| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 18.11.99 11:40l 198 Lines 6366 Bytes #-9679 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_99_294D
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 99/294D
Path: DB0AAB<DB0ZKA<DB0LX<DB0RBS<DB0SEL<DB0ZDF<DB0SRS<DB0ROF<DB0ERF<DB0HDF<
DB0HOT<OK0PKL<OK0PPR<OK0PPL<OK0POK<9A0YRB<PP5BLU<IW9EXL<SV1AAW<SV1AAW<
EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 991118/0552Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:21498 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g $:HD_99_29
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA23805 ; Thu, 18 Nov 99 05:16:39 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.67/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00016905 ; Wed, 17 Nov 99 23:17:42 MET
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 99 23:13:35 MET
Message-Id: <hd_99_294D>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 99/294D
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
> PACTOR I & II, Clover, G-TOR, Hellschreiber, HF/internet connection,
> and digital contesting." Order #7652 for $15.
Just discovered another ARRL publication, #6982 for $10, entitled
_Technical Descriptions: CLOVER, G-TOR, PACTOR, PACTOR II, PSK31_
--
73, Cecil, W6RCA http://www.mindspring.com/~w6rca
>.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 17 Nov 1999 02:55:45 GMT
From: "John Roberts" <johnr@ece.jhu.edu>
Subject: Where docs for pactor, amtor, clover, etc...
The SCS-PTC II is one thing. The Swiss-PTC II is a whole different issue.
The Swiss-PTC II has a private mode. I hear it all the time, but I can't see
what is being said. I *want* to be able to demodulate this.
Does anyone know? Does anyone know anything about this "private mode"?
You better believe that if/when I write code to do this, I'm going to make
it GNU. Screw SCS. Public airwaves deserve public protocols. Security
through obfuscation is futile. That's why I'll exploit them. I just wish I
had more time to dedicate to this sort of thing. School/research keeps
getting in the way of the fun stuff.
John
Steve Sampson <ssampson@usa-site.net> wrote in message
news:382FF916.E0CE3D08@usa-site.net...
> Why not just buy the modem, use it, and let the company
> succeed?
>
> Why does everything have to be free? Would you work for
> free? Build products for millions in investment, and then
> give away all your secrets so that others can duplicate
> 10 years of work in 10 minutes?
>
> Some Hams are are just plain communists at heart. Ham radio
> isn't a commune, it's a hobby. People are allowed to
> make a dollar.
>
> Why not let the company get a return on investment? In
> 17 years, you can then build cheap knock-offs of 20 year
> old technology.
>
> Do you go down to the department store and demand to know
> the protocol inside the toaster or microwave oven? or, do
> you just buy one and use the damn thing as designed?
>
> Sheesh...
>
> Paul Keinanen wrote:
> >
> > Is there a description for these protocols that has been obtained
> > independently from these hardware vendors e.g. by reverse engineering
> > the signal on air ?
> >
> > While the implementation by the hardware vendor is proprietary and
> > possibly even patentable, I very much doubt that the actual
> > transmission protocol i.e. the algorithm is patentable at least in
> > most countries.
>.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 22:32:12 -0500
From: "Bob Lewis" <aa4pb@erols.com>
Subject: Where docs for pactor, amtor, clover, etc...
I believe the protocols are published and you can develop your own
Clover or Pactor-II unit for your own use and communicate with all
those who have purchased units. What you can't do is sell units
without paying royalties In other words, your can't make money from
other's work without giving them a piece of the action. While you can
design and build your own compatible unit, the developers are not
likely to give you the source code for free. But then you wouldn't
want them to do that anyway because you'd miss the experience of
developing it yourself.
The way I see it, what we are really complaining about here is that
the companies who spent the $$$ developing the protocol won't allow
someone else to copy it and sell clones at cheap prices, which they
would be able to do because they didn't have to pay for the protocol
development.
W6RCecilA <Cecil.A.Moore@IEEE.org> wrote in message
news:383021D6.210F1C27@IEEE.org...
> Steve Sampson wrote:
> > Why not just buy the modem, use it, and let the company
> > succeed?
> >
> > Why does everything have to be free? Would you work for
> > free? Build products for millions in investment, and then
> > give away all your secrets so that others can duplicate
> > 10 years of work in 10 minutes?
>
> Can't argue with what you say, Steve, but some of us would
> rather roll our own for our personal use and learn something
> in the process. Time was when most hams rolled their own.
> --
> 73, Cecil, W6RCA http://www.mindspring.com/~w6rca
>.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1999 22:29:18 -0500
From: "Bob Lewis" <aa4pb@erols.com>
Subject: Where docs for pactor, amtor, clover, etc...
> The Swiss-PTC II has a private mode. I hear it all the time, but I
can't see
> what is being said. I *want* to be able to demodulate this.
>
If it's not publicly documented then it's illegal in the U.S.
>.
------------------------------
Date: Mon, 15 Nov 1999 06:14:14 -0600
From: Steve Sampson <ssampson@usa-site.net>
Subject: Where docs for pactor, amtor, clover, etc...
Why not just buy the modem, use it, and let the company
succeed?
Why does everything have to be free? Would you work for
free? Build products for millions in investment, and then
give away all your secrets so that others can duplicate
10 years of work in 10 minutes?
Some Hams are are just plain communists at heart. Ham radio
isn't a commune, it's a hobby. People are allowed to
make a dollar.
Why not let the company get a return on investment? In
17 years, you can then build cheap knock-offs of 20 year
old technology.
Do you go down to the department store and demand to know
the protocol inside the toaster or microwave oven? or, do
you just buy one and use the damn thing as designed?
Sheesh...
Paul Keinanen wrote:
>
> Is there a description for these protocols that has been obtained
> independently from these hardware vendors e.g. by reverse engineering
> the signal on air ?
>
> While the implementation by the hardware vendor is proprietary and
> possibly even patentable, I very much doubt that the actual
> transmission protocol i.e. the algorithm is patentable at least in
> most countries.
>.
------------------------------
End of Ham-Digital Digest V99 #294
******************************
You can send in your contribution to this digest by
sending an e-mail to: hd-group@pa2aga.ampr.org
or (via BBS-net) to: hdaga@pi8vnw.#zh2.nld.eu
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
