I was disturbed when the ROS author suggested that he was considering
legal action against N3TL for merely raising the question of legality
in the USA. I am even more disturbed that the author of the software
has an apparent plan to include the callsign of certain hams in a
non-grata list ,
On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 07:56 -0500, Andy obrien wrote:
Some people think to keep telling lies on Internet blogs is going to
go free. People still trying to outlaw ROS although the FCC has given
approval will not be able to make any QSO with ROS or any of the
projects I have designed for the
Somehow in the last generation or so, we have lost the ability to understand
the meaning of some words. Lie is one of them. It has become a catchall for
honest mistake, difference of opinion, misunderstanding, etc. Or perhaps
there is an inability to to consider someone could be acting with
Wow, I hadn't been looking at these messages for a few days as they were
flooding my e-mail software faster than I could be bothered to read.
From what I read here Andy,
that is really shocking, to actively place code into a software to disable
it from being used by a particular callsign. The
... considering legal action ... has an apparent plan ... may have
understandably frustrated Jose
---
So as far as I understand it the developer with a Spanish temperament is
understandably frustrated by actions of some people making baseless fuss.
Baseless since the FCC position is
WELL SAID
73 de
Ron W4LDE
On 3/3/2010 10:36 AM, pd4u_dares wrote:
... considering legal action ... has an apparent plan ... may have
understandably frustrated Jose
---
So as far as I understand it the developer with a Spanish temperament
is understandably frustrated by actions of
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Toby Burnett ruff...@... .. But to
be honest I don'' t think I shall bother too now as there seems much to much
grief happening from this.
Like I say, it seemed a fair experimental mode but it is wider than ..
It'd be nice to see something other than
Marc,
I'm not saying that, I'd be happy to support ROS and I do think it's a
rather good experimental mode. Ok so it is wide but as I said experimental
I think Jose did a fantastic job of making a software package for a
completely new type of ham radio mode. BUT,
The debate is getting out
pd4u_dares wrote:
... considering legal action ... has an apparent plan ... may have
understandably frustrated Jose
I really have mixed feelings about how this all played out as well.
While I don't agree with ban lists, I can see where the software author
could get very frustrated at what
In spite of temperaments (my roots are spanish somewhere in the past) it
has gone to extremes it never should have got even near to. Statements
like FCC will have to pay me to see my code, the threat of legal
action to someone who just was looking for his own spectrum management
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Toby Burnett ruff...@... wrote:
The debate is getting out of hand (period)
I think we can all agree on that, so let's stop it here. And let's go on with
our hobby.
Though I have some doubts that there actually was a debate. There have been
arguments as
I really don't think there any ROS haters. ROS is a mode that is fun
to use and works well. There may be some who complain that it interferes
with the NCDXF beacon network, but the suggested frequency was then
moved upward, in the true spirit of cooperation.
However, there is a misconception
Toby MM0TOB
Jose gave all Amateurs a gift in my view. My copy was free es latest beta
version was free. My payment was improvement
suggestions es reports of bugs to Jose. Man what a deal! Jose is not the enemy
es never was, but better described as a hero
in my book. Giving the hobby a bit of
Hi Phil,
I have followed this from the beginning and to be honest it sickens me.
People raise a legitimate question because of the author's own wording
and Jose became hostile over it. Now he is going to ban people from his
program and all future programs that he writes. Why are we putting
Earlier this morning, I called the FCC to confirm the FCC: ROS LEGAL IN
USA assertion made in
http://rosmodem.wordpress.com/
I asked for confirmation that the FCC had deemed ROS legal for use on HF by
US amateurs. When asked for a case number, I provided the case number given
on the above web
installed a new version? Rebooting PC and restarting ROS again helped me when
no text appeared. When you push the PTT button anyway ROS transmit idle tones
until you push the stop buttun again.
Running version 2.2.2 FB here.
Marc
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, David Michael Gaytko //
even more reason to stop this debate, because no definitive position of the
FCC is published.
Basta!
