¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

  1. BITX20
  2. Topics

Why I bought a uBITX

R. E. Klaus
 

? First, Mr. Farhan, thank you for developing the BITX series of radios. I think there has been a great need for an inexpensive HF radio particularly for the QRP operator. I have a couple (used) QRO rigs but have a desire to try QRP and portable operation.? I would like to have a FT-817 but they are way beyond my budget. When I heard about the uBITX, I had to check it out and bought one ( now I am looking for the "perfect" (for me) case.) The basic uBITX is a good little radio. My wish list would be to have 10 watts PEP from 80 through 10 meters (many fixes available) and for it to have some type of output indicator to help avoid over driving the output and distortion.? May be a very basic CAT interface to use a tablet for digital modes.
? Now a suggestion to the group originator. I find it interesting that the highest number of posts seem to involve bickering over the best software developer/development. Maybe it is time to split the group into separate groups one for software developers and one for basic usage and modifications.
Roxie -- K1AUS
 

¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

I was with you until the split¡­

The world is full of split¡­.

In this case, I don¡¯t see how you can split the software, from the hardware as there is no blurry line, no sharp distinct line between the two¡­..they are the same animal¡­.they are both components of the radio, and they do not work exclusively from each other in vacuums¡­¡­but work side by side, interwoven¡­..and attempts to break the software discussions out and make them separate¡­.with such justifications as¡­..the software compatibility with the IDE the user chooses and whether something else exists at some level or not¡­..is not exclusive from hardware mods that are required to make some of the software versions and flavors work¡­.or enhance them¡­you want to miss out on that?

As a systems guy¡­..who appreciated that my job existed because there were users, not the other way around¡­.and that I had to create a system that worked for everyone¡­..

How about a shift in thinking??

What about thinking more about how to make it work for everyone, (let me tell you, with my experience, this environment is really hard to stomach sometimes, I would love to make it work better, but, then that would be better for me? right? what about you?)

And I bet you know what is the natural progression that comes next? right? If you would like something separate, just like if you would like something separate in the software¡­.start working on it.

As clumsy as one big dump is¡­¡­that is desirable¡­..the thing that is missing is easy retrieval¡­..the tools for that exist, but the biggest problem is compliance from hundreds of ¡®right¡¯ ideas¡­.expectations cause work¡­..who wants that?

Craig?
KM4YEC



On May 16, 2018, at 11:52 AM, R. E. Klaus via Groups.Io <reklaus@...> wrote:

? First, Mr. Farhan, thank you for developing the BITX series of radios. I think there has been a great need for an inexpensive HF radio particularly for the QRP operator. I have a couple (used) QRO rigs but have a desire to try QRP and portable operation.? I would like to have a FT-817 but they are way beyond my budget. When I heard about the uBITX, I had to check it out and bought one ( now I am looking for the "perfect" (for me) case.) The basic uBITX is a good little radio. My wish list would be to have 10 watts PEP from 80 through 10 meters (many fixes available) and for it to have some type of output indicator to help avoid over driving the output and distortion.? May be a very basic CAT interface to use a tablet for digital modes.
? Now a suggestion to the group originator. I find it interesting that the highest number of posts seem to involve bickering over the best software developer/development. Maybe it is time to split the group into separate groups one for software developers and one for basic usage and modifications.
Roxie -- K1AUS

Laurence Oberman
 

Indeed

I have always said folks need to be more appreciative of what they are
getting here and less ready to bicker/moan about stuff.
Its an awesome little radio and provides freedom for those who want it
and simple function for those who just want it to work.
This group of folks is awesome and will help with any issues so is
pretty much the best of both worlds.

Thank you again Mr Fahran
73 KB1HKO
Laurence



On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 11:52 AM, R. E. Klaus via Groups.Io
<reklaus@...> wrote:
First, Mr. Farhan, thank you for developing the BITX series of radios. I
think there has been a great need for an inexpensive HF radio particularly
for the QRP operator. I have a couple (used) QRO rigs but have a desire to
try QRP and portable operation. I would like to have a FT-817 but they are
way beyond my budget. When I heard about the uBITX, I had to check it out
and bought one ( now I am looking for the "perfect" (for me) case.) The
basic uBITX is a good little radio. My wish list would be to have 10 watts
PEP from 80 through 10 meters (many fixes available) and for it to have some
type of output indicator to help avoid over driving the output and
distortion. May be a very basic CAT interface to use a tablet for digital
modes.
Now a suggestion to the group originator. I find it interesting that the
highest number of posts seem to involve bickering over the best software
developer/development. Maybe it is time to split the group into separate
groups one for software developers and one for basic usage and
modifications.
Roxie -- K1AUS
david todd
 

Roxi,

I totally agree with u. some members spout a plethora of knowledge but won't respond to any ham asking for help. but shame on any of us who love to build mention the bickering about who's software is the best what standards etc. Thats why some clubs shut the doors because of internal bickering and everyone has to do it their way.im a builder and a qrper. i bought this rig for the economics of an all band rig and possibly modify it MY way later with the help of other great knowledgeble hams on this forum. I mean really, price of other rigs, and they are outrageous.

