Apologies and Excuses

.

I'm a tad embarrassed when I look at the date of my last post on this blog and see how long it has been.  But from "Don's Big Book of Excuses," here are some of the reasons I have been so lax in posting:

• The day job.  We have many, many positive things happening with our company, despite silly government regulations and scurrilous legal actions.  Still, the time requirement has been considerable.

• Books!  My latest, "Undersea Warrior," just hit the bookstores this week.  This is the remarkable story of submarine skipper Commander Dudley "Mush" Morton, arguably the most important figure from World War II that most people have never heard of.  I'm doing several events in support of the book, and just yesterday recorded a segment for CSPAN "Book TV" to air nationally later in November.  Details and exact air times for the TV thing will be at http://www.donkeith.com/
• More books!  At the moment, I'm working on several books: a novel that I'm very excited about; a non-fiction book about a truly fascinating man who overcame gang membership and drug pushing to become a painter and has already gained a huge following in the sports community; another thriller set in submarines, co-written with Commander George Wallace--a sequel to "Final Bearing," which will also be a sequel to the book that will soon be a major motion picture titled "Hunter Killer," set for release in December 2012 by Relativity Media; and a book of articles and short stories set in amateur radio, some of which have appeared in other versions on http://www.eham.net/.  I'll probably self-publish that bad boy when I get around to finishing it up.

• And still more books!  Just got an ebook version of "Final Bearing" up on Amazon.com.  Click HERE to see and order it.  Details are at http://www.donkeith.com/.
• Ham radio!  Yes, I have managed to get a few hours in on the new Kenwood TS-590 transceiver and I have been having a blast.  The radio combines tried and true technology with more modern stuff to make a truly remarkable transceiver...especially the receiver.  And with the bands open and the appearance of more sunspots, it is about as much fun as I have ever had in ham radio.  Just last weekend, in what we hams call "radiosport," I participated in a worldwide contest called CQWW and on the ten meter band--not far from the same frequencies occupied by Citizens Band--I had contacts with stations in over 50 different countries.
• Oh, and a few health issues with my wife, Charlene, too, if we want to include all the excuses for not posting here.  We now know what the situation is and how to deal with it.  It is not nearly as serious as our bout with breast cancer fifteen years ago, but still something to contend with.

So, apology accepted?  I will try to post more often.  But there is the Alabama-LSU football game tomorrow.  And it's a gorgeous weekend coming up and I have leaves to rake.  Then I just checked the DX clusters and the band seems to be open to Asia so...

Don Keith N4KC
http://www.n4kc.com/
http://www.donkeith.com/

Luddite or Traditionalist?

...



There is quite a debate raging over on eHam.net about a service provided to amateur radio operators by our national organization, the American Radio Relay League.  For those unfamiliar with the working of hamdom, when two stations contact each other, since the early days of the hobby, they often exchange a confirmation postcard to confirm the contact.  Called a "QSL card," these confirmations have often been colorful and informative "souvenirs" of the conversation, sometimes featuring pictures of the stations, local geography, and more.  Those cards also serve as verification for a long list of awards that hams can earn.  "WAS" signifies that a station has confirmed contact with a station in all 50 U.S. states.  "DXCC" is an award for confirming contacts with at least 100 countries around the world. 

Now, with the Internet and computer being an integral part of most amateur radio "shacks," the ARRL created an electronic way to do these confirmations.  Some say they went overboard on the security aspect of their "Logbook of the World" system.  It does require a security certificate with an applicant's call sign and location verified through the Federal Communications Commission before it is granted to the user.  Many hams have had difficulties setting up the system on their computers or moving it to a different machine when necessary.

The thrust of the eHam comments--and those with a negative view tend to dominate this discussion just as they do any Internet forum--is that LoTW is too complex, that it threatens the traditional printed, post office-delivered QSL card, and even that it threatens the "privacy" of anyone who uses the system since the League could sell that info or it could be subpoenaed by some nefarious government agency.

This type of debate seems to be quite common these days anytime there is a new-fangled way to do anything in our society.  I suspect a big part of it is simple resistance to technological change.  People still have a choice in most things technical.  You don't have to use a smart phone, join Facebook, have an email address, or use an online QSL service.  But I understand why anyone with an aversion to change or a distrust--however well founded or dismally unfounded it might be--of all this technology is reluctant to accept it.

