Yaesu's "overlooked" Dayton introduction - the FT-1D

[KA9UCE]

I would like to see Icom produce a radio that has selectivity, most of the models I have seen,used and owned, have been very poor in the selectivity department.
I made a comparison several years ago when I purchased an Icom mobile from HRO, I installed the radio, drove to South Mountain in Phoenix, and was welcomed by nothing but intermod.
I could not even hear the on-channel repeater that was ON that peak, the IMD was that horrid for that radio!
The radio was returned with a large 'junk' tag posted on the box. A purchase of a Yaesu FT2500 was made, and back to the mountain I headed.
Not only was I able to HEAR most of the repeaters I wanted to listen to, I could also hear and use the very same machine I could NOT hear with the Icom.
Aside from a minor squawk early on, the Yaesu vastly out-performed the Icom.
Both radios were in the same price range, and capabilities, as well as RX coverage. But the front end was far superior with the Yaesu.
Aside from my single test, I have never been too happy with the designs of Icom, save for the single band model(heck if I can remember it now).
That radio did have a decent front end, and IMD products were noticably lower as well. That radio made me feel a little better about the Icom, or will they follow many others and change their name to iCOM so as to appeal to cellphone buyers(my poke)?
Truth be told, I have not been a fan of Icom products, but I did love the IC-2AT, THA was one solid radio, but again, horribly lousy battery, NO CTCSS encode at the very least.

[N0RRS]

I think the reason behind Yaesu NOT wanting to build a D-Star compliant HT is because it sells so much equipment to the commercial radio field. In the commercial radio business each brand has its own protocol and can only talk to other radios manufactured by that company. They do it to secure gov't contracts and corner the markets on their specific mode of communication. Therefore, Yaesu is attempting to create a NEW digital protocol and make the average Joe Ham by all their equipment from Yaesu. If they introduce mobiles, base units, and repeater equipment this might actually be a good thing.

[N0RRS]

It was an HF rig, but this is a "D" model with the "D" standing for DIGITAL. Also, this rig only works in Digital/FM modes.

[N5YCK]

just think it moto turbo

[W4FID]

With so many key issues/questions unknown and no definitive/authoritative source for info -- even verifiable plans for what will be released at a future date -- can we really say it was introduced? "Overlooked" Dayton intro and "lost in the buzz" may be an overstatement if all that was introduced was a display mock up shell and rumors. Introduce something real -- then decide if it got proper recognition.

[WA6ITF]

Many years ago, when I was a Broadcast Engineer specializing in the repair of 1/2" Betacam, M-II and other broadcast video recorders, I attended numerous schools on various VCR models from several Japan-based manufacturers. Each time I would ask the same question: "Why is it that you have such a different and incompatible product with everyone else?"

The answer was always the same: (Paraphrased): "Thats our way. We NEVER will make the same product as our competitor because that is our way. Our standard is the only standard. No other exists..."

I think that business mindset explains far more than one technology being superior to another. Or as my friend Ron used to say: "The nice thing about standards is that everybody has one."

My personal belief is that unless the ham radio community as a whole selects its own singular digital standard and refuses all others, that at some time in the future when radios are digital-only with no common analog format like FM or SSB included, we will have a world-wide amateur radio community where owners of one brand of radio will have no way to talk to the owners of any other brand of radio.

In the past, "we" the ham radio community have been the ones who dictate to the manufacturers what "we want." Now, in the digital domain, we are the ones being dictated to. While given manufacturers may each want to corner the marketplace with "their standard" it is up to we hams to decide among us what "we want" and then demand en masse such products. Otherwise, one day in the not so distant future, my Brand X digital radio system may not be able to talk to you because you have a Brand Z digital radio that can only talk to other hams with Brand Z digital radios.

Imagine a DXpedition where the participants have to carry three or four brands of radios just to be able to make contacts with the owners of various brands of digital audio radios that cannot talk to one another. Or contests where the same scenarios hold forth.

Its easy to say "...well there will always be CW" -- but there may come a day -- faster than anyone might think -- when there are no new radios with CW included. Then what?

Final thought: If you think this to be a fairy tale, just think in terms of the total incompatibility for most of the worlds TV receivers designed to receive COFDM signals and those here in the USA (and a small number of other nations) that have opted for the lousy compromise of 8VSB because our government regulator the FCC threw open the doors to "competition" rather than setting a single standard and forcing all to manufacture to it and thus make us "world compatible."

de WA6ITF

[K5CO]

Why would anyone want digital?

[NP3FS]

I am starting to believe Icom, Yaesu and Kenwood have a conspiracy, they are leading us to believe "DIGITAL" stand for; Directing Illuminated Gentlemen Into Total Abalienation Language.

[AB0RE]

Quickest way to tick off a Yaesu employee? Go to their booth in Dayton and ask them when they'll be releasing a D-Star radio. VERY cold reception there.

Yes, D-Star has it's cons, but as others have mentioned the infrastructure is already there. I don't know why Yaesu has to try to be so different, even if it means releasing a product nobody will buy (think, "WIRES".... Epic Fail).

[N6MYA]

What's a DV Dongle??