On 17/06/2024 17:12, nanov2support wrote:
> Hi,
> You can find the latest official firmware releases here:
> https://nanorfe.com/nanovna-versions.html#versions
> <https://nanorfe.com/nanovna-versions.html#versions>
>
> Please note the official NanoVNA V2 users group has moved to
> https://groups.io/g/NanoVNAV2 <https://groups.io/g/NanoVNAV2>. The old group is
> abandoned and all of the developers have left it due to spam. You may repost
> your question in the new group.
> Thanks,
> NanoRFE Support

Sorry for the incorrect address.

I and very disappointed to find that the firmware is now some two years old,
and doesn't incorporate many of the latest advances.

Cheers,
David
--
SatSignal Software - Quality software for you
Web: https://www.satsignal.eu
Email: davidtaylor@writeme.com
Twitter: @gm8arv

Hi, we're working on troubleshooting the remaining stability bugs in the next firmware release, we are aware it is taking a while and apologize for the inconvenience. In the mean time we are going to release a minor update to 20230711 to enable the ADF4350 output power adjustment, and to get 20230711 released for the V2 Plus4 series.
Thanks

On 18/06/2024 06:07, nanov2support via groups.io wrote:
> Hi, we're working on troubleshooting the remaining stability bugs in the next
> firmware release, we are aware it is taking a while and apologize for the
> inconvenience. In the mean time we are going to release a minor update to
> 20230711 to enable the ADF4350 output power adjustment, and to get 20230711
> released for the V2 Plus4 series.
> Thanks

Pleased to hear that!

Thanks,
David
--
SatSignal Software - Quality software for you
Web: https://www.satsignal.eu
Email: davidtaylor@writeme.com
Twitter: @gm8arv

Hello,

a major update had been promised for 10/2023.
So when will be released the major update ?
I honestly expected more communication, this will take users (and customers) calm and waiting.
Would be great to know also the status of various upgrade and changelog.

Regards
Arrio Antonelli

Hi,
We are currently just running through the extended stability test (fuzz
test) and ironing out one remaining crash. Since most of our customers
demand stability as the highest priority, we have to ensure every release
is crash free. Sorry for the wait and hopefully the next version will be
ready for release soon.
Thanks,
NanoRFE Support

>

I personally appreciate stability. I’m not a beta tester and don’t want a bricked unit 😊

Thanks

Frank

KA2FWC

shoud not a new release have the date of the release (for user easier to
keep track of fw versions)

but in june 24 talk about a july 23 release?? HMM?!?

just think that the release date should also be updated ... not??

........ a thought from a dumb nut :-)

dg9bfc sigi

Am 18.06.2024 um 07:07 schrieb nanov2support:

> Hi, we're working on troubleshooting the remaining stability bugs in
> the next firmware release, we are aware it is taking a while and
> apologize for the inconvenience. In the mean time we are going to
> release a minor update to 20230711 to enable the ADF4350 output power
> adjustment, and to get 20230711 released for the V2 Plus4 series.
> Thanks
>

Hello,

the issue is different.
New update has been announced several time and with goal date but never released.
Now they announce a minor release for 11 of July.
I ask when the major update will be rleased and also will be apreciated a changelog ... but never get a real answer from @nanov2support

If you like stability is anough do not update your item with new software.

Why are most calibrating or updating firmware so frequently as this is not a precision instrument and never was intended for commercial or industrial applications, just for hobbyists.

Calibration is necessary to compensate for cabling. If you don’t care about a
dB or so may be you can get away with no cal unless temperature changes.



Best regards,

Rob Rowlands

415 849 5667



> On Jun 26, 2024, at 9:29 PM, W4JDY1953_G via groups.io
<W4JDY1953=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:
>
>

> 

>

> Why are most calibrating or updating firmware so frequently as this is not a
precision instrument and never was intended for commercial or industrial
applications, just for hobbyists.

