| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#21
July 21st 05, 03:15 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Mike Coslo wrote:
wrote: Mike Coslo wrote: wrote: http://www.getboost.com/dz/sienna.htm My thoughts. First, the unit has a lot of promise. While I think I prefer separate components between the computer and the rig for flexibility, this setup might just be fun to use. Some folks might like the integrated internal computer. It's certainly the first rig to offer it. My only concern is that a computer's life cycle is much shorter than most ham rigs'. Of course, the computer would work for all the Ham radio functions at the time of manufacture, so it wouldn't "go" out of date. Would you like a nice 4100 MHz Pentium 1 running Win95 for your shack computer, Mike? Ten years ago, that was a dream machine... Plus my idea given down below might be a winner. Next, I don't buy the teeny florescent screen rationale. My idea of the modern integrated rig is more along the line of looking like a laptop, with a folding large screen on top of the RF portions of the box. But that's just me. You can plug an external VGA display into the rig. Sometimes. But you see, here is what I'm thinking of. A computer with the RF guts, and a laptop of some choice that plugs into the computer, and sets on top of it. Many of the features now used in hardware could be handled by the laptop. You would have logging, digital modes, dsp - probably not important to you, but for a growing group of us, it would be great. Been done. Kachina 505. Also TT Pegasus. Rigs without a front panel. If the laptop were to become obsolete, say if a new mode came along that required too much horsepower, then the unit could be replaced. A mounting kit could be made available. In fact, a radio could be designed so that you could attach your present laptop. Remember the Warbler? In any event what you're suggesting is a rig that is controlled by the computer - an RF modem of sorts. Great if you like that sort of thing, but they didn't sell all that well. Maybe times have changed. Interesting that they chose an LDG autotuner. This is a concept that might be expanded upon. It would be wonderful if ham rigs were like desktop computers in the form of standardization. Sometimes. Why not? Look at what it's done for PCs. Why not for ham rigs? Don't like the computer interface screenshot. I really hope that they do well. I do think the price point is too high. I would be willing to pay extra for an American made unit, but 3K for the entry level, and 6K for the works unit is pretty high. Perhaps - but a lot depends on how well it really performs. Unless of course, the rig has outstanding performance. I would love to see some test results. Mo bettah, some actual on-air performance. Somebody wins CQWW DX with one, then watch the fireworks... Or to really get to the bottom of it: Is it $6000 worth of fun? And is it 6K worth of fun for the XYL? ;^) Who is to say that the spouse doesn't get his/her fun items too? Hoping that they can sell enough to expand the concept, because it is a good one.... Expand which concept? Kits have been around a long time - curious that they never mention Elecraft or any of the other kits... For me, the concept isn't the kit - its the idea of the integral computer, the modular construction, even to using another manufacturers tuner. That *would be* a good thing! Of course my entire main HF rig cost me less than one of their optional filters, so I guess everything is relative.... One more observation on price: Go to the local Home Depot, Lowes or similar outfit, as long as they carry a full range of appliances and such. Look at the ranges, refrigerators, countertops, etc. You can get a nice range for $300-400, or spend double, triple, quadruple that price for one with all the gizmos like self- cleaning, stainless steel, high-capacity oven, dissimilar burners, etc. Same for dishwashers, refrigerators, etc. Countertops? Granite seems to have replaced Corian and similar materials around here, at $100 a square foot, installed. Me, I prefer a nice laminate like Formica, but apparently a lot of folks prefer fancier stuff. Does a burger taste any better if it's made in such a kitchen? I dunno, but they must be selling the fancy stuff because they continue to stock it. If its involved with real estate, people will shuck out astoundingly foolish amounts of money. Sure! But consider: 1) How do home values relate to incomes when adjusted for inflation? Go back 20, 30, 40, 50 years and compare house prices to income levels. Houses were cheap then until you look at what the typical income level was. 2) A house is one of the few investments an individual can make that can be used without selling it. 3) A house is one of the few necessities an individual can buy that will almost certainly appreciate in value. Look at the everyday things you own - how many of them will be worth more in 10 years? 4) Home loan interest is a tax deduction for most people. What other debt reduces your taxes? BTW, those McMansions are becoming very, very hard to resell. Not around here! And it's not the McMansion owners that are buying the stuff. It's the people in older homes who are fixing up. Often it's easier to fix up than to move. 73 de Jim, N2EY 36 years ago today..... |
|
#22
July 21st 05, 03:48 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dave Heil wrote: wrote: If a Ten-tec decided the next-off-the-line series of OhRyans needs a newly-designed boards any number of circuit board job shops in this country can put a few protypes in Ten-tec's hands inside 72 hours for test and evaluation and be set to make whatever revisions Ten-tech wants and be set to roll into production within hours after it gets the feedback from Ten-tec. As if any ricbox radio builder can come even close. We may have a chance to find out soon. Ten-Tec announced the Orion II today. It is set for October shipping. Woo-woo, here we go again - ought to be an another major attention-grabber from Seiverville. I'll be waiting and watching because whatever it turns out to be it'll sure as God made little apples render used versions of it's predecessor much more available in the used market. Which is my money usually goes. Dave K8MN w3rv |
|
#23
July 21st 05, 05:39 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#24
July 21st 05, 03:46 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#26
July 22nd 05, 01:14 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Michael Coslo wrote:
wrote: Mike Coslo wrote: wrote: Mike Coslo wrote: wrote: http://www.getboost.com/dz/sienna.htm My thoughts. First, the unit has a lot of promise. While I think I prefer separate components between the computer and the rig for flexibility, this setup might just be fun to use. Some folks might like the integrated internal computer. It's certainly the first rig to offer it. My only concern is that a computer's life cycle is much shorter than most ham rigs'. Of course, the computer would work for all the Ham radio functions at the time of manufacture, so it wouldn't "go" out of date. Would you like a nice 100 MHz Pentium 1 running Win95 for your shack computer, Mike? Ten years ago, that was a dream machine... I want a computer that can do the work. I can run Digipan (as well as a lot of other soundcard software) on a P1 class computer, as well as a lot of logging software. So assuming that there is not aome huge change in something, the computer will continue to function, the radio will continue to work. Of course, but over time support disappears. Obviously an up to date laptop would be included in any modern designed system. I think we're saying the same thing two different ways. If the computer. And it would be upgradeable, so it wouldn't be much of a problem. Plus my idea given down below might be a winner. Next, I don't buy the