| |
ZL3AI > APRDIG 16.06.04 11:09l 829 Lines 32837 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 3466-ZL3AI
Read: GUEST
Subj: TAPR Digest, Jun 09, 6/8
Path: DB0FHN<DB0FOR<DB0MRW<DB0WUE<DK0WUE<DB0RES<ON0AR<7M3TJZ<ZL2BAU<ZL2BAU<
ZL3VML
Sent: 040616/0726Z @:ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC #:25928 [Chch-NZ] FBB7.00i $:3466-ZL3AI
From: ZL3AI@ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC
To : APRDIG@WW
Subject: Re: [ Robert Bruninga ] Re: D700 - Yes mine has FLASH and In-Circuit
Programming.
From: "Robert Bruninga" <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 16:58:55 -0400
X-Message-Number: 84
>>>gregg@skymaster.cytetech.com 6/9/04 3:39:53 PM >>>
>>AND only 10% of users ever upgraded...
>
>It might be that only 10% of the users really understood
>what the upgrade meant to them and the importance
>of the features.
And it is EXACTLY this lack of "significance" and "importance" of OPENtrack
"new features" for the end user that is my WHOLE POINT. That is why there
is NO UPGRADE to the kenwood, because
1) The PROTOCOL IS STABLE
2) The KENWOOD does pretty good with the protocol
3) There have been NO fundamental can't-live-without features missing from
the Kenwood that would trigger the release of a new radio and an
obsolescence of the old one!
>>4) All it takes is one constant complainer....
>> (who doesnt even own one, but who lambasts the
>> (1994 product endlessly for not having user FLASH]
>> (which wasnt mainstream until later)
>
>I think you just have a desire to say if you don't own it,
>you can't say bad things about it.
No, I just wonder what features are SO IMPORTANT to upgrade if he doesnt
know what it can do NOW! And has NEVER identified a feature that is
missing!
>>Complain all you want. But until you can show a
>>business model of how a company that can only sell
>>say 5000 APRS radios to a very tiny niche market
>>where it costs $60 to upgrade and only 10% of them
>>would, dont hold your breath.
>I think this is where kenwood went wrong. Sure, they
>wanted to fix bugs.
WRONG WRONG WRONG. The bugs in the very first few radios were all fixed
under WARRANTY at no cost. It is the (g) model that added all the
satellite and multi-personality features which was a upgrade that they had
to charge for to cover the major expenses previously described here.
>When the D7A(G) upgrade was installed, kenwood
>could have made it possible for users to do future
>upgrades by extending the wiring harness into a place
>where it was accessible.
Clearly you have never been a design engineer. Any design change on the
CASE and the water sealing system and on a multi-layer surface mount board
is NOT TRIVIAL and would be DUMB to tell joe-clue ham to open it and do it
himself. Then they would hav no end of technical service problems. I sure
am glad you arent designing the next one!
Bob
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: The 6th day, was yada yada yada
From: Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 16:01:36 -0500 (CDT)
X-Message-Number: 85
Quoting Robert Bruninga <bruninga@usna.edu>:
>4) All it takes is one constant complainer like Jeff King
> (who doesnt even own one, but who lambasts the
> (1994 product endlessly for not having user FLASH]
> (which wasnt mainstream until later)
And you have a good day as well Mr. Bob... ;-)
I guess instead of pointing out the obvious fact Bob has yet to respond to
my direct challege of the validity of this in this disussion, let alone all
the other challeges he has ignored, I'll point out the following:
1. This has been going on over 6 days now, and generated over a 1000 posts.
2. Whatever can be said, has been said.
Get over it Bob.
Thanks
-Jeff
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Tetroon collateral damage report, revision1
From: "Robert Bruninga" <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 17:00:50 -0400
X-Message-Number: 86
>>>"Scott Miller" <scott@opentrac.org> 6/9/04 3:44:00 PM >>>
>Speaking of number of formats... how many NMEA
>sentences are required to be supported? I couldn't
>find a list in the spec.
It should be in there...
GPRMC and GPGGA of course, and you've mentioned GPWPL and what about GPGLL?
