You know if we and sighted people and ARRL got together and demanded it, 
maybe it would happen.  I mean look at ELCRAFT, They don't even talk.
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Butch Bussen" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Sunday, November 07, 2010 9:32 PM
Subject: Re: ft-897d


>I agree.  Anyway, I don't consider a radio accessible if I have to use a
> computer to run it and sighted people do not.  It isn't rocket science
> to make this stuff talk, they just don't give a damn.
> 73
> Butch Bussen
> wa0vjr
> open Node 3148
> Las Vegas
>
>
> On Sun, 7 Nov 2010,
> John Miller wrote:
>
>> The biggest problem with no speech is going beyond your privileges, I
>> suppose if you have the top license class for your country and the radio
>> isn't modified to transmit out of band, that's not a huge concern but I
>> wouldn't want to risk it and that's very possible on HF unless there's a
>> work around which there usually is I suppose, but I hate having to depend 
>> on
>> someone else to help setup a radio or tying it to a computer.
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "colin McDonald" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Sunday, November 07, 2010 6:56 PM
>> Subject: Re: ft-897d
>>
>>
>>> two things.
>>> Firstly, I understand the attitude.  I agree with it.  There is little 
>>> to
>>> no
>>> reason that I know of why Yaesu can't put speech synth capability into 
>>> all
>>> their radios.  It's cheap, and exceedingly simple considering icom and
>>> kenwood both do it on their cheapest radios.
>>> Secondly, just because a radio doesn't speak some functions does not 
>>> mean
>>> it
>>> is "unaccessible" to use as a blind person.
>>> Perhaps one doesn't have the audio feedback, but that does not mean one
>>> cannot use the radio for what it is designed to do...IE talking on and
>>> listening to others talk.
>>> we can all memorize menu sequences, button presses, panel layouts all 
>>> that
>>> stuff...we've all done it on one device or other weather it's a 
>>> microwave,
>>> or a sell phone or some other operating system or menu driven 
>>> device...we
>>> learn it and sometimes, if possible, get sighted help to do initial set
>>> up...or at least, to get the initial panel layout or help navigating 
>>> until
>>> we remember what does what.
>>> We all tend to rely on audio feedback when it's availible to confirm 
>>> what
>>> we
>>> are doing or what button we've pressed or whatever.
>>> Once you figure out which buttons to press to perform the functions you
>>> want, then they're going to keep doing that everytime you press 
>>> them...the
>>> radio isn't going to suddenly change on you and alter all it's button
>>> functions.
>>> Map it out, play with it, memorize it and off you go.
>>> I mean we do this with the Kenwood and Icom HT's..we learn them and use
>>> them.  Why can we not do this and be comfortable doing this on an HF 
>>> rig?
>>> Yes, I know other rigs offer speech and so on, but to say a radio is
>>> unusable, or inaccessible just because it doesn't talk like other rigs 
>>> is
>>> kind of strange to me.
>>> My preference too is to have a radio with a speech synth.  But, that
>>> doesn't
>>> mean I would totally dismiss out of hand a radio that doesn't.
>>> Especially if it was given to me.
>>> However, all that said, you could probably still trade it in on a 
>>> kenwood
>>> or
>>> icom rig that does offer speech.  You could potentially trade it in on 
>>> an
>>> Icom IC7000 that does offer speech and isn't a terribly difficult radio 
>>> to
>>> learn if you play with it long enough.
>>> The FT450 has great reviews.  it is small and has an excellent receiver
>>> apparently.
>>> You could most definitely trade the 897 directly across for that rig 
>>> since
>>> it is retailed cheaper than the 897.
>>> I've played with an ft450 and for the five mins I spent with it, I got 
>>> the
>>> hang of it very quickly with little to no assistance.
>>> it's only HF plus 6 meters though.  There is a model with an antenna 
>>> tuner
>>> as well.
>>> 73
>>> Colin V A6BKX
>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>> From: "Butch Bussen" <[log in to unmask]>
>>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>> Sent: Sunday, November 07, 2010 2:09 PM
>>> Subject: Re: ft-897d
>>>
>>>
>>>> I don't think we're saying they're not good radios, although even Yaesu
>>>> fans admit they have quality control problems, but the point I'm making
>>>> is
>>>> accessibility.  I don't care if it is the best radio ever made and it
>>>> only
>>>> costs two hundred dollars, if it isn't accessible to me, what good is 
>>>> it
>>>> to me?  I haven't seen the radio I won, but so far from what folks have
>>>> written, it won't do me much good which makes me sad as it covers 160
>>>> through 440 and has a lot of bang for the buck.  My main problem with
>>>> Yaesu is their attitude ow unwillingness to put in speech.  I guess the
>>>> 450 has it, but none before have and the technology is cheap and been
>>>> around for years.  My 440 I bought back in 85 had a speech option.  The
>>>> last Yaesu I owned, I think was a 980, not sure of the number, owned it
>>>> back in early 80s.  I owned it for a year and 6 months out of that year
>>>> it
>>>> spent in the shop.  I just wish I'd won a radio that talked.
>>>> 73
>>>> Butch Bussen
>>>> wa0vjr
>>>> open Node 3148
>>>> Las Vegas
>>
>>
>