Order Tray | Contact Us | Home | SIG Lists

[aprssig] An amusing aside (Text Pagers)

Matti Aarnio oh2mqk at sral.fi
Fri Jan 29 22:21:19 UTC 2010


On Fri, Jan 29, 2010 at 04:11:58PM -0500, Robert Bruninga wrote:
> I have been trying for a few years to get Echoloink author to
> add DTMF callsign decoding (with then a copy sent over to the
> APRS-IS each time somone checks in using it)..  No joy.

You should realize that here you are trying to compete against MICe
bursts, which does all of that and much more without hands touching.

Perhaps it also has something to do with the quality of the
"specification" of the APRStt.  Three rather messy text files...

Furthermore, it has always been marketed as "kludgy thing for this
local grid in the event area".

> I have also been asking to cross-connect Echolink CHAT mode with
> APRS messaging too, since then when I am listening to an
> Echolink Conference net, I can send an APRS text message to the
> Net control via his CHAT window on Echolink.  No joy on that
> request either.
> 
> I am frustrated because these are trivial additions that could
> seamlessly crossconnect info between these two very powerful ham
> radio systems!

Sometimes your "trivial" is far from it.  Next thing is that you
will hotly cry out and want bi-directionality for that "trivial"
thing.


Trying to kludge things with ancient hardware HOWEVER "CHEAP" it
may appear at first sight is fancy one-off demo, not something
that I would like to put on real production environment.

Sometimes old e-waste junk is just that, and not worth to turn
specifications into prezels to try to support them.

Getting guaranteed supply of pager hardware along with all support
tools (beginning with address code programmers) might persuade me
around to write a pgate software,  but without a supply of hundreds
of pagers and all that device programming support hardware I see
absolutely no point to spend time on it.


If you really want two-way messaging, do rethink your paradigms
again.  Sometimes NEW hardware may be the best solution.

Amending the APRS specification with things to support even more
obsolete hardware than what AX.25 packet systems now need is
something that just discourages people to do any development on
new and better ways of communication.  I do not see APRStt as
IMPROVEMENT of any kind.

> Bob, Wb4APR

73 de Matti, OH2MQK



More information about the aprssig mailing list