So we all know that we don't know if ROS is legal in the land of the free and
the brave... or not. Thus there is no debate possible anymore that makes any
sense without an official publication of the FCC.
Since it is not legal, nor illegal, to beta test ROS in the US at the moment. I
see no
For the record, I have no problem with the ROS mode whatsoever. Soon after
its announcement, I emailed the developer offering interoperation with
DXLab -- an offer that stands.
Developing a great new mode or application does not entitle one to threaten,
belittle, or mock those who respond with
pd4u_dares wrote:
Though I have some doubts that there actually was a debate. There have been
arguments as in all debates. But the figurative meaning of the arguments
was getting the overhand over the literal meaning of arguments in a
debate...HIHI
Marc, on many occasions I have had to
Oh ja... someone raises a supposed illegality, and Jose changed the discription
BECAUSE of that SUPPOSED illegaly. And he is to blame... I think all of us are
to blaim for this flaming thread. No one excluded.
So let's continue betatesting since we do not know if it illegal or not, in the
pd4u_dares wrote:
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Toby Burnett ruff...@... .. But to
be honest I don'' t think I shall bother too now as there seems much to much
grief happening from this.
Like I say, it seemed a fair experimental mode but it is wider than ..
It'd be nice to see
Alan Barrow wrote:
And think real hard next time before calling the FCC. Ham radio was the
net loser in this episode. We are already viewed as squabbling children
at the FCC, and this type of episode just reinforces that view of
amateur radio.
And so it was in the UK over the endless debates
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, KH6TY kh...@... wrote:
I really don't think there any ROS haters.
Me neither, just using a hyperbole to prevent it becomes that cae in the future.
And ur right, Jose has done a good programming job in a short time so far. The
rest of his REactions are
Gang:
I am out of here for now, will try again in a month when the smoke settles..
Fred
CIW649/VE3FAL
CFARS Member
SATERN Member
SATERN Amateur Radio Liaison Officer
DEC Amethyst District ARES
Try Hamspots, PSKreporter, and K3UK Sked Page
Interesting ... The text of the FCC: ROS LEGAL IN USA assertion seems to be
missing from that site now.
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave AA6YQ aa...@... wrote:
Earlier this morning, I called the FCC to confirm the FCC: ROS LEGAL IN
USA assertion made in
Pst! Marc! Uh, 'scuse me but the only one uttering such thoughts thus far
is
YOU. No one else, just YOU. You might want to cool down the dramatics and
take a breath, less you attract others with the same flair and end up creating
a
self-fulfilling prophecy.
Howard W6IDS
Richmond, IN
Thanks to all those that expressed views, nice to see varying
opinions. I will be rationing ROS related posts for the next few
days. No email will be censored, I will simply send them through to
the group in dribs and drabs, so that we can focus on a wider array of
digital mode topics.
Andy
Let's continue the experiment in the true spirit of HAM radio.
So far no one has tabled an actual piece of legal document stating the legality
of the mode. So continue to use the mode until otherwise told.
Mark (VK2KLJ)
On 04/03/2010, at 6:33 AM, pd4u_dares p...@hotmail.com wrote:
Oh ja...
I downloaded ROS the other day and just tried it for the first time today, but
it will not key my transmitter. I have my Kenwood on Com1 but I see there are
not other setting for the comm port.
Thanks,
73s, Tom
I was about to call myself since I couldn't find anything on the FCC site about
it, no ROS, no such case number no nothing.
From: Dave AA6YQ aa...@ambersoft.com
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com; rosdigitalmodemgr...@yahoogroups.com
Cc: Skip Teller KH6TY
The latest version has support for different comm ports.
Andy K3UK
On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Tom wd8...@rocketmail.com wrote:
I downloaded ROS the other day and just tried it for the first time today,
but it will not key my transmitter. I have my Kenwood on Com1 but I see
there are
Just installed 2-3-1 .. can see and select the usb sound card (ADS) however
... after clicking on save .. all looked to be ok .. but once the 'ptt' is
selected .. the tx audio reverts to the pc on board sound card and the
options in the select box are re -set to the
33 matches
Mail list logo
