It's important to note that this thread has 3 periods of comments that are somewhat out of sync.
1. My original comments that were ... well, whatever.
2. My recent reply to clarify that I did not accept the summary dismissal of the material without intelligent review of the material.
3. The possibly up-to-date comments addressing changes that were possibly made to the device and software in the interim.
There have been several threads and private comments regarding the lack of engineering, the lack of supporting documentation, the lack of adequate user training and operational guides, and the difficulty getting in touch w the developers. I did offer early on to write docs,
because I have experience in that area, and I have and want to use the device. My request was to be able to work with a developer to have access to adequate info. The replies were to the effect that I should just start using the device and that way I would learn what I needed to write the docs. The irony was apparently lost on the developers. I decided not to waste my time, because I have other projects on the table. I just finished a project with a manufacturer of ham-related products, and they were very good...though understandably not wordy...about keeping in touch as the project progressed.
I am still impressed with the whole idea of a NanoVNA, and the energy of the developers, and the energy of those who have stepped up to develop supporting software that has so increased the usefulness of the devices. However, the steady stream of questions here, many of them duplicates, and the reports of errors in released version of firmware and software, further convince me that the field is missing some important concepts about how to effectively develop products and software.
~R~
72/73 de Rich NE1EE
On the banks of the Piscataqua
--
72/73 de Rich NE1EE
On the banks of the Piscataqua
Rich NE1EE