>

>
>

> **From:** NanoVNAV2@groups.io <NanoVNAV2@groups.io> **On Behalf Of**
cocopuppy via groups.io
> **Sent:** Wednesday, June 19, 2024 12:30 PM
> **To:** NanoVNAV2@groups.io
> **Subject:** Re: [nanovnav2] Firmware for NanoVNA V2plus4

>

>
>

> I personally appreciate stability. I’m not a beta tester and don’t want a
bricked unit 😊

>

> Thanks

>

> Frank

>

> KA2FWC

>

>
>

> **From:** [NanoVNAV2@groups.io](mailto:NanoVNAV2@groups.io)
<[NanoVNAV2@groups.io](mailto:NanoVNAV2@groups.io)> **On Behalf Of**
nanov2support
> **Sent:** Wednesday, June 19, 2024 12:14 PM
> **To:** [NanoVNAV2@groups.io](mailto:NanoVNAV2@groups.io)
> **Subject:** Re: [nanovnav2] Firmware for NanoVNA V2plus4

>

>
>

> Hi,

>

> We are currently just running through the extended stability test (fuzz
test) and ironing out one remaining crash. Since most of our customers demand
stability as the highest priority, we have to ensure every release is crash
free. Sorry for the wait and hopefully the next version will be ready for
release soon.

>

> Thanks,

>

> NanoRFE Support

>

>
> [![](https://s-install.avcdn.net/ipm/preview/icons/icon-envelope-tick-round-
orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif)](https://www.avast.com/sig-
email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-
email&utm_content=emailclient)| Virus-
free.[www.avast.com](https://www.avast.com/sig-
email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-
email&utm_content=emailclient)
> ---|---

_._,_._,_

* * *

Dear nanov2support,

Many decades ago, there were devices that didn't actually run software, but only some digital logic circuit did the job ( such as a DMM). - Without a doubt, these devices was rock stable (or even those weren't stable). Nowadays, software updates make it possible to add extra functions over time; - A nd always increase stability - there can always be mistakes.

Supported devices with new software released at least every six months or annually is the general practice.

I would be particularly interested in fine-tuning the reference clock, even after possible replacement of parts (better TCXO). This is included in the software of competing products. Is there a possibility for this here as well? Does the factory calibration (only) mentioned in another post cover this setting?

István

And calibration is necessary when you are working on kit for the higher
bands.
There's no way my HB 13cm dish feed will exhibit similar characteristics to
my commercial 9cm feed.

Dave, G1OGY

On Thu, 27 Jun 2024, 17:01 Rob Rowlands NZ6J, <rowlands47@gmail.com> wrote:

> Calibration is necessary to compensate for cabling. If you don’t care
> about a dB or so may be you can get away with no cal unless temperature
> changes.
>
> Best regards,
> Rob Rowlands
> 415 849 5667
>
> On Jun 26, 2024, at 9:29 PM, W4JDY1953_G via groups.io <W4JDY1953=
> gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:
>
> 
>
> Why are most calibrating or updating firmware so frequently as this is not
> a precision instrument and never was intended for commercial or industrial
> applications, just for hobbyists.
>
>
>
> *From:* NanoVNAV2@groups.io <NanoVNAV2@groups.io> *On Behalf Of *cocopuppy
> via groups.io
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 19, 2024 12:30 PM
> *To:* NanoVNAV2@groups.io
> *Subject:* Re: [nanovnav2] Firmware for NanoVNA V2plus4
>
>
>
> I personally appreciate stability. I’m not a beta tester and don’t want a
> bricked unit 😊
>
> Thanks
>
> Frank
>
> KA2FWC
>
>
>
> *From:* NanoVNAV2@groups.io <NanoVNAV2@groups.io> *On Behalf Of *
> nanov2support
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 19, 2024 12:14 PM
> *To:* NanoVNAV2@groups.io
> *Subject:* Re: [nanovnav2] Firmware for NanoVNA V2plus4
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> We are currently just running through the extended stability test (fuzz
> test) and ironing out one remaining crash. Since most of our customers
> demand stability as the highest priority, we have to ensure every release
> is crash free. Sorry for the wait and hopefully the next version will be
> ready for release soon.
>
> Thanks,
>
> NanoRFE Support
>
>
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
> Virus-free.www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
> <#m_6154595242191020019_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
>
>
>
>

Hello,

today is 07-11 you will release firmware ?

Congrats on earning a block based on your incessant spamming the list.
What a useless poster.

@nanovnav2 I suggest banning him, he's ruining the experience for everyone
else. Customers like him have negative value.

I don't know where you live (and given your behavior I'm not interested in knowing) but I live in a free world.
A world where everyone is free to express their opinions without offending people.
And since I haven't offended you (unlike you) I think I can continue asking.
I will stop asking the question when I get some clarity on the topic and answers from @support.
If you are not interested in my posts you are equally free not to read them, but remember never to offend people!

Sound advice.



