toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
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
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!
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
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
Why can't everyone just get along and drop the Elite
On 2/17/2014 6:16 PM, Jeremy
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:
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
unc Phil, W0xi, Lawrence, KS