| |
ZL3AI > APRDIG 16.06.04 11:16l 723 Lines 30735 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 3477-ZL3AI
Read: GUEST
Subj: TAPR Digest, Jun 10, 7/8
Path: DB0FHN<DB0RGB<OK0PPL<DB0RES<ON0AR<ZL2BAU<ZL2BAU<ZL3VML
Sent: 040616/0733Z @:ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC #:25940 [Chch-NZ] FBB7.00i $:3477-ZL3AI
From: ZL3AI@ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC
To : APRDIG@WW
Subject: I QUIT. I tried.
From: "Robert Bruninga" <bruninga@usna.edu>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 21:23:37 -0400
X-Message-Number: 135
I Quit. I tried!
This constant bickering by a few anarchists who want change, but cannot
idenfity exactly what it it they need specifically is destroying this SIG.
I have stayed on the SIG for 10 years and always offered to help people
find a way to do what ever they needed doing within the APRS protocol, or I
would find a way to ADD it that wouldn't affect existing users. We have
been very successful at that as long as the person could identify Exactly
what it was he needed.
Since Jeff and Scott and Danny, and Spider and Drew and Curt have now taken
over this sig for the sole purpose of cramming (what was a good idea of
OPENtrack) down our throats at the expsense of 38% of the users on APRS and
on 144.39, and Steve and I and a few others are the only ones defending the
existing users, I fear I am only adding to this melt down.
I Quit.
I am off this sig, until it cools down and we can get back to working on
the APRS Spec in a gentlemenly manner where the goal is consensus and what
is best for the end user. Not just a bunch of egos...
I always listened. I always tried to add things that were needed and made
sense without abusing existing users.
73's
WB4APR, Bob
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: APRStt is it set in stone yet?
From: "Doug Younker" <dougy@ruraltel.net@ruraltel.net>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 20:31:22 -0500
X-Message-Number: 136
OK; that makes sense. I guess I should ask Kenwood "what where they
thinking?', not I will make the effort. I understand the idea behind APRStt,
but the inability to have a text two-way most likely limit it's popularity
around here. Oh well one more cool looking thing to try, who's cool doesn't
stand the is worth the effort? going over. Thanks...
73
Doug, N0LKK
dougy@ruraltel.net
----- Original Message -----
From: "Robert Bruninga" <bruninga@usna.edu>
: Oh, and since over 5000 HAMS use exactly this
: same technique for sending APRS messages from
: their D& and D700 APRS radios, it seems consistent
: to design APRStt the same way so that those 5000
: users dont have to do things differnetly on the D7
: then they would do on their othe HT's with APRStt.
:
: Remember, APRStt is nothing more than making it
: possible to have the SAME message capability
: from ANY HT that we enjoy from the D7 and D700..
: using the SAME keypad entry... Bob
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Trains, planes and APRS automobiles. was: Kenwood APRS radio
From: Steve Dimse <k4hg@tapr.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 21:33:59 -0400
X-Message-Number: 137
On 6/10/04 at 7:21 PM Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net> sent:
>>New drivers are coming on the the road all the time.
>
>And drivers also leave the road. In the cellular industry they call this
>churn.
Churn refers to people that switch from one cell service to another, not to
people that leave altogether. If opentrack and APRS were both working
systems with separate user bases, there could be churn.
Yes, people leave, but more people come, and so far always in greater
numbers, leaving a net gain.
>>A lot of effort
>>is being expended in some areas to make room for these new drivers.
>>Two years from now, there will be more than 20k drivers...not 40k,
>>but 25 or 30k is certainly possible.
>
>Certainly possible. But if you look at marketing/economic models, with that
>growth rate, the market is approaching saturation. Growth has slowed
>substantially.