When I have the time from my weapon system engineering, work, I will look at the device’s accuracy, precision and error figures to see if and when calibration is truly required



Interesting comments on the use of this unit by Moonbounce operators and the one person interested in using the device as a radar emitter.



Caution of using Windows 11 Pro … w/o some tweaks beyond making it User friendly, it has problems running any older 32b software, so be careful before upgrading your OS. I keep an old but battleship grade HP 6470b for such firmware and older apps usage.



Correct assumption as to acceptable losses that all depend on your application. So before tweaking this device and bricking it, see what you usage requirements are in terms of the accuracy and acceptable errors.

A proven example of selected freedom of speech.



That is what the delete button is for.



There is no customers here, but a User Group.



Interested in the use of your device in what exactly what task or profession? That helps to ascertain you needs for what appears to repeated calibration.



I find the application of these marvelous devices degraded by the same daily calibration activities.



There are so many tasks within a hobby and some lower-level engineering and technical work not demanding a certified, authorized calibration facility that this device can be used for.



In amplifier design, I find it a quick and dirty tool; but in antennae, one has to be careful that the DUT is not compromised by transmission lines or waveguides not being properly matched and tuned.



I have used this unit for LF thru SHF work, and it gets me to where I can see the need for or no need for final design refinements.



Thereafter, if for a commercial, industrial or military contract deliverable, I then pull out the Big Gun test equipment.



These professional devices too suffer from lousy Cyber Hygiene and Health issues as patched are not periodically available or timely promulgated. You get what you can afford and what the task demands are.



I saw two of these devices used in a passive radar demonstration – that was amazing as the experimenter, a budding future engineer, was only 14 y.o. !



So, if these young adults and teens can use these cheap devices to pique their interests in a future career as a engineering or scientific profession, their value is immeasurable. I donated one of my old 1300 units to a local school, and in their science class the kids were as amazed as when they can talk to the ISS crew when I have the time from work to allow them to see something beyond the Internet to invest their personal free time into.



Eventually with M/L and AI, the need for calibration will disappear as the DUT will auto-program the test equipment to meet the User’s needs and device’s characteristic parameters.



In the meantime, have fun using these tech toys, as that is about the level of professional use I would risk using them for.



Great postings here esp. when it comes to antenna and VNA design work – I learned a few new things about the use of the device from you all these past years.

Incessant spamming?
The man posted 3 messages over months in this thread.


On Fri, 12 Jul 2024 at 06:59, Matt Arcidy via groups.io
<marcidy=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:

>
> Congrats on earning a block based on your incessant spamming the list. What a useless poster.
>
> @nanovnav2 I suggest banning him, he's ruining the experience for everyone else. Customers like him have negative value.
>
>

You live in a free world that I and my comrades paid for, so do not hand me that dodge.



As you stated, everyone is entitled to their opinions, esp. I so your argument validates your assumed character.



If you want to know where I live, then let’s meet.



Where in my home in Europe or here stateside – your call.



24 years and two wars from enlisted thru officer ranks ranked one through those years, followed by 8.5 years as a foreign military advisor in-country in Arabia, and back here as a senior weapon system engineer.



That’s 50 years of technical, maintenance and operational experience across 4 continents.



You offend me with your air of superiority and the question I asked was legitimate and based on years of using test equipment commercial and ones you will never see in the military.



Enough said ….

Spamming as opposed to your one-sided wokeness.

Spamming - what do you know about spamming from a security and legal side as my opinions like your free speech are not spamming.

Get a life and apply your social metrics for free speech to yourself before pointing u=your unqualified fingers at others.

Back to what this blog is for - if you want to continue your childness victimization fit, then let's take it off line between us ... leave the rest here sticking back to the topic of asking questions, and not insulting others that you cannot back up in person.

What? Did you hit reply to the wrong message?

On Sun, 14 Jul 2024 at 07:00, W4JDY1953_G via groups.io
<W4JDY1953=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:

>
> Spamming as opposed to your one-sided wokeness.
>
> Spamming - what do you know about spamming from a security and legal side as my opinions like your free speech are not spamming.
>
> Get a life and apply your social metrics for free speech to yourself before pointing u=your unqualified fingers at others.
>
> Back to what this blog is for - if you want to continue your childness victimization fit, then let's take it off line between us ... leave the rest here sticking back to the topic of asking questions, and not insulting others that you cannot back up in person.
>
>

Moderator - please close this entire thread.

Let's move onto what this group is all about.

