On Mon, 22 Nov 2004 02:55:30 GMT, John McHarry wrote:
Charles Brabham wrote:

APRS was developed as a packet radio "killer application" by folks
associated with TAPR in the US.

The idea is to kill any interest in packet by eliminating its most
interesting and useful features, substituting a pointless
internet-dependent activity sure to put just about anyone to sleep....

I don't see why one person's dislike for a particular use of a couple
frequencies should be grounds for such an attack. Hams do lots of different
things, which is one of the attractions of the hobby. I have no real
interest in APRS, but if others find it amusing to hook three or more
different kinds of technology together to do something, why not? It is no
more pointless than DX or moonbounce or QRP or dozens of other ham
activities. If some people are having fun and learning a few things, more
power to them, except the QRP crowd, of of course. N5PVL needs to get
himself a hobby.

Just ignore Charles. Every now and then he'll get up and
start screeching about how this, that, and the other thing
has "killed packet", occasionally try to drive people to look
at his website ( When was that thing last updated? 1998? ),
and then sit back and try to abuse anyone who responds to him.

Almost makes me wonder what ever happened to Burt Fisher....

"Reg" wrote in message
...
"Charles Brabham" wrote

APRS fits TAPR's ideal of a "killer application" perfectly - It
kills off all interest in the hobby.

Charles, that may be to case in the US, but here in England, it was
the RSGB that killed off packet radio.

Our ARRL did nothing to damage the Packet hobby - and nothing to help it
either. It was a secondary organization, TAPR, which was the main problem on
this side of the pond. The irony here is that TAPR was allegedly supposed to
support packet radio and it did - until a clique of internet junkies took
the organization over in the late 1980's. The non-ham types have since
discredited TAPR and had the organization to the point where last year, they
hired a fellow to examine the organization in order to determine what it
might be good for. - The report was inconclusive.

I could have saved them a little money on that one... I could have told them
that TAPR was of dubious value for free.

The Radio Society of GB had this odd idea that reducing the channel
spacing was needed because the commercial radio used closer channel
spacing than ham radio.

Yes, it's amazing how amateurs are supposed to innovate, and do new things -
but there is a large group of halfwits who judge the hobby's worth and state
of the art by how closely it resembles commercial stuff that has nothing to
do with amateur radio. The TAPR halfwits disparage any aspect of amateur
radio which does not resemble the familiar internet.

Judging by your experience with RSGB and our experience with TAPR, it should
be plain (except to halfwits of course) that instead of trying to emulate
existing systems, amateurs should be experimenting with new and different
ideas that the commercial outfits may someday emulate.

The commercial outfits supposed to be following our lead as they have many
times in the past - and not the other way around. The RSGB and TAPR folks
being discussed are the worst kind of Luddites, in this respect. Because of
their destructive ignorance, these people have no place in the hobby. We
would be much better off without them.

At least APRS has increased activity on VHF here. However I agree
that internet connections would appear to be more important for some
folk.

It's what they know.

Charles, N5PVL

"Reg" wrote in message
...
"Charles Brabham" wrote

APRS fits TAPR's ideal of a "killer application" perfectly - It
kills off all interest in the hobby.

Charles, that may be to case in the US, but here in England, it was
the RSGB that killed off packet radio.

Our ARRL did nothing to damage the Packet hobby - and nothing to help it
either. It was a secondary organization, TAPR, which was the main problem on
this side of the pond. The irony here is that TAPR was allegedly supposed to
support packet radio and it did - until a clique of internet junkies took
the organization over in the late 1980's. The non-ham types have since
discredited TAPR and had the organization to the point where last year, they
hired a fellow to examine the organization in order to determine what it
might be good for. - The report was inconclusive.

I could have saved them a little money on that one... I could have told them
that TAPR was of dubious value for free.

The Radio Society of GB had this odd idea that reducing the channel
spacing was needed because the commercial radio used closer channel
spacing than ham radio.

Yes, it's amazing how amateurs are supposed to innovate, and do new things -
but there is a large group of halfwits who judge the hobby's worth and state
of the art by how closely it resembles commercial stuff that has nothing to
do with amateur radio. The TAPR halfwits disparage any aspect of amateur
radio which does not resemble the familiar internet.

Judging by your experience with RSGB and our experience with TAPR, it should
be plain (except to halfwits of course) that instead of trying to emulate
existing systems, amateurs should be experimenting with new and different
ideas that the commercial outfits may someday emulate.

The commercial outfits supposed to be following our lead as they have many
times in the past - and not the other way around. The RSGB and TAPR folks
being discussed are the worst kind of Luddites, in this respect. Because of
their destructive ignorance, these people have no place in the hobby. We
would be much better off without them.

At least APRS has increased activity on VHF here. However I agree
that internet connections would appear to be more important for some
folk.

It's what they know.

