This may be the answer to your dreams. A SOFTWARE DEFINED RADIO!

http://www.flex-radio.com/

This radio is basically controlled by software. Selectivity not good
enough? A new program is written and distributed (the programs are
free!)...

New band authorized? New software is written to include the new band...

A new digital mode invented? Yup, new software is written to give the
radio that capability...

Scott
N0EDV

John Smith wrote:

Decades have brought us moon landing, mars landings,masers, lasers, lets,
fets, mosfets, computers, etc...

But the shape of radio equip. has remained virtually stagnant.

One "innovation" would be to just copy what the IBM clone has taught us.

Build a radio of "cards." Just like the computer, a standard case which you
can plugin various power supplies, frontend board "cards", intermediate
board "cards", buffer amp board "cards", IF board "cards", audio board
"cards", xmitter board "cards", final amp board "cards", etc.... I think
you get the pic

One radio case can/could virtually be any radio you can imagine.... new
design in a frontend? Plug in a new front end "card", new audio offering?
Plug in a new audio board "card."

Someone really should get off a dead duff somewhere and DO IT!!!!

Kinda makes ya wonder why not? Doesn't it?

Warmest regards,
John

Well, if what I see coming on the horizon is what I think it is--American
dominance in "innovation" is dying....



With China, India, etc. "coming online", even the American consumer will
soon be of small importance... even our auto manufacturers will soon be
selling more cars there, than to citizens here... as these countries
continue to "harvest our bucks" and upgrade, soon we will not even be able
to compete over the cost of oil--it will go where it is more
important--manufacturing over-seas...



Tying the hands of ourselves with overly restrictive rules and regulations
which hamper our ability to compete has been taxing too--some of these ideas
can only be instituted over-seas--where they will soon see the idea of
promoting innovation and forward progress is conductive to even their
self-serving interests...



Not everyone sees salvation in a new regulation, law or restriction…



But, we will see...



Warmest regards,

John

--
I AM ONE-IN-A-MILLION!!!!!
Too bad the other 999,999 got there first.. frown

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
| Decades have brought us moon landing, mars landings,masers, lasers, lets,
| fets, mosfets, computers, etc...
|
| But the shape of radio equip. has remained virtually stagnant.
|
| One "innovation" would be to just copy what the IBM clone has taught us.
|
| Build a radio of "cards." Just like the computer, a standard case which
you
| can plugin various power supplies, frontend board "cards", intermediate
| board "cards", buffer amp board "cards", IF board "cards", audio board
| "cards", xmitter board "cards", final amp board "cards", etc.... I think
| you get the pic
|
| One radio case can/could virtually be any radio you can imagine.... new
| design in a frontend? Plug in a new front end "card", new audio offering?
| Plug in a new audio board "card."
|
| Someone really should get off a dead duff somewhere and DO IT!!!!
|
| Kinda makes ya wonder why not? Doesn't it?
|
| Warmest regards,
| John
|
| --
| I AM ONE-IN-A-MILLION!!!!!
| Too bad the other 999,999 got there first.. frown
|
|

On Sun, 8 May 2005 06:25:45 -0700, "John Smith"
wrote:

Russ:

That is my point! Too many look at ham radio as "special" and "separate."

What I suggested was gov't, commercial and, yes, even CB in that suggestion.
I am just guessing, but you market to that wide a group and you are just
bound to sell a dozen--or two! grin

And, having the design so others can purchase rights (reasonably charged!)
to use "your case", then the innovation brought to the market by "the many
manufacturers" (and thousands of minds) gives your product real "SEX
APPEAL!"

Intriguing idea, but how would this work with varying licensing
requirements on some of your proposed bands, maximum power
differences, as well as the "type acceptance" or certification
required for operation?

Would changing cards within such a unit count as a mod, presently only
allowed for licensed amateurs transmitting on amateur frequencies?

You are on the right track as far as getting marketable numbers, but
the rules are so different for the various bands you mention, I am not
sure that can be resolved, even if all of the technical issues can be.

Happy trails,
Gary (net.yogi.bear)
--
At the 51st percentile of ursine intelligence

Gary D. Schwartz, Needham, MA, USA
Please reply to: garyDOTschwartzATpoboxDOTcom

On Sun, 08 May 2005 18:39:36 +1000, atec wrote:

Roy Lewallen wrote:
John Smith wrote:

. . .
Someone really should get off a dead duff somewhere and DO IT!!!!

Kinda makes ya wonder why not? Doesn't it?


I sure seem to hear that a lot.

Some *other* lazy bum oughtta get off his duff and do it.

Why don't you do it? If the problem is that you don't have the technical
know-how, well, how do you think those people who have it, got it? By
being lazy?

Typing a few sentences and hitting Send sure is easier than studying,
isn't it?
So it would appear is attacking another's comment .

