| |
PA2AGA > HDDIG 26.09.00 22:51l 188 Lines 7212 Bytes #999 (0) @ EU
BID : HD_2000_261E
Read: GUEST
Subj: HamDigitalDigest 2000/261E
Path: DB0AAB<DB0ZKA<DB0ABH<DB0CWS<DB0ROF<DB0AIS<DB0NDK<DB0ACH<PI8JOP<PI8ZAA<
PI8HGL
Sent: 000926/1922Z @:PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU #:18349 [Den Haag] FBB $:HD_2000_261E
From: PA2AGA@PI8HGL.#ZH1.NLD.EU
To : HDDIG@EU
Date: Tue, 26 Sep 00 19:50:29 MET
Message-Id: <hd_2000_261E>
From: pa2aga@pe1mvx.ampr.org
To: hd_broadcast@pa2aga.ampr.org
X-BBS-Msg-Type: B
> seldom have you had to go over 50 miles to find reliable service.
And areas where you did have to go over 50 miles. Ignore them?
> But even
> when portions of the telephone network goes down, that doesn't mean that the
> Internet is down.
And services which only use dialup, leased lines, xDSL, ISDN. Ignore them?
> First, there are many locations that don't use dial-up
> connections. They use dedicated circuits which bypass a lot of telephone
> network. Even ADSL is split off of the cable before it hits the switch. You
> don't get the overloading effect that you have on the telephone. And it's
> usually not the failure of service during a disaster,
And when it is a failure of service you ignore that?
> it's an increased
> capacity requirement that causes most of the problems.
And so we don't need emergency communications?
> Not anywhere near as
> big of an issue on the Internet circuits.
Ok, I'm convinced!
There is no longer any need for hams to prepare
for, or take part in, emergency communications.
> And there's a good number of businesses that use satellite of microwave to
> get their Internet connections. Maybe a little rain fade, maybe a dish needs
> realigning.
> No, I'm not saying through away radio. No, I'm not saying use the Internet
> exclusively. What I am saying is that we should combine the networks and use
> the best of both.
No disagreement at all.
But that is not what hams did.
They threw away the radio networks, and placed total reliance on the internet.
--
... Hank
http://horedson.home.att.net
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 01:45:39 +0300
From: Paul Keinanen <keinanen@sci.fi>
Subject: Compression et all
On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 18:42:02 GMT, "Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net>
wrote:
>The correct statement is "tens of thousands of hams worldwide."
>The growth was pretty fast in the late '85 - '88 time frame.
>Peaked at roughly 55,000 hams and over 5,000 servers.
Let's be honest here.
You seem to claim (in multiple postings) that this network was killed
by internet forwarding of packet radio bulletins.
I claim that the decline of the packet radio network was due to direct
internet access by licensed amateur radio operators. i.e. these
messages were never transported by amateur radio means neither locally
nor through any packet radio link chains.
Over here, it has been legal to tunnel packet radio messages using
public telecommunication networks between amateur subnets since 1997,
but the packet radio network had declined long before that. The only
form of packet radio network that is working well and there seems to
be an interest of maintaining it is the DX-cluster network. The
maintainers are often keen HF-DXers, who have a keen personal interest
of maintaining the network.
Paul OH3LWR
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 05:25:47 +0000
From: Jim Jerzycke <kq6ea@amsat.org>
Subject: Compression et all
Your response to my observation reveals a superior, elitist attitude.
Get a grip. Hams do this stuff for fun. If we DO happen to make a few
improvements in the technology, all the better.
You should go play with model trains or boats.
------------------------------
Date: Sun, 24 Sep 2000 09:48:42 GMT
From: nomail@rob.knoware.nl (Rob Janssen)
Subject: Compression et all
Paul Keinanen <keinanen@sci.fi> wrote:
>On Sat, 23 Sep 2000 18:42:02 GMT, "Hank Oredson" <horedson@att.net>
>wrote:
>>The correct statement is "tens of thousands of hams worldwide."
>>The growth was pretty fast in the late '85 - '88 time frame.
>>Peaked at roughly 55,000 hams and over 5,000 servers.
>Let's be honest here.
>You seem to claim (in multiple postings) that this network was killed
>by internet forwarding of packet radio bulletins.
>I claim that the decline of the packet radio network was due to direct
>internet access by licensed amateur radio operators. i.e. these
>messages were never transported by amateur radio means neither locally
>nor through any packet radio link chains.
That may very well be true. In de early days of the packet radio BBS
network, this network was the first way for many radio amateurs to
transport e-mail to their friends all over the world, read news bulletins,
etc.
Ok, there was the Fidonet network, but access was usually difficult
(telephone lines BUSY all the time), and there were variable costs like
telephone charges and message charges by the sysop.
But with the advent of private-user Internet access, any guy in the street
can send and receive e-mail and access information, so why would you do it
via packet radio and be able to reach only a small number of users and
access only limited amounts of information?
This hasn't only killed the packet network, but the Fido network as well!
(in the same way: some people desperately try to keep smaller and smaller
parts of it alive, fighting against the Internet using the same arguments
as HAMs use to keep the packet network alive)
It is like the 2M Handheld. In its early days (the Icom IC-2), every
amateur wanted a handheld and they used it to chat on the local repeater,
communicate with friends while visiting rallys, and sometimes even carry it
on the street and be able to chat with someone while shopping.
Everyone else would see those guys as geeks. But now, everyone has a GSM
phone and is doing exactly the same things.
But who is still using his 2M handheld? Mine has been in the closet for
years, with defective NiCd batteries.
Apparently there are trends, sometimes radio amateurs are early adopters,
and after a while these things die off again. Another trend appears,
interest peaks, and the same thing happens.
Right now, many of the still active radio amateurs are in FM ATV. This
has some of the characteristics of many trends in amateur radio: surplus
equipment is available that makes part of the job easier (phased-out
satellite TV indoor units that became worthless when sats went digital),
and interesting parts came on the market that made constructing a UHF/SHF
transmitter easier for the average amateur.
But of course, the surplus unit supply will dry up, the parts will
disappear (because integration advances, and the customized parts that
replace them are no longer usable by amateurs - has happened many times!).
Also, the bands quickly get filled by these wideband signals, and we may
lose some of these bands in the near future.
So, this will probably be temporary as well, just like packet radio.
Besides, with all these trends a factor is that it gets boring after
some time. When the initial thrill is over, only the really dedicated
operators remain on the mode. The rest moves on.
Rob
--
+----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
| Rob Janssen pe1chl@amsat.org | WWW: http://www.knoware.nl/users/rob |
| AMPRnet: rob@pe1chl.ampr.org | AX.25 BBS: PE1CHL@PI8WNO.#UTR.NLD.EU |
+----------------------------------+--------------------------------------+
To be continued in digest: hd_2000_261F
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
