lucky43113
Member
Why don't you build your scanner if all these "upgrades" seem so easy to you, 99% of us are fine the way they are.
WS1088 feature requests
- Thread starter Machria
- Start date
- Status
My scanners work much the same as commercial two ways radios, they work for me and I am sure many other people also. I have 350? channels programmed, it scans these how I expect, I can search for frequencies how I want. Maybe I am the weird one and you are right, I don't know but I do know I am happy with how my scanners work, how I operate them. I would not want them to become too "phone like".
lucky43113
Member
You are 100% spot on
Maybe it's just me but I like the challenge of figuring things out. Get aggravated but stick with it then once I figure it out it like a sense of accomplishment. Making a scanner plug and play loses a lot of the appeal of the hobby for me
So do I. I was the first person back in like 2003 to get a trunk tracking scanner working with our TASGRN EDACS trunking network. I did this by lots of trail and error and then wrote step by step guides for various models over the years.
When I first herd about them years ago when they first started coming out, I was extremely excited. They were on the right track! But I think they fell short because they really just made dumbed down versions of scanners, with a nice interface. But honestly, I have not looked at them in a while. When I looked at them and read about them, they did not have much advanced functionality/control to them. They seemed great for the "basic home" user that wants to listen to the Weather, local FD, and local PD precinct. But fell short of all the rest from what I saw.
I would like to see a fully functional unit, like the TRX-1 or new Uniden HP's, but with a new easy to use user interface to them...
The HP-1 and 2 did have functionality added over time and the Extreme update adds even more functions but it is still missing features compared to the other top-of-the-line models.
I think the real reason the user interface on scanners has not changed much over the years is that they are a niche product that largely does what is needed by the people who buy them. There is likely just not enough perceived demand for change from their users for the manufacturers to invest the money required to develops a different user interface.
Yes, good one! :lol: You remind me of the stories of the people who ran around hysterical in the streets when people started using motorized vehicles. "Motor vehicles, BLASPHEMY!!" Get back on your horse!!
Trust me, 99% of "US" are NOT fine with the way they are. But, I will say 99% of people that do not buy a scanner today, don't because they see how difficult they are to use, and loose interest in it. Of the 10 people different people that posted to this thread, about 50% of them agree we need some changes.
I'm not even sure what "phone like" is. What I want them to do is be usable for the casual scanner, like myself. I'm not an expert, I don't understand or pretend to understand all the protocols and different systems and how they work. But I do understand what I want to listen to, I do understand it's complicated and do put in the work to learn enough to program what I require in, which is more than 1/2 the game. And as I've mentioned before, this is the only area they have made good progress. Automated downloads from the RR db for example, can't get much easier for the layman. But once everything is programmed, it's then a nightmare to find anything, and turn on/off things you want. And there is too much memorization required.
Figuring things out is not the problem with the User interface. The problem is there is no figuring it out, the features do not exist to figure out. Try searching for the tag of one of your programmed in channels. Find it yet? No, you won't find it. Cause there is no simple feature to search for text. That to me is just incredible. I can store 10,000 objects in memory, all with nice descriptive text to go with it (a tag), but I can't search for that text?? That's hard for me to fathom. That is not a matter of figuring something out, it's just a simple convenience. There are lots of things as simple as this that is missing from these UI's. Imagine Apple not allowing you to search for your contacts on your iPhone by entering in some text. No, you have to remember what their zip code is, or their last 4 digits of the phone number to find it. That would be fun to look up an old colleague and give him/her a call wouldn't it? Oh, but wait, you like to "figure things out". Ok, Apple should let us all just "figure it out". Common man!!