Yes, it used to be GPGLL, but I would have no objection if anyone omitted
that one. Thanks, good idea. Ill add that to the list of changes for
APRS1.1
Bob
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Tetroon collateral damage report, revision1
From: "Curt, WE7U" <archer@eskimo.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 14:06:37 -0700 (PDT)
X-Message-Number: 87
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004, Doug Bade wrote:
> I had written a reply which was running on 2 pages, but decided to
>get short, as it seems those of us who like to elaborate, get torn up the
>most... really bizarre..
Seriously? From what I wrote below? That was the only point I wanted to
respond to as I had no personal interest in the rest of it. Don't take
that as a commentary on the rest of what you wrote, as it wasn't.
I don't care a whit what people think one way or the other about a kenwood.
I own a kenwood or two (although not a D7A or D700A), some icoms, some
yaesu, some heathkit, probably a few others. I don't want to get involved
in any my-radio-is-better-than-yours discussions. It's not important to
me! I think I've so far avoided the personal attacks to this point, but
they've been frequent, and so has the labeling. Some of the side QSO's
have been most entertaining though. Humor abounds!
This opentrac-will-obsolete-my-kenwood-radio-that-I-love-so-very-much stuff
is getting SO ridiculous!
In case nobody's figured it out by now, I've pledged my support to
OpenTrac. I've also pledged my support for APRS. So what! They both
work. I've owned Chevy's, Ford's, and Jeep's too. They all work. Mostly.
Attempting to head off a separate issue: I'm certainly _not_ saying that
the OpenTrac packets should head across the APRS-IS. They _should_ head
across the internet though, and will. Those issues are being worked.
You'll most certainly be seeing more OpenTrac packets on local RF in the
coming days. It ain't going to be going away. Remember: Change is a
_good_ thing. We're supposed to be the innovators, not the
sit-on-our-laurel(ators). Do I need to post the four emotional stages of
change? Ah the heck with it, here's one:
http://www.refresher.com/!stagesofchange.html
Recognize anything in there?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Kenwood APRS radio...
From: "Robert Bruninga" <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 17:07:09 -0400
X-Message-Number: 88
>>>Steve Dimse <k4hg@tapr.org> 6/9/04 3:46:07 PM >>>
>>Throw out the HALF of all those packets that
>>are from Europe (not part of my claim)...
>Well Bob, sorry to disappoint you, but it doesn't go
>that high. Discard any packet that does not start
>with KNWA or that originates on the internet...leaves
>US stations on RF, you get 2165 of 6975, 31.0%.
Wow, thanks. I was wrong in my wild guess. But still 31% is a large
number of APRS users who would loose tactical real-time-information if
people startted sending OPENTrack data on the APRS system..
I am curioius, I have NO CLUE how much kenwoods are used in Europe. I
wonder if anyone can work that up? I have been assuming that it is mostly
a USA thing. If I am wrong, I need updating.... thanks...
Bob
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: APRS TT
From: "Scott Miller" <scott@opentrac.org>
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 14:04:30 -0700
X-Message-Number: 89
>And Scott, thats good news on your new device.
>Lets just work togehter to see if we can make your
>DTMF codes compatible with the APRStt ones.
I haven't even given any thought to actually implementing DTMF controls yet.
The CMX860 just has the encoder and decoder built in, so it'll be there.
Once the thing's not vaporware (or more solid than the current pile of
development boards, ribbon cables, and logic analyzer leads on my bench),
someone can figure out what they want to do with it.
I've been planning on including D/A (or at least PWM) output from the MCU to
feed into the audio output, as well. That'd let you at least play back
recorded voice from flash, though I'm not sure about synthesized voice. Are
there any free text-to-speech libraries out there for embedded C?
Scott
N1VG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Tetroon collateral damage report, revision1
From: "DG2JW" <dg2jw@privateasylum.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 00:08:30 +0300
X-Message-Number: 90
Scott just don't bother anymore. "They" are never going to understand that
evolution is a natural part of everything. "They" will never understand
that neither APRS or the Kenwood's are at risk. "They" will never listen to
reason. The worst thing of all is, "They" will never understand why I have
lost respect for people who I considered innovators up last weekend.
