanks for the hours of fun already provided...
--- In email@example.com
, "Alex, VE3NEA" <alshovk@d...>
> Hi Patrick,
> Thank you for the suggestions. My to-do list is already two pages
> keeps growing. I did not realize that so many people used callsign
> completion when sending. Personally I think this is a bad habit and
> be avoided, but since most users want it, I will see if I can
> 73 Alex VE3NEA
> > Alex
> > Many thanks for releasing Morse-runner...
> > I have been a PED-freak for years, and it's really nice to have
> > something running under XP, which emulates modern contest
> > Sound is great and flutter / fading really realistics....
> > A few remarks/suggestions, after having spent quite a few hours
> > it along the weekend:
> > 1- the main problem I face with MR is the lack of "type ahead
> > buffer": this is implemented in all major contest software since
> > and it is one of the main tip to improve pileup rate... intensive
> > training with morse-runner is a bit "counter-productive" in this
> > aspect.
> > 2- The ESM mode behavior is not N1MM-like (not even WL-like)-
> > like the cursor auto-jumping in report field when "enter" is
> > In my opinion field change should happen only with spacebar.
> > linked to a/m point - it should be possible to finish typing the
> > call, while the call is already transmitted - meaning you have
> > pressed enter)
> > 3- In major contest software which implement ESM, the message sent
> > depends on cursor position and if the field is empty or not - it
> > not always the case with morse-runner (ie when you erase a call:
> > next message sent will always be "agn" though the call is new, and
> > the cursor in call field)
> > 4- Though ctrl-W also works in N1MM, I do prefer alt-W... would be
> > good to also have F11 (ie for CT, WL and Wintest users). In any
> > alt-W should reset ESM message (as mentionned above)
> > 5- The score obtained depends for a part on a "luck" factor (the
> > multipliers)- Think that the PED notation was better, as the
> > were given in relation with the call complexity: ie VP8/SM7OQO
> > give far more points than P3F or D4B. On top of that the UBN
> > was applied (3 QSO's penalty for a "Bad" ), which is also a good
> > point for training (ie you don't log a call if you are not 100%
> > 6- The activity "setting" progression is not "smooth" enough - ie
> > going from 2 to 3 makes a huge difference (to make a score 2 is
> > almost the only position, as the pile becomes too heavy on 3)
> > 7- When setting a keying-speed to 36 for example, I get the
> > impression that the average of stations replying is somewhat above
> > 36, and many stations far above this speed (ie >50)
> > 8- Would be nice to have real time rate-meter -ie 10 QSO rate and
> > hour-rate
> > 9- Think you need to differenciate the competition mode, from the
> > training mode:
> > a-In competition mode the master.dta should be locked (or content
> > checked ) - otherwise cheating is too easy and the high score
> > meaningless ;-)
> > b-In training mode, it should be possible to enter also the given
> > report in the call DB - this would allow to emulate major contests
> > like CQWW (waz) or ARRLDX(state for non-US stations)
> > 10- bad report is just theoretical - never got anything but 5NN -
> > dupe also (in any case if you implement dupe, you need an
> > that's a dupe before logging ). Anyway as no penalty is associated
> > with dupes, it is a non-issue...
> > 11- Think too many "lids" and no way to correct logged report
> > you are too fast)-for ex. would be nice to have the N1MM ctrl-Q
> > function emulated (calls back last logged QSO in entry windows).
> > 12- for the fun - would be nice to have (sorry once more - like in
> > PED-) a few non-computer keyed stations (i.e bug-vibro-double
> > and a few old-rig C or D signals... (piou piou piou
> > 13- Using narrow bandwidth - ie 200hz- just make handling the pile
> > more difficult (as the same number of station is within 200hz
> > than within 600). Think to make it more realistic, you need
> > to be spread always on the same bandwith - let say +/-300 - and a
> > function to be implemented....
> > 14- making sure a call is correct is a bit too easy: sends the
> > and the report -if the "guy" comes back with NR only you are sure
> > are right - if the "guy" comes back with call+NR you are sure you
> > wrong ...
> > 15- Finaly - but this one may not be that easy to implement -
> > be great to have signal strength and quality function of the "home
> > call" versus "distant call" - ie for a EU station having US west-
> > coast stations sounding different from east-coast...
> > OK - already makes quite a few point ! If I had to keep only one
> > would obviously be the -1- above
> > Best regards- Patrick
> > F6IRF
> > PS: also take this opportunity to thank you for "hamcap" - was a
> > ioncap user, but hamcap really makes the things far simpler and
> > usable during SO-operation !