Charles, N5PVL

"John McHarry" wrote in message
ink.net...
Charles Brabham wrote:

APRS was developed as a packet radio "killer application" by folks
associated with TAPR in the US.

The idea is to kill any interest in packet by eliminating its most
interesting and useful features, substituting a pointless
internet-dependent activity sure to put just about anyone to sleep....

I don't see why one person's dislike for a particular use of a couple
frequencies should be grounds for such an attack.

I looked back at my post, and did not see any reference to "a particular use
of a couple frequencies ", or any attack of any kind.

Do you have any response to what I actually said? - Or will you just put
words in other people's mouths and then answer them, effectively debating
with yourself?

Hams do lots of different
things, which is one of the attractions of the hobby. I have no real
interest in APRS, but if others find it amusing to hook three or more
different kinds of technology together to do something, why not?

I don't know... Since you have brought up the question of somehow "not
allowing APRS", perhaps you can answer yourself. - Again.

It is no
more pointless than DX or moonbounce or QRP or dozens of other ham
activities. If some people are having fun and learning a few things, more
power to them, except the QRP crowd, of of course.

That's your opinion, and you are welcome to it. My opinion is that ARPS is
pointless, but that "DX or moonbounce or QRP or dozens of other ham
activities" are not. The "ham activities" you mention are legitimate
applications of amateur radio.

N5PVL needs to get himself a hobby.

I have a hobby.. It's called Amateur Radio, not Amateur Telephone. We
amateur radio operators are funny, in that we try to see what can be done
with radio.

Try it out sometime.

Charles, N5PVL

"John McHarry" wrote in message
ink.net...
Charles Brabham wrote:

APRS was developed as a packet radio "killer application" by folks
associated with TAPR in the US.

The idea is to kill any interest in packet by eliminating its most
interesting and useful features, substituting a pointless
internet-dependent activity sure to put just about anyone to sleep....

I don't see why one person's dislike for a particular use of a couple
frequencies should be grounds for such an attack.

I looked back at my post, and did not see any reference to "a particular use
of a couple frequencies ", or any attack of any kind.

Do you have any response to what I actually said? - Or will you just put
words in other people's mouths and then answer them, effectively debating
with yourself?

Hams do lots of different
things, which is one of the attractions of the hobby. I have no real
interest in APRS, but if others find it amusing to hook three or more
different kinds of technology together to do something, why not?

I don't know... Since you have brought up the question of somehow "not
allowing APRS", perhaps you can answer yourself. - Again.

It is no
more pointless than DX or moonbounce or QRP or dozens of other ham
activities. If some people are having fun and learning a few things, more
power to them, except the QRP crowd, of of course.

That's your opinion, and you are welcome to it. My opinion is that ARPS is
pointless, but that "DX or moonbounce or QRP or dozens of other ham
activities" are not. The "ham activities" you mention are legitimate
applications of amateur radio.

N5PVL needs to get himself a hobby.

I have a hobby.. It's called Amateur Radio, not Amateur Telephone. We
amateur radio operators are funny, in that we try to see what can be done
with radio.

Try it out sometime.

Charles, N5PVL

"Here to there" - a nameless, no-callsign troll -
wrote in message
...
Charles Brabham wrote:

APRS was developed as a packet radio "killer application" by folks
associated with TAPR in the US.

The idea is to kill any interest in packet by eliminating its most
interesting and useful features, substituting a pointless
internet-dependent activity sure to put just about anyone to sleep....


Just ignore Charles. Every now and then he'll get up and
start screeching about how this, that, and the other thing
has "killed packet", occasionally try to drive people to look
at his website ( When was that thing last updated? 1998? ),

The web site was created in 2002, Einstein, and last updated three days ago.
There was a major re-write six months or so ago.

You can check it out (obviously you need to) at: http://www.uspacket.org

and then sit back and try to abuse anyone who responds to him.

Just the morons and nameless no-callsign trolls, such as yourself.

I'm friendly with everybody else, and will not apologize for stepping on
toes that were made to be stepped on. - such as yours.

Almost makes me wonder what ever happened to Burt Fisher....

Is he the new president at TAPR? That would fit like a glove...
BWAHAHAHAHAWR!

Charles, N5PVL

"Here to there" - a nameless, no-callsign troll -
wrote in message
...
Charles Brabham wrote:

APRS was developed as a packet radio "killer application" by folks
associated with TAPR in the US.

The idea is to kill any interest in packet by eliminating its most
interesting and useful features, substituting a pointless
internet-dependent activity sure to put just about anyone to sleep....


Just ignore Charles. Every now and then he'll get up and
start screeching about how this, that, and the other thing
has "killed packet", occasionally try to drive people to look
at his website ( When was that thing last updated? 1998? ),

The web site was created in 2002, Einstein, and last updated three days ago.
There was a major re-write six months or so ago.

