I fully agree. I have no problem with the mode or modulation. I wish I could run Pactor-2 cheaply! It is just the Pactor-3 "bomb" from unattended Winlink machines that explodes over existing QSO's in the narrowband data areas that irritates me.
I am happy to put Jack's Pactor/Packet (kb-2-kb) spotting page up at http://www.projectsandparts.com/pactor/ which if nothing else will give an indication of the amount of use of keyboard-keyboard QSO's in these modes. 73 Sholto KE7HPV ----- Original Message ----- From: "Steinar Aanesland" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <digitalradio@yahoogroups.com> Sent: Friday, January 04, 2008 8:20 AM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Licensing of Pactor modes > > Sorry, but I have to ask; What is wrong with some of you pactor guys ? > It is the QRM from untended stations that cause the main trouble, > NOT the net or system. > > Strange that this is so difficult to understand after hundreds of > debates that often turn in to endless circular arguments. :( > > LA5VNA > > > > > > Jose A. Amador skrev: > > > > > > 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 > > <mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.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 <http://www.universidad2008.cu> > > > > > > >
