KT4HX said:
If GRE went with a virtual memory scenario, there would be no need for V-folders. As for size, I much prefer the size of the 396T, and I don't have a problem with its audio personally. Even though I have large hands and fingers, I much prefer smaller handhelds. After getting the 396T I have hardly touched my Pro-96. The 396T is just so much easier to transport and carry on your belt in my view than the likes of the 96 or 97. If GRE is gonna counter the 396T they may want to to rethink their approach a bit. Not that the 396T is perfect by any means. Uniden has some work to do also. It's an ever evolving process.
I think you are wrong about not needing the V-Scanner / V-Folders with so-called `virtual memory'. In fact it appears that the `virtual memory's' main `achille's heel' is that it makes it very tempting to stuff the scanner with a lot more `info' than the majority of users out there have the ability to `cope with' at one time. (The main `great?' thing about `virtual memory' is that one
isn't limited to one set size banks. Ending up with banks that take more than just simple single button press to enable isn't all that great of an idea.) Having V-Scanner / V-Folders w/ `virtual memory' would allow one to be able to have several different `setups' whereby one could have systems that take 150 `channels' and systems that only take 20 `channels' grouped together according to `area' and then have an entirely different setup with entirely different bank sizes for another area and except for the loading of the new V-Scanner / V-Folder all one would have to deal with would be the `normal' 0 - 9 bank `numbering' as needed for moving around in whatever `area' one was in at the time. 'Course with the `advance?' towards `control channel' trunking VS the older `sub-audible data' and `LCN' type trunking having tens of thousands of `channels' along with `virtual memory'
may turn out to be `overkill'. Especially if the scanner also has V-Scanner / V-Folders functionality. [Even with various assorted non-trunked stuff that some of listen to that
might `need?' 100+ `channel' banks. (A good example would the the Railroad's 95 or so AAR `channels'.)])
As for the `size'... The PRO-97's size is probably pretty close to being perfect. While some of you younger people
might claim to like a smaller size I put forth the debacle known as the cellphone. With the cellphones getting as small as they have it is becoming harder and harder for those of us who are older to easily use them. The buttons are harder than heck to both see and use and even though they have made some advances with the displays all the extra so-called `information' they are trying to cram onto them is becoming increasingly harder to see and use, too. (Before anyone squawks about scanners not getting more and more info on their displays take a look at some of the threads where there have been discussions about adding `features' like signal strength meters and other stuff to the displays and then take a look at some of the scanners out there that have things like that already.) I'm not all that old, 57, but already I am up to `tri-focals' and even they sometimes don't help and I really don't relish having to upgrade to something, like the new batch of cellphones for example,
and `quad-focals' just to see what is on a display.
Then add in those scannists who don't have quite the same `full use?' of their hands and fingers like youngsters do. Every time the buttons `shrink' the harder it becomes to use them. There are plenty other reason out there that make something around the size of the PRO-97, or maybe PRO-99, pretty close to optimum size, too.
Where scanner makers
should start concentrating their efforts are things like improving their reception abilities (Being able to receive stuff other than just Moto and GE/Ma-com systems, adding LTR comes to mind, making their `decoding', both with the P25 spec modulation along with any newer modulation schemes
and `Talk Groups'.), improving the power useage, and improving the ability to deal with adjacent channels and over powered and over modulated pager transmissions. (Yeah, I do know that `wideband' radios usually are a compromise when it comes to the latter. But... The `state of the art' being what it is I expect that they will soon be able to take care of it without too much problem or cost.)
