BLIND-HAMS Archives

For blind ham radio operators

BLIND-HAMS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Walt Smith <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Blind-Hams For blind ham radio operators <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 3 Jan 2006 12:09:35 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (23 lines)
Frankly, I seriously doubt that the blind ham was a factor in Kenwood's
decision to make more of their rigs' functions accessible than other
manufacturers do; or, at least, I doubt it was a major consideration. My
guess is that the decision was based more on the widespread use of Kenwood
rigs as mobile transceivers and the design engineers' belief that having a
lot of audio available would provide greater safety and convenience to a ham
while trying to drive and use a rig at the same time.

----- Original Message -----
From: "Richard Fiorello" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Saturday, December 24, 2005 10:58 AM
Subject: accessability


Merry Christmas everyone;
I have often been curious why Kenwood in particular seems to have taken a
step or two to make most of their radios user friendly for blind operators?
It certainly isn't because we buy such a high percentage of their rigs
overall.  Very often compassion or consideration gets lost in the corporate
world.
Rich

ATOM RSS1 RSS2