Not sure where you get that from. After dupchecking, findU processsed
1234820 packets between 0000z 9Jun2004 and 0000 10Jun2004.Near the
beginning of the year that number was just over 1M. 59 days ago, the oldest
date I can search on (raw data is kept for 60 days on findU) gives 1174699,
a gain of 4.8% in two months. The web logs at findU continue to grow at a
steady pace. Sure, there are lots of uncertainties, but through today APRS
has not topped out.
>>If opentrack completely replaces APRS, then the total number of
>>drivers on the road would be the same as in the pure APRS system at
>>any given point in time.
>
>Or if 50% convert, or if 25% convert. The math still holds.
No, because of the guys that want to see both sides of the road...
>Your right, thanks for reminding me. I think, what was that, comment field
>extension of APRS? That is a car that is pulling a trailer.
As is the fact that anyone can add any extension to opentrack. Or ar you
saying additional data in opentrack doesn't take space...
>>Imagine if the road had two lanes with a very pronounced crown...you
>>could drive on the right, and see the scenery off the right side of
>>the road, or drive in the left lane and see the scenery on the
>>left...but if you drove in the middle, taking up both lanes, you
>>could see all the scenery.
>
>Yeap, and you'd also get a traffic ticket. This is exactly why I suggested
>maybe Scott remove the simultaneous dual protocol option at some point. There
So you want the opentrack people to limit what users can do, yet you
lambast APRS authors when they do it? Your looking pretty asymmetric
yourself! Why are you to be placed in the role of Highway Patrol? At least
the real Highway Patrol actually drives cars!
I'll be d*mned if someone tells me I have to do one or the other! I can run
HF APRS, satellite APRS, 144.39 APRS at the same time, plus talk through a
440 Mic-E repeater. If I want to, I have every right to use opentrack too.
Or are you saying the QRM opentrack causes to APRS is OK, but APRS
shouldn't be allowed to QRM opentrack? Is it just me, or is the room
tilting?
Steve K4HG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: compressed posits on APRS
From: "Spider" <spider@rivcom.net>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 18:38:01 -0700
X-Message-Number: 138
>Come to think of it, I think I'll add another checkbox or two to control
>output of at least one of the I/O pins based on config profile. That way,
>you can change frequencies with your Pocket Tracker or trigger some external
>event based on the profile parameters.
I need a 'beep' trigger so I know the thing is working. Problem with the
TT3 and OT is if it's mounted in a box, stuffed under the dash, you can not
tell if it is working or not. I like the little beeps my Maratrac puts out
when it does it's thing. I know what it's doing without looking at it. Just
a personnel issue I've been thinking about.
Jim, WA6OFT
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Need help with installing APRS on XP machine
From: Bill Tetens <zuki269@netscape.net>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 20:45:31 -0500
X-Message-Number: 139
Guite some time ago I got info to help install APRS on an XP machine. I
remember that I had to install a Win 98 file into the system folder in
XP. I have misplaced the info and I need to help a friend to install
APRS on his XP machine. Can anyone furnish me with the procedure and I
promise to not lose it this time. Thanks.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: A thought experiment...
From: Steve Dimse <k4hg@tapr.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 21:54:28 -0400
X-Message-Number: 140
OK, I just thought of a way maybe opentrack proponents could explain to me
and others why what they want would be a god thing. Two scenarios, first:
Suppose the opentrack protocol was complete.
Suppose APRS and opentrack co-existed with no problems on 144.39.
Suppose there was an opentrack internet system that had the same
capabilities as the APRS IS.
Suppose there Kenwood decides to support opentrack and produces a version of
both the D7 and D700 software that supports opentrack.
Now, imagine there is a drawing...every APRS user reaches into a bag and
draws a marker with an A or an O, if an O, they get new versions of their
software supporting opentrack, and if they own one, new software flashed
into their Kenwoods. Sipulate that there is no random abberations in the
draw: IGates, digi owners, all other classes of users, and geographic units
are all evenly distributed. Understand that to get to this point, a major
amount of work (and in the case of the Kenwoods at least, money) have been
expended.