I enjoy getting a QSL card from a new country in Africa or one that bears a picture of a ham's antenna farm in rural Belgium.  I hope we never lose that personal touch.  But I also enjoy the convenience and cost savings of being able to confirm contacts electronically.  Stamps to mail to some parts of the world are expensive.  It can take years to send and receive back a card.  Stations in rare locations get tons of requests for confirmations and that can run into big expense for them, too.  Some even ask for "green stamps"--U.S. dollars--to offset their expenses, but putting cash into an envelope is risky, especially in some spots where an envelope bound for a ham radio operator is routinely opened because everyone knows there are bucks in there.

But the real reason I endorse LoTW and similar services is that it allows me to easily and inexpensively extend the courtesy of a confirmation to anyone and everyone who wants it for whatever reason.  I still get paper cards and I display them on the wall in my office/"shack."  I enjoy looking at them.  I hope they never stop coming.  But I also recognize that there is a way that is better in most aspects and that allows me to benefit from the service.  And I believe there are enough people like me who still like the card that they will probably not go away.

And isn't that what new technology is supposed to do?  I love the fact that I can download a book on my Nook, but I also still enjoy the traditional book.  I also think both methods will still be around for a long, long time. 

But I also understand that all this change is scaring the bejesus out of some folks.

Don Keith N4KC
http://www.n4kc.com/
http://www.donkeith.com/

When Tech Change is at Its Greatest

--
I had the unique opportunity this past week to visit Minneapolis and be a part of their excellent World War II History Roundtable.  Yes, you ask, but what does that have to do with rapid technological change?  And why do you, Mr. Blogger, bring that up on this tech-change forum?

Well, hold your horses and I'll tell you.  Thanks to Don Patton and others involved with the roundtable, I had the opportunity to tour historic Ft. Snelling, where more than 300,000 young men were inducted into the service in WWII.  It was an old horse fort, established in the early 1800s when the area was Sioux territory, and was once the lodging place for Dred Scott, among other historical significance.  Interesting...no, fascinating...but hardly high-tech. 

But not far from there, I was treated to a restoration project that boggles the mind.  Inside a small, cramped room at the back of a lumberyard, a group of amazing people are meticulously restoring a CG-4 glider plane.  During the war, a couple of Minneapolis companies combined to build a bunch of these gliders...decidedly low-tech aircraft...but they were, in their own way, very high-tech in their design and operation.  The handiwork and craftsmanship used in these planes was astounding, as is the talent of the dedicated individuals who are restoring this one.

A little digression here, but later in the day, I got a glimpse of the "Greatest Generation" exhibit at the Minnesota History Center.  While there, we ran into an elderly gentleman being helped through the museum by his son.  And that man had actually flown one of the CG-4s during the war.

Anyway, it occurred to me just how much technology comes from something as destructive and horrible as war.  I often give presentations on submarines, and specifically about the Gato and Balao class boats that helped win the war in the Pacific.  At the time of their construction, they were by far the most technologically advanced war machines on the planet.  And they worked.  Over 50% of all Japanese shipping destroyed during the war was the result of the submarines, even though they were at no time any more than 5% of the total naval assets in the Pacific.

I also talk about how much a factor other tech developments such as radar were.  We came up with better radar than the enemies did and it made a big difference in the eventual outcome.  Heck, even VHF radio...previously thought to be virtually useless...helped submarine skippers work together in their wolfpacks without fear of the enemy eavesdropping.

Odd but true: when bad things happen, good things can come from them.  And sometimes the worst things are, the more we gain.

Don Keith N4KC
http://www.donkeith.com/
http://www.n4kc.com/

1999 is just around the corner

  -- 

Regular readers know that I often quote media researcher/consultant Mark Ramsey in these musings.  He does about as good a job as anyone in anticipating rapid technological change and how it relates to the future of broadcast media.  In one of his latest posts, he talks about what broadcasters can learn from Steve Jobs (Mark also has a knack for being topical, too).  In the post, one thing jumped out at me when he listed five things radio broadcaster "leaders" continue to believe:

1.This business hiccup is only a passing phase. 1999 is just around the corner.


