ad: Rohn-1

eQSL vs. LoTW

Discussion in 'Discussions, Opinions & Editorials' started by KC9GLI, Nov 27, 2012.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. KC9GLI

    KC9GLI XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    Like many of you, I maintain logs on both eQSL and LoTW. And like many of youI often wonder why there is no reciprocity between the two systems. Surely it can't be for technical reasons -- it should be relatively easy to create a log interchange for LoTW and eQSL users. Why are these two major, popular online logs so distant and separate? And what does this tell about us as a community?
     
  2. K8WLT

    K8WLT Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    I have used eQSL log very little and lotw seems to be a real pain sometimes -- K8WLT
     
  3. M6RIK

    M6RIK Ham Member QRZ Page

    LOTW is a waste of my time. I have twice tried to use it but have given up on it. the registration process is a real pain and doesn't work.

    I like eQSL but it could do with modernising.
     
  4. W8MR

    W8MR Ham Member QRZ Page

    QUOTE=W8MR

    Presently the return rate on qrz, lotw, hrdlog, is about 15%. E-qsl amazed me, with about 35%. Everyone has different qso's and everyone doesn't belong to every program. I tried all the above. Unfortunately i have to spend most of my time doing paperwork and filing logs into every program, rather than on the aair having fun.
    Its ok to have many programs, but some things should be universal such as input files, and credits from all programs.towards same awards. I don'y see why e-qsl should not be accepted for dxcc, as long as it is from a guaranteed member. The "paperwork" envovled to enter all the data makes it not as much fun.
     
  5. W8MR

    W8MR Ham Member QRZ Page

    QUOTE=W8MR

    Presently the return rate on qrz, lotw, hrdlog, is about 15%. E-qsl amazed me, with about 35%. Everyone has different qso's and everyone doesn't belong to every program. I tried all the above. Unfortunately i have to spend most of my time doing paperwork and filing logs into every program, rather than on the air having fun.
    Its ok to have many programs, but some things should be universal such as input files, and credits from all programs.towards same awards. I don'y see why e-qsl should not be accepted for dxcc, as long as it is from a guaranteed member. The "paperwork" envovled to enter all the data makes it not as much fun.
     
  6. W0ELC

    W0ELC Ham Member QRZ Page

    IMHO, they're both cumbersome to update, but for degree of difficulty LOTW handly wins the race! I recently got a vanity callsign and trying to get LOTW to send me a new cert is a real PITA! Eqsl is a little better, but doesn't count towards ARRL awards (if I understand it correctly)...
    I would like to see BOTH programs become more user friendly.
    73,
    Jimbo WØELC
     
  7. K0QEI

    K0QEI Ham Member QRZ Page

    LOTW works just fine so does eqsl, the biggest difference is there is a much more rock solid proof that you are who you say you are on LOTW, eqsl one could "claim" to be anyone and is not good for ARRL awards because of it, very few people are "AG" on the site and actually one of the ways to prove who you are to get that credit is to upload your cert from LOTW
     
  8. KG5VK

    KG5VK XML Subscriber QRZ Page

    The difference with respect to ease of use in eQSL versus LOTW,
    is in the feelings within the ARRL
    To change that Members must voice their input to the league via their representatives.

    It is as simple as that, just whining about it will not change a thing !

    Email your section manager or talk to them at the state convention (Ham Fest), other wise the ARRL will continue to require Secure Digital certificate use (Tqsl), as if they were guarding the gold that is in Fort Knox.

    And even if you are NOT an ARRL member contact the section managers and voice why
    these are fellow amateurs and they do listen, the wheels like that of any large organization turn slowly but they do turn.

    I prefer LOTW because, because those credits are valid for the awards I chase (mainly DXCC) however I do still reciprocate those that eQSL or even snail mail them to me, albeit much slower on those returns.

    I believe, you are not going to find the ARRL accepting eQSL credits for ARRL awards,
    it comes down to funding as in money lost in paying for the credits

    Membership in LOTW is FREE,
    however the credits (QSL's) for QSO's while small in cost compared to snail mail, are NOT free.

    My TI5/KG5VK Q's are immediately uploaded to both LOTW and eQSL upon returning home from Costa Rica, as well as after each contest I participate in here at home.

    Steve
    KG5VK
     
  9. 2J0COQ

    2J0COQ Ham Member QRZ Page

    Hi

    I use LOTW and e-QSL all the time, I find both simple to use. I mainly use data modes so have set-up HRDLog to auto upload to e-qsl. Weekly I just export my log, and sign it an upload it to LOTW. Whole process takes 3 or 4 minutes weekly. Even if I use JT65-HF and have to manually upload to both sites it just takes a couple minutes longer.

    The application process for LOTW was simple once I read the instructions and was completed in just a few days despite having to post documents from the UK to USA over the run up to Christmas. E-qsl was equally easy.

