profmb

Hmm, I think that Woodbender and rfk sum this up well. I design software and there are two approaches you either use familiar routes and menu's (like Microsoft) that are built up through time and you produce help files and manuals that take new entrants through a learning curve - or they produce 'wizards' which take the pain out of configurations. I cannot help but feel that Futaba have made the assumption that purchasers of high end systems MUST be experienced users, and if they are not then they would not need to own them. Perhaps there is an implicit assumption that one works though simple systems first before embarking on the more sophisticated? In software we employ writers who have the communication skills to look objectively at the software and write in terms that key user types can understand - - perhaps that is what these manufacturers need to do? We find that the designers are too vclose to it to write objectively.

All I can say is that I am not scared of technology because in my professional life at work at the leading edge of it. Because I wish to progress through the sport I reasoned why purchase a 'low end' radio when in a relatively short time I will want to work with a greater range of functions. When I explain to my clients some of the concepts that they need to understand I take trouble to explain why we need to do what we need to do. To build understanding the 'why to do' is as important as the 'what to do'.

Experimenting can only take you so far, and for people who are time constrained, spending hours trying to work all this out by 'trial and error' is unsustainable. Even today, reading this forum I learnt for the first time the significance of 'group' versus 'single' configurations. Yet when I have asked friends in my club they just shrug their shoulders!

So thanks for the empathy guys - but I wonder what Futaba's and other manufacturers view are?