Under these conditions, I think the half that draw A have a reason to be
unhappy...they have lost half their number...they look on their displays
and see half the stations (the good part of this doesn't happen, channel
loads and collisions are as high as ever). However, other than this, their
lives are pretty much as before, they have gained nothing.
Explain to me how things are better for the half with opentrack.
Second, suppose everyone switched to opentrack. Explain to me the AVL
utopia you would create.
This is an honest attempt by me to understand what you are trying to
create. Clearly you feel as pasionately about this as I feel about APRS,
and if you have expresed where you want to go, I've not caught on for
whatever reason. Please enlighten me now...
Steve K4HG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: XASTIR - Mac OSX - Serial Ports ?????
From: "Brian Riley (maillist)" <n1bq_list@wulfden.org>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 21:54:52 -0400
X-Message-Number: 141
The other day I spoke t quickly when I included Xastir as being useable with
a a newer Mac running OSX and Xastir.
I have xastir 1.3.1 up and running but when I tell it to open a TNC on one
of the Keyspan USBSerialPorts, it locks up. If I tell it to go after a
nonexistent port it behaves fine and tells me I am nuts. I give it the right
port xastir goes south! locks up, has to be force-quit!
I thought it was something I had done but over the last couple of weeks I
have gotten emails from a number of people all seeing the same thing with
various USBSerial adapters under OSX.
Now yesterday I had a guy over here with a 17" Mac Powerbook running APRS
Point under WinXP/VirtualPC and using a Keyspan USB Serial adapter that
worked just fine.
Curt ???????
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: I QUIT. I tried.
From: Drew Baxter <droobie@maine.rr.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 22:08:30 -0400
X-Message-Number: 142
Now wait a minute here Bob.. I never claimed to want Opentrac on the 144.39
frequency. As a matter of fact, I said that they should make gateways
between frequencies if they want to share data, but should not be on the
same frequency. This would not increase the payload on 144.39 because the
gateways could be SMART about what it sends both directions.
I never said I want to throw away my D700. I never said I hated
APRS. Hell, the reason why I went to take my license test was solely for
the APRS traffic in my area I was getting on a scanner, and wanting to be
involved in some way. People needed an I-Gate that was up most of the
time, and here I am.
However, I'd like to think I'm more willing to reflect on other peoples
ideas and thoughts than apparently you are. I'm not here to call people
stupid, moronic, etc. I'm here because I see this grow, and grow, and
grow, in this area, but people still are unaware of proper use or the uses
they're missing out on. I have the ONE AND ONLY APRS Mobile radio. You
think I really would've wanted to even own such a thing if I was some sort
of APRS hater?
I think you have me confused with someone else, perhaps you wish I was
arguing such things because then it's slightly more of 'the world against
Bob'. I'm not defending Opentrac either way, nor have I ever claimed
Opentrac as the answer or solution to life's problems. I believe that it's
time for a change in some form, but I don't think that screwing up a
perfectly good, evolved, and working system, is the way to do that. As
long as things don't break my implementation of the current system (My
Igate, my Kenwood), then I'm fine with whatever people want to do as long
as they adhere to the rules of the ARS.
Anyway, it's not my place to say. People have free roam on ANY frequency
provided it does not directly interfere with the operations on that
frequency. You cannot convince me that Opentrac packets taking up (dead
space) on the frequency would do that just because a receiver COULD
perceive data incorrectly. I've put a lot of thought into this the last
few days, trying to think of some way that this could be defined
somewhere. The reality is we do not delimit at the protocol level anywhere
in the ARS that I have found, certainly not in the Band Plan. Get 144.390
defined somewhere, by the FCC, etc. as an APRS-only frequency. That will
end THAT problem. You can encourage people NOT to do things on 144.390,
but the reality is, you can't stop them if they play by the rules of the ARS.
