--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Roger J. Buffington" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > To paraphrase Bill Clinton, it depends on one's use of the word "many." > In fact, a vanishingly small percentage of either American or European > digital operators ever bought SCS modems, due to their high cost. That > was the problem -- it was very difficult to have a Pactor2 > Keyboard-to-Keyboard (KtoK) QSO because so few ops had an SCS modem--and > SCS modems were the ONLY TNCs that could support Pactor 2. For reasons > I am not conversant with, no other manufacturer was ever able to license > Pactor from SCS. Some tried to reverse-engineer Pactor, with some > success with Pactor 1, but no success of which I am aware with Pactor 2.
Hi Roger, Of course they licensed PACTOR 1 and Kantronics, MFJ, AEA and others made a mess of PACTOR 1 because they were not able to implement it properly. They could ask SCS for the license of PACTOR 2 but they were not even able to copy PACTOR 1 properly, never mind PACTOR 2. I still have a KAM plus, but it's this modem even on HF PACKET performed horribly compared to the SCS Modems. The only guy that managed to write a decent program that worked fine in PACTOR 1 and many other modes including AMTOR, was G4MBK. His software BMKmulti could do RTTY, AMTOR and PACTOR 1 but it needed a homemade modem or terminal unit to work. It run in DOS mode and I still have mine loaded in my Olivetti Quaderno (an A5 sized DOS Laptop). An other 2 soundcard Pactor 1 implementations, one in DOS and the other in Linux I hear that they never worked properly. > least. I cannot speak for Europe because propagation being what it is > these days I can rarely hear or work Europe. When you tell me that > Pactor is more common in Europe, I cannot contradict you for this > reason. If true, a logical explanation is the fact that SCS is based in > Europe and Pactor originated there. Or am I wrong, Demetre? > > It became impossible to convince anyone (other than mailbox operators) > to get an SCS TNC once the sound card modes appeared on the scene, more > or less invented by Peter Martinez, one of ham radio's Greats. Since > probably all hams had access to a computer, the need for a $500+ TNC > vanished since hams had access to a plethora of digital modes merely by > interfacing one's radio to the computer. Once I switched over from > Pactor to the sound card modes, I discovered that all of my old Pactor > buddies had done the same, and Pactor was simply dead except for mailboxes. OK now people do not seem to want to part with their cash easily and they are right if they are not going to use their radios more than for QSOs, but really if they want to have any speed at all in their HF file transfers then I'm afraid that PSK31 leaves a lot to be desired, especially when the conditions on HF are what they are, i.e. full of QSB, QRM etc. PSK31 is good for keyboard to keyboard QSOs but that is about all I'm afraid. Peter Martinez is a brilliant guy, but so are the guys at SCS because nothing even comes close to PACTOR 2 never mind 3. There are modes that perform fast in a clear HF channel but when it comes to noise and QSB and QRM then they all fail horribly. > > There may be a lot of American MBOs, as you say. This illustrates the > need for all of us to support Mark's fine petition -- to get control of > this legion of unattended source of QRM for the benefit and betterment > of our hobby and the advancement of the radio art. No Roger, this means that Winlink-2000 is popular in USA and of course it is in the rest of the world. > > Despite my support for Mark's fine petition, I suspect that the > mailboxes will fade away pretty soon anyway, as boaters and RVers get > access to the internet through satellite and Wi Fi rather than the > horribly inefficient Winlink system. Heck, you can get internet access > via Wi Fi in coffeeshops and Starbucks these days. They are adding Wi > Fi capability to boat harbors here in California. This trend will > likely spell the end to Winlink. And Pactor. You may think so because it seems that you were expecting from PACTOR to replace your Internet connection, but it is not about Internet, it is about communication between radio Hams as a priority and second about Internet e-mail as well as emergency use. Forget about emergency for now, if you think it is propaganda, and think about the fact that all Radio Hams that have a PACTOR station can also exchange MAIL MESSAGES, just like they used to do with PACKET RADIO, no matter where they are in the World or no matter which PMBO they are accessing. The message addressed to them will there waiting to be delivered by them. This is how it all started. But along the way, just like PACKET, we found out that we could also exchange e-mails, and that the PMBOs should better connect to each other via Internet and not via HF Radio. This left the HF Radio Spectrum free only for the client connections and only for those Hams that have no other means of connecting to the system. Is this so bad? Most use VHF/UHF Packet or even Internet to collect their MAIL. They only use HF if they have to. There is no other Long Range Amateur Radio Communication System that has all these options today! If you know of any better please let me know. WiFi (a very unreliable system for ranges longer than 50 - 100 meters) and Satellite links (very expensive to buy and run) are for FULL INTERNET SURFING and they are not Radio Amateur Systems. How do you think that Radio Amateur Boaters, Radio Amateur RVers and Radio Amateurs who are on Holiday in a remote island will abandon PACTOR3 and Winlink-2000 and buy Satellite dishes to carry on their backpacks? They will continue to use Winlink-2000 because they are Radio Amateurs and because PACTOR and Winlink-2000 are Radio Amateur Systems. I always use Winlink-2000 during my Summer Vacations. It's a hobby and I personally enjoy it as much as I enjoy, RTTY, SSTV etc. > > de Roger W6VZV > 73 de Demetre SV1UY P.S. Finally if the petition wins in USA you will have to battle other uprising unattended operations such as PSKmail, FLARQ, ALE etc. I hope that this petition will fail because it just wants to stop any sort of advancement in the world of Amateur Radio in USA and in the rest of the world.