You can check it out (obviously you need to) at: http://www.uspacket.org

and then sit back and try to abuse anyone who responds to him.

Just the morons and nameless no-callsign trolls, such as yourself.

I'm friendly with everybody else, and will not apologize for stepping on
toes that were made to be stepped on. - such as yours.

Almost makes me wonder what ever happened to Burt Fisher....

Is he the new president at TAPR? That would fit like a glove...
BWAHAHAHAHAWR!

Charles, N5PVL

"Charles Brabham" wrote in message:

APRS was developed as a packet radio "killer application" by folks
associated with TAPR in the US.

Hi Charles:

I don't believe that is true. If you'll check early issues of Gateway
(I think around 1993) you'll see APRS was initially developed to track
sailboats out of the U.S. Naval academy in Annapolis, MD. So if you
want to go pointing fingers, point it at the U.S. Navy.

Now, if your claiming TAPR shameless tried to ride the coattails of
APRS, then I will agree with you. Their only real contribution to APRS
was to form the APRS working group, which they quickly cut and run
from leaving a adminstrative FUBAR'ed mess behind.


The idea is to kill any interest in packet by eliminating its most
interesting and useful features, substituting a pointless internet-dependent
activity sure to put just about anyone to sleep.

Have you even run APRS? Up until about 1998 it didn't even use the
internet, and the way it uses the internet is as a giant data
collector. APRS is firmly in the RF domain, even if some people use it
to track their homes ;-(

APRS fits TAPR's ideal of a "killer application" perfectly - It kills off
all interest in the hobby.

TAPR bashing aside, APRS has generated quite a bit of interest in the
hobby, and a strong case could be made it has prolonged interest in RF
based packet radio.

The more TNC's they can talk hams into tying up
so they can report thier house's position on the internet, the less will be
used for communicating as hams or doing anything else that may be
interesting or useful.

Ahh.... now that is the rub, isn't it? "anything interesting or
useful"

What do you suggest? The only other popular packet application on the
horizon I see is WinLink. You may not like that, but those are the
facts. And oh, did I mention, WinLink has a form of APRS position
reporting in it as well.

Charles, you interest in some of streaming protocols is well placed.
This could be a killer application if further developed and refined.
If your that concerned, I suggest putting efforts into that.

"Charles Brabham" wrote in message:

APRS was developed as a packet radio "killer application" by folks
associated with TAPR in the US.

Hi Charles:

I don't believe that is true. If you'll check early issues of Gateway
(I think around 1993) you'll see APRS was initially developed to track
sailboats out of the U.S. Naval academy in Annapolis, MD. So if you
want to go pointing fingers, point it at the U.S. Navy.

Now, if your claiming TAPR shameless tried to ride the coattails of
APRS, then I will agree with you. Their only real contribution to APRS
was to form the APRS working group, which they quickly cut and run
from leaving a adminstrative FUBAR'ed mess behind.


The idea is to kill any interest in packet by eliminating its most
interesting and useful features, substituting a pointless internet-dependent
activity sure to put just about anyone to sleep.

Have you even run APRS? Up until about 1998 it didn't even use the
internet, and the way it uses the internet is as a giant data
collector. APRS is firmly in the RF domain, even if some people use it
to track their homes ;-(

APRS fits TAPR's ideal of a "killer application" perfectly - It kills off
all interest in the hobby.

TAPR bashing aside, APRS has generated quite a bit of interest in the
hobby, and a strong case could be made it has prolonged interest in RF
based packet radio.

The more TNC's they can talk hams into tying up
so they can report thier house's position on the internet, the less will be
used for communicating as hams or doing anything else that may be
interesting or useful.

Ahh.... now that is the rub, isn't it? "anything interesting or
useful"

What do you suggest? The only other popular packet application on the
horizon I see is WinLink. You may not like that, but those are the
facts. And oh, did I mention, WinLink has a form of APRS position
reporting in it as well.

Charles, you interest in some of streaming protocols is well placed.
This could be a killer application if further developed and refined.
If your that concerned, I suggest putting efforts into that.

Thanks for showing everyone you lack a real understanding of APRS.
Ignorance is bliss.

Charles Brabham wrote:
APRS was developed as a packet radio "killer application" by folks
associated with TAPR in the US.

The idea is to kill any interest in packet by eliminating its most
interesting and useful features, substituting a pointless internet-dependent
activity sure to put just about anyone to sleep.

APRS fits TAPR's ideal of a "killer application" perfectly - It kills off
all interest in the hobby. The more TNC's they can talk hams into tying up
so they can report thier house's position on the internet, the less will be
used for communicating as hams or doing anything else that may be
interesting or useful.

In the US, tying up equipment to do APRS has taken the place of astrology,
numerology, or socialism a quick ( lack of ) intelligence test.

Charles, N5PVL