Being of course the only regular ham poster who is memebr of the Tech
Class. I frankly don't undersatdn the "Problem" being discussed with
Pactor.

Are Pactor stations not obeying the rules?

Or is it that the rules are so loose as to permit very bad usages of
the Mode?

please forgo the flaming after all as Far as I know Pactor is little
used (if at all) at VHF, and of course VHF with its wider bands
(generalyly shorter ranges) and fewer users at any given momnet doesn't
have these "problems"

"an_old_friend" wrote in message
oups.com...
Being of course the only regular ham poster who is memebr of the Tech
Class. I frankly don't undersatdn the "Problem" being discussed with
Pactor.

Are Pactor stations not obeying the rules?

Or is it that the rules are so loose as to permit very bad usages of
the Mode?

please forgo the flaming after all as Far as I know Pactor is little
used (if at all) at VHF, and of course VHF with its wider bands
(generalyly shorter ranges) and fewer users at any given momnet doesn't
have these "problems"


The concern/fear/issues being raised by many are that the ARRL "regulation
by bandwidth" proposal will result in practically all of the HF CW/data
bands being "over-run by Winlink/PactorIII robots," that those stations
don't "play nice" with real-time human to human modes, that PactorIII takes
a lot of bandwidth for a non-proportional gain in throughput, and that
Winlink and PactorIII are closed, proprietary modes that are only available
through the purchase of some rather expensive, sole-source hardware and
software.

There seem to be rather widely held views that "robot" stations that "don't
play nice" with conventional human-human modes should be restricted to
limited sub-bands because otherwise they will cause considerable
interference problems, that they don't need to be able to take over huge
swaths of the bands, and that closed, proprietary systems should not be
"pushed" in the ham bands. (conversely, the feeling seems to be widespread
that modes used in the ham bands should be "open source" - both h/w and s/w)

I hope that answers your question about what's the (at least perceived)
"problem with Pactor."

73,
Carl - wk3c

Carl:

Exactly, why would arrl back such a system?

Amateur radio should not allow any PROPRIETARY hardware/software to become
a standard. We are not about supporting monopolies, we are about the free
experimentation, development, testing, construction, use, etc. of equip.
and methods/protocols, even that equipment encompassed by the homebrewer.

We need some more linux people in amateur radio for the software and more
computer hardware people for the hardware... it would be a mistake to
support companies holding a monopoly, there are already commercial
stations for that... besides, windows software just ends up enriching
bill g.

John

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 19:59:53 +0000, Carl R. Stevenson wrote:


"an_old_friend" wrote in message
oups.com...
Being of course the only regular ham poster who is memebr of the Tech
Class. I frankly don't undersatdn the "Problem" being discussed with
Pactor.

Are Pactor stations not obeying the rules?

Or is it that the rules are so loose as to permit very bad usages of
the Mode?

please forgo the flaming after all as Far as I know Pactor is little
used (if at all) at VHF, and of course VHF with its wider bands
(generalyly shorter ranges) and fewer users at any given momnet doesn't
have these "problems"


The concern/fear/issues being raised by many are that the ARRL "regulation
by bandwidth" proposal will result in practically all of the HF CW/data
bands being "over-run by Winlink/PactorIII robots," that those stations
don't "play nice" with real-time human to human modes, that PactorIII takes
a lot of bandwidth for a non-proportional gain in throughput, and that
Winlink and PactorIII are closed, proprietary modes that are only available
through the purchase of some rather expensive, sole-source hardware and
software.

There seem to be rather widely held views that "robot" stations that "don't
play nice" with conventional human-human modes should be restricted to
limited sub-bands because otherwise they will cause considerable
interference problems, that they don't need to be able to take over huge
swaths of the bands, and that closed, proprietary systems should not be
"pushed" in the ham bands. (conversely, the feeling seems to be widespread
that modes used in the ham bands should be "open source" - both h/w and s/w)

I hope that answers your question about what's the (at least perceived)
"problem with Pactor."

73,
Carl - wk3c

John Smith wrote:
Carl:

Exactly, why would arrl back such a system?

SOUNDS like a good system. Sounds modern and up to date.

Amateur radio should not allow any PROPRIETARY hardware/software to become
a standard.

Agreed.

We are not about supporting monopolies, we are about the free
experimentation, development, testing, construction, use, etc. of equip.
and methods/protocols, even that equipment encompassed by the homebrewer.

We need some more linux people in amateur radio for the software and more
computer hardware people for the hardware...