This is not at all about Opentrac anymore. Its about the Ham community
coming together to cooperate on a project that can enhance experimentation
in our hobby. Experimentation that could lead to useful implementations of
the knowledge gained. Im not saying APRS is crap. I have invested lots of
time and money into it, and I will continue to do so as will the other
"Opentrac" guys im sure. I am trying to say that APRS needs to grow and it
cannot make any innovative leaps and bounds without major revision to the
spec. Since that revision is not going to happen we have looked at an
alternative route. I will however continue to promote APRS and teach more
hams about useful ways of implementing APRS locally.
For the past few days I have been drumming up support for opentrac in
Scandinavia and UK. People are not interested in what is going on this SIG
because they think this SIG is destructive to APRS. I suppose I agree with
that, if the attitude is "Shut up and take what we give you"
Steve by the way, Your website is broken. But don't fix it as you might
alienate people who would like to have data from it.
(im not joking)
findu.com/cgi-bin/find.cgi?call=OH8HQL then "Click here to find
nearby stations." Then select "Click here to display all the stations on
a map." I assure you all of these station do not all reside in that one
tiny point of earth..
Quality control issues?
Best regards
Julian
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Kenwood APRS radio...
From: Steve Dimse <k4hg@tapr.org>
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 17:18:02 -0400
X-Message-Number: 91
On 6/9/04 at 5:07 PM Robert Bruninga <bruninga@usna.edu> sent:
>I am curioius, I have NO CLUE how much
>kenwoods are used in Europe. I wonder if anyone
>can work that up? I have been assuming that it
>is mostly a USA thing. If I am wrong, I need
>updating.... thanks...
I can't break it out exactly, there are too many prefixes, but if you look
at the numbers I already gave, KNWA only is 1914, all RF is 3368, leaving
1454, so 43% of the Kenwoods are using callsigns other than US prefixes...
Steve K4HG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Kenwood APRS radio...
From: Danny <danny@messano.net>
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 17:17:04 -0400
X-Message-Number: 92
SD> I do not think so. Opentrack has made several appearances on this sig, and
its
SD> self-advertised mission is to fix all that was done wrong with the APRS
SD> protocol. If I were dissatisfied with APRS and/or the way it was run, I
wouldSD> certainly be on that list. Even if you want to say only 1 in 10
dissatisfied
SD> people are on the list, it still only amounts to a few percent of all APRS
SD> users.
A vote for change is not a vote for Opentrack, it is a vote for change.
That is where the problem lies in all these "opentrack vs APRS" arguments.
Problem is, it doesn't really matter. Neither you or Bob care to listen to
any of the arguments, dismissing them as "Opentrack propaganda" or in this
case as coming from a miniscule part of the APRS population.
>>It's a shame that what is ACTUALLY being said is being twisted around and used
>>for personal attacks, instead of the real issues being addressed.
>>
SD> The difference is in what you and I consider a real issue. For Bob and I,
it is
SD> maintaining the utility of APRS for the USERS, not the programmers. I've
SD> listened to all the suggestions presented, and while some would be nice, a
few
SD> even cool, when weighed against the trauma it would cause to the users, I am
SD> unswayed. Your opinion obviously differs, and that is certainly your right.
Yep. Like I said though, it really doesn't matter, does it? Once again,
another discussion pushing for APRS change is beat down by name calling and
kenwood propaganda, and claims of "defense of the user base". What
happened to the opinions of the users that agreed with a lot of the points
being made AGAINST the APRS establishment? They were dismissed as being
"Opentrack supporters", "programmers", and "argumentative".
It's really sad to see APRS being managed the way it is. I hope this
bureaucracy pays off in the long run, and doesn't obsolete APRS due to
inability to change.
Danny
KE4RAP
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: [ Robert Bruninga ] Re: Tetroon collateral damage report, revision1
From: "Robert Bruninga" <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 17:11:32 -0400
X-Message-Number: 93
>>>gregg@skymaster.cytetech.com 6/9/04 3:52:12 PM >>>
>>Yet, the complainers, that don't even have a kenwood,
>>that dont use APRS in the field anyway (or they would
>>have one), and who just like to argue to hear themselves
>>argue just keep on complaining...
>
>Bob, I enjoyed your correcting my comment right up to
>these paragraphs. I think this personal attack stuff needs
>to be stopped.
Sorry, that was not pointed at you at all. I have no idea whether you have
a kenwood at all. I appologize. When I reply to an Email on the APRSSIG,
I am not talking to that person, I am responding to the text and to the
SIG.