Perhaps it is because Roy is, like your's truly, getting a bit tired
of seeing "John Smith's" conversations with himself. I don't use any
software filters on my newsreader but I've sure engaged a mental
filter.

It would work like EVERYTHING else in the world works!!! am I the only one
realizing that

You can buy a diesel truck if you want to--but can't drive it unless you are
licenced. You can build/buy a car with a thousand-horsepower engine--but
have to be careful how fast you go on highways... You can buy a handgun and
use it to protect yourself--but suffer the wrath of "God" if you error...
You can buy poison--but can't poison your neighbor... you can buy razor
blades--but can't put them in the apples you handout at Halloween... you
can buy gasoline--but can't use it to burn down anothers property... you can
buy a car--but can't use it as a weapon and run down people on the street...

Yanno, they USED to teach this stuff in school!!!!

Warmest regards,
John
--
I AM ONE-IN-A-MILLION!!!!!
Too bad the other 999,999 got there first.. frown

"Gary S." Idontwantspam@net wrote in message
...
| On Sun, 8 May 2005 06:25:45 -0700, "John Smith"
| wrote:
|
| Russ:
|
| That is my point! Too many look at ham radio as "special" and
"separate."
|
| What I suggested was gov't, commercial and, yes, even CB in that
suggestion.
| I am just guessing, but you market to that wide a group and you are just
| bound to sell a dozen--or two! grin
|
| And, having the design so others can purchase rights (reasonably
charged!)
| to use "your case", then the innovation brought to the market by "the
many
| manufacturers" (and thousands of minds) gives your product real "SEX
| APPEAL!"
|
| Intriguing idea, but how would this work with varying licensing
| requirements on some of your proposed bands, maximum power
| differences, as well as the "type acceptance" or certification
| required for operation?
|
| Would changing cards within such a unit count as a mod, presently only
| allowed for licensed amateurs transmitting on amateur frequencies?
|
| You are on the right track as far as getting marketable numbers, but
| the rules are so different for the various bands you mention, I am not
| sure that can be resolved, even if all of the technical issues can be.
|
| Happy trails,
| Gary (net.yogi.bear)
| --
| At the 51st percentile of ursine intelligence
|
| Gary D. Schwartz, Needham, MA, USA
| Please reply to: garyDOTschwartzATpoboxDOTcom

Well, I just hope you are not getting to the point of contemplating
"Un-American Activities", you still support free speech--don't you?

Warmest regards,
John
--
I AM ONE-IN-A-MILLION!!!!!
Too bad the other 999,999 got there first.. frown

"Wes Stewart" wrote in message
...
| On Sun, 08 May 2005 18:39:36 +1000, atec wrote:
|
| Roy Lewallen wrote:
| John Smith wrote:
|
| . . .
| Someone really should get off a dead duff somewhere and DO IT!!!!
|
| Kinda makes ya wonder why not? Doesn't it?
|
|
| I sure seem to hear that a lot.
|
| Some *other* lazy bum oughtta get off his duff and do it.
|
| Why don't you do it? If the problem is that you don't have the
technical
| know-how, well, how do you think those people who have it, got it? By
| being lazy?
|
| Typing a few sentences and hitting Send sure is easier than studying,
| isn't it?
| So it would appear is attacking another's comment .
|
| Perhaps it is because Roy is, like your's truly, getting a bit tired
| of seeing "John Smith's" conversations with himself. I don't use any
| software filters on my newsreader but I've sure engaged a mental
| filter.
|
|

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
Decades have brought us moon landing, mars landings,masers, lasers, lets,
fets, mosfets, computers, etc...

But the shape of radio equip. has remained virtually stagnant.

One "innovation" would be to just copy what the IBM clone has taught us.

Build a radio of "cards." Just like the computer, a standard case which
you
can plugin various power supplies, frontend board "cards", intermediate
board "cards", buffer amp board "cards", IF board "cards", audio board
"cards", xmitter board "cards", final amp board "cards", etc.... I think
you get the pic

One radio case can/could virtually be any radio you can imagine.... new
design in a frontend? Plug in a new front end "card", new audio offering?
Plug in a new audio board "card."

Someone really should get off a dead duff somewhere and DO IT!!!!

Your comments are interesting. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, the
amateur market did begin down this road.

Look at: The Heathkit SB-104(A) and the Yaesu FT-ONE. there were a number
of "lessons learned" from those experiences - but the "state of the art" has
also moved from "thru-hole" construction to surface mount.

This concept is not unique to amateur radio, network equipment manufacturers
have gone back and forth between "chassis based" equipment and "appliance"
at least 5 times over past 20 years. Each has their unique attributes,
advantages and disadvantages ....

w9gb

gb:

Well, we certainly need to examine the "bottle neck" and remove it... before
we are doomed...

If we can't institute this "radical" idea here, we need to look at Canada,
Mexico, So. America, China, India, etc...