Here is a cool Linux thing for Hams:

http://hamshack-hack.sourceforge.net/

It is a hack of the Knoppix Linux distribution. Lots of Ham radio
goodies. Make a disk image, and you can boot your computer up in Linux.
then switch back to Windoze. Works prefect on my desktop 8^), but needs
a few tweaks on my Laptop.

- Mike KB3EIA -

.... dual boot here, slackware & xp ...

John

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 18:40:37 -0400, Mike Coslo wrote:

John Smith wrote:
Carl:

Exactly, why would arrl back such a system?

SOUNDS like a good system. Sounds modern and up to date.

Amateur radio should not allow any PROPRIETARY hardware/software to become
a standard.

Agreed.

We are not about supporting monopolies, we are about the free
experimentation, development, testing, construction, use, etc. of equip.
and methods/protocols, even that equipment encompassed by the homebrewer.

We need some more linux people in amateur radio for the software and more
computer hardware people for the hardware...

Here is a cool Linux thing for Hams:

http://hamshack-hack.sourceforge.net/

It is a hack of the Knoppix Linux distribution. Lots of Ham radio
goodies. Make a disk image, and you can boot your computer up in Linux.
then switch back to Windoze. Works prefect on my desktop 8^), but needs
a few tweaks on my Laptop.

- Mike KB3EIA -

"John Smith" wrote in message
news
Carl:

Exactly, why would arrl back such a system?

If they, indeed are, I don't think they should be ...

Amateur radio should not allow any PROPRIETARY hardware/software to become
a standard. We are not about supporting monopolies, we are about the free
experimentation, development, testing, construction, use, etc. of equip.
and methods/protocols, even that equipment encompassed by the homebrewer.

We need some more linux people in amateur radio for the software and more
computer hardware people for the hardware... it would be a mistake to
support companies holding a monopoly, there are already commercial
stations for that... besides, windows software just ends up enriching
bill g.

While I have experience with linux I am forced by the need for a number of
applications to use Windows XP on most of my machines.
I think there are a lot of people in the same boat, so I don't think that
you're going to get an overwhelming majority of hams to abandon the Windows
OS and move to linux exclusively ... HOWEVER, open source ham APPLICATIONS
can be ported to both operating systems so the users don't have to be locked
out by their choice (whether they're "forced" to use Windows for other
reasons or not) of OS.

73,
Carl - wk3c

Carl:

I can't say the lack of anything in linux forces me to use windows...
however, the lack of commercial video games written for linux forces me to
revert to windows to run them... "Neverwinter Nights" is an exception, and
is ported to linux, however, the game is now a few years old and I went
on to others and this is the main reason my private computers sport
windows also...

The only factor truly forcing windows on me is other windows users, and I
am paid 85%+ of the time to develop on the windows platform because of
them, and almost exclusively for NT these days (thin clients like cell
phones are an exception)...

Anything windows can do--Linux can do, Linux can just do it better...
windows on the other hand cannot do all which linux can--mostly this is
because of MS having to hold the source secret and pursue proprietary
ends... what is good for MS pockets is not good for the
consumer--generally...

John

On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 00:42:12 +0000, Carl R. Stevenson wrote:


"John Smith" wrote in message
news
Carl:

Exactly, why would arrl back such a system?

If they, indeed are, I don't think they should be ...

Amateur radio should not allow any PROPRIETARY hardware/software to become
a standard. We are not about supporting monopolies, we are about the free
experimentation, development, testing, construction, use, etc. of equip.
and methods/protocols, even that equipment encompassed by the homebrewer.

We need some more linux people in amateur radio for the software and more
computer hardware people for the hardware... it would be a mistake to
support companies holding a monopoly, there are already commercial
stations for that... besides, windows software just ends up enriching
bill g.

While I have experience with linux I am forced by the need for a number of
applications to use Windows XP on most of my machines.
I think there are a lot of people in the same boat, so I don't think that
you're going to get an overwhelming majority of hams to abandon the Windows
OS and move to linux exclusively ... HOWEVER, open source ham APPLICATIONS
can be ported to both operating systems so the users don't have to be locked
out by their choice (whether they're "forced" to use Windows for other
reasons or not) of OS.

73,
Carl - wk3c

On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 00:42:12 -0000, Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

While I have experience with linux I am forced by the need for a number of
applications to use Windows XP on most of my machines.

Ditto.

I think there are a lot of people in the same boat, so I don't think that
you're going to get an overwhelming majority of hams to abandon the Windows
OS and move to linux exclusively ... HOWEVER, open source ham APPLICATIONS
can be ported to both operating systems so the users don't have to be locked
out by their choice (whether they're "forced" to use Windows for other
reasons or not) of OS.