    I can understand why LOTW would not take e-qsl confirmed contacts, as the double blind system on LOTW is what gives it the greater acceptance for more serious awards. I like the great immediacy of contact confirmations of e-qsl.

    regards

    Leslie

    MJ6BDJ / 2J0COQ
     
  10. K6DY

    K6DY Ham Member QRZ Page

    I prefer EQSl and I've been AG since the beginning and have never had a problem. If a contact doesn't match my log it gets rejected it's just that simple. The whole think with the ARRL not wanting to accept EQSL is it boils down to money and I'm an ARRL member! EQSL log entries are also good for CQ magazine awards.
     
  11. W3WN

    W3WN Ham Member QRZ Page

    About 12 years ago or so, there were discussions between ARRL & the eQSL owners about connecting the two systems together. There were some technical difficulties involved; nothing major, nothing that couldn't be overcome, but had to do with some design issues.

    What is often overlooked or forgotten today: While these discussions were ongoing, eQSL suddenly changed their site one day. The comments posted on the site alleged that the changes & new, stricter interface were in place to meet the demands of the ARRL. The immediate result was that access to the system virtually halted. After 2 or 3 days, eQSL reverted back to their original site, and their original (porous) security, with comments alleging that due to user complaints, they had abandoned the changes.

    The ARRL folks, meanwhile, vehemently denied making any demands of this nature.

    And after this incident, as far as I know, the talks about connecting the two systems together stopped. (Personally, to me, the whole thing smelled of a setup, but that's just my opinion)

    Now, that history aside... the two systems serve two different, though overlapping, purposes. LotW is a log repository, and also serves the ARRL as an electronic verification system for several of their awards, plus the CQ WPX awards as well. eQSL is a log repository, and it provides JPG files that resemble a printed QSL card.
    LotW has an extremely high level of security; eQSL does not.
    LotW uses a "double blind" system to notify you of a match between your log entry and that of the other station; eQSL does not.
    eQSL will act as a non-exclusive QSL manager for uploaded logs, and "sell" you a printed QSL card for any station that says you're in their log. LotW does not.

    What does this tell us as a community? I don't know... that some people despise anything that the ARRL has anything to do with, just from the fact that they're associated with it? That some people like a choice? That some people take log confirmations more "seriously" than others? Or something else?
     
  12. N4UP

    N4UP Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    I use LOTW and eQSL and QRZ and HRDLOG and I have no real issues with any of them, but I only upload to LOTW and HRDLOG.

    For eQSL and QRZ I just confirm any legitimate QSOs that other people upload.

    In my experience, HRDLOG is the least reliable of the bunch, as ( for me ) it "drops" about 1% of the automatically uploaded QSOs and it's a real pain to figure out which ones are missing.

    I understand that LOTW is a more rigorous system, but my problem is how to make corrections. With eQSL and QRZ and HRDLOG you can edit your data to make corrections. With LOTW you ( apparently ) cannot do that, so you have to upload the correct data while leaving all the incorrect data in the system, which artificially lowers the confirmation rate.
     
  13. G4OTU

    G4OTU Ham Member QRZ Page

    Like K6DY, I prefer eQSL(with AG). Easier to use, just as good for many things ...and you can actually print out the QSL if you wish.

    LOTW (and hence the ARRL) need to lighten up and realise that the vast majority of hams are not in the USA and don't necessarily see ARRL awards as the be all and end all....particularly if you got DXCC 30 years ago , you don't need LoTW now.

    The only reason I even belong to eQSL is so that someone who wants a QSL/confirmation from me can get one easily....
     
  14. K0RGR

    K0RGR Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    I use both LOTW and eQSL, but my real focus is on LOTW. eQSL started out very simple, but now it seems to be a commercial enterprise with about as many rules as EBay. I don't like getting eScrewed wherever I go, but I continue to use it.

    I'm waiting for the logs I uploaded Sunday to be processed on LOTW. I hope my DXCC total jumps dramatically.
     
  15. WG7X

    WG7X Ham Member QRZ Page

    Gosh, There must be something in the air (so-to-speak) this month. Otherwise how can we explain the sudden emergence of the LOTW vs. e-QSL threads?

    Simple, quick answer: Use whatever system you like and try not to bad-mouth the other.

    Simple, no?

    73 Gary
     
  16. N2RJ

    N2RJ Ham Member QRZ Page

    I have gotten so many bogus eQSLs I am very glad that ARRL doesn't accept them for DXCC. You'd have lots of people on #1 honor roll in no time!

    I still upload to eQSL but I prefer LoTW. I have my logging software to do easy LoTW uploads so I'm good.
     
  17. N8MSA

    N8MSA Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

    This is the real answer, for Pete's sake. Try them both and see which one you like the best.

    And, to be honest, I am beginning to consider these "troll" posts. A ten-second search would have provided over a hundred opinions. How many active "LoTW v.s. eQSL" post do we need active at any given moment?
     
  18. W3WN

    W3WN Ham Member QRZ Page

    They're plowing through the backlog, although I'm sure that the contest logs from the weekend may extend things a little.

    I had an upload to LotW on Friday morning. It was processed during my lunch hour. Sure was nice to see that PT0S confirmation!!
     
  19. NN3W

    NN3W Ham Member QRZ Page

    ..........
    20080202231407!Beating-a-dead-horse.gif
     
  20. N8MSA

    N8MSA Premium Subscriber QRZ Page

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page