teeny florescent screen rationale. My idea of the modern integrated rig is more along the line of looking like a laptop, with a folding large screen on top of the RF portions of the box. But that's just me. You can plug an external VGA display into the rig. Sometimes. But you see, here is what I'm thinking of. A computer with the RF guts, and a laptop of some choice that plugs into the computer, and sets on top of it. Many of the features now used in hardware could be handled by the laptop. You would have logging, digital modes, dsp - probably not important to you, but for a growing group of us, it would be great. Been done. Kachina 505. Also TT Pegasus. Rigs without a front panel. Not what I am describing. Except for the form factor, it's exactly what you're describing. Imagine some sort of HF transciever. Size would be similar to what we use today. A laptop or the equivalent would be setting on top of the device. The laptop would dock into the transciever. Functions would be controlled by the laptop. Although transciever front panel controls would be a possibility, the ideal method for what I am talking about would be all control via the laptop. Except for the docking station part, that's what a Kachina was. And a Pegasus. Computer did all the control functions, transceiver was an RF modem of sorts. This would not be a unit that needed a take-along computer, or an LCD screen, both with their own separate power supplies. It would be a unit that you plug in, open the case and "boot" the computer and transciever. All that's really changed is the form factor. And maybe the integration of power supply. There were a few devices that touched on the idea, including the unmanufactured PSK rig by the Sienna people, and another PSK31 kit rig that sits outboard of a laptop. You mean the Warbler? But this would be a full featured rig, SSB, AM, FM, CW, RTTY, PSK Hell, and onaonaonaonaon. At least 100 watts output. DSP that is upgradeable, logging software, and whatever else you might do with the rig. Right. Now who is going to bell that cat? I can well understand your dislike of the klugey nature of many rig-computer setups. Two different big boxes (computer and rig) interconnected by a bunch of cables, and a bunch of little boxes too. Bulky and clunky and very unportable. Meanwhile, there are excellent CW rigs like the KX1 that can be configured to be self-contained (rig, battery, ATU, even paddles) except for antenna and headphones. Toss up a wire, plug in the 'phones, turn on the rig and you're on the air. You'd think the digital folk would be ahead of that curve... If the laptop were to become obsolete, say if a new mode came along that required too much horsepower, then the unit could be replaced. A mounting kit could be made available. In fact, a radio could be designed so that you could attach your present laptop. Remember the Warbler? Yup. That's about 25 percent of the way there. In any event what you're suggesting is a rig that is controlled by the computer - an RF modem of sorts. Great if you like that sort of thing, but they didn't sell all that well. Maybe times have changed. Not completely. This rig isn't "controlled by the computer, any more than it is controlled by the transmitter. cuz if either one isn't there, it isn't going to work. Can it be used without a computer or not? Interesting that they chose an LDG autotuner. This is a concept that might be expanded upon. It would be wonderful if ham rigs were like desktop computers in the form of standardization. Sometimes. Why not? Look at what it's done for PCs. Why not for ham rigs? One of the areas in which digital people often make a mistake is in thinking that RF is the same thing as digital. That is why they sometimes design skunks like BPL. I'm not talking about using PC methods, just the basic idea. The rig would have certain standard insides that could be made by a variety of sources. Example: Suppose we decide on a basic architecture with a given IF, LO/BFO frequencies, power voltages, control signals, signal & impedance levels, and form factor. Once those things are set, the parts could come from anywhere. Want a DDS VFO? All it has to do is meet the interface requirements. PLL? Same difference. e idea of an RF PCI board is a little chilling. Perhaps a very low power UHF version, such as my PC card wireless card, of course, but not likely any substsntial power. Don't like the computer interface screenshot. I really hope that they do well. I do think the price point is too high. I would be willing to pay extra for an American made unit, but 3K for the entry level, and 6K for the works unit is pretty high. Perhaps - but a lot depends on how well it really performs. Unless of course, the rig has outstanding performance. I would love to see some test results. Mo bettah, some actual on-air performance. Somebody wins CQWW DX with one, then watch the fireworks... Or to really get to the bottom of it: Is it $6000 worth of fun? And is it 6K worth of fun for the XYL? ;^) Who is to say that the spouse doesn't get his/her fun items too? Hoping that they can sell enough to expand the concept, because it is a good one.... Expand which concept? Kits have been around a long time - curious that they never mention Elecraft or any of the other kits... For me, the concept isn't the kit - its the idea of the integral computer, the modular construction, even to using another manufacturers tuner. That *would be* a good thing! Of course my entire main HF rig cost me less than one of their optional filters, so I guess everything is relative.... One more observation on price: Go to the local Home Depot, Lowes or similar outfit, as long as they carry a full range of appliances and such. Look at the ranges, refrigerators, countertops, etc. You can get a nice range for $300-400, or spend double, triple, quadruple that price for one with all the gizmos like self- cleaning, stainless steel, high-capacity oven, dissimilar burners, etc. Same for dishwashers, refrigerators, etc. Countertops? Granite seems to have replaced Corian and similar materials around here, at $100 a square foot, installed. Me, I prefer a nice laminate like Formica, but apparently a lot of folks prefer fancier stuff. Does a burger taste any better if it's made in such a kitchen? I dunno, but they must be selling the fancy stuff because they continue to stock it. If its involved with real estate, people will shuck out astoundingly foolish amounts of money. Sure! But consider: 1) How do home values relate to incomes when adjusted for inflation? Go back 20, 30, 40, 50 years and compare house prices to income levels. Houses were cheap then until you look at what the typical income level was. There is an old paradigm about the amount of money spent on a house should be 2X your yearly income. Not as I remember it! The old rule was that your *mortgage* should not exceed 2x your annual income. But that was in the days when most people were SILKs, not DINKs. Perhaps 10 years ago, it went to 2.5-3X. Now it seems to have been abandoned into whatever the maximum amount the bank will loan you. That's due in part to lower interest rates, and in part to a big flow of money from the stock market to real estate. That progression indicates that a change has happened. A lot higher percentage goes to putting the roof over the head. That's "okay", just get another Credit card or two! There are lots of other factors. For example, longer term mortgages increase buying power. Two-income families, and delayed family starts, have their own effects. The biggest change is that RE values vary widely with location. *Very* widely. 2) A house is one of the few investments an individual can make that can be used without selling it. If you do the home equity thing, you sort of have sold it. Not at all! You still live there. 3) A house is one of the few necessities an individual can buy that will almost certainly appreciate in value. Look at the everyday things you own - how many of them will be worth more in 10 years? 4) Home loan interest is a tax deduction for most people. What other debt reduces your taxes? All true, Jim. and all used to get people to become "house poor". What's the alternative, Mike? Some people resort to living a long way from their jobs in order to pay less for a house, get away from CC&Rs and HOAs, etc. Trouble is, they spend lots of time and money commuting, and are at the mercy of weather, traffic and fuel prices. BTW, those McMansions are becoming very, very hard to resell. Not around here! Interesting! My XYL, who works in the industry doing a lot of high-end houses around here, notes that the people who have 500K to a million and up almost always insist on building their own. Where *you* are, $500K is high end. Around here, $500K is a 30-40 year old 4 br 2-1/2 ba Cape Cod tract house on a half-acre lot that needs a bit of work. And it will sell in a week. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