The niche product argument does have some merit. I do understand that, and I understand it's not a high volume sale item which also means it's not a high income item for the companies. BUT, I went through this same exact scenario about 10 years ago with the Marine electronics manufactures, who are also in a niche market, and work on a low volume sales scenario. The interfaces on our electronics was at the same level these scanners are, which is 20 or 30 years behind the times. After many complaints and fighting with these companies(Raytheon/Raymarine, Furuno, Lowrance..) and getting nowhere, Garmin decided to get into the market. Well they made new stuff and listened to the users. They did all the things the other companies said they could not afford to do (color displays, touchscreens, EASY UI's). Low and behold, they instantly became the leader in the market and yet they were the newest player in it. Now they are by far the leader, and have blown the others away in sales. And what ended up occurring is, they sold marine electronics to users that normally would not have bought them. In the past, only the "professionals" and serious fisherman would buy electronics for their boat. Well now since Garmin made them easy to use and understand and yet still perform at the top of the game, all of a sudden the flood gates opened in the market and sales doubled and tripled. And Garmin got most of that growth and made a killing on it.
There may be a lesson to learn there for a company like Whistler. They are on the right track, listening to us users, and innovating. I think if they made a modernized scanner with a 21st century UI on it that performed as good as the rest, they just might blow out the market and surprise everyone by selling a lot more scanners not only to the usual crowd (like the folks on here), but to a whole new market of users that currently find it to daunting.
Innovation is good!
Last edited:
lucky43113
Member
Yes, good one! :lol: You remind me of the stories of the people who ran around hysterical in the streets when people started using motorized vehicles. "Motor vehicles, BLASPHEMY!!" Get back on your horse!!
Trust me, 99% of "US" are NOT fine with the way they are. But, I will say 99% of people that do not buy a scanner today, don't because they see how difficult they are to use, and loose interest in it. Of the 10 people different people that posted to this thread, about 50% of them agree we need some changes.
I'm not even sure what "phone like" is. What I want them to do is be usable for the casual scanner, like myself. I'm not an expert, I don't understand or pretend to understand all the protocols and different systems and how they work. But I do understand what I want to listen to, I do understand it's complicated and do put in the work to learn enough to program what I require in, which is more than 1/2 the game. And as I've mentioned before, this is the only area they have made good progress. Automated downloads from the RR db for example, can't get much easier for the layman. But once everything is programmed, it's then a nightmare to find anything, and turn on/off things you want. And there is too much memorization required.
Figuring things out is not the problem with the User interface. The problem is there is no figuring it out, the features do not exist to figure out. Try searching for the tag of one of your programmed in channels. Find it yet? No, you won't find it. Cause there is no simple feature to search for text. That to me is just incredible. I can store 10,000 objects in memory, all with nice descriptive text to go with it (a tag), but I can't search for that text?? That's hard for me to fathom. That is not a matter of figuring something out, it's just a simple convenience. There are lots of things as simple as this that is missing from these UI's. Imagine Apple not allowing you to search for your contacts on your iPhone by entering in some text. No, you have to remember what their zip code is, or their last 4 digits of the phone number to find it. That would be fun to look up an old colleague and give him/her a call wouldn't it? Oh, but wait, you like to "figure things out". Ok, Apple should let us all just "figure it out". Common man!!
The niche product argument does have some merit. I do understand that, and I understand it's not a high volume sale item which also means it's not a high income item for the companies. BUT, I went through this same exact scenario about 10 years ago with the Marine electronics manufactures, who are also in a niche market, and work on a low volume sales scenario. The interfaces on our electronics was at the same level these scanners are, which is 20 or 30 years behind the times. After many complaints and fighting with these companies(Raytheon/Raymarine, Furuno, Lowrance..) and getting nowhere, Garmin decided to get into the market. Well they made new stuff and listened to the users. They did all the things the other companies said they could not afford to do (color displays, touchscreens, EASY UI's). Low and behold, they instantly became the leader in the market and yet they were the newest player in it. Now they are by far the leader, and have blown the others away in sales. And what ended up occurring is, they sold marine electronics to users that normally would not have bought them. In the past, only the "professionals" and serious fisherman would buy electronics for their boat. Well now since Garmin made them easy to use and understand and yet still perform at the top of the game, all of a sudden the flood gates opened in the market and sales doubled and tripled. And Garmin got most of that growth and made a killing on it.