Admin.  Please close all of this rubbish down.  Thankyou

On Sunday, 14 July 2024 at 03:00:01 pm AEST, W4JDY1953_G <w4jdy1953@gmail.com> wrote:

Spamming as opposed to your one-sided wokeness.

Spamming - what do you know about spamming from a security and legal side as my opinions like your free speech are not spamming.

Get a life and apply your social metrics for free speech to yourself before pointing u=your unqualified fingers at others.

Back to what this blog is for - if you want to continue your childness victimization fit, then let's take it off line between us ... leave the rest here sticking back to the topic of asking questions, and not insulting others that you cannot back up in person.

Dude you are the one causing the ruckus ...

On Mon, 15 Jul 2024 at 06:59, W4JDY1953_G via groups.io
<W4JDY1953=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:

>
> Moderator - please close this entire thread.
>
> Let's move onto what this group is all about.
>
>

Unless one is using some rather “cheap” cabling or it is aged, the cable loss for any engineering purposes let alone amateur radio or SWL use is negligible. Use the cable data tables for your loss calculation as we do in industry or military for initial setups.





In cases of up and down converters for radio astronomy, then and only then would I invest time into this detailed analysis of cable losses as factors for the signal analyses one uses.



W4JDY

For a VNA 'calibration' is to remove the effect of cables and fixtures from
the test setup and ensure that you have well defined reference planes for
the device under test. E.g. If you want to measure an antenna itself at the
end of a cable, you need to calibrate at the end of the cable to remove its
effect from the measurement, you can then attach the antenna and measure
it's characteristics.
I think you need to read some basic information about VNAs e.g.
https://www.mwrf.com/technologies/test-measurement/article/21271461/copper-mountain-technologies-an-introduction-to-the-vna-and-vector-network-analysis
Stephen Tompsett

On Sun, 29 Dec 2024, 16:01 W4JDY1953_G via groups.io, <W4JDY1953=
gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:

> Unless one is using some rather “cheap” cabling or it is aged, the cable
> loss for any engineering purposes let alone amateur radio or SWL use is
> negligible. Use the cable data tables for your loss calculation as we do in
> industry or military for initial setups.
>
>
>
>
>
> In cases of up and down converters for radio astronomy, then and only then
> would I invest time into this detailed analysis of cable losses as factors
> for the signal analyses one uses.
>
>
>
> W4JDY
>
> *From:* NanoVNAV2@groups.io <NanoVNAV2@groups.io> *On Behalf Of *Rob
> Rowlands NZ6J via groups.io
> *Sent:* Thursday, June 27, 2024 2:26 AM
> *To:* NanoVNAV2@groups.io
> *Subject:* Re: [nanovnav2] Firmware for NanoVNA V2plus4
>
>
>
> Calibration is necessary to compensate for cabling. If you don’t care
> about a dB or so may be you can get away with no cal unless temperature
> changes.
>
>
>
> Best regards,
>
> Rob Rowlands
>
> 415 849 5667
>
>
>
> On Jun 26, 2024, at 9:29 PM, W4JDY1953_G via groups.io <
> W4JDY1953=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:
>
> 
>
> Why are most calibrating or updating firmware so frequently as this is not
> a precision instrument and never was intended for commercial or industrial
> applications, just for hobbyists.
>
>
>
> *From:* NanoVNAV2@groups.io <NanoVNAV2@groups.io> *On Behalf Of *cocopuppy
> via groups.io
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 19, 2024 12:30 PM
> *To:* NanoVNAV2@groups.io
> *Subject:* Re: [nanovnav2] Firmware for NanoVNA V2plus4
>
>
>
> I personally appreciate stability. I’m not a beta tester and don’t want a
> bricked unit 😊
>
> Thanks
>
> Frank
>
> KA2FWC
>
>
>
> *From:* NanoVNAV2@groups.io <NanoVNAV2@groups.io> *On Behalf Of *
> nanov2support
> *Sent:* Wednesday, June 19, 2024 12:14 PM
> *To:* NanoVNAV2@groups.io
> *Subject:* Re: [nanovnav2] Firmware for NanoVNA V2plus4
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> We are currently just running through the extended stability test (fuzz
> test) and ironing out one remaining crash. Since most of our customers
> demand stability as the highest priority, we have to ensure every release
> is crash free. Sorry for the wait and hopefully the next version will be
> ready for release soon.
>
> Thanks,
>
> NanoRFE Support
>
>
>
>
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
>
> Virus-free.www.avast.com
> <https://www.avast.com/sig-email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
>
>
>

I’d differ on cable compensation - It makes a substantial difference with a 50
foot run of RG-8X even on HF, when measuring a multi-band monopole (6BTV in
this case).



