Hi Anthony,
Truer words were never spoken. Icom has always had a significant edge when
it came to receiver sensitivity, low noise floor, and dynamic range. In the
days before menus, when accessibility was not an issue, Icom was the radio
of choice for me. Now, however, I have to consider ease of operation, and
Kenwood wins every time. I just wish there was a radio combining ease of
accessibility with technical excellence.
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: "Anthony Vece" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 10:40
Subject: Re: ic7000
> Hi Steve;
>
> If Icom's radios were as accessible as Kenwood radios, I'd switch in a
> minute.
>
> I have always found Icom radios to be both more sensitive and more
> selective
> and, they are definitely quieter.
>
> They have a lower noise floor.
>
> On vhf/uhf if you hit the input, you can usually hear the station you are
> talking to on simplex.
>
> However, Kenwood radios are just not as sensitive.
>
> 73 De Anthony W2AJV
> [log in to unmask]
> ECHOLINK NODE NUMBER: 74389
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Steve Dresser" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Tuesday, October 23, 2007 10:16 AM
> Subject: Re: ic7000
>
>
>> Lou,
>>
>> I don't want to bash Icom because I think they make some great radios,
>> but
>> from what I've seen, the menus in the 706 aren't very friendly to anyone,
>> blind or sighted. Who in their right mind would make you go into a menu
>> just to adjust power level or Mic gain? Clearly, this radio wasn't
>> designed
>> by anyone who understands the needs of a radio operator. This is a
>> mobile
>> radio, and the last thing you need while driving is to be trying to pick
>> your way through complicated menus. It's an accident waiting to happen.
>>
>> Steve
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Lou Kline" <[log in to unmask]>
>> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>> Sent: Monday, October 22, 2007 21:12
>> Subject: Re: ic7000
>>
>>
>>> Hi.
>>>
>>> I just don't like the way that Icom does menus period. I've never found
>>> the Icom IC706 Mk IIg to be that blind friendly. That is why I have a
>>> TS2000S now. Unless Icom changes their design pretty dramatically, it's
>>> pretty unlikely that they will sell me another radio.
>>>
>>> 73, de Lou K2LKK
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> At 08:04 AM 10/22/2007 -0400, you wrote:
>>>>Hi John;
>>>>
>>>>As long as you can remember where your menus are set you'll be <<>fine.
>>>>
>>>>I had a 7000 and it drove me up a wall.
>>>>
>>>>73 De Anthony W2AJV
>>>>[log in to unmask]
>>>>ECHOLINK NODE NUMBER: 74389
>>>>
>>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>>From: "John Miller" <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>>>Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2007 6:49 PM
>>>>Subject: Re: ic7000
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > The speech board is made in to it. I didn't play with it for
>>>> > accessibility,
>>>> > but did play with one at HRO a couple years ago and for what it is,
>>>> > it's
>>>> > pretty impressive compared to the 706. If I didn't have the 706
>>>> > already
>>>> > I'd
>>>> > probably get 1 of those for my go kit but I have the 706 and hardly
>>>> > use
>>>> > it
>>>> > other than a few times a year so it's not worth while replacing it
>>>> > now.
>>>> > Especially now that we officially can't afford to go away in the
>>>> > summer
>>>> > anymore which is where it got the most use.
>>>> > ----- Original Message -----
>>>> > From: "Richard Fiorello" <[log in to unmask]>
>>>> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>>> > Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2007 6:31 PM
>>>> > Subject: ic7000
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >> Speaking of the ic7000, is there a speech board and I wonder how
>>>> >> usable
>>>> >> it
>>>> >> is? Has anyone had the chance to try one?
>>>> >> Richard
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>--
>>>>No virus found in this incoming message.
>>>>Checked by AVG Free Edition.
>>>>Version: 7.5.503 / Virus Database: 269.15.6/1086 - Release Date:
>>>>10/22/2007 7:57 PM
>>>
>>> Louis Kim Kline
>>> A.R.S. K2LKK
>>> Home e-mail: [log in to unmask]
>>> Work e-mail: [log in to unmask]
>>> Work Telephone: (585) 697-5740
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
|
