jaws will read a single incoming signal in digipan, but if there are more
then one, it garbles things up pretty bad.
In PSK31, you have to be able to choose a signal on the water fall and I
don't know of a software that allows that to be done manually or
non-graphically.
There are offten multiple conversations going on at once on the digital mode
freqs and without the ability to choose which signals to listen to, it gets
pretty difficult to figure out what is being said.
However, perhaps there are some other programs some people have played with
that allow for manual selection on the water fall or that are more screen
reader friendly.

73
Colin, V A6BKX
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dan" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2006 6:08 PM
Subject: Re: New Frequencies


> Speaking of PSK31, or any digital mode like that, is most o of the
software
> for that accessible?  Like will screenreaders be able to read what is on
the
> screen?
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: For blind ham radio operators [mailto:[log in to unmask]]
> On Behalf Of Colin McDonald
> Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 19:39
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: New Frequencies
>
> I guess that makes me a chicken bander.
> I never new until now.
> That attitude is what is making ham radio an antiquated, excentric
> non-progressive hobby in many places.
> Who wants to learn to communicate using a bunch of short and long beeps
when
> you can talk, or use digital modes using computers.
> Learning CW has to be the most awcward thing imaginable at first.  Until
you
> become really good at it, its slow, tedious and takes much more time to
> convey a thought then simply speaking it or sending it via pSK31 or other
> digital modes.
> And the idea that CW is the one and only method of communication that can
> get through when nothing else can is also a very outdated theory.
> Any digital mode will accomplish the same task, and offen with much lower
> error rate then a typical CW operater who is attempting to pull a signal
out
> of the noise, or below the noise floor.
> Using PSK31, you offten can't even hear the signal, but the computer can
and
> puts it out to the screen as text.
> So the idea that not learning some antiquated form of communicated just
for
> the sake of doing so, and therefore getting a free ride because you didn't
> have to learn it is a very narow minded and outdated point of view.
>
> Now, all that said, i think CW is a very important aspect of amateur radio
> below 30MHZ and that it certainly has its place and usage.  I don't
begrudge
> anyone their decision to use any mode of communication on any amateur
> frequency.
> However, i really don't believe anyone mode should be chosen over all the
> rest as one that a person must have near to absolute  perficiency in in
> order to communicate below 30MHZ.
>
> Naturally, the arguement that CW transmitters and receivers are some of
the
> simplest and easy to setup and operate when compared to voice or digital
> stations always comes up.  It comes up in the context of emergency
measures
> or emergency communications.
> If that arguement is made, then the argument must also be made to include
> vastly more emergency training aspects to the general class or extra class
> licensing examinations.
> If you are going to force someone to learn CW because there just might be
a
> once in a life time situation where they absolutely must use it, then it
> should also be required for those same individuals to learn vast amounts
of
> procedural knoledge regarding emergency communications and procedures.
>
> Its a great mode, but its not the most important anymore.
>
> 73
> Colin, V A6BKX