And even for shorter runs - the phase shift is important if you want to do
more than measure SWR or |S11|. For instance, I measure R & X to figure out
how to set a computer controlled tuner to control the relative phase between
two verticals, and since there’s substantial interaction (they’re only 5
meters apart), you need to know S21 too.





Yes, you could probably use databook values for the coax in the design phase
(it’s what we do for spacecraft) - but sooner or later, you’ll want to measure
the actual cables (if only to know that they’re not damaged). And it’s really
handy to be able to “back out” the cable to get the “at the terminal” Z or S11
for testing - is the antenna installed correctly, did something change in the
vicinity of the antenna.





> On Dec 29, 2024, at 08:00, W4JDY1953_G via groups.io
<W4JDY1953=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:
>
>

> 

>

> Unless one is using some rather “cheap” cabling or it is aged, the cable
loss for any engineering purposes let alone amateur radio or SWL use is
negligible. Use the cable data tables for your loss calculation as we do in
industry or military for initial setups.

>

>
>

>
>

> In cases of up and down converters for radio astronomy, then and only then
would I invest time into this detailed analysis of cable losses as factors for
the signal analyses one uses.

>

>
>

> W4JDY

>

> **From:** NanoVNAV2@groups.io <NanoVNAV2@groups.io> **On Behalf Of** Rob
Rowlands NZ6J via groups.io
> **Sent:** Thursday, June 27, 2024 2:26 AM
> **To:** NanoVNAV2@groups.io
> **Subject:** Re: [nanovnav2] Firmware for NanoVNA V2plus4

>

>
>

> Calibration is necessary to compensate for cabling. If you don’t care about
a dB or so may be you can get away with no cal unless temperature changes.

>

>
>

> Best regards,

>

> Rob Rowlands

>

> 415 849 5667

>

>
>
>

>

>> On Jun 26, 2024, at 9:29 PM, W4JDY1953_G via groups.io
<[W4JDY1953=gmail.com@groups.io](mailto:W4JDY1953=gmail.com@groups.io)> wrote:

>

>> 

>>

>> Why are most calibrating or updating firmware so frequently as this is not
a precision instrument and never was intended for commercial or industrial
applications, just for hobbyists.

>>

>>
>>

>> **From:** [NanoVNAV2@groups.io](mailto:NanoVNAV2@groups.io)
<[NanoVNAV2@groups.io](mailto:NanoVNAV2@groups.io)> **On Behalf Of** cocopuppy
via groups.io
> **Sent:** Wednesday, June 19, 2024 12:30 PM
> **To:** [NanoVNAV2@groups.io](mailto:NanoVNAV2@groups.io)
> **Subject:** Re: [nanovnav2] Firmware for NanoVNA V2plus4

>>

>>
>>

>> I personally appreciate stability. I’m not a beta tester and don’t want a
bricked unit 😊

>>

>> Thanks

>>

>> Frank

>>

>> KA2FWC

>>

>>
>>

>> **From:** [NanoVNAV2@groups.io](mailto:NanoVNAV2@groups.io)
<[NanoVNAV2@groups.io](mailto:NanoVNAV2@groups.io)> **On Behalf Of**
nanov2support
> **Sent:** Wednesday, June 19, 2024 12:14 PM
> **To:** [NanoVNAV2@groups.io](mailto:NanoVNAV2@groups.io)
> **Subject:** Re: [nanovnav2] Firmware for NanoVNA V2plus4

>>

>>
>>

>> Hi,

>>

>> We are currently just running through the extended stability test (fuzz
test) and ironing out one remaining crash. Since most of our customers demand
stability as the highest priority, we have to ensure every release is crash
free. Sorry for the wait and hopefully the next version will be ready for
release soon.

>>

>> Thanks,

>>

>> NanoRFE Support

>>

>>
>>

>> [![](https://s-install.avcdn.net/ipm/preview/icons/icon-envelope-tick-
round-orange-animated-no-repeat-v1.gif)](https://www.avast.com/sig-
email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-
email&utm_content=emailclient)

>>

>> |

>>

>> Virus-free.[www.avast.com](https://www.avast.com/sig-
email?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-
email&utm_content=emailclient)
>>
>> ---|---

_._,_._,_

* * *

Lossy cable and not using simple odd quarter wavelengths for a perfect match is an art.