I hope everyone is aware of that and does not take any of my comments
personally. In fact, in alomst all of my replies, the FROM field is way
off the screen and I have no clue who I am responding to. (Except one
person that drives me nuts)...
Im just trying to keep APRS on track..
sorry
Bob
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: Thoughts on a proposed replacement for D700
From: Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 16:19:50 -0500 (CDT)
X-Message-Number: 94
Quoting Robert Bruninga <bruninga@usna.edu>:
>>>>Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net> 6/8/04 2:42:46 PM >>>
> http://www.tapr.org/tapr/list-archive/aprsspec/9912/msg00059.html
...
>In the 5 years since someone WROTE that email,
>Kenwood has sold (apparenlty by APRS-IS numbers)
>over 4100 and EVERYONE of them is a happy user.
Good for them. But the reason "I druge up" that 5 year old e-mail was to
try and explain to you the reason I don't own a Kenwood.... it was a buying
decision on my part. Something I knew 5 years ago, and was pronounced by
one of the members of your now dis-functional APRS-WG.
And I don't think I made a mistake. Even so, if the Kenwood does get
"hacked" by the user community, aka WRT54G, I very well may buy a used one.
In closing, I want to thank you personally Bob, for keeping this
discussion unemotional, non-personal and factual. Your really are a beacon
for all to follow on the APRSSIG. I can only hope to emulate your behavior
here.
Thank you
-Jeff wb8wka
>>>PLEASE NOTICE FOLKS, Jeff King who CONDEMS
>>>the KENWOODS and their obsolescence and how
>>>they are HOLDING BACK APRS is the one who JUST
>>>SAID HE has never owned one and doesn't really
>>>know anything about them. How can he then be such
>>>an expert on their capabilities to justify his condemnation...???
>
>>What did I condemn? The only thing you have
>>PROVED, is I made a BUYING DECISION, based
>>in part on this 5 year old message:
> http://www.tapr.org/tapr/list-archive/aprsspec/9912/msg00059.html
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Tetroon collateral damage report, revision1
From: "Robert Bruninga" <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 17:20:20 -0400
X-Message-Number: 95
>>>"Scott Miller" <scott@opentrac.org> 6/9/04 4:12:35 PM >>>
>If you're running OpenTRAC, it's because YOU DO
>NOT NEED APRS USERS TO SEE YOU....
THen why are you doing this on the "APRS" channel?
>If you need APRS users to see you, you use APRS.
Thanks. I think we are on the same page now...
Again, I have nothign against OPENTrack. A fresh start on a different
frequency would be an ideal place to espeiment. ANd I have even make some
suggestions of where to start.
I think 145.01 (the old NATIONAL PACKET channel) is a great place to
investigate. And if you want to attack systems simply beacuse of their
AGE, then attack that one whihc has been using the same stuff for 22 years.
Im serious. That is what the nationall 145.01 packet frequency was for.
Please lets investigate this before all those old TNC's disappear. They
are there, and maybe only used by one old fud once a week to check his
packet mail...
Ask him if you can bring new life to the frequency, he might be overjoyed
at the activity...
Seriously. Id love to see more packet and I'd LOVE to see us rejuvenate
the 145.02 backbones. That was fun to node hop and make QSO's!
Bob, Wb4APR
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Kenwood APRS radio...
From: Steve Dimse <k4hg@tapr.org>
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 17:26:49 -0400
X-Message-Number: 96
On 6/9/04 at 5:17 PM Danny <danny@messano.net> sent:
>Problem is, it doesn't really matter. Neither you or Bob care to listen to
any
>of the arguments, dismissing them as "Opentrack propaganda" or in this case
as
>coming from a miniscule part of the APRS population.
You are wrong, we certainly do listen. Do not confuse a decision not to
implement with not listening. It is human nature when a person presents an
idea to another, and the recipient is not moved by the idea, to place the
blame on the recipient..."clearly he wasn't listening to my idea, if he
bothered to understand it, he'd think is was as great as I do". People have
different priorities, sometimes even a great idea cannot be implemented.
Just the way the world works...
The bar in APRS is high, something either has to cause no disruption, or huge
benefit to be implemented.
