| |
ZL3AI > APRDIG 11.05.03 10:06l 293 Lines 10619 Bytes #999 (0) @ WW
BID : 1295-ZL3AI
Read: GUEST
Subj: TAPR Digest, May 08, 1/5
Path: DB0FHN<DB0RGB<OK0PPL<RZ6HXA<IK1ZNW<ON0AR<ZL2BAU<ZL3VML
Sent: 030510/1334Z @:ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC #:16 [Chch-NZ] FBB7.00i $:1295-ZL3AI
From: ZL3AI@ZL3VML.#80.NZL.OC
To : APRDIG@WW
TAPR APRS Special Interest Group Digest for Thursday, May 08, 2003.
1. Xastir on Linux
2. RE: Xastir on Linux
3. Re: WAS: KCAPRS Site... IS GROWTH..
4. Re: [ "Gregg G. Wonderly" ] Re: WAS: KCAPRS Site... IS GROWTH..
5. WIN APRS bugs
6. Re: 271....
<LYR15564-131914-2003.05.07-23.15.47--ej.vanmol#quicknet.nl@lists.tapr.org>
7. Re: 270 is UNSTABLE
8. Re: WIN APRS bugs
9. Re: 270 is UNSTABLE
10. Re: WAS: KCAPRS Site... IS GROWTH..
11. 2001-current raw APRSSIG archives
12. Xastir on Linux
13. Re: Another minor 270 bug?
14. Re: Another minor 270 bug?
15. Re: 271....
16. Re: WIN APRS bugs
17. Re: 270 is UNSTABLE
18. Truck drivers - APRS -Questions!
19. HTX-10 for $49 at RS
20. Delorme SA5 Mapping softwaer
21. Re: WAS: KCAPRS Site... IS GROWTH..
22. RE: Truck drivers - APRS -Questions!
23. Re: WAS: KCAPRS Site... IS GROWTH..
24. RE: Truck drivers - APRS -Questions!
25. RE: Truck drivers - APRS -Questions!
26. RE: Truck drivers - APRS -Questions!
27. RE: Truck drivers - APRS -Questions!
28. RE: Truck drivers - APRS -Questions!
29. RE: Truck drivers - APRS -Questions!
30. RE: Truck drivers - APRS -Questions!
31. Re: 2001-current raw APRSSIG archives
32. RE: Truck drivers - APRS -Questions!
33. RE: Truck drivers and radar- APRS -Questions!
34. Re: 270 is UNSTABLE
35. Re: 2001-current raw APRSSIG archives
36. Need two old TNC chips
37. Re: 2001-current raw APRSSIG archives
38. Re: 2001-current raw APRSSIG archives
39. Re: 2001-current raw APRSSIG archives
40. Re: 2001-current raw APRSSIG archives
41. Re: 270
42. RE: Need two old TNC chips
43. RE: Need two old TNC chips
44. RE: Need two old TNC chips
45. WinAPRS 2.7.1 works
46. MacAPRS 3.7?
47. chest pack(et)
48. KPC-3 Hacking
49. Re: KPC-3 Hacking
50. RE: Need two old TNC chips
51. Just For the Halibut?; Tiger Maps
52. Re: Just For the Halibut?; Tiger Maps
53. Good question that was not answered
54. RE: Need two old TNC chips
55. Re: Good question that was not answered
56. Re: Good question that was not answered
57. Documentation for an older TNC
58. Cybikos at Dayton
59. Tiger maps!
60. Re: Info on the Zenith Cruisepad
61. Re: chest pack(et)
62. Re: chest pack(et)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Xastir on Linux
From: Tim Schall <grover@fortgirlfriend.com>
Date: Wed, 7 May 2003 21:54:22 -0700
X-Message-Number: 1
Just wanted to put in a plug for my favorite APRS setup. I'm currently
watching my SuSE 8.0 Linux box run Xastir. It's hooked to five different
internet servers and tracking 23k+ stations/objects. It's pasting the
relevant ones over the top of a 24k topo map of Washington state that
consists of 1448 tiles (If that's the right word.). The machine is an AMD
K6-3/400 with 512Megs of RAM. Runs SuSE Linux 8.0 and KDE 3.0.1. It'll do
this for weeks on end with not a crash in site.
If you're looking for a good stable product that'll run on a dumpster dive
rescue computer or a $100 swap meet machine then I'd suggest your favorite
flavor of Linux and Xastir. The software guys that work on it bust their
collective butt to make sure it runs right.
http://www.xastir.org to get your copy today. Oh, and It's free.....
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: RE: Xastir on Linux
From: Miller Scott Contr 30SCS/FTI <Scott.Miller@vandenberg.af.mil>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 05:18:22 -0000
X-Message-Number: 2
I agree... Xastir's working great for me. I don't have any particular need
to connect to multiple servers - I'm just on a statewide feed - but I've got
street data loaded for all of CA, plus county boundaries, highways, military
bases, national parks, and so on. Haven't put many raster images on the
system yet, but I've got about 20 gigs of DOQQs for this area to test out.
It'd be nice if Xastir could reproject them properly, though.
I'm running it on a Celeron 466 with 384 MB of RAM - the fastest thing I
could scrounge out of my bonepile. Got a P-III 550 I'll probably throw in
there when I can verify it's stable. I've currently got Debian 3.0 running,
with the 2.4.20 kernel.
Scott
N1VG
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: WAS: KCAPRS Site... IS GROWTH..
