Re: Logbook of the world versus eQSL

Jeremy Utley

ARRL will *never* recognize eQSL, not without a massive change in their architecture.  LOTW runs as a "double-blind" type of system - you submit your logs, others submit theirs, and if the details of 2 logs match - you then have a confirmed QSL.  The use of the TQSL software to "sign" the log submissions means that, ideally at least, noone but you is submitting that log file.  eQSL is quite different in that regard - if someone uploads a contact with me, i will see that contact show up in my inbox available to be confirmed.  There's no validation (signing) of submitted logs to eQSL either.

From a technical standpoint, LOTW is the more "secure" system.  From an ease-of-use standpoint, eQSL wins by a landslide.  Since the ARRL awards carry so much prestige in the amateur radio community, I'm not really surprised they chose the more secure solution.

LOTW is not that difficult - takes about 10 minutes of activity, and a week or so of waiting for the postcard from ARRL.  The problems with changing computers, well, that's because nobody takes the advice of backing up their certificate after they do the initial setup - if you take that one small step, and put that backup file somewhere safe, it's a 5-minute process to set up TQSL on a new computer.

If anyone's having problems setting up LOTW/TQSL, I'd be happy to help out!  Computers are my day job, and a passion!

Jeremy, NQ0M
in Beautiful downtown Iola, KS

On 2/17/2014 6:35 PM, Charlie , W5COV wrote:

I upload to both with my logging program.

My rate of return is substantially higher, especially from DX stations on eQSL.

The setup process for LOTW is lengthy and I have heard of many people having problems even getting it to run . You of course have to wait to get the post card in the mail from the ARRL. The TQSL that you MUST have, has been a problem area for changing computers and doing upgrades when your authorization expires.

They have you over the proverbial barrel though, since they will not recognize eQSL contacts if you want any ARRL awards.

It is a decent program once you get it up and running.

eQSL is quick and easy to do. I like it better for all around setup and use.

They have to offer their own awards since the ARRL LOTW doesn't recognize them.

The REAL solution is for the ARRL to catch up with the people that started this service, eQSL and recognize contacts confirmed through them.

It is the best possible solution for the good of ALL ham radio operators, like I said mainly for DX stations.

Both are good programs and make logging and confirmation much quicker and easier, when you run with a good logging program.

Why can't everyone just get along and drop the Elite attitude ?

Charlie, W5COV

On 2/17/2014 6:16 PM, Jeremy Utley wrote:

I actually upload to both.  But keep in mind, that LOTW and eQSL aren't logging programs, but rather "QSO Matching Servces".  Without a logging program to upload to those services, they are next to useless.  Most popular logging programs for general use in my book are N3FJP's ACLog, HamRadioDeluxe, and DXKeeper.  I like ACLog for the simplicity - never really cared for the layout of HRD or DXKeeper.  With ACLog, at the end of each operating session, I punch a few buttons and upload all my contacts to both LOTW and eQSL.  When the other person also uploads their data, I end up with a confirmed QSO that's useable for awards.


On 2/17/2014 6:00 PM, Phil Anderson wrote:

Hi 4sqrpers..........

I've been researching on "best" logging programs and whether to
go with LOTW or eQSL for uploading QSO data. There is lots of
junk mail about these subjects on the various forums; ; however,
I found a nicely balanced review of Logbook of the World (ARRL)
at NK7Z's side:

Over the years, Dale's reviews have been good.

Curious what some of you might be using if any?

unc Phil, W0xi, Lawrence, KS

Join to automatically receive all group messages.