Steve K4HG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Tetroon collateral damage report, revision1
From: "Scott Miller" <scott@opentrac.org>
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 14:29:01 -0700
X-Message-Number: 97
>I vote drop them both as irrelevant and focus on the real issue of
>whether OT should be encouraged on the APRS-IS ( as well as the dedicated
I will state one more time for the record that I have never intended for
OpenTRAC data to be carried over the APRS-IS. Others may be interested in
experimenting with that, but it's not something I'm planning on doing. I'd
rather design a new backbone system that integrates in a more uniform manner
with RF backbones and the RF net(s), or go with the next-generation backbone
that's been mentioned here. I hope to hear some more about that system -
it's certainly an area that's going to take a lot of work, and I haven't had
the time to work on it with OpenTRAC. If someone's already going to devote
some time to doing it right, let me know what I can do to help.
Scott
N1VG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: APRS user beware part 2
From: "Scott Miller" <scott@opentrac.org>
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 14:30:54 -0700
X-Message-Number: 98
>Yea, after doing the math on MIC-E and compressed packets; their prositions
>are not what I would call HUMAN readable...
Heh... I actually HAVE done OpenTRAC packets by hand, during debugging. The
math's a lot easier than MIC-E. I didn't go so far as to plot it on a paper
map, but I've certainly done enough of that with SAR.
Scott
N1VG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: disabling APO on Kenwood TM-733
From: Drew Baxter <droobie@maine.rr.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 17:32:38 -0400
X-Message-Number: 99
AUTOMATIC POWER OFF (APO) [F] (1s),[MHZ]
is what I found on the web.. Hope it works out for you.
--Droo, K1XVM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Tetroon collateral damage report, revision1
From: "Scott Miller" <scott@opentrac.org>
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 14:32:41 -0700
X-Message-Number: 100
>It should be in there...
Yeah, I'm sure it is, just not seeing it.
>Yes, it used to be GPGLL, but I would have
>no objection if anyone omitted that one.
>Thanks, good idea. Ill add that to the
>list of changes for APRS1.1
And GPWPL? Isn't that supposed to be supported so everyone can send GPS
waypoints? I don't ever remember seeing it in the spec, but I remember you
being pretty clear on the fact here that it needs to be implemented
everywhere.
Scott
N1VG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: Thoughts on a proposed replacement for D700
From: Drew Baxter <droobie@maine.rr.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 17:38:04 -0400
X-Message-Number: 101
Actually those could be useful as long as they still work, for a special
event function... Use a laptop as an XServer with Xastir and dump a copy of
xastir to all of the terminals.
I've seen a few of those units around, they're pretty slick.
The Sparc Ultra 1 on the other hand, runs very hot and is not mapping
friendly. This is the limitation of 160mb of RAM and 170mhz processor, and
not Xastir... I'll be happy once I can replace the Multi-purpose server and
the Sparc with a single thing. I think I really want to find a Mac G4, but
I'm not willing to pay 2 grand for such a thing.. :)
http://www.1-x.net/am/osxastir.jpg
Although it is pretty hot stuff on my POS Original Mac G3 Powerbook. I'd
never use the thing for APRS but it was neat to mess with.
--Droo, K1XVM
At 03:32 PM 6/9/2004, Scott Miller wrote:
>Hey, this reminds me of something else I was going to set up as a demo.
>I've got a garage full of old HDS ViewStations - they're monochrome X
>consoles (I had a few color ones, but sold them on eBay.) I've had them run
>just fine off of Linux, Irix, and Solaris. They'd be just fine for mapping
>displays on a LAN. Not sure how many monitors I've got left, though - I
>ditched a ton of them before the landfill started charging to take CRTs.
>
>Scott
>N1VG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: disabling APO on Kenwood TM-733
From: James Jefferson <jj@aprsworld.net>
Date: Wed, 9 Jun 2004 16:38:10 -0500
X-Message-Number: 102
Thanks to those who responded on disabling the APO. All is good now :-)
73
-Jim
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: APRS TT
From: "Robert Bruninga" <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 17:38:13 -0400
X-Message-Number: 103
>>>"Robert Bruninga" <bruninga@usna.edu> 6/9/04 4:23:21 PM >>>
>FUNDAMENTAL TO THIS APRStt PROTOCOL was
>the desire to keep the USER Touch-Tone KEY
>sequences as close as possible to the D7 already used
>by 38% of all APRS operators.