|
#27
July 22nd 05, 02:40 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
K4YZ wrote:
wrote: Dave Heil wrote: K4YZ wrote: Mike Coslo wrote: Hoping that they can sell enough to expand the concept, because it is a good one.... I don't think that's going to happen, Mike. First off, I don't think very many folks will drop $3K to $6K on a radio that comes incomplete, computer or not. Incomplete? Incomplete as it requires more than providing a power source, ground and an antenna to get operating. So what? Yes, $3000 to $6000 is a lot of dough. Definitely way above *my* ham radio budget. But that's just me, and what I'm willing to spend. Others will put down a lot more for just a tower.. But a tower is a rigid structural item. That's one of the LAST things I'd skimp any money on! The point is that there are plenty of hams for whom the cost is not prohibitive. The DZ website makes the point of comparing popular rigs of ~40 years ago and their prices when adjusted for inflation. New ham gear in the bad old days was amazingly expensive when you consider the inflation factor. In fact, consider what PCs cost just ten years ago! A 486DX50 with 32 meg of RAM and a half-gig hard drive could cost you big bucks then - and it's a doorstop today. Whelllp...it's 2005 and $3000 is still a chunk of change! Sure - but not what it was back when. I can spend a heck of a lot of LESS money and get more radio AND computer for my bucks! Maybe more computer, but not more radio, if the performance is up to the claims. Is that "performance" worth it, Jim, for a non-professional station? "non-professional"? What does that mean? Let's talk about how it relates to *amateur* radio. Sure, if I was trying to transmit high fidelity audio I might want to drop those extra bucks. For most applications the difference isn't noticeable. But the competitive DXer/contester types *do* notice the difference. Much of that difference is in the receiver, not the transmitter. For example, when the band is full of big signals during a contest, lesser rigs experience an apparent rise in noise level. What's really going on is all sorts of mixing between signals in the rx front end, which limits the ability to hear the weak ones. A better rx can handle the mass of big signals without problems. The "professionals" often avoided this problem by having separate transmitting and receiving sites. Most hams can't do that. But in an era when I can communicate via a satellie with an HT and a hand help yagi, I'd be hard pressed to justify the cost. If you're going to make that argument, why not just use the internet? But the big issue is how many hams will spend the money, and how many DZ needs to sell to be viable. Maybe he only needs/plans to sell 100 or so. How many Amateurs might have the need for the specifications? I dunno. But look how many FT-1000s have been sold. Or any other top-end rig. Remember when Icom introduced the IC-781? How many did they sell? Consider the Elecraft K2. When it first came out, I heard some scoffing in the peanut gallery that said very few hams would pay almost $600 for a rig that was, in basic form, CW only, hambands only and QRP. They said that having SSB, 160, NB, ATU and 100W all as extra-cost options would doom the rig and the company. But more than 5000 have been sold since 1999 with minimal advertising. True. But a topped-out K2 still comes in UNDER $2000 if you add in ALL of the options... And you can get a lot of other rigs for less than $2000, ready built. Yet the K2 succeeds - why? And not mcuh more if you add in the new VHF transverters. And in it's present configuration, you can get started for well under $750. That's a lot easier pill to swallow. There are plenty of hams out there for whom $750 is what they'll spend on IF filters.... Secondly, it's a "kit" only in the sense that it does come "disassembled". The potential buyer is actually paying the "manufacturer" for the privilege of him (the "manufacturer) not having to pay an assembly line. I don't think so. It's not clear from the website how much assembly the buyer actually does. Obviously it's less than the bag-o-parts scenario of some kits but less than fully assembled. OK...maybe you ahve to solder the wires going to the front panel pots and antenna connectors and a couple of point-to-point chassis connectors. I wonder if the instruction manual will show that? To make his "three evening" claim it can't be much more elaborate than that. Sure it can. Heck, back in high school, I built a complete 150 watt transmitter in one evening. Of course I had the metalwork done and all the parts on hand, and it was a long night. Lastly, he brags about the "kit" being "built in America" because the owner "builds it right here in America". I wish I had the spare change to drop to buy one for no other reason than to see where all of the pre-assembled boards are actually assembled. No doubt in some PacRim nation where the guy who REALLY built it wouldn't be able to afford it in a lifetime. I think the boards may be assembled here in the USA. There are all sorts of prototype and assembly outfits here in the USA to do small runs. Of course they cost a lot more per unit than "offshore", but if you're not making a million units or even 10,000 units, the total package price can be very competitive. I know. I did that for a while, as Lennie will quickly remind you! Lennie who? But even on "limited production runs" of 500 or less units, the cost was prohibitive For what? There aren't nearly as many components built in the U.S. as in the past, Steve. Even back in the late seventies and early eighties, most solid state devices were produced in Mexico, Maylasia, Hong Kong, Taiwan, etc. Yep. And while first runs of new devices may be US made, the production quickly moves away. Not just silicon devices, either, but many other components. By "components", I didn't mean the actual resistors, SMD's, etc...My bust. Among the reasons that I continue to use Ten-Tec gear is that families in the U.S. receive pay checks when I do so. Ten-Tec manufactures their enclosures, plastic components, variable caps and the like. When I telephone for service, a real person answers the telephone and directs my call. A service tech in the U.S. handles my inquiry. If my equipment needs service, I ship it a relatively short distance, pay a fair price and it is turned around in short order. Parts are on hand for most Ten-Tec gear produced. Yep. Service alone is a reason to buy Ten Tec. Yep! My "made in USA" Orion is filled with components manufactured in the far east. Everybody's else's rig is filled with 'em. Not everybody's! ;-) Not mine! Thank-you old TV's! Old TVs, od BC radios, old test gear, military surplus (swords into plowshares), old ham gear, etc., etc. For me to buy this latest assemble-it-yourself transceiver, it'd have to be considerably better than what I have now. From what I've read, it has numerous features which I see as having dubious value. The real telling point will be the performance up against an Orion or other top-of-the-line state-of-the-art rig. Absolutely. But who's gonna pony-up the change for one to find out...?!?! Not me! But some will, and then we'll know. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
