| |
ZL3AI > APRDIG 22.09.06 22:35l 208 Lines 7747 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 8808-ZL3AI
Read: GUEST
Subj: [APRSSIG] Vol 27 #21, 4/4
Path: DB0FHN<DB0MRW<DB0FSG<I4UKI<IK1ZNW<I0TVL<TU5EX<IW2OAZ<ZL2BAU
Sent: 060922/2026Z @:ZL2BAU.#87.NZL.OC #:5837 [Waimate] $:8808-ZL3AI
From: ZL3AI@ZL2BAU.#87.NZL.OC
To : APRDIG@WW
Message: 27
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 08:28:11 -0700
From: "Cap Pennell" <cap_at_cruzio.com>
Subject: [aprssig] RE: New EU Paradigm
While certainly not wanting to cram anything down anybody's throat, I'd
suggest dropping support for any "EU Paradigm" and instead only holding out
the more efficient North American system as a potential international model
too. The Newn-N system is better here in North America now and can help in
Europe or elsewhere too as their networks grow. I don't think any useful
purpose is served by encouraging conflicting non-interoperable "regional"
paradigms. It's a small world after all.
One good thing about the North American Newn-N Paradigm is that we've
already seen it can be slowly (and quite painlessly) "grown" from earlier,
less efficient, systems (and aliases).
The international http://info.aprs.net already shows Ireland is supporting
the more modern digipath system. Over time, others will too because it
better avoids "reduced throughput".
73, Cap KE6AFE
P.S. Why encourage forcing APRSers to change digipath settings just
because they've crossed a "border"? It's already bad enough that some
travelers have to change _frequency_ to rejoin the VHF APRS network just
because they've flown across borders.
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Robert Bruninga
>Sent: Wednesday, September 20, 2006 06:44 AM
>To: ui-view_at_yahoogroups.com; phil_at_g1lkj.org.uk
>Subject: [ui-view] New EU Paradigm
>
>>Bob Bruninga WA4APR has requested not to use WIDE
>>as a unproto address and all those who are in the
>>know have changed to TRACE in the UK.
>
>As APRS moves forward, we do need to assure simplification and
>standardization of paths. In the USA, the New-N Paradigm is to
>obsolete all of these, RELAY, WIDE, TRACE and TRACEn-N, and make
>WIDEn-N the only universal path (replaces TRACEn-N so it is
>FULLY traceable). Fill-In Digis would use WIDE1-1.
>
>Since Europe seemed to not have the RELAY dupe problem, the only
>way we seemd to have gotten consensus was to propose the New EU
>Paradigm which for Europe would suggest the universal path to be
>TRACEn-N. And RELAY could be used for fill-in digis.
>
>As new devices enter the APRS market, it is important to get
>agreement that these are the standards so that Manufacturers can
>have consistent expectations and User education can be greatly
>simplified.
>
>There seems to me no more debate in the USA. Are these
>standards acceptible to Europe?
>
>This is posted on the Uiview list, since most Europeans using
>APRS are on this list. But please respond on the
>APRSSIG_at_lists.tapr.org where the discussion should take place.
>
>Thanks,
>
>Bob, WB4APR
------------------------------
Message: 28
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 11:32:34 -0400 (EDT)
From: Doug Ferrell <kd4moj_at_kd4moj.org>
Subject: RE: [aprssig] APRS to NMEA
On Wed, 20 Sep 2006, Andrew Rich wrote:
>Righto, show me rfe-formatting my $2000 del laptop back to dos
That's what old klunker PC's are for andrew! [GRIN]
--
....DOUG
KD4MOJ
------------------------------
Message: 29
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 11:52:56 -0400
From: "Danny Messano" <danny_at_messano.net>
Subject: RE: [aprssig] APRS to NMEA
....or
Vmware and VirtualPC
DOSBox (http://dosbox.sourceforge.net) is a toy I recently found as well.
Cross platform, Open Source, Serial/Parallel port support, and has a very
small footprint. APRS876 runs well under it.
