| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 09.02.00 17:46l 222 Lines 7759 Bytes #-9585 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_37I
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/37I
Path: DB0AAB<DB0KFB<DB0CZ<DB0LX<DB0RBS<DB0SWR<DB0FP<DB0SRS<DB0AIS<DB0ME<
ON6AR<PI8HWB<PI8HGL<PE1MVX<PE1NMB<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 000209/0942Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:50071 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g24
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA29984 ; Wed, 09 Feb 00 08:27:36 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.70/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00017859 ; Tue, 08 Feb 2000 18:17:52 MET
Date: Tue, 08 Feb 00 18:11:36 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_37I>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 2000/37I
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
>neat, but say I bought 4 of them, I bet I couldn't find 3 people who
>would set one up and form a network to experiment with them.
>
>I have been messing around with Part-15 stuff lately, and it's hard to
>find others willing to experiment with long range Spread Spectrum.
>While the cards are cheap for in the home, the price goes up rather
>quickly as you move to the roof. People who are used to paying
>$400 for a 5 Watt talkie, just won't spend that much for a 100 mW
>1.6 Mbps network. Plus the microwaves are a little more difficult to
>aim, as there are no repeaters as such. Since I've set up a 4 1/2 mile
>link, I have been asked a lot about my system from commercial
>entities, but Hams so far have just circled their fingers around their
>ears when I describe it :-) But the throughput is very exciting when
>compared to FSK modes. Heck it's more exciting than my ISDN
>throughput! I'm about the same speed as a cable modem, and
>the annual fee ($500 a year) will set you up for about 4 miles range
>at 100 mW (into a 21 dB gain parabolic). But there is just no
>interest in networking for any other purpose than web browsing on
>the internet it seems... I should be able to take this knowledge to
>Part-97 Ham when Spread Spectrum modems begin to appear, but
>we're still a few years off.
>
>Just a few comments, I'm not trying to start anything :-)
>
>Steve
>
>Cathryn Mataga wrote:
>>
>> ...The real answer lies
>> in what kind of people use that mode, and are those
>> the kind of humans you want to hang out with?
>>
>> I would say that to the extent you're insterested in developing
>> or even using 'weird technology' -- well, that's part
>> of it too. Obviously the specifics, and perhaps the 'rules'
>> are a matter for some debate. But at the bottom of it,
>> is always, 'what kind of 'interesting' techology can
>> we use to communicate' and 'are the other people doing
>> this the kind of people I want to hang out with.'
>
>
-----------== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News ==----------
http://www.newsfeeds.com The Largest Usenet Servers in the World!
------== Over 73,000 Newsgroups - Including Dedicated Binaries Servers ==----
-
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 5 Feb 2000 23:17:19 -0600
From: "Steve Sampson" <ssampson@usa-site.net>
Subject: What is a good TNC?
I used to meet with several Hams every week, and we discussed
packet and other Ham stuff over a pizza. Some of us were into the
software, some into the hardware. Mostly we just had fun with the
mode. Most of those guys have passed away, and I don't see anyone
on the band who wants to experiment. Mostly it's just DX Cluster
and APRS. So, I look at the wide-band radios and say that's pretty
neat, but say I bought 4 of them, I bet I couldn't find 3 people who
would set one up and form a network to experiment with them.
I have been messing around with Part-15 stuff lately, and it's hard to
find others willing to experiment with long range Spread Spectrum.
While the cards are cheap for in the home, the price goes up rather
quickly as you move to the roof. People who are used to paying
$400 for a 5 Watt talkie, just won't spend that much for a 100 mW
1.6 Mbps network. Plus the microwaves are a little more difficult to
aim, as there are no repeaters as such. Since I've set up a 4 1/2 mile
link, I have been asked a lot about my system from commercial
entities, but Hams so far have just circled their fingers around their
ears when I describe it :-) But the throughput is very exciting when
compared to FSK modes. Heck it's more exciting than my ISDN
throughput! I'm about the same speed as a cable modem, and
the annual fee ($500 a year) will set you up for about 4 miles range
at 100 mW (into a 21 dB gain parabolic). But there is just no
interest in networking for any other purpose than web browsing on
the internet it seems... I should be able to take this knowledge to
Part-97 Ham when Spread Spectrum modems begin to appear, but
we're still a few years off.
Just a few comments, I'm not trying to start anything :-)
Steve
Cathryn Mataga wrote:
>
> ...The real answer lies
> in what kind of people use that mode, and are those
> the kind of humans you want to hang out with?
>
> I would say that to the extent you're insterested in developing
> or even using 'weird technology' -- well, that's part
> of it too. Obviously the specifics, and perhaps the 'rules'
> are a matter for some debate. But at the bottom of it,
> is always, 'what kind of 'interesting' techology can
> we use to communicate' and 'are the other people doing
> this the kind of people I want to hang out with.'
>.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2000 20:30:01 GMT
From: t41@optonline.net (CoolBreeze)
Subject: What is a good TNC?
In article <lC%l4.224$l27.19534@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>, "Hank
Oredson" <horedson@att.net> wrote:
>.... or other hardware that one can PURCHASE and connect and use?
>
>There is a long thread complaining about Kantronics TNCs, and how
>terrible they are, but nobody has yet posted any suggestions on what
>one should purchase instead. Something equally easy to hook up.
>
>What is better? Timewave? PACCOM? MFJ?
>In what way better?
>Test results to back up the claims?
>Prices and sources?
>
I would'nt pay much attention to the Kantronics Bashing....I myself have used
them for years and know several others who have as well without ever having
difficulty. For the majority of users on basic 1200/9600 Packet...they are
just fine...and you can also easily find one used. There is a KAM PLUS on
rec.radio.swap right now in perfect condition, asking 100$.
W2TMA
--------------------------
ICQ# 36063892
--------------------------
When one's expectations are reduced to zero, one really appreciates
everything one does have.
Stephen Hawking
----------------------------------
>.
------------------------------
Date: Wed, 02 Feb 2000 19:31:29 GMT
From: "Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net>
Subject: What is a good TNC?
.... or other hardware that one can PURCHASE and connect and use?
There is a long thread complaining about Kantronics TNCs, and how
terrible they are, but nobody has yet posted any suggestions on what
one should purchase instead. Something equally easy to hook up.
What is better? Timewave? PACCOM? MFJ?
In what way better?
Test results to back up the claims?
Prices and sources?
--
... Hank
http://horedson.home.att.net
>.
------------------------------
Date: 30 Jan 2000 22:54:59 GMT
From: clarke@aztec.asu.edu (JACK CLARKE)
Subject: Y2K glitch in DOS and Windows version of PcPakratt program.
Hey, Rick, when you buy a company, you buy the good stuff AND
the bad stuff.
You can't pass the bad stuff back to some individual. It's
"company" we're looking at.
Of course, you can do anything you want!
Jack VE3EED/W7
Phoenix, AZ
--
>.
------------------------------
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2000 19:24:55 -0500
From: Glen Menendez <menendez@eznet.net>
Subject: Y2K glitch in DOS and Windows version of PcPakratt program.
Well said. Of course this isn't the first time Slimewave has stuck it
to us. I'm still hanging on to my $439 paperweight called the DSP232,
hoping they'll contact me someday to say they want to make it right. I
To be continued in digest: hd_2000_37J
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