|
#28
July 22nd 05, 04:27 PM
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote:
Michael Coslo wrote: wrote: Mike Coslo wrote: wrote: Mike Coslo wrote: wrote: http://www.getboost.com/dz/sienna.htm My thoughts. First, the unit has a lot of promise. While I think I prefer separate components between the computer and the rig for flexibility, this setup might just be fun to use. Some folks might like the integrated internal computer. It's certainly the first rig to offer it. My only concern is that a computer's life cycle is much shorter than most ham rigs'. Of course, the computer would work for all the Ham radio functions at the time of manufacture, so it wouldn't "go" out of date. Would you like a nice 100 MHz Pentium 1 running Win95 for your shack computer, Mike? Ten years ago, that was a dream machine... I want a computer that can do the work. I can run Digipan (as well as a lot of other soundcard software) on a P1 class computer, as well as a lot of logging software. So assuming that there is not aome huge change in something, the computer will continue to function, the radio will continue to work. Of course, but over time support disappears. I pretty much have to support myself with my old Icom. Obviously an up to date laptop would be included in any modern designed system. I think we're saying the same thing two different ways. If the computer. Whoops - think we missed something there. And it would be upgradeable, so it wouldn't be much of a problem. Plus my idea given down below might be a winner. Next, I don't buy the teeny florescent screen rationale. My idea of the modern integrated rig is more along the line of looking like a laptop, with a folding large screen on top of the RF portions of the box. But that's just me. You can plug an external VGA display into the rig. Sometimes. But you see, here is what I'm thinking of. A computer with the RF guts, and a laptop of some choice that plugs into the computer, and sets on top of it. Many of the features now used in hardware could be handled by the laptop. You would have logging, digital modes, dsp - probably not important to you, but for a growing group of us, it would be great. Been done. Kachina 505. Also TT Pegasus. Rigs without a front panel. Not what I am describing. Except for the form factor, it's exactly what you're describing. The form factor, having several different pieces of equipment to hook together, cabling, and different power supplies. Imagine a rig that has a 15 - 17 inch screen and a keyboard that otherwise looks like a typical HF rig. You turn it on and use it. You arent going to use the Pegasus unless you plug it into a computer. IMO, those things are similar, but in the same way that a transciever and separate transmitter/reciever setups are similar. In fact, I see this sort of thing as as a natural progression, just like from separates to transcivers. Imagine some sort of HF transciever. Size would be similar to what we use today. A laptop or the equivalent would be setting on top of the device. The laptop would dock into the transciever. Functions would be controlled by the laptop. Although transciever front panel controls would be a possibility, the ideal method for what I am talking about would be all control via the laptop. Except for the docking station part, that's what a Kachina was. And a Pegasus. Computer did all the control functions, transceiver was an RF modem of sorts. This system would be much more highly integrated. You might thiink of this as a system that someone would consider using in their automobile. I doubt that there were too many mobile Pegasus setups. 8^) Of course, I don't suggest using a keyboard while mobile! But that is okay, the rig would perform all the other functions. This would not be a unit that needed a take-along computer, or an LCD screen, both with their own separate power supplies. It would be a unit that you plug in, open the case and "boot" the computer and transciever. All that's really changed is the form factor. And maybe the integration of power supply. I guess I'm having trouble making myself clear. There were a few devices that touched on the idea, including the unmanufactured PSK rig by the Sienna people, and another PSK31 kit rig that sits outboard of a laptop. You mean the Warbler? But this would be a full featured rig, SSB, AM, FM, CW, RTTY, PSK Hell, and onaonaonaonaon. At least 100 watts output. DSP that is upgradeable, logging software, and whatever else you might do with the rig. Right. Now who is going to bell that cat? Oh, I imagine someone will eventually. I can't imagine that I'm the only one begging for better system integration. The Warbler, the unmanufactured kit, and a lot of the others are interesting, but they are toys by comparison - thats not an insult, just an observation, because I enjoy toys too. But the new Sienna HF rig is where it is starting to come together I can well understand your dislike of the klugey nature of many rig-computer setups. Two different big boxes (computer and rig) interconnected by a bunch of cables, and a bunch of little boxes too. Bulky and clunky and very unportable. Meanwhile, there are excellent CW rigs like the KX1 that can be configured to be self-contained (rig, battery, ATU, even paddles) except for antenna and headphones. Toss up a wire, plug in the 'phones, turn on the rig and you're on the air. You'd think the digital folk would be ahead of that curve... We're trying! Seems some people don't like our ideas though! ;^) If the laptop were to become obsolete, say if a new mode came along that required too much horsepower, then the unit could be replaced. A mounting kit could be made available. In fact, a radio could be designed so that you could attach your present laptop. Remember the Warbler? Yup. That's about 25 percent of the way there. In any event what you're suggesting is a rig that is controlled by the computer - an RF modem of sorts. Great if you like that sort of thing, but they didn't sell all that well. Maybe times have changed. Not completely. This rig isn't "controlled by the computer, any more than it is controlled by the transmitter. cuz if either one isn't there, it isn't going to work. Can it be used without a computer or not? Nope. Interesting that they chose an LDG autotuner. This is a concept that might be expanded upon. It would be wonderful if ham rigs were like desktop computers in the form of standardization. Sometimes. Why not? Look at what it's done for PCs. Why not for ham rigs? One of the areas in which digital people often make a mistake is in thinking that RF is the same thing as digital. That is why they sometimes design skunks like BPL. I'm not talking about using PC methods, just the basic idea. The rig would have certain standard insides that could be made by a variety of sources. Example: Suppose we decide on a basic architecture with a given IF, LO/BFO frequencies, power voltages, control signals, signal & impedance levels, and form factor. Once those things are set, the parts could come from anywhere. Want a DDS VFO? All it has to do is meet the interface requirements. PLL? Same difference. It is an interesting concept. We wouldn't get all the advantadges that the PC people would have, given that we wouldn't have the economy of scale. But one *very* nice feature is that the homebrewers could make up their own subassy boards. I guess that should wait until after the warranty is over!! did some snipping That's due in part to lower interest rates, and in part to a big flow of money from the stock market to real estate. That progression indicates that a change has happened. A lot higher percentage goes to putting the roof over the head. That's "okay", just get another Credit card or two! There are lots of other factors. For example, longer term mortgages increase buying power. For that house, they do. But the longer the term, the greater the future impact. No free lunch. More house now by stretching the paymoents out, the less capital available later Two-income families, and delayed family starts, have their own effects. The biggest change is that RE values vary widely with location. *Very* widely. 