| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 04.10.99 22:32l 243 Lines 7270 Bytes #-9730 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_248C
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/248C
Path: DB0AAB<DB0ZKA<DB0LX<DB0LEL<DB0TTM<DB0FP<DB0SRS<DB0MW<DB0ERF<DB0SHG<
DB0OBK<DB0SM<PI8DAZ<PI8GCB<PI8HGL<PE1NMB<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 991004/1648Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:5708 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_248
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA20500 ; Mon, 04 Oct 99 16:11:43 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00016182 ; Sat, 02 Oct 99 14:20:31 MET
Date: Sat, 02 Oct 99 14:09:19 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_248C>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/248C
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
And you still suggest it as a viable solution?
Unbelievable.
>Oh, more "it has to be perfect" again.
>The justification is to link networks that otherwise CANNOT be linked
>over ham radio. We have some long stretches of "empty" here in the
>Western US.
Covering it with "links" that only succeed in exchanging node info and that
break down when someone tries to use them is not going to help you.
Sorry Hank, but we have passed that station some 15 years ago here. Lots
of nodes in the table, nice to look at. Connect them and you get a failure
message.
Pity that you have not realized yet that no link may be better than a link
that does not work.
Rob
--
+----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Rob Janssen pe1chl@amsat.org | WWWhome: http://www.pe1chl.demon.nl/ |
| AMPRnet: rob@pe1chl.ampr.org | AX.25 BBS: PE1CHL@PI8WNO.#UTR.NLD.EU |
+----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 00:09:07 -0500
From: "J.T. Johnston" <jtncarol@net1inc.net>
Subject: Caldera 2.3 and AX.25 Set-up
>So where is the latest information? Should I switch to Redhat?
Don't bother switching to RedHat. I am trying to set up RedHat for AX.25
and am in the same boat. I came to the newsgroup hoping I could find some
pointers. I'm also going to check out tapr.org.
J.T. Johnston N4ZWV
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 2 Oct 1999 08:33:43 +0100
From: Woody <woody@tangon.demon.co.uk>
Subject: Connectors for Blaupunkt "Gamma" radio/cassette ???
In article <DySccLAAhJ93Ew$a@dowrmain.demon.co.uk>, Ian Wade
<ian@dowrmain.demon.co.uk> writes
>I've acquired a Blaupunkt "Gamma" radio/cassette, but without any
>connectors for power, control, antenna and speakers.
>
>Can anyone point me to where I might get these from, together with pin-
>out details?
>
>73
>Ian, G3NRW
Er, Halfords? They do a whole range. Other than that any car radio
shop. They should be standard DIN connectors on a Blaupunkt.
--
Andrew W.
Harrogate, UK
woody@tangon.demon.co.uk
g1uxp@gb7cym
>.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 22:37:36 +0000
From: "D. Stussy" <kd6lvw@bde-arc.ampr.org>
Subject: Is a TM-241 ready for 9k6???
On Thu, 30 Sep 1999, Rodrigo E. Rodriguez R. - CE6NUG wrote:
> well... I guess subject says it all.
> Does anyone knows if TM-241 works fine at 9k6??
> Thanks in advance.
It doesn't come ready. That model needs to be modified.
>.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 23:28:58 +1000
From: "Shane Deering" <sdeering@vic.australis.com.au>
Subject: Let's look at real numbers for TNC software sales
> >>
> >>As an "idiot" and ex node sysop, I still maintain that I and most
individuals
> >>in my neighbourhood used the "ham radio" packet network to send or
retrieve
> >>data from point A to point B, with no concern how it travelled in the
network
> >>as long as it got from point A to point B.
Idiot is a bit harsh. How about Parasite.
Gee, phone call costs are going up. Think I'll get an amateur ticket and
save a few
bob on phone calls. While I'm at it, I can get a TNC and use the packet
network,
provided by others, for cheap email.
> >>
> >>Nothing you can say, personal or otherwise, will change what it was.
> >>
> >>It is a pity that the conversation has to degenerate into personal
animosity.
> >
> >
> >Hmm, or maybe it's just that it's changed since you were active. How far
> >back was that? Seems like nowadays anybody who just wants to send
> >a message from Point A to Point B uses email. The number of people
> >who need Ham SYSOPS to provide them with access to email, I would
> >guess is pretty near to zero. Even the little old ladies have email
> >nowadays, .it seems. Why be on packet right now? Except for that it's
> >radio?
> >
> >
>
> Just in case there is a comprehension problem; I said: "send or retrieve
data
> from point A to point B" That is pretty much all inclusive, not restricted
to
> email like messages.
>
> "Why be on packet right now? Except for that it's radio?"? I do not
Obviousely you're not. Now that the internet is cheaper , you no longer need
to
freeload off the amateur community.
> understand what you are saying, but, as I said before, if the sole purpose
of
> using packet radio is using the radio, so be it. Different strokes for
That sounds like a pretty good reason. Or at least a better reason that
using
packet radio so we can hook it up the internet and bypass heaps of Hams that
are using radios. I've always thought that radios played a role
in amateur radio. Otherwise it could have been called amateur anything.
> different folks. I did packet and TCP/IP radio for years, and enjoyed it.
If
> those that chose to forward by landline are such reprehensible, subhuman,
> worthless S.O.B.s, I suggest the radio elite cease associating with the LL
set
> and do it their radio way. They have choices. Live with the limitations of
> your choices, or kill all the landline forwarders. After all it is only a
> hobby.
That's right, it is a hoby. If you want reliable fast Email then use the
internet.
If you'd like a fast reliable packet network then help us build it, don't
bypass it.
>
> Free will exists, so I do not associate with known baby rapers.
Are you trying to hide something?
>
> Pete/wa4hei
>
> --
> Eschew obfuscation.
--
Shane Deering
Packet VK3BVP@VK3BVP.#SEV.VIC.AUS.OC
EMAIL sdeering@vic.australis.com.au
ICQ.# 46641156
>.
------------------------------
Date: Fri, 1 Oct 1999 08:21:47 -0500
From: "Charles Brabham" <n5pvl@texoma.net>
Subject: Let's look at real numbers for TNC software sales
Mike Hughes <mchughes@NOSPAM.netnitco.net> wrote in message
news:7t1b9o$4g1$1@hyperion.nitco.com...
> pmarkham wrote in message
<36433.3060258178F2pmarkhamnewsguycom@208.134.253.187>...
> >
> >A LLLid "law", as proposed, is not going to bring me or others back to
packet
> >radio.
Good of "pmarkham" to verify the effectiveness of my proposed "Anti-Lid
Law".
It's not designed to magically enhance a Lid's character or intelligence, or
to "bring them back into the fold"... It's designed to run them off from the
Packet network altogether by forcing them to face legal repercussions if
they insist upon continuing their destructive, antisocial behavior.
I do not believe that anything short of that is going to work. How many
"LandLine Lids" have you seen who have displayed enough character and
intelligence to cease their anti-ham behavior, and then go on to become
worthwhile Hams?
Hmmm?
>
> You must be confusing me with Charles. I never proposed, nor would I ever
> support any such law. Better to just route around the buzzards and leave
> the government out of it.
Yes, I believe that Hank Oredson shares your view on this matter, and I used
To be continued in digest: hd_99_248D
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
