I have attempted to ignore what matters only to those under the FCC jurisdiction. Seems that this anti-Winlink regurgitation is an unavoidable evil...
Going to the facts: Kantronics did not implement memory ARQ for Pactor in their early KAM's. So, they were inferior to the real stuff, the SCS Z-80 Pactor Controller. PacComm sold a Pactor controller, but they had marginal profits in general, as they did not offsource the production of their units, as AEA did. Jose, CO2JA --- Demetre SV1UY wrote: > --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Roger J. Buffington" > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Demetre SV1UY wrote: >> >>> Well, >>> >>> I have a KAM controller with PACTOR 1. I bet you have not even seen >>> one. >> You know, Demetre, I am getting tired of remarks like that from you. I >> have attempted to reply to your posts with courtesy, but you seem bent >> upon returning courtesy with bad manners. Please stop that. >> In actual fact, I **own** a KAM unit. Used it for GTOR. It was >> horrible for Pactor 1 in my opinion; quite inferior to my old PK232 (my >> first TNC) and in no way comparable to the SCS PTC-II which I also used >> to own. GTOR was very unreliable, and is utterly dead and gone. >> >> Someone else on this forum has corrected my statement that the KAM > units >> lacked memory-arq. OK, fine. My experience with the unit, as I >> mentioned above, was that they were buggy and did not do well for > Pactor. >>> As for reverse engineering, I do not know about that, but if they did >>> that, this is one more reason for the failure of their product. I >>> know that SCS did license PACTOR 1 though >> Actually, the only outfit they licensed it to was one American company >> the name of which escapes me. They were not a business success, and I >> think they were actually just selling re-labelled SCS modems rather > than >> different modems using licensed Pactor protocol. I do not believe that >> any amateur radio manufacturer ever succeeded in negotiating a straight >> license with SCS for Pactor. This leads to the inference that SCS > wants >> to sell hardware, not merely enjoy licensing fees. I may be mistaken >> about that, but that is not an unreasonable deduction. >> >> de Roger W6VZV >> > > Sorry if I made you upset Roger, but you insist on something you do > not know very well and always try to prove that the other guy is > wrong. If I was a bit harsh with you it was for that reason and I did > not mean to offend you. > > Happy New Year and I hope the New Year will be better for us all. I > hope we will all be happier with the FCCs outcome whatever this maybe. > > You know, we can all get along without any arguments. Every mode and > every taste has it's place in the amateur bands. There are no better > and no worse modes. The best ones are the ones we like. So you can do > your thing and I can do mine and as I said before, the civilized world > is supposed to be tolerant. > > 73 de Demetre SV1UY > > P.S. enough said!!! __________________________________________ Participe en Universidad 2008. 11 al 15 de febrero del 2008. Palacio de las Convenciones, Ciudad de la Habana, Cuba http://www.universidad2008.cu
