Article: 52359 of rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc From: Jayson Davis Subject: Re: Amazing References: Message-ID: Date: Mon, 16 May 2005 11:48:26 -0400 Marty Albert wrote: > I am curious as to what people attribute the (apparent) death of digital > systems overall. > > I, of course, have my own ideas that have, by the way, not changed for more > than a decade. > > So, what say you about the life of digital services? The death of the digital modes is directly attributible to the fact that the protocol is 20 years old and has throughput equal to the speed of an old lady sitting in a motorized wheelchair trying to check-out her groceries in the express isle. TAPR had a great spread-spectrum board, but the project died a death due to a thousand cuts of various sorts. Until amateur radio gets a similar project that makes speeds > 384 kbps and in a form that makes it easy for appliance operators to plug-n-play, packet is all we have. I'm surprised the ARRL hasn't sponsored a project. Kids playing with 802.11 are having far more success in building networks that amateur radio operators. Article: 52360 of rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc From: "Charles Brabham" References: Subject: Re: Amazing Message-ID: Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 10:14:51 GMT The single biggest drawback that US digital hams face is TAPR. The second largest drawback US digital hams face is the ARRL. Between the two, they have managed to keep the US somewhere between fifteen to twenty years behind the rest of the world. Charles Brabham, N5PVL Director: USPacket http://www.uspacket.org Admin: HamBlog.Com http://www.hamblog.com Webmaster: HamPoll.Com http://www.hampoll.com Weblog: http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php Article: 52361 of rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc From: hgoldste@mpcs.com (Howard Goldstein) Date: Tue, 17 May 2005 13:09:33 GMT Subject: Re: Amazing References: Message-ID: <1116335373.50449@news.queue.to> On Tue, 17 May 2005 01:51:05 GMT, Marty Albert wrote: : I wish that I still had the schematic for the prototype that he gave me, but : over the course 15+ years and 3 cross-country moves, I have misplaced them. 80mps sounds nice. Was the sort of thing a moderately clumsy guy could put together out of off the shelf parts? Article: 52362 of rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc From: "Marty Albert" References: Subject: Re: Amazing Message-ID: <7Dyie.18447$J12.11529@newssvr14.news.prodigy.com> Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 03:28:03 GMT Up to a point, I think that you are correct, but there far more dynamic forces acting on this than just the ARRL and TAPR. (a side note: I gave up membership in both about 1991) Take Care & 73 -- >From The Desk Of Marty Albert, KC6UFM "Charles Brabham" wrote in message news:vujie.402$VB6.275@newssvr12.news.prodigy.com... > The single biggest drawback that US digital hams face is TAPR. > > The second largest drawback US digital hams face is the ARRL. > > Between the two, they have managed to keep the US somewhere between fifteen > to twenty years behind the rest of the world. > > Charles Brabham, N5PVL > > Director: USPacket http://www.uspacket.org > Admin: HamBlog.Com http://www.hamblog.com > Webmaster: HamPoll.Com http://www.hampoll.com > Weblog: http://www.hamblog.com/blog_n5pvl.php > > > Article: 52363 of rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc From: "Marty Albert" References: <8KqdnaEjBt-D8hffRVn-2g@comcast.com> Subject: Re: Amazing Message-ID: Date: Wed, 18 May 2005 04:02:57 GMT Yep... Who will pay for it? The gizmo that Frank designed (16+ years ago) could be built for about $25.00 (USD) buying the parts retail. I would suspect that, at that time, a manufacturer going all out in building and selling these things could have got all the parts for around $4.00 or so. With a redesign to take advantage of today's DDS, DSP, SS, uControllers, etc., I would suspect that manufacturer, buying in lots to build 5000 units, would probably pay about $6.00 for the parts and perhaps another $8.00 in labor. That would put their wholesale price to dealers at about $40.00 and retail price at about $80-$100. You'll pay that for a 1200 bps TNC! But, actual prices aside, we hams need to start doing some innovative and interesting things that private industry can pick up on and make a few dollars. Want to get really bad news? Go to the FCC site and take a look at what bands the size of, for example, our 70 cm band are selling for at auction. Hams in the US are probably sitting on a couple of billion dollars worth of bandwidth. How long do you think it will be before some congress critter notices that hams, (A) Ham a lot of valuable bandwidth, (B) Have not contributed very much to the electronics or radio industries since the early 1950's, (C) Are shrinking in numbers and spend most of their time acting just like CBer's, and (D) Are basically a moot point when it comes to emergency communications. In other words, the people that really like ham radio will come up with the money because it matters to them if it goes away. And, BTW, there were the same arguments about money when we had a lot of privately owned BBSs for computer users to call into. Take Care & 73 -- >From The Desk Of Marty Albert, KC6UFM "Dee Flint" wrote in message news:8KqdnaEjBt-D8hffRVn-2g@comcast.com... > > There is nothing stopping the hams from changing it except for lack of > money. Too many people come up with these grandiose ideas and expect > somebody to fund it. Well it isn't going to happen. Many clubs are > struggling just to keep their repeaters funded and maintained. > Individuals face dilemmas of their own on how to allocate their financial > priorities. > > Dee D. Flint, N8UZE > >