Re: Should we adopt the KD8CEC firmware?

B C
 

if it was carefully and intentionally engineered with design documentation that will open the door for experimentation then I am all for it..if it was hacked on the fly with no or poor documentation then I would prefer to write my own like the project was intended..I sense too many folks bought this as an appliance to be a cheap rig, not the experimental development platform it was intended to be. Dont adopt anything, develop your own solution.
Brian K9wis
---- Konstantinos Konstas <constantine170@...> wrote:

=============
Ashhar,

I am fully in favor of Dr. Lee's software and developments.
When I first got uBitx and fired it up, I was fully disappointed with the poorness of its firmware.
Just to mention the stock Split operation. I am sure more fellow users will agree with me.
Frankly speaking, it is thanks to CEC software that I decided to keep uBITx and play with it.
Memory Manager is a very useful tool, especially if you come to things like the S-meter calibration or the recovery of factory calibration that has been added in version 1.075
I do share some of the concerns of the published responses about the size and perhaps the too many features, but I am convinced about Dr. Lee's ingenuity and I am sure he can come up with a good start up version that can be helpful to beginners and  feature upgradeable.
Also if I may suggest, please consider using an I2C LCD that leaves a certain number of ports free for further experimentation and use. The cost of a I2C adapter for the LCD is minimal and I am sure you can purchase the I2C ready LCD cheaper.  A 20 by 4  LCD would make uBITx more attractive marketing-wise.

Konstantinos, SV1ONW

Join BITX20@groups.io to automatically receive all group messages.