| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 30.09.99 14:12l 203 Lines 7742 Bytes #-9736 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_245E
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/245E
Path: DB0AAB<DB0PV<DB0MAK<DB0BOX<DB0ABH<DB0SRS<DB0AIS<DB0IZ<DB0QS<DB0PKE<
PI8DRS<PI8DAZ<PI8GCB<PI8HGL<PE1NMB<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 990929/2242Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:4292 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_245
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA20250 ; Wed, 29 Sep 99 22:15:31 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00016096 ; Wed, 29 Sep 99 23:42:25 MET
Date: Wed, 29 Sep 99 23:37:02 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_245E>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/245E
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
: visit http://hfradio.org/ :
>.
------------------------------
Date: 28 Sep 99 11:53:47 GMT
From: hylton@global.co.ZA (Hylton Conacher (ZR6HPC))
Subject: Ia.n.i. RemoteControlSystem
Hi
And lets's hope this url for Ia.n.i. RemoteControlSystem works as the previous
ones didn't!What is this Ia.n.i. Remote Control System anyway?Does anybody
have info or a decent URL for this?
ZR6HPC
Hylton
>.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 10:35:37 -0700
From: "Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net>
Subject: Let's look at real numbers for TNC software sales
Peter O. Brackett <ab4bc@ix.netcom.com> wrote in message
news:7sq4in$24g@dfw-ixnews6.ix.netcom.com...
> Cathryn et al:
>
> With respect to having fun.
>
> Our fun is predicated upon the availability of frequency spectrum, period.
> We do not allocate the frequencies, that is a political and commercial
> matter. We amateurs have been lucky so far, due mostly to the valiant
> efforts of our forefathers in this grand hobby. But remember, no bands,
no
> fun, period!
>
> Our situation, other than in the HF regions where no one else cares
anymore,
> is in dire straits.
>
> Simply put, "use it or loose it".
>
> There are many commercial interests who covet our frequencies. We need to
> populate and show use those frequencies, not just keep them for a few
> "elite" folks having "fun".
>
> Just as with the amateur packet network heyday of the 70's and 80's, we
need
> plenty of ham radio "users", call them appliance operators if you will, to
> keep the networks viable. The only way to keep these great majority of
> appliance operators is to treat them like "customers", try to give them
> compelling applications so that they continue to participate and create a
> "market" for ham equipment, and traffic to keep our networks viable.
>
> Returning to the past is fun, but it won't protect our valuable spectrum.
> We must move forward and attract the users back to the amateur packet
> networks even if they don't have the same form and functions as before.
And
> Chalie's idea of convincing the government regulators to protect us by
> regulation is a "pipe dream", they (The FCC) are under siege themselves.
> The Administration, the Congress, the commercials are mostly all espousing
> the breakup of the FCC and the elimination of most regulations. Like the
> ostrich of Africa when frightened, Charles Brabham has his head in the
sand
> and that is very dangerous to our hobby!
>
> Use it or loose it.
>
> Comments, thoughts?
>
> Peter AB4BC
Exactly the point I have been making for ten years.
Get the ham radio networks back to ham radio.
Those hams who want to play ham radio on the internet should
certainly do that, it can be fun. But when they intentionally interfere
with the radio networks (by FORCING traffic intended for the
radio networks to go to it's destination over the internet) they
have killed those radio networks. All this discussion of "new technology"
and "I would use the radio network if it was as fast as the internet"
is just blowing smoke. That "new technology" will never make it into
ham radio as long as it cannot be USED there, and the Land Line
Lids have pretty much gauranteed it cannot be used: they grab all the
traffic and FORCE it to go over the land lines instead of via radio.
The ham radio network will never be "as fast as the internet"
because it is not possible for hams to build network that runs as
fast as wire, cable, or fiber. What we can do is what Cathryn suggests:
have fun with digital radio, and build a network using those modes.
To do so, you ignore all the folks who post here claiming it can't
be done, and simply go do it. It *can* be done, and it *has* been
done in the past. We could do it again, if we choose to. Those who
claim it cannot be done are either ignorant or have some other
agenda in mind; an agenda which does not include ham radio.
One does have to wonder why anyone posts in this newsgroup
if they are not interested in Recration, Radio, Amateur, Digital.
It's not Recration, Telephone, Commercial, Digital, no matter
what some posters would have us believe.
Anyone want to move some traffic using CLOVER?
All LSB dial reading:
Radio 1, full time 7.087 (WestNet long haul links).
Radio 2, full time scans 14.110, .116, .120, 21.076, .077, 28.077, .100,
..110
Anyone welcome to make use of these links.
Also available in the Portland area on HF (CLOVER and/or PACTOR):
WA7EES, KA7AGH, N7QDN.
--
... Hank - W0RLI
http://horedson.home.att.net
>.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 28 Sep 1999 10:20:22 -0700
From: "Cathryn Mataga" <cathryn@junglevision.com>
Subject: Let's look at real numbers for TNC software sales
Peter O. Brackett wrote in message <7sq4in$24g@dfw-ixnews6.ix.netcom.com>...
>Cathryn et al:
>
>With respect to having fun.
>
>Our fun is predicated upon the availability of frequency spectrum, period.
>We do not allocate the frequencies, that is a political and commercial
>matter. We amateurs have been lucky so far, due mostly to the valiant
>efforts of our forefathers in this grand hobby. But remember, no bands, no
>fun, period!
>
>Our situation, other than in the HF regions where no one else cares anymore,
>is in dire straits.
>
>Simply put, "use it or loose it".
>
>There are many commercial interests who covet our frequencies. We need to
>populate and show use those frequencies, not just keep them for a few
>"elite" folks having "fun".
>
>Just as with the amateur packet network heyday of the 70's and 80's, we need
>plenty of ham radio "users", call them appliance operators if you will, to
>keep the networks viable. The only way to keep these great majority of
>appliance operators is to treat them like "customers", try to give them
>compelling applications so that they continue to participate and create a
>"market" for ham equipment, and traffic to keep our networks viable.
>
>Returning to the past is fun, but it won't protect our valuable spectrum.
>We must move forward and attract the users back to the amateur packet
>networks even if they don't have the same form and functions as before. And
>Chalie's idea of convincing the government regulators to protect us by
>regulation is a "pipe dream", they (The FCC) are under siege themselves.
>The Administration, the Congress, the commercials are mostly all espousing
>the breakup of the FCC and the elimination of most regulations. Like the
>ostrich of Africa when frightened, Charles Brabham has his head in the sand
>and that is very dangerous to our hobby!
>
>Use it or loose it.
>
>Comments, thoughts?
I guess. Err, whatever you mean by 'going to the past'. What are you
talking about exactly? Whatever we do, will be in the future -- I think.
PBBS = bad? Is that the point? I'm trying to get a handle on this?
Me, I don't quite see the point of a 'network', if the goal is to give
away cheap internet access. Really, the best way to do this is
for sysops to get internet connections, and then route IP
directly to the internet from every site. And, not bother with connecting
to any other ham radio sites. Still, in my neighborhood, at least,
even the little old ladies are now getting cable modems -- and are on a
10Mbps lan, for like $50 bucks a months. So, it's tough to compete
To be continued in digest: hd_99_245F
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