2) A house is one of the few investments an individual can make that can be used without selling it. If you do the home equity thing, you sort of have sold it. Not at all! You still live there. Kinda like renting, eh? The money isn't free, yaknow. I have a relative who has refied her house ever time she could. She bought her place a few years before we bought ours. The house prices were almost the same. We are almost finished with our mortgage (15 years), and she's still paying, as every time she refied, she reset the mortgage. Looks like she'll be making mortgage payments for her entire life. 3) A house is one of the few necessities an individual can buy that will almost certainly appreciate in value. Look at the everyday things you own - how many of them will be worth more in 10 years? 4) Home loan interest is a tax deduction for most people. What other debt reduces your taxes? All true, Jim. and all used to get people to become "house poor". What's the alternative, Mike? Living within ones means. When we bought our place, we spent around 100K less than we were "approved" for. The banks thought we were nuts, the real estate people thought we were nuts (as well as making for a smaller commission) Big deal - we bought a nice place, and have discretionary money for investment and other stuff. And the dot.com folks thought we were nuts for not investing in them, too..... Some people resort to living a long way from their jobs in order to pay less for a house, get away from CC&Rs and HOAs, etc. Trouble is, they spend lots of time and money commuting, and are at the mercy of weather, traffic and fuel prices. Sometimes it is just nice to not live in a city too. BTW, those McMansions are becoming very, very hard to resell. Not around here! Interesting! My XYL, who works in the industry doing a lot of high-end houses around here, notes that the people who have 500K to a million and up almost always insist on building their own. Where *you* are, $500K is high end. Around here, $500K is a 30-40 year old 4 br 2-1/2 ba Cape Cod tract house on a half-acre lot that needs a bit of work. Philadelphia area right? No doubt that they are more expensive. But 500K isn't really the high end around here. And it will sell in a week. As I said, all those "benefits" of owning a house convince people to do extrordinarily stupid things... - Mike KB3EIA - |
|
#29
July 23rd 05, 02:47 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Michael Coslo wrote:
wrote: Michael Coslo wrote: wrote: Mike Coslo wrote: wrote: Mike Coslo wrote: wrote: http://www.getboost.com/dz/sienna.htm But you see, here is what I'm thinking of. A computer with the RF guts, and a laptop of some choice that plugs into the computer, and sets on top of it. Many of the features now used in hardware could be handled by the laptop. You would have logging, digital modes, dsp - probably not important to you, but for a growing group of us, it would be great. Been done. Kachina 505. Also TT Pegasus. Rigs without a front panel. Not what I am describing. Except for the form factor, it's exactly what you're describing. The form factor, having several different pieces of equipment to hook together, cabling, and different power supplies. Exactly. You want it all in an integrated box rather than bits and pieces. Imagine a rig that has a 15 - 17 inch screen and a keyboard that otherwise looks like a typical HF rig. You turn it on and use it. The 'DZ is almost there. As I see it, the trick would be to have the RF part as a lapper docking station. The laptop makers do the heavy lifting on the digital end. You arent going to use the Pegasus unless you plug it into a computer. IMO, those things are similar, but in the same way that a transciever and separate transmitter/reciever setups are similar. In fact, I see this sort of thing as as a natural progression, just like from separates to transcivers. Total integration rather than boxes patched together. Imagine some sort of HF transciever. Size would be similar to what we use today. A laptop or the equivalent would be setting on top of the device. The laptop would dock into the transciever. Functions would be controlled by the laptop. Although transciever front panel controls would be a possibility, the ideal method for what I am talking about would be all control via the laptop. Except for the docking station part, that's what a Kachina was. And a Pegasus. Computer did all the control functions, transceiver was an RF modem of sorts. This system would be much more highly integrated. You might thiink of this as a system that someone would consider using in their automobile. I doubt that there were too many mobile Pegasus setups. 8^) Of course, I don't suggest using a keyboard while mobile! But that is okay, the rig would perform all the other functions. One big difference would be that the DSP/SDR would happen at IF from the getgo. This would not be a unit that needed a take-along computer, or an LCD screen, both with their own separate power supplies. It would be a unit that you plug in, open the case and "boot" the computer and transciever. All that's really changed is the form factor. And maybe the integration of power supply. I guess I'm having trouble making myself clear. No, I see what you mean now. Rather than the computer and rig being two separate entities connected by cables, they'd be one integrated unit. Avoids duplication of function. Like in a transceiver where one set of oscillators and filters does the job for both transmit and receive. There were a few devices that touched on the idea, including the unmanufactured PSK rig by the Sienna people, and another PSK31 kit rig that sits outboard of a laptop. You mean the Warbler? But this would be a full featured rig, SSB, AM, FM, CW, RTTY, PSK Hell, and onaonaonaonaon. At least 100 watts output. DSP that is upgradeable, logging software, and whatever else you might do with the rig. Right. Now who is going to bell that cat? Oh, I imagine someone will eventually. I can't imagine that I'm the only one begging for better system integration. Fun fact: The earliest example of a true heterodyne transceiver I have been able to find in the amateur radio literature was a CW rig made from a BC-453. "True heterodyne transceiver" means: 1) The same tunable oscillator tunes both transmitter and receiver simultaneously, 2) the receiver is a superhet 3) the whole unit is an integrated one-box unit (except for power supply, antenna, headphones/speaker, and key or microphone). What you're asking for is the next step - integrated rig/computer. The Warbler, the unmanufactured kit, and a lot of the others are interesting, but they are toys by comparison - thats not an insult, just an observation, because I enjoy toys too. But the new Sienna HF rig is where it is starting to come together I can well understand your dislike of the klugey nature of many rig-computer setups. Two different big boxes (computer and rig) interconnected by a bunch of cables, and a bunch of little boxes too. Bulky and clunky and very unportable. Meanwhile, there are excellent CW rigs like the KX1 that can