[Elecraft] time to order your P3, design details?

[Al Lorona]

> To get you started, look at ... 
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=q_Fom1QwNa4&feature=related  

That is really pretty, but my prevailing thought was that perhaps it's just too much eye candy-- which really doesn't make interpreting the data any easier. The spectrum readout-- arguably the most important area of the screen-- is difficult to concentrate on with the distraction of the other detail (color, shading, texture, 3D effects, text, labels, buttons, controls) of the skin.

I really believe simpler is better. Let me illustrate by example. The last time you flew on a Boeing 767 this is what the pilots saw on the flight deck:
http://www.airliners.net/photo/Continental-Airlines/Boeing-767-424-ER/0111170/&sid=0444c7e1280e36facb8845d82b29142f   

Many of you would perhaps laugh at such a simplistic 1970s display and would find excuses not to pay money for it in 2010. But this is certainly a mission-critical application where simpler displays mean quick, efficient interpretation by the pilots in whose hands we place our lives. They gotta be able to glance and read the situation instantly, without having to twiddle or read a lot of controls. 

I know I'm comparing apples and oranges. And I know I'm sounding like an old guy. But the trend in radios-- whether traditional or SDR-- is certainly going towards more and more eye candy. These fancier and fancier GUIs (and front panels) can start to make one dizzy. If it doesn't have at least four blue LEDs and two or three irregular-shaped pink buttons, people won't buy it, I guess!

The display of the P3 shares many characteristics with the 767 display. Without getting into any of the pro-computer/ anti-computer arguments, this is one reason why I like the way the P3 has been laid out.

I kinda like simple and uncluttered. If it's good enough for the captain of a 767, it's good enough for me.