------------------------------
Message: 30
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 09:45:26 -0700
From: <scott_at_opentrac.org>
Subject: [aprssig] Kenwood TK-760
Does anyone have the manuals for this radio? And does it have an accessory
connector like the TK-790? They offer AVL options for it, so I'm guessing
it must have something.
Thanks,
Scott
N1VG
------------------------------
Message: 31
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 09:48:09 -0700 (PDT)
From: "Curt, WE7U" <archer_at_eskimo.com>
Subject: RE: [aprssig] APRS to NMEA
On Wed, 20 Sep 2006, Danny Messano wrote:
>...or
>
>Vmware and VirtualPC
>
>DOSBox (http://dosbox.sourceforge.net) is a toy I recently found as well.
>Cross platform, Open Source, Serial/Parallel port support, and has a very
>small footprint. APRS876 runs well under it.
Or Linux + DosEMU. ;-)
I've played graphical DOS games under it before.
--
Curt, WE7U. APRS Client Comparisons: http://www.eskimo.com/~archer
"Lotto: A tax on people who are bad at math." -- unknown
"Windows: Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates." -- WE7U
"The world DOES revolve around me: I picked the coordinate system!"
------------------------------
Message: 32
Date: Wed, 20 Sep 2006 10:49:52 -0600
From: Joel Maslak <jmaslak-aprs_at_antelope.net>
Subject: Re: [aprssig] Rant - Cross platform portability
On Sep 20, 2006, at 9:20 AM, Gregg Wonderly wrote:
>Yep, many people doing software development in the HAM community
>don't have enough training or information, or motivation to get it
>right. That's a real problem for many people. Some argue that
>HAMs ought to be smart enough to figure it out. I think it's
>important to not waste unneeded time in peoples lives just because
>you can.
Your definition of "get it right" and mine differ. Portability appears to
be near #1 in priority for you. That's fine, and I respect it. To be
honest, it's not near #1 for me - for me, writing code to solve *my* needs
is #1 in priority, and #2 is to do it as quick as possible.
I know Java, and have written enterprise apps in Java. I've done the same
thing in at least 5 other languages. I pick the language that (A) fits my
team, (B) has the features I need, and (C) results in the least work for
me. Portability is usually not a concern to me. I know you disagree with
my view on that, but that's fine. You can do it your way, but that doesn't
mean you get it right while I get it wrong. It means you focus on
something different than I do, and hopefully you achieve your goal.
If I write software in, say, Microsoft .NET, you don't have to use it, and
I haven't wasted your time by writing it (because if I didn't write it at
all, you would be no better off). Sure, I could have saved you work by
using Java, if you are going to recode in Java later, but not trying to
save you work is hardly the same as costing you time.
I've tried to stay out of this argument, because IMHO, it has no place on a
group dedicated to APRS. It's about software development methodology.
I've been in the software business long enough to know that there is no
"right way" to do this development.
I'd be all for someone starting an APRS GUI client project that is designed
to be cross platform capable. I'd probably even run their software. But
I'm not going to write it, nor am I going to criticize others who write
non-cross-platform apps. Instead, if it bothers me, I'll do it myself.
Otherwise I'll let other people make contributions to APRS that are
different from the ones I might want to see in an ideal world.
Besides, a good chunk of APRS development is - by necessity - non-
cross-platform. For instance, I doubt I could load the HAM-HUD code on
Windows, or use SmartPalm on a TinyTrack - nor can I see any circumstance
where Java would run on many of our platforms (including the DOS platform
that Bob still supports and apparently feels enough people use to continue
his support).
Once again, I think cross-platform support is a Good Thing, but I'm not in
favor of saying that non-cross-platform software is hurting APRS. It is
not preventing likeminded people from writing cross-platform software.
------------------------------
aprssig mailing list
aprssig_at_lists.tapr.org
https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig
End of aprssig Digest, Vol 27, Issue 21
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