From: "Gregg G. Wonderly" <gregg@skymaster.cytetech.com>
Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 00:18:31 -0500
X-Message-Number: 3
>So a few guys burning multiple megahertz chunks of spectrum to use 50 year
>old technology to watch each others pets playing can prevent the adoption of
>nifty new digital communications technology? Now that's got to be a heck of
>a feather in the cap for Amateur Radio.
Well, in particular, we use it to show live storm footage, post disaster
status to the EOCs and other useful things where real, full motion video is
necessary.
>We need to get the rules fixed and get SS working on far more of the ham
>bands. FHSS would be great even on 430 to 450. Smart radios could take
>advantage of all those vast under used portions of the band.
The FCC really is in a particularly bad spot on this one. A truely useful
technology is being bought by the consumer, and then want to use it. Yet,
there is absolutely no production to the consumer under Part-15, and there is
no protection to us under part-97. So, I use it in my house, but do not
suggest it should be deployed from anything around the clock. You can take it
into remote regions and not be interfered with, but in towns and cities, I
think it is going to be tough to create a dependable network...
-----
gregg@cytetech.com (Cyte Technologies Inc)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: [ "Gregg G. Wonderly" ] Re: WAS: KCAPRS Site... IS GROWTH..
From: "Gregg G. Wonderly" <gregg@skymaster.cytetech.com>
Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 00:32:55 -0500
X-Message-Number: 4
>The FCC really is in a particularly bad spot on this one. A truely useful
>technology is being bought by the consumer, and then want to use it. Yet,
>there is absolutely no production
Alas I need to get some sleep... This should say
.... and they want to use it. Yet there is absolutely no protection...
-----
gregg@cytetech.com (Cyte Technologies Inc)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: WIN APRS bugs
From: "Julian White" <julian@privateasylum.com>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 09:57:11 +0200
X-Message-Number: 5
I bet Mark would sure appreciate getting some screen shots of the errors
many of you speak about.
A picture is worth a thousand words.
FYI
Im using UIView32 v1.92. I create maps with MS Autoroute 2003. Other than a
few networking problems that were caused by my configuration I have had no
problems with UIView32 here is a screen shot of western USA
www.privateasylum.com/USA-APRS.jpg
Anyway its all hard work and we should not be to hard on those people that
write the code for little or nothing in return other than pleasure from our
hobby.
Br
Julian
OH8GEJ
HB9TMJ
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: 271....
<LYR15564-131914-2003.05.07-23.15.47--ej.vanmol#quicknet.nl@lists.tapr.org>
From: Ed van Mol <ej.vanmol@quicknet.nl>
Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 10:58:55 +0200
X-Message-Number: 6
2.71 works ok now under XP.
2.70 wasn't. chrashes after 10 sec.
Ed.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: 270 is UNSTABLE
From: "hasan schiers" <schiers@netins.net>
Date: Thu, 8 May 2003 06:47:01 -0500
X-Message-Number: 7
Jim Duncan said:
>Seriously, there aren't many software writers out there that respond
>like you guys do!
You must be kidding, right?
UI-View support is without peer.
APRS+SA support is very good.
Xastir sure seems to be right up there, but I don't run Linux.
WinAPRS...read the archives and make up your own mind.
At least your post gave me a good laugh.
....hasan, N0AN
----------------------------------------------------------------------
[commercial content deleted]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: 270 is UNSTABLE
From: Alex <kr1st@amsat.org>
Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 07:59:31 -0400
X-Message-Number: 9
But Hasan, read what he wrote again....he's right! ;)
73,
--Alex KR1ST
hasan schiers wrote:
>
>Jim Duncan said:
>
>>Seriously, there aren't many software writers out there that respond
>>like you guys do!
>>
>
>You must be kidding, right?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: Re: WAS: KCAPRS Site... IS GROWTH..
From: "John R. Ackermann N8UR" <jra@febo.com>
Date: Thu, 08 May 2003 08:16:02 -0400
X-Message-Number: 10
--On Thursday, May 08, 2003 12:18 AM -0500 "Gregg G. Wonderly"
<gregg@skymaster.cytetech.com> wrote:
>The FCC really is in a particularly bad spot on this one. A truely
>useful technology is being bought by the consumer, and then want to use
>it. Yet, there is absolutely no production to the consumer under
>Part-15, and there is no protection to us under part-97. So, I use it
>in my house, but do not suggest it should be deployed from anything
>around the clock. You can take it into remote regions and not be
>interfered with, but in towns and cities, I think it is going to be
>tough to create a dependable network...
Gregg wrote a really good summary of the issue here. If you're interested
in this topic, you might want to look at the Winter 2003 issue of TAPR's
Packet Status Register (http://www.tapr.org/PSR) where I wrote about this
at some length. The long and the short of it is that if (when?) ham
operations start to interfere with the little old lady down the street's
wireless network, or screws up an ISP's wireless links, who's in the right
according to the regulations won't mean much. The lobbying power of a
multi-billion dollar industry plus the PR implications of annoying ordinary
users will outweigh our "but we're the protected users" argument in an
instant.
The 802.11b technical concept is great, but for real deployment we should
be looking at ways to use that gear on other, non-shared bands. For
example, a simple transverter to 3.3GHz wouldn't be all that much harder to
do than a 2.4GHz power amp/preamp. TAPR is actively looking for RF
developers willing to work on such a project; we have modest funding and
manufacturing support available for someone who wants to do a transverter
project like this. If you fit the bill, please contact me.
73,
John N8UR
jra@febo.com -- n8ur@tapr.org
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Read previous mail | Read next mail
| |