be configured to be self-contained (rig, battery, ATU, even paddles) except for antenna and headphones. Toss up a wire, plug in the 'phones, turn on the rig and you're on the air. You'd think the digital folk would be ahead of that curve... We're trying! Seems some people don't like our ideas though! ;^) Who would that be? Seems to me the real problem is the divide between the digital and RF worlds. On one side you have the folks who build "radios" - the digital stuff is simply a way to get the job done. So you have dedicated custom microcontrollers in the rig to run the DDS, choose bands, do DSP, etc., but they don't do things like word processing, logging, PSK31 interface, etc. On the other side you have the computer folks with the neat software and generic hardware - but it's all external to the rig. If the laptop were to become obsolete, say if a new mode came along that required too much horsepower, then the unit could be replaced. A mounting kit could be made available. In fact, a radio could be designed so that you could attach your present laptop. Remember the Warbler? Yup. That's about 25 percent of the way there. In any event what you're suggesting is a rig that is controlled by the computer - an RF modem of sorts. Great if you like that sort of thing, but they didn't sell all that well. Maybe times have changed. Not completely. This rig isn't "controlled by the computer, any more than it is controlled by the transmitter. cuz if either one isn't there, it isn't going to work. Can it be used without a computer or not? Nope. Interesting that they chose an LDG autotuner. This is a concept that might be expanded upon. It would be wonderful if ham rigs were like desktop computers in the form of standardization. Sometimes. Why not? Look at what it's done for PCs. Why not for ham rigs? One of the areas in which digital people often make a mistake is in thinking that RF is the same thing as digital. That is why they sometimes design skunks like BPL. I'm not talking about using PC methods, just the basic idea. The rig would have certain standard insides that could be made by a variety of sources. Example: Suppose we decide on a basic architecture with a given IF, LO/BFO frequencies, power voltages, control signals, signal & impedance levels, and form factor. Once those things are set, the parts could come from anywhere. Want a DDS VFO? All it has to do is meet the interface requirements. PLL? Same difference. It is an interesting concept. We wouldn't get all the advantadges that the PC people would have, given that we wouldn't have the economy of scale. But one *very* nice feature is that the homebrewers could make up their own subassy boards. I guess that should wait until after the warranty is over!! The big problem is that somebody has to make up the standards, and then the manufacturers stand to lose because people will buy a piece here and a piece there. did some snipping That's due in part to lower interest rates, and in part to a big flow of money from the stock market to real estate. That progression indicates that a change has happened. A lot higher percentage goes to putting the roof over the head. That's "okay", just get another Credit card or two! There are lots of other factors. For example, longer term mortgages increase buying power. For that house, they do. But the longer the term, the greater the future impact. No free lunch. More house now by stretching the paymoents out, the less capital available later Of course. But people are living longer and working longer. Two careers has become very common. Two-income families, and delayed family starts, have their own effects. The biggest change is that RE values vary widely with location. *Very* widely. 2) A house is one of the few investments an individual can make that can be used without selling it. If you do the home equity thing, you sort of have sold it. Not at all! You still live there. Kinda like renting, eh? Except renters have *no* equity, and no tax breaks. The money isn't free, yaknow. I have a relative who has refied her house ever time she could. She bought her place a few years before we bought ours. The house prices were almost the same. The big question is - why did she refi and take the cash out? What happened to the money? A refi to pay for improvements can be a good idea. Say you take out $100K for a renovation, but that renovation makes the house worth $100K more and you avoid needing to move. That's a win. We are almost finished with our mortgage (15 years), and she's still paying, as every time she refied, she reset the mortgage. Looks like she'll be making mortgage payments for her entire life. Why did she cash out with every refi? I did the refi thing some time back to get a lower interest rate and to shorten the term. 3) A house is one of the few necessities an individual can buy that will almost certainly appreciate in value. Look at the everyday things you own - how many of them will be worth more in 10 years? 4) Home loan interest is a tax deduction for most people. What other debt reduces your taxes? All true, Jim. and all used to get people to become "house poor". What's the alternative, Mike? Living within ones means. Of course. But who defines what that is? At one extreme, "living within your means" is saving up for everything and never carrying any debt at all. Which means you'll be quite old before you buy a house. At the other extreme, "living within your means" is taking advantage of every financial tool there is, to make debt work for you. Somewhere in the middle is the best path. When we bought our place, we spent around 100K less than we were "approved" for. The banks thought we were nuts, the real estate people thought we were nuts (as well as making for a smaller commission) Big deal - we bought a nice place, and have discretionary money for investment and other stuff. But you could find such a place. In a lot of situations, finding a house you can afford is a real challenge. And the dot.com folks thought we were nuts for not investing in them, too..... Yep! Some people resort to living a long way from their jobs in order to pay less for a house, get away from CC&Rs and HOAs, etc. Trouble is, they spend lots of time and money commuting, and are at the mercy of weather, traffic and fuel prices. Sometimes it is just nice to not live in a city too. Of course. Point is, it's a question of balance and situation. Suppose A buys a house for $500K that means a short commute, good schools, etc. B buys a similar house for $300K but then has to spend hours and dollars each day commuting, puts the kids in private schools, and has to hire out a lot of things s/he could have DIT'ed except for lack of time. Who is really ahead? BTW, those McMansions are becoming very, very hard to resell. Not around here! Interesting! My XYL, who works in the industry doing a lot of high-end houses around here, notes that the people who have 500K to a million and up almost always insist on building their own. Where *you* are, $500K is high end. Around here, $500K is a 30-40 year old 4 br 2-1/2 ba Cape Cod tract house on a half-acre lot that needs a bit of work. Philadelphia area right? Philadelphia's Main Line. Where suburbia and commuting was invented over 100 years ago. No doubt that they are more expensive. Exactly. But 500K isn't really the high end around here. Nor here. Check out realtor.com with my zip code. Make sure the properties are in Radnor or Lower Merion school districts. Also make sure they're houses where a ham could have an antenna, even if it's just a G5RV. And it will sell in a week. As I said, all those "benefits" of owning a house convince people to do extrordinarily stupid things... For me, "stupid" is putting that kind of money into a house in a place where the ground shakes every so often. Or the hurricanes come in and wipe everything out. 73 de Jim, N2EY |