There may be a lesson to learn there for a company like Whistler. They are on the right track, listening to us users, and innovating. I think if they made a modernized scanner with a 21st century UI on it that performed as good as the rest, they just might blow out the market and surprise everyone by selling a lot more scanners not only to the usual crowd (like the folks on here), but to a whole new market of users that currently find it to daunting.
Innovation is good!
No matter what they would do it doesn't sound like you would be happy. So you have 3 choices learn to use what's out there, make your own scanner, or get out of it all together and just go play with your phone.
Lucky,
Really, go find another thread to jack around on. This one is looking for suggestions on possible firmware upgrades to the TRX-1 / WS1088.
Nobody is interested in your opinion of how great the world is "as is".
CycleSycho
Member
A moderator SHOULD come in and stop the BS going on here. Can THIS post get back on track for suggested features, or will some continue to belittle? 
I was going to mention the same thing! I haven't used one, so I don't know if it has the features Machria is looking for; the ability to look up systems by name rather than having to recall which number the system is on.
ratpatrol
Member
I need this feature and had assumed it was standard. I spent an hour trying to read the manual and figure out what i was doing wrong and then it hit me that it wasnt there.
Sure makes sense, should be a "standard" feature. Anyway, I compiled a document with two sections I'm going to send to Whistler:
1. Changes for the TRX-1 (and WS1088 if also possible)
2. "Wish List" for a new scanner
Both have many items I want, and both have many items you guys asked for in this thread and a few others from other threads I read thru.
It's a clear concise document, with numbered items, detailed descriptions of what function we would like to see, and brief example of why we want them if it isn't obvious. I've done this with other manufacturers and I find they really appreciate it. It saves them a lot of time trying to compile this info themselves, and gives them some clear direction from users. I've even received very detailed responses to them explaining what they will do, what they won't do and why (technically not possible, would negatively affect something else....).
Any other ideas to add?
Even though the HP models are often though of as beginner models, they are wonderful due to this exact thing. That touch screen is amazing .. and why I mostly hate my other Uniden scanners as who wants complicated ?
Besides .. the new Whistler TRX scanners out perform them, a very good thing.
Exactly. Now image an "HP" type model (easy to use interface) but with all the bells and whistles (no pun intended). An "expert" scanner with an easy to use/convenient interface.
We should use the word "convenient" instead of "easy". Maybe that is what is throwing off some of the folks posting against making it "easier". Think of it as more convenient to use, it's still going to be a complicated device, the radio systems today are complicated so there is no getting around that. But it sure would be nice if it were more convenient to use.
But it sure would be nice if it were more convenient to use.
To me this is just dumbing things down...
Not at all, that is dead wrong.
Let me give you an example: Lets say you have an HF radio with a few programmable softkeys on it. They let you program it to go to a particular frequency on a particular mode, and power setting (like most HF transceivers do). So you program the first softkey "F1" to 155.150Mhtz, NFM mode, and 6 watts. Now when you simply press the F1, now matter how the radio was set, you go to 155.150, nfm and 6 watts.
Now, you also have the same exact radio, except without the programmable softkeys option on it. To do the same task, you would have to press Menu, Tune, and then rotate a knob until your radio displays 155.150Mhtz, then hit the ENTER key. Then select Menu, Mode, and turn a selector until you are on NFM and press ENTER. Then Press Menu, then select Power and select 6 Watts.
Which one was easier, Pressing F1, or going though the menus? Now, does having the programmable softkeys version of the the radio mean that is a "dumbed down" version of the radio because it was easier/more convenient to use? No! Not only is it not dumbed down, it is actually a more technically advanced radio.
That was an example of making a radio (HF) easier, similar to making a scanner easier. If your having problems figuring out the comparison logically, I don't know what to tell ya.
Just my 2 cents, I would like Whistler to make the attenuate button on the 1080 a key that can be set for priority on/off or any other option you may want. I never use it for attenuation so I think the ability to use it any way you want would be great. I do realize the 1088 and TRX-1 have a priority button.
- Status