Farhan has an incredible rig. unfortunately some hams aren't happy with anything.ive been a ham since early 80s, and i love cw. some do not. some refuse to be my friend anymore because i love cw. oh well, its a great hobby. and a lot of hams forget that. i don't get impressed by the bickering and arguing. its boring and stifles amateur radio as a whole.i was lucky to have mentors who really enjoyed ham radio and was OPEN i repeat OPEN to others suggestions without arguing.i love the forum and the knowledge others bring to share or help ,but i erase any posts that have a bickering title to it.they forget there are thousands of hams who have gone it alone because of bickering ,only to discover a new technology.there are also thousands of hams who are programmers and they don't get on here to argue about code. life is too short to bicker about petty things. Well roxi i probably made some mad but, they will get over it. if not they don't need to be in this hobby. remember we love this hobby to promote technology , self learning and spread goodwill across the world without any biases or politician agendas¡­?

thats why i mostly work cw. try arguing in cw .:)

73s
David?
ka9koj.

p.s.?

remember to have fun.

?


Sent from Yahoo Mail.


On Wednesday, May 16, 2018 1:21 PM, Laurence Oberman <oberman.l@...> wrote:


Indeed

I have always said folks need to be more appreciative of what they are
getting here and less ready to bicker/moan about stuff.
Its an awesome little radio and provides freedom for those who want it
and simple function for those who just want it to work.
This group of folks is awesome and will help with any issues so is
pretty much the best of both worlds.

Thank you again Mr Fahran
73 KB1HKO
Laurence



On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 11:52 AM, R. E. Klaus via Groups.Io
<reklaus=[email protected]> wrote:
>? First, Mr. Farhan, thank you for developing the BITX series of radios. I
> think there has been a great need for an inexpensive HF radio particularly
> for the QRP operator. I have a couple (used) QRO rigs but have a desire to
> try QRP and portable operation.? I would like to have a FT-817 but they are
> way beyond my budget. When I heard about the uBITX, I had to check it out
> and bought one ( now I am looking for the "perfect" (for me) case.) The
> basic uBITX is a good little radio. My wish list would be to have 10 watts
> PEP from 80 through 10 meters (many fixes available) and for it to have some
> type of output indicator to help avoid over driving the output and
> distortion.? May be a very basic CAT interface to use a tablet for digital
> modes.
>? Now a suggestion to the group originator. I find it interesting that the
> highest number of posts seem to involve bickering over the best software
> developer/development. Maybe it is time to split the group into separate
> groups one for software developers and one for basic usage and
> modifications.
> Roxie -- K1AUS
>





 

Having just gotten off my bi-weekly company-wide engineering review, I must confess to having a bit of difficulty separating some of the uBitx discussions from my commercial product development (IOT and security).? The topics are often similar.

What I read on groups.io seems more like spirited creative discussion rather than bickering. Folks seems respectful of each other, but have informed points of view. I have been a working hardware and software developer for almost 60 years, but still learn stuff from the group every day.

Thanks to Farhan for being the Godfather of this product line while never letting ego block him from evaluating outside ideas fairly - unusual traits. Thanks also to so many group members for sharing their hard won technical skills and knowledge so freely. I hope to be able to contribute in kind over time.

73,

Paul K2AYZ
 

Paul, well put!

Retired Engineer
Roy
WA0YMH

On Thu, May 17, 2018, 10:15 AM Paul Galburt - K2AYZ <galburt@...> wrote:
Having just gotten off my bi-weekly company-wide engineering review, I must confess to having a bit of difficulty separating some of the uBitx discussions from my commercial product development (IOT and security).? The topics are often similar.

What I read on seems more like spirited creative discussion rather than bickering. Folks seems respectful of each other, but have informed points of view. I have been a working hardware and software developer for almost 60 years, but still learn stuff from the group every day.

