| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 20.06.00 02:54l 207 Lines 7370 Bytes #-9437 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_169F
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/169F
Path: DB0AAB<DB0PV<OE2XOM<OE5XBL<DB0RGB<DB0MRW<DB0ERF<DB0SHG<DB0SM<PI8DAZ<
PI8GCB<PI8WNO<PI8HGL
Sent: 000619/1803Z @:PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU #:53010 [Den Haag] FBB $:HD_2000_169F
From: PA2AGA@PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 00 17:50:45 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_169F>
From: pa2aga@pe1mvx.ampr.org
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga.ampr.org
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
use
> >> the spectrum for what it is intended to be. I'm sure you have read the
> >> bitching from the PSK group about this subject.
> >
> >What a giggle. "We're the good guys, we avoid using ham radio!"
> >
> >> 2. NEW features have been added to allow more efficient forwarding of
> >> information between WL2K base stations and the users. True, presently
only
> >> AirMail has adopted these features, however, the specs are public and
anyone
> >> is welcome to join the bandwagon.
> >
> >Presumably you have bulk compressed forwarding now?
> >That "... giant leap ..." was done many years ago in all the BBS codes
> >I know of, except for WinLink.
> >
> >> 3. The only feature removed from WinLink 2000 is interactive keyboarding
> >> with a base station, again, to promote more efficient use of the
airwaves.
> >> Since client software is free and readily available to anyone who wishes
to
> >> use it there is simply no need for keyboarding any longer.
> >
> >So it is not possible to use, for example, Linux to connect with WinLink?
> >
> >> Any use of words like alliances, private, proprietary, commercial or
> >> whatever is pure nonsense. Yes, we are taking advantage of the best
> >> technology has to offer and employ such technology to the fullest in the
HAM
> >> world - what's wrong with that?
> >
> >Um ... you have me confused with someone else.
> >What "... technology ..." do you mean? The internet? What a giggle.
> >
> >> Hans - N8PGR
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> ----- Original Message -----
> >> Mid: 129061_CMBO
> >> From: SMTP:n0zo@lcia.com
> >> To: SMTP:"K4CJX - Steve Waterman" <k4cjx@home.com>;N8PGR@N8PGR
> >> Sent: 06/16/00 03:25:00
> >> Subject: On the snoozegroups
> >>
> >> I found the below on the newsgroups, Ole Hank strikes again. It was
> >> entitled:
> >> N0ZO no longer longer supports keyboard inputs.
> >>
> >> Path:
> >>
news1.atlantic.net!pants.skycache.com!newsfeed2.skycache.com!newsfeed.skycac
> >>
he.com!Cidera!205.252.116.205!howland.erols.net!news-out.worldnet.att.net.MI
> >>
SMATCH!wn3feed!worldnet.att.net!wnmasters3!bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.ne
> >> t.POSTED!not-for-mail
> >> From: "Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net>
> >> Newsgroups: rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc
> >> References: <wgFY4.10775$ND5.640240@news20.bellglobal.com>
> >> <393375B5.638FFC9A@philips.com> <sj7a95rl5pj146@corp.supernews.com>
> >> Subject: Re: N0ZO no longer supports Keyboard inputs!
> >> Lines: 84
> >> X-Priority: 3
> >> X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
> >> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4029.2901
> >> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.50.4029.2901
> >> Message-ID: <L7VY4.34$pk3.1206@bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>
> >> Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 20:02:51 GMT
> >> NNTP-Posting-Host: 12.73.129.64
> >> X-Complaints-To: abuse@worldnet.att.net
> >> X-Trace: bgtnsc04-news.ops.worldnet.att.net 959716971 12.73.129.64 (Tue,
30
> >> May 2000 20:02:51 GMT)
> >> NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 30 May 2000 20:02:51 GMT
> >> Organization: AT&T Worldnet
> >> Xref: news1.atlantic.net rec.radio.amateur.digital.misc:38796
> >>
> >>
> >> "Steve Sampson" <ssampson@usa-site.net> wrote in message
> >> news:sj7a95rl5pj146@corp.supernews.com...