If just stringing coax out at any length and then measuring one’s loss – for single bands it makes sense, but for multi-band operation, it does not.


By the way, no one gets a 1::1 match math-wise …

If one cannot afford the best transmission lines or no space for the correct odd ¼ wavelength, I suggest using fractal lengths instead to save one pain and time.

Try these and get as close to the lengths as possible …

Joseph D. Yuna
Joseph D. Yuna (LCDR USN/ret.)
W4JDY / EM79xr / ITU 8 / CQ 5
United States of America
<mailto:W4JDY1953@gmail.com> W4JDY1953@gmail.com

Hi nanov2support,

Earlier in this thread on July 18, 2024, and July 19, 2024 (posts #4779 and #4782) you mentioned that you were working on getting version 20230711 ready for the V2 Plus4 series.  On your firmware website I see that version 20230711 is available for the VNA6000 but it is not listed for the V2 Plus4 series.  Are you still planning on a version 20230711 release for the V2 Plus4 series?

Thanks,

Jim

Yes, this would be amazing... would love if the V2plus4 could perform
resonant calculation overlay like my other nanovna <3

On Sat, Jan 25, 2025 at 8:03 AM Jim via groups.io <jrteig=
sbcglobal.net@groups.io> wrote:

> Hi nanov2support,
>
> Earlier in this thread on July 18, 2024, and July 19, 2024 (posts #4779
> and #4782) you mentioned that you were working on getting version 20230711
> ready for the V2 Plus4 series. On your firmware website I see that version
> 20230711 is available for the VNA6000 but it is not listed for the V2 Plus4
> series. Are you still planning on a version 20230711 release for the V2
> Plus4 series?
>
> Thanks,
>
> Jim
>
>
>

As above I'm also wondering when, if at all, a firmware update for the V2 plus4 will be out.

Even my original nanoVNA-H has firmware that was released in Sept of 2024.

Hi, we've just completed qualification for the new firmware, and will do a
firmware release after the New Year holidays.
Thanks,
NanoRFE Support

>

Thanks! we are looking forward to updated firmware. I have a couple of NanoVNA but use my use my NanoVNA V2plus4 for VHF and UHF measurements.

73 Mike N2MS

> On 01/26/2025 2:34 AM EST nanov2support via groups.io <edelswartz123=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:
>
>
> Hi, we've just completed qualification for the new firmware, and will do a firmware release after the New Year holidays.
> Thanks,
> NanoRFE Support

I just tried 20220814 and could not get a good calibration. The marker was moving all over on the smith chart after calibration.
So I went back to the older version that is stable. and works well.
Larry
n0sa

Hello support,

can you please let us know the release date ?
Can we also know the changelog for new release ?
Many thanks for all your job.

Arrio

Ok
I will sell my unit.
Thanks for support.

Regards
Arrio

I purchased the NanoVNA V2 PLUS4 v2.4, with firmware version 20220301.
The latest download available on the official site is 20220814, which I have not loaded into my VNA.
There have since been unfulfilled promises of updates, and things are moving rather slowly.
I suspect either something has happened to the development team, or the NanoVNA V2 PLUS4 is a low priority for them.

Hi, we have just released the maintenance update 20250121 for both V2 and VNA6000 series of devices.
This update fixes a few UI bugs when changing frequency range from under 140MHz to above 140MHz, and a UI bug with the menu.
This update improves the calibration algorithm and handling for the factory calibration and improves measurement quality. You may need to redo any saved calibrations.
You can find the firmware downloads here: https://nanorfe.com/nanovna-versions.html#versions
We apologize for the delay as we have been busy shipping orders after the Chinese New Year break.
Thanks

Thanks for the update.

I have a NanoVNA V2 Plus4. I placed the device in white screen mode by depressing the left toggle button and powering it up. I tried to upgrade the firmware via vna_qt 1.1. The application detects the COM port in the white screen mode but does not connect to the device. I tried NanoVNa-APP and it successfully detected the device and uploaded the firmware.