Just to clarify, and because I see SO MUCH missunderstanding on the SIG,
here is what this means: Please understand this:
The D7 and D700 put ALL OF APRS into the radio but the USER interface is
still your FINGERS on the DTMF PAD...
The only thing that APRStt does is MOVE THE APRS PROCESSING to the HILLTOP
at the APRStt server and lets the conversion from DTMF KEYS to APRS be done
at one central location for ALL conventional HT's in the area. Thus, ANY
HT or mobile radio can be used to enter standard APRS messages and data
JUST LIKE the Kenwoods! And as close to the SAME way as possible...
Well, you say, BUT all those HT's dont have an APRS display. BUT THEY
HAVE A SPEAKER and so the APRStt server tells them everything they need to
know by VOICE RESPONSE.
That is what APRStt is, and that is why it is so important to make it
seamless with the 38% of ALL APRS users that already use the D7 key pad to
be able to blindly take those keystrokes over to their other HT's as well.
That is why I wrote APRStt, to INSPIRE someone to do this right, so I
invested a year in developing the PROTOCOL to be APRS compatible,
(something I can do), so the programmers for Windows Sound cards could just
take the idea and run with it. (something I cant do)...
Thanks for listening.
Bob
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Kenwood APRS radio...
From: "DG2JW" <dg2jw@privateasylum.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 00:59:01 +0300
X-Message-Number: 104
Could someone please explain in plain easy to read English how its possible
that 31% of APRS users would loose tactical real-time-information if people
started sending OPENTrack data on the APRS system?
Could you also explain to me how not even a small percentage of that same
31% did not watch their Kenwood's melt down during last weeks Tetroon
launch as they surely heard or received OPENTrack data on the APRS system
during the Tetroon launch last week?
I know im being a smart aXs now but really. Surely the facts can be laid
out on the table in a clear easy gentlemanly manner.
Julian
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: Thoughts on a proposed replacement for D700
From: Drew Baxter <droobie@maine.rr.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 17:49:51 -0400
X-Message-Number: 105
All I want is a promise or some sort of assurance that Kenwood is willing
to offer an upgrade path if such a thing is needed in the interest of their
vast majority of users. For a fee or not is irrelevant as much as if they
will commit to it. If they have to ask "How many D7 owners" or "How many
D700 owners" would pay to get such things, so be it.
I don't like the fact that I paid 600$ for a radio that could be phased out
instantly. I don't like the fact that it was said innovation WILL be
stifled - either through hacks (which we will run out of room in comment or
we'll just flood the network with), or through the fact that the Kenwood
cannot be adjusted to reflect the data properly.
It's not about OpenTRAC or APRS, it's about the fact that the company that
made the hardware is making no assurances it won't be a doorstop, so
instead it's a potential anchor to the progress of the technology it was
designed for. We can't keep things this way forever, because here we
already have a traffic jam in the southern part of the state. It's peoples
prerogative to run asinine paths and flood the network with their weather,
but the pipe is only 1200 baud wide!
I hope that makes sense. It shouldn't be "Think about the Kenwoods". It
should be, "We don't want to ruin the stability of the network and force
people to pay money or upgrade, to make minimal adjustments we can do
elsewhere with less/no impact to the existing userbase." Even Bob is
guilty of blaming the Kenwoods sometimes.
--Droo, K1XVM
At 03:35 PM 6/9/2004, Robert Bruninga wrote:
>But why does it need INSTANT upgrades (flash) to do
>"new" as yet unidentified things i f you dont even have
>one, and dont know what it DOES do now.
>
>In the 5 years since someone WROTE that email,
>Kenwood has sold (apparenlty by APRS-IS numbers)
>over 4100 and EVERYONE of them is a happy user.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: I AM OUTTA HERE! (38% is good enough for me!)
From: "Robert Bruninga" <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 18:02:55 -0400
X-Message-Number: 106
>>>Steve Dimse <k4hg@tapr.org> 6/9/04 5:18:02 PM >>>
Bob asked:
>>I have been assuming that Kenwoods are mostly a
>>USA thing. If I am wrong, I need updating.... thanks...