2.We are the Great and Powerful Radio and can enforce our will on consumers if we run enough promotional announcements to do it

3.Don’t worry about Google and Groupon and Pandora – just sell more commercials

4.Everyone who listens to the radio today consumes as much of it as ever – maybe even more!

5.We can defend our importance among consumers and advertisers even as we trim out all that expensive stuff between the songs

When it comes to the people who run radio these days, there has never been a group with their heads more deeply buried in the sand.  A few are trying.  They really are.  But some think their digital strategy is to compensate their program directors with how many hits the station gets on its web site.  Lord help them!
 
The time has come--and maybe passed already--when they will have to group together and do some radical things to maintain and grow radio broadcasting as a viable medium.  Individual stations will have a tough time saving the whole concept of "radio broadcasting."
 
And I know from experience that radio folk are cannibalistic.  Everything they do is designed to take down what they perceive to be their biggest and most "direct competitors," other over-the-air radio stations. 
 
Is the National Association of Broadcasters the means for doing that, for leading the charge into the future?  I don't think so.
 
It's not the sand where those guys have their heads stuck!
 
Don Keith N4KC
http://www.n4kc.com/
http://www.donkeith.com/
 
 

The Wall Street Yo Yo

 

As we sit here, head bobbing, watching the stock market bounce up and down like a yo yo, we should realize that we are seeing yet another example of how rapid technological change has affected an institution that has been around forever.  And that has a direct effect on something as personal to us as our money.



I've been ranting for a while about how technology is now being used by short-term traders who are constantly buying and selling, making pennies on each share but trading automatically at certain trigger levels on such a high volume that they make millions doing it.  And at such a volume that it dramatically affects the market indicators.  That, in turn, leads to emotional over-reaction by us normal folks, which only contributes to the volatility.  Then, today, I see an article about Mark Cuban, a former broadcaster and now NBA-team-owner, who speaks to the same subject and used his opinions to correctly predict the dizzying last few days.

Does this mean we need to return to the days when any order on the NYSE had to be scribbled on a piece of paper and submitted in order for a sale or buy to be accomplished?  A part of me says, "Yeah!"  It will never happen, of course, nor should it.  And though I favor as little government regulation on the free market--including the buying and selling of pieces of companies--another part of me longs for the government to make any such rapid, reactive, pre-programmed trading illegal.

But something has to be done.  Remember the Whammo "Superball?"  The little ball with the super-secret rubber compound material that was supposed to bounce four times as high when you dropped it?  That's what our stock market reminds me of.  If certain key stocks drop a small percent, the SELL programs kick in and it gets pummeled.  It has nothing to do with whether the company is doing well or has a favorable outlook.

It's just that some bit of computer code somewhere is doing exactly what it has been told to do, and logic and common sense be damned.

Don Keith N4KC

http://www.n4kc.com/

http://www.donkeith.com/

A truly startling realization

  
I no longer subscribe to many printed magazines but I still always look forward to receiving a couple of my amateur radio publications, QST and CQ magazines, each month.  I really do enjoy reading about our hobby and appreciate the authors who contribute to these publications (for very little money in return). Shoot, I even study the ads, including those that have not changed in decades. (Why do some vendors insist on showing the faces of every radio by every manufacturer, as if we make our purchasing decisions based on those tiny thumbnails? And will MFJ ever change the full-page Hy-Gain rotator ad?)  I always feel good when I open the mailbox and one of the magazines is in there, waiting for me.  It usually lies right there on the hearth next to my recliner where I can pick it up and read an article whenever the mood strikes.

However, as I thumbed through the current edition of CQ, I could not help but notice that the lead article is about all the new gear unveiled this year at the largest amateur radio gathering in the world, the Dayton Hamvention in Dayton, Ohio. The event was in May! And it’s August as I write this. You know, there was a time when we took such delay in a story’s content as the norm. It is, after all, the nature of the magazine publishing biz that there must be considerable lead time for reporting, gathering info, composing the magazine, getting it printed and bound, and putting it in the mail at a rate that the publication can afford, even if it takes a few days to wend its way out to its readers.