Mike N2MS

> On 02/16/2025 3:09 AM EST nanov2support via groups.io <edelswartz123=gmail.com@groups.io> wrote:
>
>
> Hi, we have just released the maintenance update 20250121 for both V2 and VNA6000 series of devices.
> This update fixes a few UI bugs when changing frequency range from under 140MHz to above 140MHz, and a UI bug with the menu.
> This update improves the calibration algorithm and handling for the factory calibration and improves measurement quality. You may need to redo any saved calibrations.
> You can find the firmware downloads here: https://nanorfe.com/nanovna-versions.html#versions
> We apologize for the delay as we have been busy shipping orders after the Chinese New Year break.
> Thanks
>

Thank you for the maintenance release. I can confirm what appears to be a near-inconsequential improvement of measurement (at the expense of showing active spurious noise levels at the higher supported frequency ranges above 3.7Ghz, which is understandable, given the true limitations of the hardware. It is better to see the true signal than to mask it, so that we can best decide fitness for purpose or gauge quality of measurement that may be possible). However, it is beyond disappointing that in over 3yrs of product development, we still cannot even have simple functional improvements such as scales displayed on screen, grid lines as dots (so as not to interfere as much with the signal display), >201 sweep points in standalone mode, etc, all of which are things that competing products have had this entire time. These are not overly complicated features that require entire hardware redesigns or faster MCU like perhaps resonance identification and display, etc, but it still begs the question: is there a reason such minimal effort is put into upkeep and competitiveness of your product ? It's as if you want it to slowly fail and fall into also-ran obscurity.

So many of us went out of our way to locate a trusted source to purchase a non-clone RFE NanoVNA and pay the naturally higher premium cost to do so, in order to support the original designers. Yet we get the absolute minimum continued product support. After 3+ years of "supporting" in hopes that doing the right thing would eventually be rewarded, I believe it may be time to finally pull the rip cord and concede that RFE is focused only on painting a picture of superior product without any real effort to provide such. Please explain to me how I am wrong.

We all wanted to believe.

-=dave

Hi, we add features based on feedback from customers, and a common theme among the feedback is they do not wish any changes to be made to the user interface, display, or menu system. Therefore the focus has been stability, bug fixes, and measurement accuracy. Our customers use the instrument in professional settings and prefer no gratuitous changes that may not add functional value for them.
We understand that hobbyists may want something different, so we still have the open source NanoVNA-QT software, which you may hack to suit your needs: https://github.com/nanovna-v2/NanoVNA-QT
Thanks

Bello support,

if this is true where is wroted that this product is reserved for professional application ?
There is an area reserved for feedback ?
There are some product that have less hardware performance and receive software update that increase the efficency.
Sweep point and a possible frequency adjustment are for 99% of users a must.

Regard
Arrio

On Sun, Feb 16, 2025 at 09:41 PM, nanov2support wrote:

>
> Hi, we add features based on feedback from customers, and a common theme among
> the feedback is they do not wish any changes to be made to the user interface,
> display, or menu system. Therefore the focus has been stability, bug fixes,
> and measurement accuracy. Our customers use the instrument in professional
> settings and prefer no gratuitous changes that may not add functional value
> for them.
> We understand that hobbyists may want something different, so we still have
> the open source NanoVNA-QT software, which you may hack to suit your needs:
> https://github.com/nanovna-v2/NanoVNA-QT
> Thanks
>
Hello @nanov2support,
I would like to formally request the following features and updates. Thanks to Dave Johnson for most of these.
1. Scales displayed on screen.
2. Option to have grid lines as dots (so as not to interfere as much with the signal display).
3. Option to select 401 and 601 sweep points in standalone mode.
4. Battery status displayed on screen.

My sincere thanks in advance!

Ah no one who is a professional for sure 😊





W4JDY / EM79xr / ITU 8 / CQ 5

On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 06:59 PM, W4JDY1953_G wrote:

>
> Ah no one who is a professional for sure 😊

???

-=dave

On Mon, 17 Feb 2025 20:13:21 -0800
"Dave Johnson via groups.io" <davejohnson3000=gmail.com@groups.io>
wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 06:59 PM, W4JDY1953_G wrote:
>
> >
> > Ah no one who is a professional for sure 😊
>
> ???

I think he means that RF professionals still use slotted waveguide, a
travelling probe with vernier scale and a diode detector together with a
true RMS voltmeter.

;-)

fx: <evil_laughter>

--

Brian Morrison

"I am not young enough to know everything"
Oscar Wilde

And the waveguide for 30 MHz is enormous.