You're severely mistaken though if you think I'm sitting here dreaming
about the day my Kenwood device is no more useful than any
dual-bander. Amateur Radio hardware is supposed to have longevity. 2
years is NOT longevity. My ONLY concern with Kenwood is they won't commit
to the longevity of my 600$ radio. Not because they SHOULD make an update,
but because they SHOULD be willing to, should the situation arise. I want
to hear that Kenwood is going to be there for ME and the people that bought
into this gamble they made to develop the first full-featured APRS
radios. Heck, I'd love to hear that they ABSOLUTELY WON'T, too.
But - I'm not cramming anything down anyones throat. No sales pitches
here. No "Oh this'll work better than this".
The things I want to see happen are simple, and have nothing to do with
Opentrac:
1> There should be an APRS-WG, and it sounds like (maybe I'm mistaken)
there are people who would be more than willing to volunteer.
2> The WG should discuss and focus on implementation of the APRS protocol
in your vision. Opentrac can have its own WG if they want it.
3> People should be able to easily petition the WG with an implementation
idea, addition to the protocol, etc.
4> There should be an accurate documented SPEC with all additions (errata,
etc.) up to THIS point, defined as a version number.
I appreciate the fact that you can just throw a new format idea together to
extend the use of the APRS protocol without messing up existing
infrastructure. But it's these sudden additions (Such as !DAO! format or
DIGI-injected objects) that make APRS a bear to implement in software. You
have a lot of trust in computer technology to 'do the right thing', not
humans. We're trusting that a microcontroller will relay what we want it
to and that computers and electronics will show us the right data.
Once you weren't the only person shooting APRS packets onto frequencies in
this world, this became bigger than you. This is something you should be
proud of. Kenwood's not going to be taking any of my ideas (or most of our
ideas probably) and building them into hardware. People aren't going to
make little PIC-based devices to get more people involved in any of my
technology cheaply. I'm perfectly fine with that, but if they were, I'd be
very proud that I motivated people to want to be involved in my idea.
I don't really care if people want what I want or perceive things the way
that I do. If I wanted that, I'd go e-mail myself or talk to myself in the
mirror. I really prefer a good argument now and then because it forces
people to think.
--Droo, K1XVM
** I apologize if any of my sentences loop, repeat, or run-on.
At 09:23 PM 6/10/2004, Robert Bruninga wrote:
>Since Jeff and Scott and Danny, and Spider and
>Drew and Curt have now taken over this sig for
>the sole purpose of cramming (what was a good idea
>of OPENtrack) down our throats at the expsense
>of 38% of the users on APRS and on 144.39, and
>Steve and I and a few others are the only ones
>defending the existing users, I fear I am only adding
>to this melt down.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: XASTIR - Mac OSX - Serial Ports ?????
From: Curt Mills <archer@eskimo.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 18:12:31 -0700 (PDT)
X-Message-Number: 143
On Thu, 10 Jun 2004, Brian Riley (maillist) wrote:
>I have xastir 1.3.1 up and running but when I tell it to open a TNC on one
>of the Keyspan USBSerialPorts, it locks up. If I tell it to go after a
>nonexistent port it behaves fine and tells me I am nuts. I give it the right
>port xastir goes south! locks up, has to be force-quit!
>
>I thought it was something I had done but over the last couple of weeks I
>have gotten emails from a number of people all seeing the same thing with
>various USBSerial adapters under OSX.
>
>Now yesterday I had a guy over here with a 17" Mac Powerbook running APRS
>Point under WinXP/VirtualPC and using a Keyspan USB Serial adapter that
>worked just fine.
>
>Curt ???????
Sorry, don't run OSX, and don't run anything with USB. We have reports of
people using Xastir on Mac OSX with USB though. Ask on the Xastir list and
somebody might be able to help you.
--
Curt, WE7U. archer at eskimo dot com
http://www.eskimo.com/~archer
Lotto: A tax on people who are bad at math. - unknown
Windows: Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates. - WE7U.