|
#30
July 23rd 05, 04:34 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
wrote:
Michael Coslo wrote: wrote: Michael Coslo wrote: wrote: Mike Coslo wrote: wrote: Mike Coslo wrote: wrote: http://www.getboost.com/dz/sienna.htm But you see, here is what I'm thinking of. A computer with the RF guts, and a laptop of some choice that plugs into the computer, and sets on top of it. Many of the features now used in hardware could be handled by the laptop. You would have logging, digital modes, dsp - probably not important to you, but for a growing group of us, it would be great. Been done. Kachina 505. Also TT Pegasus. Rigs without a front panel. Not what I am describing. Except for the form factor, it's exactly what you're describing. The form factor, having several different pieces of equipment to hook together, cabling, and different power supplies. Exactly. You want it all in an integrated box rather than bits and pieces. Imagine a rig that has a 15 - 17 inch screen and a keyboard that otherwise looks like a typical HF rig. You turn it on and use it. The 'DZ is almost there. As I see it, the trick would be to have the RF part as a lapper docking station. The laptop makers do the heavy lifting on the digital end. You arent going to use the Pegasus unless you plug it into a computer. IMO, those things are similar, but in the same way that a transciever and separate transmitter/reciever setups are similar. In fact, I see this sort of thing as as a natural progression, just like from separates to transcivers. Total integration rather than boxes patched together. Imagine some sort of HF transciever. Size would be similar to what we use today. A laptop or the equivalent would be setting on top of the device. The laptop would dock into the transciever. Functions would be controlled by the laptop. Although transciever front panel controls would be a possibility, the ideal method for what I am talking about would be all control via the laptop. Except for the docking station part, that's what a Kachina was. And a Pegasus. Computer did all the control functions, transceiver was an RF modem of sorts. This system would be much more highly integrated. You might thiink of this as a system that someone would consider using in their automobile. I doubt that there were too many mobile Pegasus setups. 8^) Of course, I don't suggest using a keyboard while mobile! But that is okay, the rig would perform all the other functions. One big difference would be that the DSP/SDR would happen at IF from the getgo. This would not be a unit that needed a take-along computer, or an LCD screen, both with their own separate power supplies. It would be a unit that you plug in, open the case and "boot" the computer and transciever. All that's really changed is the form factor. And maybe the integration of power supply. I guess I'm having trouble making myself clear. No, I see what you mean now. Rather than the computer and rig being two separate entities connected by cables, they'd be one integrated unit. Avoids duplication of function. Like in a transceiver where one set of oscillators and filters does the job for both transmit and receive. There were a few devices that touched on the idea, including the unmanufactured PSK rig by the Sienna people, and another PSK31 kit rig that sits outboard of a laptop. You mean the Warbler? But this would be a full featured rig, SSB, AM, FM, CW, RTTY, PSK Hell, and onaonaonaonaon. At least 100 watts output. DSP that is upgradeable, logging software, and whatever else you might do with the rig. Right. Now who is going to bell that cat? Oh, I imagine someone will eventually. I can't imagine that I'm the only one begging for better system integration. Fun fact: The earliest example of a true heterodyne transceiver I have been able to find in the amateur radio literature was a CW rig made from a BC-453. "True heterodyne transceiver" means: 1) The same tunable oscillator tunes both transmitter and receiver simultaneously, 2) the receiver is a superhet 3) the whole unit is an integrated one-box unit (except for power supply, antenna, headphones/speaker, and key or microphone). What you're asking for is the next step - integrated rig/computer. Yup! And it is kind of a scary-hairy step! But I think it is the sort of thing that can revolutionize the industry. The Warbler, the unmanufactured kit, and a lot of the others are interesting, but they are toys by comparison - thats not an insult, just an observation, because I enjoy toys too. But the new Sienna HF rig is where it is starting to come together I can well understand your dislike of the klugey nature of many rig-computer setups. Two different big boxes (computer and rig) interconnected by a bunch of cables, and a bunch of little boxes too. Bulky and clunky and very unportable. Meanwhile, there are excellent CW rigs like the KX1 that can be configured to be self-contained (rig, battery, ATU, even paddles) except for antenna and headphones. Toss up a wire, plug in the 'phones, turn on the rig and you're on the air. You'd think the digital folk would be ahead of that curve... We're trying! Seems some people don't like our ideas though! ;^) Who would that be? Perhaps I exxagerate. But the earlier digital rigs were not total successes. Perhaps they were just ahead of their time. Seems to me the real problem is the divide between the digital and RF worlds. On one side you have the folks who build "radios" - the digital stuff is simply a way to get the job done. So you have dedicated custom microcontrollers in the rig to run the DDS, choose bands, do DSP, etc., but they don't do things like word processing, logging, PSK31 interface, etc. On the other side you have the computer folks with the neat software and generic hardware - but it's all external to the rig. There does need to be a sort of meeting between the two. The digital parts of radios are a tad new and strange (but cool) to me. I've spent most of my life in the computer end of things. But the potential is there, and waiting.... Weeohhh, I'm starting to sound like a cheerleader again - Brian is going to have to come in and slap some sense back into me!!!!! hehe... If the laptop were to become obsolete, say if a new mode came along that required too much horsepower, then the unit could be replaced. A mounting kit could be made available. In fact, a radio could be designed so that you could attach your present laptop. Remember the Warbler? Yup. That's about 25 percent of the way there. In any event what you're suggesting is a rig that is controlled by the computer - an RF modem of sorts. Great if you like that sort of thing, but they didn't sell all that well. Maybe times have changed. Not completely. This rig isn't "controlled by the computer, any more than it is controlled by the transmitter. cuz if either one isn't there, it isn't going to work. Can it be used without a computer or not? Nope. Interesting that they chose an LDG autotuner. This is a concept that might be expanded upon. It would be wonderful if ham rigs were like desktop computers in the form of standardization. Sometimes. Why not? Look at what it's done for PCs. Why not for ham rigs? One of the areas in which digital people often make a mistake is in thinking that RF is the same thing as digital. That is why they sometimes design skunks like BPL. I'm not talking about using PC methods, just the basic idea. The rig would have certain standard insides that could be made by a variety of sources. Example: Suppose we decide on a basic architecture with a given IF, LO/BFO frequencies, power voltages, control signals, signal & impedance levels, and form factor. Once those things are set, the parts could come from anywhere. Want a DDS VFO? All it has to do is meet the interface requirements. PLL? Same difference. It is an interesting concept. We wouldn't get