[digitalradio] Re: ROS MODEM OFFICIAL GROUP
Hello John, If your situation is not due to an installation problem or other, but is part of the distributed software, planned, programmed in, it might well have other consequences. ROS modem is under consideration to be incorporated in other amateur radio digital packages. Think about that angle. 73 Rein W6SZ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Becker, WØJAB w0...@... wrote: Rein Really don't know what to say at this point. Still trying to understand why my call was added to the list of calls not able to use the ROS program. But since Jose will not say I'll just move on to things other then ROS. But I'm not the only one that this has happen to. No big deal I have gotten over it long ago. Now I'm just guessing but I think he may have misunderstood something I may have said in a post. Really not sure for the reason but since he is not talking about it I guess anyone of us that have been banned from using the program will never know. It all started when he posted a update to his program and then I found out that I could no longer us it. Like others. But I still have one of the first versions on a memory stick that I could use on the other computer if needed. Seems he is the *only* one that's knows and at this time is not saying. So be it - I got over it long ago. John, W0JAB
Re: [digitalradio] Re: ROS MODEM OFFICIAL GROUP
I agree with Rein's concern. Given the actions of the author in the past, and the fact that he is not even part of the amateur radio community, I'd be very hesitant to use that mode in a program, not know knowing what other malicious code might be embedded in the ROS software. Except for the 16 baud, 2000 Hz wide mode, which may be good for EME, I don't see from the QSL card postings on the ROS website that ROS is any better than Olivia or Contestia, and those modes do not take up a disproportionate amount of spectrum space. I'd say incorporate ROS at your own risk, programmers! 73 - Skip KH6TY Rein A wrote: Hello John, If your situation is not due to an installation problem or other, but is part of the distributed software, planned, programmed in, it might well have other consequences. ROS modem is under consideration to be incorporated in other amateur radio digital packages. Think about that angle. 73 Rein W6SZ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com, John Becker, WØJAB w0...@... wrote: Rein Really don't know what to say at this point. Still trying to understand why my call was added to the list of calls not able to use the ROS program. But since Jose will not say I'll just move on to things other then ROS. But I'm not the only one that this has happen to. No big deal I have gotten over it long ago. Now I'm just guessing but I think he may have misunderstood something I may have said in a post. Really not sure for the reason but since he is not talking about it I guess anyone of us that have been banned from using the program will never know. It all started when he posted a update to his program and then I found out that I could no longer us it. Like others. But I still have one of the first versions on a memory stick that I could use on the other computer if needed. Seems he is the *only* one that's knows and at this time is not saying. So be it - I got over it long ago. John, W0JAB
[digitalradio] Re: ROS MODEM OFFICIAL GROUP Follow-up
Hello All, from the OFFICIAL ROSMODEM WEBPAGE at 05:38 UTC: On June 7 at 00:00:01 UTC, new improvements will be incorporated to ROS Modes (ROS HF16, ROS HF8 and ROS MF7) It will improve a little more the robutness that characterizes to ROS Modes. So, this time, i expect will be possible across USA sky above ARRL headquarters with 0.015 watts instead of 0.025 watts of the latest QSO. Changes have been programmed previously in the software from version 3.6.5 two wees ago, so you should not problems during the transition. Sound records like youtuve, etc.. will not work with the new ROS from D-Day and H-Hour. ciao What's say Simon? 73 Rein W6SZ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Rein A rein...@... wrote: Hello John, If your situation is not due to an installation problem or other, but is part of the distributed software, planned, programmed in, it might well have other consequences. ROS modem is under consideration to be incorporated in other amateur radio digital packages. Think about that angle. 73 Rein W6SZ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, John Becker, WØJAB w0jab@ wrote: Rein Really don't know what to say at this point. Still trying to understand why my call was added to the list of calls not able to use the ROS program. But since Jose will not say I'll just move on to things other then ROS. But I'm not the only one that this has happen to. No big deal I have gotten over it long ago. Now I'm just guessing but I think he may have misunderstood something I may have said in a post. Really not sure for the reason but since he is not talking about it I guess anyone of us that have been banned from using the program will never know. It all started when he posted a update to his program and then I found out that I could no longer us it. Like others. But I still have one of the first versions on a memory stick that I could use on the other computer if needed. Seems he is the *only* one that's knows and at this time is not saying. So be it - I got over it long ago. John, W0JAB
RE: [digitalradio] Re: ROS MODEM OFFICIAL GROUP
