[aprssig] APRS vs. SPOT

Keith VE7GDH ve7gdh at rac.ca
Wed Sep 7 14:58:54 CDT 2011

Joe N3HGB wrote...

> APRS succeeded because it re-purposed 1200 baud packet equipment
> that was otherwise headed to the dumpster.

Mine wasn't heading to the dumpster, but you are correct that APRS
succeeded because there was so much equipment kicking around to
get started with.

> If it had rolled out on AIS type hardware the adoption rate would have
> been MUCH lower.

AIS type equipment as used today just didn't exist back then, as far as I
know. I agree that APRS wouldn't have got the start that it did without the
"surplus" 1200 bps TNCs that were common at the time. I'm just suggesting
that APRS has grown to the point that in major cities, its own success is
sometimes killing it. More intelligent time slotting and path selection
would really help. I do realize this will put the cost up and the equipment
and it won't as simple as it is now, but at some point in time, advancements
will be made. For now, we have 1200 bps, paths left up to the user (often
good, sometimes not), collisions, and sometimes ever smaller Aloha circles.
APRS still works, but it could be better.

73 es cul - Keith VE7GDH
"I may be lost, but I know exactly where I am!"

More information about the aprssig mailing list