> >> > The purpose of a BBS is to collect and distribute messages of
> >> > a public nature. The purpose of an electronic mail node, is to
> >> > collect and distribute both public and private messages.
> >>
> >> WinLink stations CAN do both, but normally only handle private messages.
> >>
> >> > I propose that you want to do that at the highest speed, thus
> >> > you want to compress the data on the transport frequency.
> >> > By allowing non-compressed users on the same frequency, you
> >> > defeat the whole purpose of achieving maximum through-put.
> >>
> >> The WinLink "transport frequency" is the internet. All RF use of WinLink
> >> in it's "AirMail" incarnation is from user to host. i.e. it's a bunch of
> >> RF email drops hanging off the internet.
> >>
> >> > We have to trust fellow Hams to do the right thing. We trust
> >> > them every day to not commercialize the spectrum, using modes
> >> > that can't be monitored directly.
> >>
> >> Har!
> >>
> >> > I think when Hams finally accept high speed data pipes as
> >> > carrying pure data, it will be the day they enter the 20th Century.
> >>
> >> As opposed to "impure data"?
> >>
> >> > If you don't want people to send "data" over your data system,
> >> > then don't put up a node. If all you want is to be a limit on
> >> > what Hams can transport, you're in the wrong hobby.
> >>
> >> You failed to understand the main point below:
> >>
> >> > "Markus Lenggenhager" wrote
> >> > > Hi all
> >> > >
> >> > > My personal opinion is that this WinLink2000-AirMail alliance is
> >> > > definitely going in the wrong direction. Ham BBSs should be
accessible
> >> > > using any commonly available client software.
> >>
> >> Ever since the original author of WinLink allowed someone else to
> >> take over development of the system, it has moved more and more
> >> toward a closed, proprietary system. Forcing (or attempting to force)
> >> the use of WinLink-specific clients appears to just be part of the
> >> strategy: to lock out competing software. Keep in mind that the
commercial
> >> use of WinLink and similar systems can produce a good deal of income.
> >> You only need to "beat" Inmarsat on price, which is probably not hard.
> >>
> >> > > Furthermore, all
> >> > > WinLink2000 BBSs are interconnected via Internet, which means it
becomes
> >> > > obvious their main purpose is to act as a cheap e-mail replacement.
The
> >> > > fact that all tfc is compressed (unreadable by thirds) makes it very
> >> > > difficult to check if this network is not misused by pirates of all
> >> > > kinds.
> >>
> >> Exactly.
> >>
> >> > > It's a pity that PACTOR-II has been kind of devaluated and is being
used
> >> > > almost entirely as a workhorse to carry binary BBS tfc. It's getting
> >> > > more and more difficult to find a live QSO partner amidst all these
> >> > > signals produced by unattended systems. No wonder PSK31 has become so
> >> > > popular: Behind every signal you monitor there's a human being!
> >>
> >> Well ... the value of bulk transfer protocols like PACTOR-II and CLOVER
> >> is that they work very well for BBS-BBS movement of messages. This allows
> >> hams to time-shift: i.e. carry on QSOs with other hams who are not on the
> >> air at the same time, etc. It's real convenient. PSK31 is not useful for
> >> this
> >> mode,
> >> so all use will, by the nature of the protocol, require a human to
> >> interpolate
> >> the errors out of the datastream.
> >>
> >> > > 73, Markus HB9BRJ
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >>
> >> ... Hank
> >>
> >> http://horedson.home.att.net
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> -----------------------------------------
> >> Pat __O
> >> _-\<,_
> >> (_)/ (_)
> >> Patrick R. McKeeby
> >> N0ZO@lcia.com
> >> n0zo@lee.win-net.org
> >> http://members.lcia.com/n0zo/
> >> IRC - mIRC #netlink channel
> >> -----------------------------------------
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >
> >--
> >
> > ... Hank
> >
> >http://horedson.home.att.net
To be continued in digest: hd_2000_169G
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