But, for example, as I read the short writeup on the exciting new Elecraft KX3 portable transceiver, I recalled that there was a YouTube video posted way back on May 20 featuring Wayne Burdick K6XR giving a very enlightening ten-minute demo of this interesting bit of kit. Posted the same day it happened.  Video.  In full color. With sound. That I could pause, back up, re-run, and go back and look at anytime I wanted to without having to subscribe to and save a magazine or riffle through a bunch of musty, stacked-up old mags to find the one that had the article I wanted to read.  I just went to YouTube and pulled up the video.  It took me all of 20 seconds to find it and get it running.

Is the KX3 story old news in CQ? I’m afraid so.

ARRL recently did a major update on their web site, but though they are trying and it does give us quite a bit of content, it is still clunky and hard to navigate. It does offer some video (welcome to the 21st century) and plenty of archived articles and reviews, all of which is much more current, colorful, and searchable than the magazine could ever be. CQ is also trying, buying World Radio News and offering it as a free PDF download.  However, it is still basically a "print" magazine that can be read on a computer monitor (can ONLY be read there unless you print it out).  It still seems to have many of the same disadvantages as any other printed pub, though.  It just happens to be available on the Internet instead of showing up in the mailbox.

I would hate to lose the printed magazines, though.  I have to worry that the day will come when it is no longer economically feasible to mail me a magazine every month. I still prefer taking that paper-and-stapled thing out on the deck to read on a nice morning.  Or along with me to Subway at lunch to peruse while I enjoy my Black Forest ham sandwich.  And am I the only one that has trouble reading things on a monitor--even a big one--when I have to scroll and click?

Won’t happen, you say? The traditional magazine will never go away. Okay, what was your favorite article in your latest copy of Look or Life? Mind if I borrow your Saturday Evening Post?  There was a time when magazines argued that they could offer more in-depth reporting and analysis than newspapers or radio/TV.  More pretty pictures than you could ever get in a newspaper.  No longer true.  Google "Dayton Hamvention" (146,000 results) or "Elecraft KX3" (13,400 results)  Any publication offering that amount of stuff would not fit into my mailbox!

I rest my case. Truth is, media consumers want their content in a wide variety of ways, and will choose such media on three primary criteria:

1) How easy it is to consume in all those myriad ways,

2) How compelling the content is, and

3) How cheap it is to access. 

We see it happening with books, movies, television, music and more and it amounts to a revolution.  Some media will not fare well unless they figure out how to monetize--the new buzz word for all media--or subsicize some of the old ways of distribution.  As in any revolution, there will be casualties.

I’m afraid that does not bode well for QST and CQ.

73,

Don Keith N4KC
http://www.donkeith.com/
http://www.n4kc.com/

Radio on the phone?

The National Association of Broadcasters has taken the stance that having the ability to receive FM-broadcast radio built into cell phones--by law--is the salvation of the medium.  In fact, it is about the only solution they are offering to keep over-the-air radio viable.

So along comes researcher (and a blogger I frequently reference here) Mark Ramsey who has conducted a survey to see just how much phone owners who already have this feature care about such a thing.  The results:

What this says is that it simply is not all that important to them.  If the question had been, "How often do you listen to the radio?", it would have been a huge percentage...somewhere north of 90% I'm betting.  But of these guys who already have a phone on which they can get FM radio, only 5% say they listen "nearly ever day."

What this says...and what Mark Ramsey has been maintaining all along...is that consumers don't particularly care about FM on the telephone.  Mark...nor I...are opposed to such a thing.  If the phone companies can sell it to their customers, bring it on!  The point is that the NAB and broadcasters are wasting time, effort and money pushing this as THE solution.

As I have said here over and over, consumers of media want to get content in a wide, wide variety of media.  They want radio from a radio, from the computer, from their smart phones, from their iPads...well, you get the message.  But what they really, really want is content that is compelling and engaging enough that they will dial it up, click on it, download it or do whatever they have to do to get it.  That includes over-the-air broadcasters, the historical controllers and purveyors or content.

But those broadcasters, as never before, face competition--not from each other so much--but from a broad variety of content pushers.  Pushers who are not only offering better heroin but giving it to users in a dizzying array of distribution methods.

People want what they want when they want it and by whatever means they can get it.  If broadcasters don't realize they are no longer in the tower-on-the-mountain-over-the-air-streaming-the-hits business, they are doomed to failure.  And it ain't gonna be pretty.

Don Keith
http://www.donkeith.com/
http://www.n4kc.com/