all the advantadges that the PC people would have, given that we wouldn't have the economy of scale. But one *very* nice feature is that the homebrewers could make up their own subassy boards. I guess that should wait until after the warranty is over!! The big problem is that somebody has to make up the standards, and then the manufacturers stand to lose because people will buy a piece here and a piece there. Which is why the first rigs of this sort are almost certainly NOT going to come from YaeComWood. It will probably be from a much smaller manufacturer who is either a start-up, or a visionary. did some snipping That's due in part to lower interest rates, and in part to a big flow of money from the stock market to real estate. That progression indicates that a change has happened. A lot higher percentage goes to putting the roof over the head. That's "okay", just get another Credit card or two! There are lots of other factors. For example, longer term mortgages increase buying power. For that house, they do. But the longer the term, the greater the future impact. No free lunch. More house now by stretching the paymoents out, the less capital available later Of course. But people are living longer and working longer. Two careers has become very common. No doubt. Even so, to me it makes a lot of sense to live well within your means, and to be sure that as retirement looms, that your bills will be lower. Two-income families, and delayed family starts, have their own effects. The biggest change is that RE values vary widely with location. *Very* widely. 2) A house is one of the few investments an individual can make that can be used without selling it. If you do the home equity thing, you sort of have sold it. Not at all! You still live there. Kinda like renting, eh? Except renters have *no* equity, and no tax breaks. The money isn't free, yaknow. I have a relative who has refied her house ever time she could. She bought her place a few years before we bought ours. The house prices were almost the same. The big question is - why did she refi and take the cash out? What happened to the money? To pay bills! Gasp!! NOt emergency ones either, Just everyday running a gazillion Credit cards up to the max sort of bills. A refi to pay for improvements can be a good idea. Say you take out $100K for a renovation, but that renovation makes the house worth $100K more and you avoid needing to move. That's a win. We are almost finished with our mortgage (15 years), and she's still paying, as every time she refied, she reset the mortgage. Looks like she'll be making mortgage payments for her entire life. Why did she cash out with every refi? I did the refi thing some time back to get a lower interest rate and to shorten the term. That bill thing. We also refied to lower the interest rate. There are good reasons that you might refi of course. I'm waiting for her to find out about the "interest-only" loans. 3) A house is one of the few necessities an individual can buy that will almost certainly appreciate in value. Look at the everyday things you own - how many of them will be worth more in 10 years? 4) Home loan interest is a tax deduction for most people. What other debt reduces your taxes? All true, Jim. and all used to get people to become "house poor". What's the alternative, Mike? Living within ones means. Of course. But who defines what that is? At one extreme, "living within your means" is saving up for everything and never carrying any debt at all. Which means you'll be quite old before you buy a house. Whoah! I have several Credit cards that are paid off every month. So I essentially pay for most things with cash, excepting the mortgage, and the cars. And I've found out a big secret. It is called discipline. When I was in my early 20's, and just having gotten married, we had old furniture, old cars, lived in a mobile home, and went without a few of the things that a lot of young people simply "have to have." And after we got credit cards, they were paid off every month, with the exception of the odd month when the re was a big car bill or somesuch. After 10 years or so, I noticed that many of our friends were divorced, yet still paying off their CC card bought furniture and other stuff. I knew that because they were grousing about it. Cool huh? I'm assuming that many of the ones who still were together were doing the same. Slowly but surely, we were buying new furniture - often with cash, taking nice vacations - with cash, and doing other things that our friends popped out the plastic for - with cash. Hard to imagine that paying for 10 year old furniture is ever a good idea. Do you know what the interest rate is for paying with cash? 8^) I don't think the CC companies like us all that much tho'.. At the other extreme, "living within your means" is taking advantage of every financial tool there is, to make debt work for you. Yeah, another person we know is into that. He spends a lot of time figuring out what to do, almost like a hobby for him. As far as I can figure out, he just about breaks even. Somewhere in the middle is the best path. When we bought our place, we spent around 100K less than we were "approved" for. The banks thought we were nuts, the real estate people thought we were nuts (as well as making for a smaller commission) Big deal - we bought a nice place, and have discretionary money for investment and other stuff. But you could find such a place. In a lot of situations, finding a house you can afford is a real challenge. And the dot.com folks thought we were nuts for not investing in them, too..... Yep! Some people resort to living a long way from their jobs in order to pay less for a house, get away from CC&Rs and HOAs, etc. Trouble is, they spend lots of time and money commuting, and are at the mercy of weather, traffic and fuel prices. Sometimes it is just nice to not live in a city too. Of course. Point is, it's a question of balance and situation. Suppose A buys a house for $500K that means a short commute, good schools, etc. B buys a similar house for $300K but then has to spend hours and dollars each day commuting, puts the kids in private schools, and has to hire out a lot of things s/he could have DIT'ed except for lack of time. Who is really ahead? Well now wait a second! Does not living in a city mean that you have to put your kids in private schools? Our so called rural area has a "world class" school system. BTW, those McMansions are becoming very, very hard to resell. Not around here! Interesting! My XYL, who works in the industry doing a lot of high-end houses around here, notes that the people who have 500K to a million and up almost always insist on building their own. Where *you* are, $500K is high end. Around here, $500K is a 30-40 year old 4 br 2-1/2 ba Cape Cod tract house on a half-acre lot that needs a bit of work. Philadelphia area right? Philadelphia's Main Line. Where suburbia and commuting was invented over 100 years ago. No doubt that they are more expensive. Exactly. But 500K isn't really the high end around here. Nor here. Check out realtor.com with my zip code. Make sure the properties are in Radnor or Lower Merion school districts. Also make sure they're houses where a ham could have an antenna, even if it's just a G5RV. (whining) But I don't wanna live there Jim! 8^) And it will sell in a week. As I said, all those "benefits" of owning a house convince people to do extrordinarily stupid things... For me, "stupid" is putting that kind of money into a house in a place where the ground shakes every so often. Or the hurricanes come in and wipe everything out. No doubt. But then again, I realize that my financial outlook is just about 180 degrees out of synch with most other people. Different strokes-different folks.. - Mike KB3EIA - |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Linear Mode