Exactly, Skip. Well put. Dave Real radio bounces off the sky _ From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of KH6TY Sent: Wednesday, 02 June, 2010 17:38 To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: ROS MODEM OFFICIAL GROUP I agree with Rein's concern. Given the actions of the author in the past, and the fact that he is not even part of the amateur radio community, I'd be very hesitant to use that mode in a program, not know knowing what other malicious code might be embedded in the ROS software. Except for the 16 baud, 2000 Hz wide mode, which may be good for EME, I don't see from the QSL card postings on the ROS website that ROS is any better than Olivia or Contestia, and those modes do not take up a disproportionate amount of spectrum space. I'd say incorporate ROS at your own risk, programmers! 73 - Skip KH6TY Rein A wrote: Hello John, If your situation is not due to an installation problem or other, but is part of the distributed software, planned, programmed in, it might well have other consequences. ROS modem is under consideration to be incorporated in other amateur radio digital packages. Think about that angle. 73 Rein W6SZ --- In digitalradio@ mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com yahoogroups.com, John Becker, WØJAB mailto:w0...@... w0...@... wrote: Rein Really don't know what to say at this point. Still trying to understand why my call was added to the list of calls not able to use the ROS program. But since Jose will not say I'll just move on to things other then ROS. But I'm not the only one that this has happen to. No big deal I have gotten over it long ago. Now I'm just guessing but I think he may have misunderstood something I may have said in a post. Really not sure for the reason but since he is not talking about it I guess anyone of us that have been banned from using the program will never know. It all started when he posted a update to his program and then I found out that I could no longer us it. Like others. But I still have one of the first versions on a memory stick that I could use on the other computer if needed. Seems he is the *only* one that's knows and at this time is not saying. So be it - I got over it long ago. John, W0JAB
[digitalradio] Re: ROS MODEM OFFICIAL GROUP
Hello Dave, K3DCW, and all others, What an eyeopener, that QRZ forum! http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?t=239742. Have been there in the beginning of this venture, but after having been shouted down on the other Yahoo group by some individuals and their uninformed follower's, I was under the impression that as far as the US ham population went this had become a dead issue, little interest, and the lets move on motto in place. Far from that, it appears. I like to use this method and in spite of its author, figurehow more or less useful it is in Weak Signal. Like to refer to a serious article in the VHF/UHF/EME/microwave magazine DUBUS. Reporting on some serious testing and comparisons with the EME designed WSJT method(s) by K1JT. Tests were done and reported by VK7MO, a well known weak signal person. In my opinion this is drifting into an area that is not good for amateur radio. The author refuses to listen, understand, address amateur radio licensing, domestic and international oversight and regulation, frequency coordination, and I can go on and on. Keeps referring to me as the ARRL's messenger as I tried so many times, to explain the difference between a radio amateur organization and an US Federal Regulatory Agency with world wide connection to the same in other countries. It is for instance, a big puzzle how an author of a software protocol can assign frequencies without checking with other users. Anyway, glad to see that I not just a single trouble maker as I am probably classified in certain circles. 73 Rein W6SZ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave hfradio...@... wrote: Rein, There are several (around a dozen I think) amateur operators that are prohibited from using ROS by having their call signs hard-coded into a persona-non-grata listing in ROS. I am proud to be one of those ops. This has been extensively documented on QRZ in the following thread: http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?t=239742 http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?t=239742. I didn't think that John was one of them, but it has been awhile since the list was looked at last. Dave K3DCW _ From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Rein A Sent: Wednesday, 02 June, 2010 17:12 To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: ROS MODEM OFFICIAL GROUP Hello John, If your situation is not due to an installation problem or other, but is part of the distributed software, planned, programmed in, it might well have other consequences. ROS modem is under consideration to be incorporated in other amateur radio digital packages. Think about that angle. 73 Rein W6SZ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com , John Becker, WØJAB w0jab@ wrote: Rein Really don't know what to say at this point. Still trying to understand why my call was added to the list of calls not able to use the ROS program. But since Jose will not say I'll just move on to things other then ROS. But I'm not the only one that this has happen to. No big deal I have gotten over it long ago. Now I'm just guessing but I think he may have misunderstood something I may have said in a post. Really not sure for the reason but since he is not talking about it I guess anyone of us that have been banned from using the program will never know. It all started when he posted a update to his program and then I found out that I could no longer us it. Like others. But I still have one of the first versions on a memory stick that I could use on the other computer if needed. Seems he is the *only* one that's knows and at this time is not saying. So be it - I got over it long ago. John, W0JAB