>
>if you look at the numbers I already gave,... 43% of the
>Kenwoods are using callsigns other than US prefixes...
WOW, NEW PARADIGM! Ok, now then if 38% of ALL APRS users (count bodies,
not SSID's) in the world use a Kenwood APRS radio and it is GLOBAL and not
jusst USA, then I think once and for all we can get off of this stupid
thread from the people who dont own one, and claim that it is "holding back
APRS".
I have had ENOUGH of all this carping by a few disgruntled complainers that
don't even own one, and I feel that I have done my job to keep the existing
network compatible with those 38% of existing APRS users.
I'm not wasting any more of my time on this sensless OPENtrack issue and
those that could care less about being backwards compatible with existing
users.
Im outta here. Im not reading ANYTTHING ELSE on ANY OF THESE THREADS
ANYMORE.
I am OUTTA HERE!
de WB4APR, Bob
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: [ Robert Bruninga ] Re: D700 - Yes mine has FLASH and In-Circuit
Programming.
From: Drew Baxter <droobie@maine.rr.com>
Date: Wed, 09 Jun 2004 18:05:41 -0400
X-Message-Number: 107
Let me make it clear that I'm playing devils advocate in the interest of
technology in general. This isn't an OpenTRAC vs APRS thing.
At 03:39 PM 6/9/2004, Gregg G. Wonderly wrote:
>>1) Hams are too cheap (as a group)
>
>I don't think this is an accurate statement. Many Hams that I know will
>spend
>money on something that has an obvious benefit to them. Many can't buy radio
>equipment or spend money on this hobby arbitrarily. I don't, because I
>have a
>family that I also like to do things with. As my kids get older, I have
>become more selective.
I agree with you ,Gregg -
Hams are too cheap? These are the same people who paid 400$ for an
dual-band HT and 600$ for a dual-band mobile right? What's 60 or 100 bucks
to make the device 'new and usable' again? I think people would be willing
to pay almost any amount if it meant they weren't going to chuck their
investment or have to pay full price for an entirely new unit.
>>4) All it takes is one constant complainer like Jeff King
>> (who doesnt even own one, but who lambasts the
>> (1994 product endlessly for not having user FLASH]
>> (which wasnt mainstream until later)
>
>I think you just have a desire to say if you don't own it, you can't say bad
>things about it. That's actually an interesting notion. I don't think that
>such a notion is good for our society. Maybe somewhere else...
That's ok though, my D700 does have flash and can be zapped with a FlashPRO
III, the 78K4 interface, and a 10 wire flat cable. No soldering or
anything. I guess the D7 users would have an issue, but the D700 and D7
should be treated as separate product anyway. Give credit where due,
Kenwood DID the right thing with the D700 and made flash and an appropriate
ICP connection on the circuit board. The problem is that they have made no
assurances, guarantees, etc. that they will evolve the product if it is
necessary.
>When the D7A(G) upgrade was installed, kenwood could have made it possible
>for
>users to do future upgrades by extending the wiring harness into a place
>where
>it was accessible. This is still an option for them if they are
>interested in
>extending the life of the radio by increasing its usefulness with new
>features
>(regardless of whether that might be OpenTrac support or otherwise). I'd pay
>for something that was a real upgrade (as I did for the first one).
I don't believe this would be possible. You really need the expensive
FlashPRO device to program the NEC chip. It's not like with an Atmel or
PIC where you can make a simple circuit to program the device. None of the
'Universal programmers' I have seen up to now support anything in that
class of device. Even the Galep4, which I wish I owned like no tomorrow..
:) I do agree that they could've used a different microcontroller to do
the job though that would permit simple circuit flashing.
>There are lots of reasons why everyone thinks this issue is important. I
>don't think that anyone can stand around and wave hands and sling derrogatory
>phrases because there is a difference of opinions.
I agree it is important. I do think that Kenwood would have to devise some
sort of way to write to the device though to program it. Considering what
NEC charges for their programmer, I suspect that it would be
hard. However, I do have a local Kenwood commercial dealer, like most
people probably do. It's likely those dealers already have a device that
could have the appropriate tool to do the job.
I would've been willing to pay more for the radio with the assurance that
there would be forward momentum if the condition warranted it.
--Droo, K1XVM
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
