| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 23.03.00 07:50l 226 Lines 7039 Bytes #-9538 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_79D
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/79D
Path: DB0AAB<DB0SL<DB0RGB<DB0ABH<DB0SRS<DB0AIS<DB0ME<ON6AR<PI8HWB<PI8HGL<
PE1MVX<PE1NMB<EA7URC<PE0MAR<PI8VNW
Sent: 000323/0259Z @:PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU #:58790 [HvHolland] FBB7.00g24
From: PA2AGA@PI8VNW.#ZH2.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Received: from pa2aga by pi1hvh with SMTP
id AA31721 ; Thu, 23 Mar 00 02:36:28 UTC
Received: from pa2aga by pa2aga (NET/Mac 2.3.70/7.5.3) with SMTP
id AA00018462 ; Sun, 19 Mar 2000 21:28:43 MET
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 00 21:26:38 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_79D>
From: pa2aga
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga
Subject: HamDigitalDigest 2000/79D
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
at that, we'd have a livable situation.
Gary
Gary Coffman KE4ZV | You make it |mail to ke4zv@bellsouth.net
534 Shannon Way | We break it |
Lawrenceville, GA | Guaranteed |
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 02:42:04 GMT
From: kelly@dvol.com (Brian Kelly)
Subject: May QEX digital voice article
On Sat, 18 Mar 2000 15:52:47 -0600, Brian <burke1@icss.net> wrote:
>
>You were running packet cluster, merely an extension of your HF hobby. If
you
>had not, you wouldn't be even close to being competetive in the HF DX
circles.
>
'Nother mindless hipshot. No, I've never used packet spots at my home
station and I've never glomed a new one as a result of a packet spot.
I used packet for selling/buying radios and antennas/towers. Boring as
hell as radio goes but it worked better than QSTclassifieds.
>
>Today, internet spotting has pretty much replaced packet cluster.
>
Baloney: We have hundreds of contesters and dxers actively running
packet on and thru the networked clusters we have in the Northeast
Corridor. There is some work underway to blend some Internet spots
into the clusters but it's nowhere near being Internet based.
>
If any of them actually gave a hoot about 2m digital radio all they'd
have to do is come up with the radios or radio mods and goose the baud
rate up and they wouldn't need the Internet. But, no they don't care
about digital radio wherin lies the reality.
>
> But of course
>you know that since u used to be on packet *eons* ago.
>
Right.
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 02:43:20 GMT
From: kelly@dvol.com (Brian Kelly)
Subject: May QEX digital voice article
On Sat, 18 Mar 2000 14:27:01 -0600, "Richard McCollum"
<rmccoll@radiks.net> wrote:
>
>. . . When you get the digital version of QSK and you can lock on
>your filters inside of 30 minutes, call me.
>
We've been running what amounts to full duplex digital comms 50-100Hz
or so wide for how long now? Heee!
>
> If nothing else, the
>ditty-boppers will provide you with a market that might interest a
>manufacturer. Experiment away, I did with slow-scan and even ran FSK in the
>days. At the present state of the art, digital fax (really what slow scan
>is) makes one hell of a lot more sense than digital voice.
>
I'd love to be able to run FAX, all they wanna do/can do is YAK and
bitch & whine here..
>
>No one is dumping on digital as such. What needs to happen is some small
>and immature minds to get beyond "Code Old, Bad. Digital New, Good" when
>the reality is that they don't understand either one.
>
>Dick McCollum N0BK
>
Right on the button, well done Dick!
>
w3rv
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2000 06:54:45 +0000
From: Dave Heil <K8MN@cats-net.com>
Subject: May QEX digital voice article
Brian wrote:
>
> Brian Kelly wrote:
>
> > On Sat, 18 Mar 2000 18:52:43 GMT, "Mark VandeWettering"
> > <raytracer@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >When I see you demonstrate any working knowledge of digital modes or
respect
> > >for users of such modes,
> > >
> > Gimmee a freaking break I was running packet eons ago, most likely
> > long before you did anything digital on the ham bands. Assuming of
> > course that you have done any digital ham radio at all. What is your
> > experience with digital ops??
>
> You were running packet cluster, merely an extension of your HF hobby. If
you
> had not, you wouldn't be even close to being competetive in the HF DX
circles.
> Today, internet spotting has pretty much replaced packet cluster. But of
course
> you know that since u used to be on packet *eons* ago.
That's an outrageous statement, Brian, backed by ignorance of that which
is possible.
Dave 5H3US, K8MN
>.
------------------------------
Date: Sat, 18 Mar 2000 20:46:54 -0800
From: "Jim Donohue" <jim_donohue@computer.org>
Subject: tnc software
Rick accurately portrays my position with the exception that I run ham stuff
exclusively under Windows 98 and have not tried his package because I am
sufficiently happy with XPWare that I do not choose to go through the pain
of adopting a new solution - his PKTerm may be wonderful - but XPWare does
all I want with consistency.
Jim KO6MH
Rick Ruhl <ricker@cssincorp.com> wrote in message
news:J7YA4.14400$511.3364003@tw11.nn.bcandid.com...
> I'd like to bring everyone up to date on my follow ups with users of the
> newsgroup with this subject.
>
> I've written emails to the four people that has responded to Gene's
request
> to find out why they recommended XPWare or PkTerm. First, I'd like to
thank
> both Jim and Roger for responding and clarifying that they weren't
> recommending it OVER PKterm, but just recommending it since they have
never
> used PKterm and just liked XPWin..
>
> Also, as I've written here before, when it comes to Windows 3.x based
> software,. XPWare is the way to go. PKTerm and Pacterm 98 are 32 bit
> software programs that don't run under Windows 3.x.
>
> As for the other two emails, one bounced because of a fake email address
and
> the other never responded publicly or privately to line he wrote that said
> PkTerm = buggy. If I don't get information about issues, I can only
assume
> they never existed, or it was because of the lack of knowledge of how
proper
> Windows based software works.
>
> CSS is dedicated to making the best ham radio software at a fair price.
The
> only way to do this is to get the input of everyone we can, on how to
> continually improve the product. And I thank every one who has done this
> so far.. your input is so valuable to us.
>
> --
> Rick Ruhl
> President, Creative Services Software
> http://www.cssincorp.com
>
>
> "Jim Donohue" <jim_donohue@computer.org> wrote in message
> news:sd88n0gkfja115@corp.supernews.com...
> > And yet another vote for XPWARE after a couple of years of use. Jim
> KO6MH
> > Tony H <tonysez@ncweb.com> wrote in message
> > news:cf3vcsc4fr819qo3a5moau1c4uiolib78q@4ax.com...
> > > On Wed, 15 Mar 2000 00:06:47 -0600, "genno" <wm9h@execpc.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > >what is a good software to use with the DSP232. I'm using PCPAKRATT
II
> > now
> > > >but know there are alot better ones out there. So far I have been
told
> > that
> > > >PKTERM99 and XPWARE FOR WINDOWS. Which of those two are better .
> > > >thanks...GENE/WM9H
> > > >
> > > >wm9h@execpc.com
> > > >
> > > >PKTerm+Buggy
> > > Use Xpware
> > >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>.
------------------------------
End of Ham-Digital Digest V2000 #79
******************************
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
| |
