[hfsig] LinLink... PTC's risks
dubose at texas.net
Fri Aug 20 17:23:12 CDT 2004
Again, that's been my point since I first heard that the ARRL's Ad Hoc
ARESCOM Committee has suggested PACTOR II/III and WinLink.
I certainly don't want to be tied to proprietary hardware or software.
> But you haven't addressed the important point of OEM survivability:
> As the PTC-II and III waveforms are proprietary, what happens if SCS ceased
> to exist? Would all of the users be left out in the cold?
> I would only consider PTC-II/III for such an important task >IF< the OEM
> agreed to move the waveform into the public domain. IMHO, an acceptable
> alternative would be if they at least committed to move it into the public
> domain IF they decide to close down.
> MIL-STD-188-110A is public while several characteristics of 110B are still
> licensable. However, as there are several 110B modem manufacturers out
> there, I would be less worried if one vendor bit the dust.
> Putting all of your eggs into one basket (SCS') is risky as it is a
> single-source protocol and there are no "legal" alternatives.
> Bruno, W6AFK
> -----Original Message-----
> From: tattje [mailto:tattje at planet.nl]
> Sent: Friday, August 20, 2004 2:48 PM
> To: TAPR HF Modes SIG Mailing List
> Subject: RE: [hfsig] RE: [linux] LinLink
> Hi Robert,
> I don't quite understand your comments about pactor 2.
> It's not expensive because a waveform like that can run on any PC. LBT is
> essential in auto-connect systems, but are we discussing these kind of
> systems? I have seen very odd specs of systems like 2400 bits/sec at -10 dB
> S/N? Wake up everyone! I think that going back to specs should be the first
> thing to do. What is really needed: high throughput, high prob. of connect ?
> Look at systems that are known to survive, by the way pactor 2 is one of
> them, just as old ccir 625. The question nobody asked is: what is the
> bandwidth available? more bandwidth means more throughput by the way, I
> think everyone is just shouting, just take some time to think about what we
> really need and what is possible. Regards Henk
> hfsig mailing list
> hfsig at lists.tapr.org
More information about the hfsig