Thanks to Farhan for being the Godfather of this product line while never letting ego block him from evaluating outside ideas fairly - unusual traits. Thanks also to so many group members for sharing their hard won technical skills and knowledge so freely. I hope to be able to contribute in kind over time.

73,

Paul K2AYZ

kq2q2000
 

Mr David Todd,
Yes, I agree 100% with you and I can add to that. I operate 80% CW and 20% otherwise.?
I do a U turn regarding Bickering.?
I enjoy the educational aspect regarding a few Forums here at?.?
I enjoy Technical and Construction topics - which does include SMD and through hole techniques. Muppet Tech for Boards!!!
I have pretty much designed, built/repaired Gear on a weekly basis since 1960. That¡¯s a few years of Solder Smoke! ?Well it¡¯s nice to be well retired now.?
I typically refrain from commenting on the Forums due to the fact that my test gear is Ancient BUT accurate enough of empirical work. Having cutting edge test gear is certainly an asset; but not a substitute for Experience.?
My point is that I can¡¯t Measure to one tenth of a Hz or quantify/report results like others.?
I¡¯ve been Flamed in the past for not being Precise and well Documented. Opinionated Flamers are ready and armed?24/7.?
It is easier to remain Silent, Learn and Elmer the appreciative Experimenters Locally.?
This is a Great Hobby - and a Hobby it is.?
Not A Profession.?
Peace Out,
-Bob. kQ2Q
 

Roxie,

You forgot us who also like to play with the radio hardware.... ;-)

The idea of a split is usually bad as the hardware/software do not see the user issues
and maybe the user gets to see what improvements people are thinking of.

That said your wish list is not unreasonable.? However CAT is not required for most data modes
though its handy.? Can CAT be done yes.

As an owner/user you also have the option to do (make, copy, even suggest) these things.? Its
a builder/makers radio.? However as a group we are self directed and there may not be a
universal single answer.? We do have a lot of feedback as well for things that do or clearly
don't work.? Its up to you to read and sort through it.

Then again its exactly why I like it.? So many things to try and incorporate.? After all what is
my idea of perfect is likely to give others the shakes or be out of contention on price.? But
that for me is the fun of experimenting and building.??

Allison
 

I haven't seen a lot of flames here regarding imprecise measurements.
If you have the Harbor Freight digital voltmeter (often free with any purchase), you are about as well armed
as most folks here in the forum.? If you have trouble troubleshooting, somebody may urge you to build a diode RF probe,
that's about it.

Some do have good lab gear and and decades of experience, can measure filter passbands or
intermodulation distortion or harmonic content, and they then report back telling us what they saw.?
But that sort of thing is definitely not required.
If anybody suggests you should spend more on test gear than you did on the radio,
that's your opportunity to go ahead and flame them good.

Jerry, KE7ER


On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 10:07 am, kq2q2000 wrote:
I¡¯ve been Flamed in the past for not being Precise and well Documented. Opinionated Flamers are ready and armed?24/7.?
It is easier to remain Silent, Learn and Elmer the appreciative Experimenters Locally.?
 

While a soldering iron and a screw driver is all you need to setup the ubitx, i would encourage everyone to experiment with testing and measuring.
A resistive swr bridge is just three resistors and a transformer. An RF voltmeter is a diode and a capacitor. An HF oscillator is a one evening project. Raduino, with a different firmware can be a programmable signal gemerator and a voltmeter too. Each of these kind of projects will enhance your understanding and bring immense joy to your hobby.??
- f

On Fri, 18 May 2018, 00:46 Jerry Gaffke via Groups.Io, <jgaffke=[email protected]> wrote:
I haven't seen a lot of flames here regarding imprecise measurements.
If you have the Harbor Freight digital voltmeter (often free with any purchase), you are about as well armed
as most folks here in the forum.? If you have trouble troubleshooting, somebody may urge you to build a diode RF probe,
that's about it.

Some do have good lab gear and and decades of experience, can measure filter passbands or
intermodulation distortion or harmonic content, and they then report back telling us what they saw.?
But that sort of thing is definitely not required.
If anybody suggests you should spend more on test gear than you did on the radio,
that's your opportunity to go ahead and flame them good.

Jerry, KE7ER

On Thu, May 17, 2018 at 10:07 am, kq2q2000 wrote:
I¡¯ve been Flamed in the past for not being Precise and well Documented. Opinionated Flamers are ready and armed?24/7.?
It is easier to remain Silent, Learn and Elmer the appreciative Experimenters Locally.?

1 - 10 of 10