I used to trumpet the same thing about IBM's Warp-OS/2 OS, which
remains my main system. If and when my favorite text editor gets
released in a version for Linux (it's allegedly in beta) and I find
a mailer and newsreader that I like, I may migrate the whole shebang
to Linux and bid Warp a reluctant farewell.

For ham use, I'm running XP for APRS and Win 98 for Packet (the DOS
program that I use doesn't run well under XP). Those "data" modes
which don't run on a TNC are on the XP machine. Three machines
next to my operating console - don't need to turn the heat on in
this room during the heating season.

--
73 de K2ASP - Phil Kane

Phil:

I never could figure IBM dropping os/2, they dropped the ball twice, once
when they didn't purchase DOS directly from bill, second when they let
bill out-market 'em with windows (an idea he stole from apple.) OS/2 was a
much superior os to windows, warp was a true contender to linux.

Shows you that the power of marketing can beat any superior product...

John

On Sat, 20 Aug 2005 19:46:23 -0700, Phil Kane wrote:

On Sun, 21 Aug 2005 00:42:12 -0000, Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

While I have experience with linux I am forced by the need for a number of
applications to use Windows XP on most of my machines.

Ditto.

I think there are a lot of people in the same boat, so I don't think that
you're going to get an overwhelming majority of hams to abandon the Windows
OS and move to linux exclusively ... HOWEVER, open source ham APPLICATIONS
can be ported to both operating systems so the users don't have to be locked
out by their choice (whether they're "forced" to use Windows for other
reasons or not) of OS.

I used to trumpet the same thing about IBM's Warp-OS/2 OS, which
remains my main system. If and when my favorite text editor gets
released in a version for Linux (it's allegedly in beta) and I find
a mailer and newsreader that I like, I may migrate the whole shebang
to Linux and bid Warp a reluctant farewell.

For ham use, I'm running XP for APRS and Win 98 for Packet (the DOS
program that I use doesn't run well under XP). Those "data" modes
which don't run on a TNC are on the XP machine. Three machines
next to my operating console - don't need to turn the heat on in
this room during the heating season.

Carl R. Stevenson wrote:
"John Smith" wrote in message
news
Carl:

Exactly, why would arrl back such a system?

If they, indeed are, I don't think they should be ...

They aren't.

Amateur radio should not allow any PROPRIETARY hardware/software to become
a standard. We are not about supporting monopolies, we are about the free
experimentation, development, testing, construction, use, etc. of equip.
and methods/protocols, even that equipment encompassed by the homebrewer.

We need some more linux people in amateur radio for the software and more
computer hardware people for the hardware... it would be a mistake to
support companies holding a monopoly, there are already commercial
stations for that... besides, windows software just ends up enriching
bill g.

While I have experience with linux I am forced by the need for a number of
applications to use Windows XP on most of my machines.
I think there are a lot of people in the same boat, so I don't think that
you're going to get an overwhelming majority of hams to abandon the Windows
OS and move to linux exclusively ... HOWEVER, open source ham APPLICATIONS
can be ported to both operating systems so the users don't have to be locked
out by their choice (whether they're "forced" to use Windows for other
reasons or not) of OS.

Right. The huge majority of us don't "choose" our operating systems, we
choose our apps for our own particular purposes and use the O/S needed
to run the apps. As is the case in just about all fields, including ham
radio, Gates has a virtual hammerlock on us because the vast majority
of the apps we need are written for Windows and not for Linux or OS X
or O/S2. Yes it's a vicious circle, the momopoly from hell. Reality is
what it is.

Take my own primary operating interest which is HF dxing and dx
contesting and the current leading edge software used by the tens of
thousands of us dxers and contesters. Writelog, DX4WIN and TRLog and
others, almost all Windows apps. There are a few legacy DOS loggers
like CT which are still widely used and a few MAC and rudimentary Linux
loggers floating around but they're all but invisible in competitive
contesting.

Consider the N1MM contest logging program which is very much a
collaborative, open source program. It's *huge*, the manual alone is
350 pages. It does stunts like variable speed keying CW via the printer
port, a mouse click on an onscreen 2M packet spot will bandswitch just
about any brand/model HF xcvr to a specific freq on any band almost
instantly and on and on.

Maybe it can be ported to Linux, I wouldn't know. What I do know is
that I utterly fail to understand why anybody would even think about
porting this beast over to Linux when it's obviously so much easier to
simply run it in Win 98 or whatever in some surplus $100 Winbox and be
done with it.

73,
Carl - wk3c

w3rv