The world DOES revolve around me: I picked the coordinate system!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Need help with installing APRS on XP machine
From: Curt Mills <archer@eskimo.com>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 18:17:33 -0700 (PDT)
X-Message-Number: 144
On Thu, 10 Jun 2004, Bill Tetens wrote:
>Guite some time ago I got info to help install APRS on an XP machine. I
>remember that I had to install a Win 98 file into the system folder in
>XP. I have misplaced the info and I need to help a friend to install
>APRS on his XP machine. Can anyone furnish me with the procedure and I
>promise to not lose it this time. Thanks.
Which flavor of APRS program? WinAPRS? APRS+SA? UI-VIEW32?
--
Curt, WE7U. archer at eskimo dot com
http://www.eskimo.com/~archer
Lotto: A tax on people who are bad at math. - unknown
Windows: Microsoft's tax on computer illiterates. - WE7U.
The world DOES revolve around me: I picked the coordinate system!"
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Multiple RX at digi site (was A Modest Proposal)
From: Wes Johnston <wes@johnston.net>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 22:33:45 -0400
X-Message-Number: 145
Actually, at one time I suggested that we put multiple receivers at the
digi sites. The idea would be that your tracker radio would have, say, 10
memories with a random order of odd splits programmed in... memory 1 would
be 144.39/144.39, m2 would be 144.39/145.01 , m3 would be 144.39/144.99, m4
would be ....... . Each time your tracker transmitted, it would have the
PTT line tied to the mic up/dn button and skip to the next memory. Care
would have to be taken to tie all the XCD pins on the tncs together so that
one did not transmit and desense any other which may be receiving a
packet. This (a gimicky orthagonal FHSS) would serve to randomize the
frequencies which two trackers might choose if they transmitted at the same
time, therefore they could both get thru. I was careful to say that I
didn't want this as some method to falsely increase the number of trackers
on a channel, but rather to make sure that they minimize hidden transmitter
problems.
To implement this, we need to have some sort of "object" in the area which
could tell the trackers which frequencies were available as alternate
inputs and a method to push those frequencies into a radio.
Wes
At 06:03 PM 6/10/2004, Scott Miller wrote:
>> Wait.... You won't move OT to a new frequency but want me to move my
>>weather station? Wow!!!! I run a weather station and an IGATE so I
>>need two radios and 2 computers and 2 TNC's and... If you want to run
>>OT ( Not APRS!!!! ) then you need to find a new frequency. PERIOD! nuf
>>said.
>
>Please, read the thread again. I was suggesting this (as others have before
>me) even before OpenTRAC ever saw the light of day. It only requires a
>second receiver at the digi site. If you've got a digi serving a large
>number of weather stations, you can add the receiver there, and simply QSY
>the weather stations. They still get heard and gated on 144.39.
>
>Scott
>N1VG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Opentrack or whatever
From: James Smith <k9apr@sbcglobal.net>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 21:35:39 -0500
X-Message-Number: 146
To whom it may concern,
You can use your opentrack all day long and I can careless if you get
out or not. If your opentrack device interferes with the existing
protocol of APRS, or my digi's I will either lock you out or turn them
off. So you see you can cause a whole new problem. So I think it is best
that you fine a whole other channel for your experiment... That is my
opinion, and on a second note I could give a rats a__ less about seeing
things down to the centimeter. A few just want to cause problems for the
rest of us, now the person who developed opentrack should be
communicating with Bob and NOT needing other people jumping IN and
adding their two cents to it please keep your two cents to yourself...
You will make allot of people and inboxes happier. I stand behind Bob,
all the other authors in their opinions and I know I'm not alone in that
feeling.... Change is good, but not when your beating someone to death
on 100's of e-mails a day.
And yes I seen the Balloon on both my D700 and D7 here, and the Darn
balloon was direct into both of my digi's and I noticed and thought what
a waste of good bandwidth as the path went anyway. I think the balloon
launches are great, just need to do some path management........