When there are as many functional radios (or "cards") hitting the dumpster
as there are functional computers and related equip. (replaced with
upgrades) we will know the right idea has prevailed and radio has come
home...

I would think there must be some EXCELLENT argument/reasoning serving as a
road block, or else, others are simply going to pass us by...

John
--
When Viagra fails to work--you are DOOMED!!!

"gb" wrote in message
...
| "John Smith" wrote in message
| ...
| Decades have brought us moon landing, mars landings,masers, lasers,
lets,
| fets, mosfets, computers, etc...
|
| But the shape of radio equip. has remained virtually stagnant.
|
| One "innovation" would be to just copy what the IBM clone has taught us.
|
| Build a radio of "cards." Just like the computer, a standard case which
| you
| can plugin various power supplies, frontend board "cards", intermediate
| board "cards", buffer amp board "cards", IF board "cards", audio board
| "cards", xmitter board "cards", final amp board "cards", etc.... I
think
| you get the pic
|
| One radio case can/could virtually be any radio you can imagine.... new
| design in a frontend? Plug in a new front end "card", new audio
offering?
| Plug in a new audio board "card."
|
| Someone really should get off a dead duff somewhere and DO IT!!!!
|
| Your comments are interesting. In the late 1970s and early 1980s, the
| amateur market did begin down this road.
|
| Look at: The Heathkit SB-104(A) and the Yaesu FT-ONE. there were a
number
| of "lessons learned" from those experiences - but the "state of the art"
has
| also moved from "thru-hole" construction to surface mount.
|
| This concept is not unique to amateur radio, network equipment
manufacturers
| have gone back and forth between "chassis based" equipment and "appliance"
| at least 5 times over past 20 years. Each has their unique attributes,
| advantages and disadvantages ....
|
| w9gb
|
|

John Smith wrote:

gb:

Well, we certainly need to examine the "bottle neck" and remove it... before
we are doomed...

If we can't institute this "radical" idea here, we need to look at Canada,
Mexico, So. America, China, India, etc...

When there are as many functional radios (or "cards") hitting the dumpster
as there are functional computers and related equip. (replaced with
upgrades) we will know the right idea has prevailed and radio has come
home...

I would think there must be some EXCELLENT argument/reasoning serving as a
road block, or else, others are simply going to pass us by...

John

I've considered this sort of a radio before. There are a few problems,
however:

First, there is a fundamental difference between digital systems and
analog systems that prevents this sort of thing working with the success
of a PC.

The basic difference is that with a digital system you either end up
with a clean signal or a useless signal. In an analog system the
character and purity of the signal must be carefully guarded, at least
until you manage to digitize it. This means that there will be a much
greater chance that adding a new card to the radio will degrade not only
the function of the new card, but the function of all the other cards.

Second, the PC market is a huge one, with great advantages to be derived
from common equipment and software, and much smaller advantages to be
derived from commonality. This is the exact obverse of the radio
market, including homebrew radios. To make a "card" radio would be to
define a basic radio architecture, probably down to the IF frequency (or
at least to the point of forcing you to match your IF and front end).
While improvements could be made within this structure an independent
experimenter couldn't play around with such things as direct-conversion,
different IF schemes, etc., without extensive modification.

In this way the radio market is more like the market for computing
devices as a whole. The PC market doesn't account for the most
processors sold, or even the most dollars of all computing devices. The
largest segment of the market is in embedded computing devices ranging
from things as visible and obvious as your PDA, through cell phones, and
down to burglar alarms and TV remotes. Take apart a new home thermostat
or TV remote and there's a good chance that you'll find a processor that
implements most of its functionality in software -- but a very slim
chance indeed that its PC compatible!

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Services
http://www.wescottdesign.com

John Smith wrote:
Decades have brought us moon landing, mars landings,masers, lasers, lets,
fets, mosfets, computers, etc...

But the shape of radio equip. has remained virtually stagnant.

One "innovation" would be to just copy what the IBM clone has taught us.

Build a radio of "cards." Just like the computer, a standard case which you
can plugin various power supplies, frontend board "cards", intermediate
board "cards", buffer amp board "cards", IF board "cards", audio board
"cards", xmitter board "cards", final amp board "cards", etc.... I think
you get the pic

One radio case can/could virtually be any radio you can imagine.... new
design in a frontend? Plug in a new front end "card", new audio offering?
Plug in a new audio board "card."

Someone really should get off a dead duff somewhere and DO IT!!!!

Kinda makes ya wonder why not? Doesn't it?

You can get a software defined radio. Front end, and pipe it into your
computer, and there ya go! Ten Tec also manufactured the Pegasus a few
years back, close to what you are thinking of.

Personally, I don't think that the PC computer paradigm is any way to
go. It's just how PC's evolved. Despite years of progress, plug and play
is not universal, and just another PC promise.

- Mike KB3EIA -