> On Feb 18, 2025, at 20:29, Brian Morrison via groups.io <bdm=fenrir.org.uk@groups.io> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 17 Feb 2025 20:13:21 -0800
> "Dave Johnson via groups.io" <davejohnson3000=gmail.com@groups.io>
> wrote:
>
>>> On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 06:59 PM, W4JDY1953_G wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>> Ah no one who is a professional for sure 😊
>>
>> ???
>
> I think he means that RF professionals still use slotted waveguide, a
> travelling probe with vernier scale and a diode detector together with a
> true RMS voltmeter.
>
> ;-)
>
> fx: <evil_laughter>
>
> --
>
> Brian Morrison
>
> "I am not young enough to know everything"
> Oscar Wilde
>
>
>
>
>

I used slotted lines at Wheeler Labs back in the seventies. Real “hands
on” VSWR.

On Tue, Feb 18, 2025 at 11:29 PM Brian Morrison via groups.io <bdm=
fenrir.org.uk@groups.io> wrote:

> On Mon, 17 Feb 2025 20:13:21 -0800
> "Dave Johnson via groups.io" <davejohnson3000=gmail.com@groups.io>
> wrote:
>
> > On Mon, Feb 17, 2025 at 06:59 PM, W4JDY1953_G wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > Ah no one who is a professional for sure 😊
> >
> > ???
>
> I think he means that RF professionals still use slotted waveguide, a
> travelling probe with vernier scale and a diode detector together with a
> true RMS voltmeter.
>
> ;-)
>
> fx: <evil_laughter>
>
> --
>
> Brian Morrison
>
> "I am not young enough to know everything"
> Oscar Wilde
>
>
>
>
>
>

Used one of them at RHG in Deer Park LI in the 80s 😊

Is this FW only for the V2 4 or will it work on the V2 plus?

Thanks

Frank KA2FWC

In nanorfe. com website, firmware 20220814 is the stable version. Are all versions after this firmware beta ?

Good morning,
It is for the plus as well.

Alan N2ZVN

On Wed, Feb 19, 2025 at 10:29 PM cocopuppy via groups.io <ka2fwc=
bellsouth.net@groups.io> wrote:

> Is this FW only for the V2 4 or will it work on the V2 plus?
>
> Thanks
>
> Frank KA2FWC
>
>
>
>
>
> *From:* NanoVNAV2@groups.io <NanoVNAV2@groups.io> *On Behalf Of *nanov2support
> via groups.io
> *Sent:* Sunday, February 16, 2025 3:09 AM
> *To:* NanoVNAV2@groups.io
> *Subject:* Re: [nanovnav2] Firmware for NanoVNA V2plus4
>
>
>
> Hi, we have just released the maintenance update 20250121 for both V2 and
> VNA6000 series of devices.
>
> This update fixes a few UI bugs when changing frequency range from under
> 140MHz to above 140MHz, and a UI bug with the menu.
>
> This update improves the calibration algorithm and handling for the
> factory calibration and improves measurement quality. You may need to redo
> any saved calibrations.
>
> You can find the firmware downloads here:
> https://nanorfe.com/nanovna-versions.html#versions
>
> We apologize for the delay as we have been busy shipping orders after the
> Chinese New Year break.
>
> Thanks
>
>
>
>
>
>

Thanks. It doesn’t show it on their site the latest is 20210726

Frank

On Wed, 19 Feb 2025 10:09:45 -0800
"mgxyz via groups.io" <mgxyz=yahoo.com@groups.io> wrote:

> In nanorfe. com website, firmware 20220814 is the stable version. Are
> all versions after this firmware beta ?

The developers state that they have been qualifying and doing
regression testing on this firmware before releasing it. So it's not
really a beta because it's clear that they intend it to be of
production quality.

--

Brian Morrison

Thanks for pointing out the differences between the professional and hobbyist uses.

It is like comparing Hand grenades to a shotgun when it comes to what one really needs.

W4JDY / EM79xr / ITU 8 / CQ 5

Ah not quite as this statement mirrors legacy thinking.

Before you have NanoVNA, we were using computerized analyzers handheld in the DoD and in the engineering shops.

Point was the differences needed between hobbyists and professionals with any piece of test equipment - remember engineering 1010 the differences between error, precision and accuracy ?

Reminds me of those who carried out calculations past 3 significant places?

W4JDY / EM79xr / ITU 8 / CQ 5

Ironically when I worked for a allied nation on loan from the DoD, the French were still using leecher wire tuners, paraffin soaked wood as high voltage insulators and slotted waveguides.

But test equipment aside, it is the man behind the machine who determines its correct use and required accuracy.

W4JDY / EM79xr / ITU 8 / CQ 5