Please keep your flaming e-mails to yourself also....
--
UI-Webserver http://k9apr.no-ip.org
73, James, K9APR
Chairman \ Coordinator
Tri-State APRS Working Group
http://www.tawg.org
mailto:k9apr@tawg.org
Run a APRS Website? Why not join the APRS Webring. http://www.tawg.org/join.htm
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: APRS Protocol - A Modest Proposal
From: Wes Johnston <wes@johnston.net>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 22:38:05 -0400
X-Message-Number: 147
Bob has also made similar suggestions... his Star backbone and Big Metro
examples. http://web.usna.navy.mil/~bruninga/aprs/fix14439.html
Wes
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: I QUIT. I tried.
From: Danny <danny@messano.net>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 22:40:25 -0400
X-Message-Number: 148
DB> The things I want to see happen are simple, and have nothing to do with
DB> Opentrac:
1>> There should be an APRS-WG, and it sounds like (maybe I'm mistaken)
DB> there are people who would be more than willing to volunteer.
2>> The WG should discuss and focus on implementation of the APRS protocol
DB> in your vision. Opentrac can have its own WG if they want it.
3>> People should be able to easily petition the WG with an implementation
DB> idea, addition to the protocol, etc.
4>> There should be an accurate documented SPEC with all additions (errata,
DB> etc.) up to THIS point, defined as a version number.
Interesting.. That is what I have been screaming for days. Bob, you choose
to dismiss all my comments as "Opentrack Propaganda", but if you had
listened, you would have heard EXACTLY this.
DB> I appreciate the fact that you can just throw a new format idea together to
DB> extend the use of the APRS protocol without messing up existing
DB> infrastructure. But it's these sudden additions (Such as !DAO! format or
DB> DIGI-injected objects) that make APRS a bear to implement in software.
Never mind the fact that ONE person is deciding these things and "throwing
them in".. That's a problem. That was supposed to be fixed by the APRS-WG
I also wanna say:
>>Since Jeff and Scott and Danny, and Spider and
>>Drew and Curt have now taken over this sig for
>>the sole purpose of cramming (what was a good idea
>>of OPENtrack) down our throats at the expsense
>>of 38% of the users on APRS and on 144.39, and
>>Steve and I and a few others are the only ones
>>defending the existing users, I fear I am only adding
>>to this melt down.
This points out that you just weren't listening. This had so little to do
with Opentrack after day 2, and more to do with all that Drew stated above.
Instead of jumping up and down with your fingers in your ears and yelling
"You can't do that!", try being open a little.
No one wants a shouting match or p*ssing contest. This could have ALL been
accomplished with less trash.
I think in your emotional defense of the 38% of users (which never asked
you to speak for them), you forgot about the other 62% of users. Those
62 out of 100 users that haven't chosen a kenwood for some reason, perhaps
those I brought up, perhaps others.
You do something very powerful when you speak for and alienate users.. you
create division. Division is NEVER a good thing, especially in the
emotional world of amateur radio. Think about that.
I will say, for my part, that I am sorry if I ever got personal.. I take it
personal when my words are twisted my words and I am argued with over
things I NEVER said.. I won't defend getting upset over that.
Danny
KE4RAP
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: What do those packets mean?
From: isobar@bcpl.net
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 22:39:28 -0400
X-Message-Number: 149
At 09:33 PM 6/10/04 -0400, Steve Dimse wrote (about another subject entirely):
>[...] After dupchecking, findU processsed 1234820
>packets between 0000z 9Jun2004 and 0000 10Jun2004.Near the beginning of
>the year
>that number was just over 1M. 59 days ago, the oldest date I can search on
>(raw
>data is kept for 60 days on findU) gives 1174699, a gain of 4.8% in two
>months.