[digitalradio] Re: ROS MODEM OFFICIAL GROUP
Hello Dave, K3DCW, and all others, What an eyeopener, that QRZ forum! http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?t=239742. Have been there in the beginning of this venture, but after having been shouted down on the other Yahoo group by some individuals and their uninformed follower's, I was under the impression that as far as the US ham population went this had become a dead issue, little interest, and the lets move on motto in place. Far from that, it appears. I like to use this method and in spite of its author, figurehow more or less useful it is in Weak Signal. Like to refer to a serious article in the VHF/UHF/EME/microwave magazine DUBUS. Reporting on some serious testing and comparisons with the EME designed WSJT method(s) by K1JT. Tests were done and reported by VK7MO, a well known weak signal person. In my opinion this is drifting into an area that is not good for amateur radio. The author refuses to listen, understand, address amateur radio licensing, domestic and international oversight and regulation, frequency coordination, and I can go on and on. Keeps referring to me as the ARRL's messenger as I tried so many times, to explain the difference between a radio amateur organization and an US Federal Regulatory Agency with world wide connection to the same in other countries. It is for instance, a big puzzle how an author of a software protocol can assign frequencies without checking with other users. Anyway, glad to see that I not just a single trouble maker as I am probably classified in certain circles. 73 Rein W6SZ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave hfradio...@... wrote: Rein, There are several (around a dozen I think) amateur operators that are prohibited from using ROS by having their call signs hard-coded into a persona-non-grata listing in ROS. I am proud to be one of those ops. This has been extensively documented on QRZ in the following thread: http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?t=239742 http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?t=239742. I didn't think that John was one of them, but it has been awhile since the list was looked at last. Dave K3DCW _ From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Rein A Sent: Wednesday, 02 June, 2010 17:12 To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: ROS MODEM OFFICIAL GROUP Hello John, If your situation is not due to an installation problem or other, but is part of the distributed software, planned, programmed in, it might well have other consequences. ROS modem is under consideration to be incorporated in other amateur radio digital packages. Think about that angle. 73 Rein W6SZ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com , John Becker, WØJAB w0jab@ wrote: Rein Really don't know what to say at this point. Still trying to understand why my call was added to the list of calls not able to use the ROS program. But since Jose will not say I'll just move on to things other then ROS. But I'm not the only one that this has happen to. No big deal I have gotten over it long ago. Now I'm just guessing but I think he may have misunderstood something I may have said in a post. Really not sure for the reason but since he is not talking about it I guess anyone of us that have been banned from using the program will never know. It all started when he posted a update to his program and then I found out that I could no longer us it. Like others. But I still have one of the first versions on a memory stick that I could use on the other computer if needed. Seems he is the *only* one that's knows and at this time is not saying. So be it - I got over it long ago. John, W0JAB
RE: [digitalradio] Re: ROS MODEM OFFICIAL GROUP
Without intending to reopen the argument about spread spectrum, the FCC has spoken about the legality of the mode. A few US hams will argue that it isn't spread spectrum since it isn't any wider than a SSB channel. Spread spectrum has no bandwidth definition, it is a transmission technique plain and simple. The developer admitted that it is spread spectrum then changed it only when it was pointed out that spread spectrum is illegal in the US for amateurs below 220MHz. Any US hams that do decide to use the mode are risking their license. As someone pointed out somewhere, it won't be the requirement of the FCC to prove that it is Spread Spectrum when they issue the fine; it will be on the US ham to prove it isn't. That's an expensive battle that no one should want to take on...especially since the author originally defined it as such. The FCC has spoken (correctly or incorrectly) about this, so the issue should be closed here in the US. What concerns me even more is the anti-ham attitude of the developer. However, he was pretty smart in that he did manage to find a willing cadre of beta-testers for a system that ultimately has an unspecified objective. He is not a ham, so why target hams except that we're experimenters by nature, so he has built-in beta testers. Between that, his shoddy and amateurish attempts at coding and security, and the uncontrolled email access that the program provides (give up access to my gmail account, no way!), one should be careful in allowing this software to reside on their computer. All of this is a shame as it is an interesting, albeit very wide, weak-signal mode. Dave Real radio bounces off the sky _ From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalra...@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Rein A Sent: Wednesday, 02 June, 2010 18:39 To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: ROS MODEM OFFICIAL GROUP Hello Dave, K3DCW, and all others, What an eyeopener, that QRZ forum! http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?t=239742. Have been there in the beginning of this venture, but after having been shouted down on the other Yahoo group by some individuals and their uninformed follower's, I was under the impression that as far as the US ham population went this had become a dead issue, little interest, and the lets move on motto in place. Far from that, it appears. I like to use this method and in spite of its author, figurehow more or less useful it is in Weak Signal. Like to refer to a serious article in the VHF/UHF/EME/microwave magazine DUBUS. Reporting on some serious testing and comparisons with the EME designed WSJT method(s) by K1JT. Tests were done and reported by VK7MO, a well known weak signal person. In my opinion this is drifting into an area that is not good for amateur radio. The author refuses to listen, understand, address amateur radio licensing, domestic and international oversight and regulation, frequency coordination, and I can go on and on. Keeps referring to me as the ARRL's messenger as I tried so many times, to explain the difference between a radio amateur organization and an US Federal Regulatory Agency with world wide connection to the same in other countries. It is for instance, a big puzzle how an author of a software protocol can assign frequencies without checking with other users. Anyway, glad to see that I not just a single trouble maker as I am probably classified in certain circles. 73 Rein W6SZ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com , Dave hfradio...@... wrote: Rein, There are several (around a dozen I think) amateur operators that are prohibited from using ROS by having their call signs hard-coded into a persona-non-grata listing in ROS. I am proud to be one of those ops. This has been extensively documented on QRZ in the following thread: http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?t=239742 http://forums.qrz.com/showthread.php?t=239742. I didn't think that John was one of them, but it has been awhile since the list was looked at last. Dave K3DCW _ From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com [mailto:digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Rein A Sent: Wednesday, 02 June, 2010 17:12 To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: ROS MODEM OFFICIAL GROUP Hello John, If your situation is not due to an installation problem or other, but is part of the distributed software, planned, programmed in, it might well have other consequences. ROS modem is under consideration to be incorporated in other amateur radio digital packages. Think about that angle. 73 Rein W6SZ --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com , John Becker, WØJAB w0jab@ wrote: Rein Really don't know what to say at this point. Still
Re: [digitalradio] Re: ROS MODEM OFFICIAL GROUP
Dave wrote: Spread spectrum has no bandwidth definition, it is a transmission technique plain and simple. This is a nuance, but an important technical one: There is a spreading ratio definition in SS that is one of the formal identifiers of spread spectrum vs other modulation techniques. It's far more important than bandwidth and is not clearly addressed in the current FCC rules or the ad-hoc interpretations. The spreading ratio is largely what defines how intrusive SS is on a band segment, and accordingly any SS ruling needs to factor that in. ROS is borderline on this with a spreading ratio far below traditional SS, but above that of most other modulation schemes if evaluated in a very literal sense, etc. So while there is a pseudo-ruling in place, it's not based on sound technical analysis of the mode against ITU definitions. I personally don't care if ROS is legal or not. I do care if overly broad or technically ignorant rulings impact future modulation schemes. Flawed precedents are dangerous things!
[digitalradio] Re: ROS MODEM OFFICIAL GROUP - some subjects are forbidden to discuss
[ROSDIGITALMODEMGROUP] CHANGE OF COURSE FOR THE GROUP ... From: wd4kpd wd4...@suddenlink.net ... Add to Contacts To: rosdigitalmodemgr...@yahoogroups.com HATE TO DO IT, BUT I NEED TO REDIRECT THE OBJECTIVE OF THE GROUP. NO NAMES TO MENTION. BUT IF YOU ARE GOING TO DISCUSS ANYTHING OTHER THAN ROS OPERATIONS AND BE HELPFUL TO OTHERS, BEST TAKE IT TO SOME OTHER GROUP. NO NEED TO DISCUSS LEGALITY OF THE MODE ANYWHERE IN THE WORLD. THE OPERATOR IS THE FINAL DECISION MAKER HERE, AND MUST ACCEPT THE CONSEQUENCES OF SUCH OPERATIONS. FAILURE TO COMPLY WILL GET YOU MODERATED, AND POSSIBLY BANNED. TKS GUYS MODERATOR/WD4KPD PSanything i have forgot is probably not welcome either.