>The web logs at findU continue to grow at a steady pace. Sure, there are
>lots of
>uncertainties, but through today APRS has not topped out.[...]
Interesting. There's a broader picture in all that data that could tell us
a lot about the trends in APRS, and maybe the larger ham world. I'm not
suggesting that you do it because it would take non-trivial analysis time,
but it would be fun to know, for instance:
Does that packet growth from the beginning of the year reflect more people,
more extensions, or more travel? Perhaps it's just that people travel more
in the summer than winter, or on the other hand, are significantly more
people getting involved. What's the growth in users compared to the growth
in new licences? Are more hams getting into packet?
Are there data trends in the statistics of the last couple of years - do
you even keep them?
Is there much growth in the rf side or is it just that we're getting better
in igate coverage (total # of igates), and are the igater's more efficient
(% of uptime/station)?
What's the trend geographically - US/Int'l ratio - or application wise -
qth, mobile, wx, etc? Do different areas favor different modes?
I'm not even sure if those are the right questions or if the data base will
support answers, but data mining can be fun & informative.
There's a paper in there someplace.
Bob Kirk
N3OZB
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: Trains, planes and APRS automobiles. was: Kenwood APRS radio
From: Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net>
Date: Thu, 10 Jun 2004 22:48:23 -0400
X-Message-Number: 150
On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 21:33:59 -0400, Steve Dimse wrote:
>On 6/10/04 at 7:21 PM Jeff King <jeff@aerodata.net> sent:
>
>>>New drivers are coming on the the road all the time.
>>
>>And drivers also leave the road. In the cellular industry they call
>>this churn.
>>
>Churn refers to people that switch from one cell service to another,
None-the-less, the fact of the matter is, people leave APRS. One need only
look at the GeoCaching thread a few days ago for two examples.
>>Certainly possible. But if you look at marketing/economic models,
>>with that growth rate, the market is approaching saturation. Growth
>>has slowed substantially.
>>
>Not sure where you get that from.
Micro and Macro economics in College. Also some marketing workshops at a
company I used to work for. I guess they didn't teach that in your
engineering program, they did in mine.
>The web logs at findU continue to grow at a steady pace. Sure, there
>are lots of uncertainties, but through today APRS has not topped
>out.
Your suggesting it adding 5000 more people over two years. I didn't question
this guess. That would be 12.5% annual growth rate, respectable by all means,
but clearly slowing from prior years.
>>Yeap, and you'd also get a traffic ticket. This is exactly why I
>>suggested maybe Scott remove the simultaneous dual protocol option
>>at some point. There
>
>So you want the opentrack people to limit what users can do,
I don't think it is a good idea, in the long term, for one tracker to send
both APRS and OpenTrak packets simultanously.... so yes, I guess your right
there.
>yet you
>lambast APRS authors when they do it?
I'm not aware of any dual protocol APRS trackers, so not sure how I labasted
anyone. Please clarify.
>Your looking pretty asymmetric
>yourself! Why are you to be placed in the role of Highway Patrol? At
>least the real Highway Patrol actually drives cars!
Again, I was trying to use a analogy to get you to open your mind. Apparently
I failed in that.
>I'll be damned if someone tells me I have to do one or the other! I
>can run HF APRS, satellite APRS, 144.39 APRS at the same time, plus
>talk through a 440 Mic-E repeater. If I want to, I have every right
>to use opentrack too.
Power to your brother and rock on. Now pound your shoe on the lectern.
>Or are you saying the QRM opentrack causes to APRS is OK, but APRS
>shouldn't be allowed to QRM opentrack? Is it just me, or is the room
>tilting?
Steve, I am saying what I am saying, and that was from a layer one
perspective as well as channel usage pattern, APRS and OpenTrak are virtually
identical.
What QRM is being caused, or is this statement a result of the room tilting?
Better go out and check the footings of your house for erosion in the latter.
Thanks for directly responding to this question.
-Jeff wb8wka
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
