my view is that, while we were screwing around trying to make an HF packet messageing system a reality, the time and money would have been better spent developing community wide wireless systems operated by hams for the benefit of their communities and neighbors. using public community brad casting organizations as a model. if we'd done that, hams today would be delivering free internet services on city, county, and state wide basis(but probably not under the aegis of their ham tickets. but contributing technical expert ice. as our licenses mandate. but instead, we diddle around with HF packet and religious aguments about morse code. today the "802.11b/g" equipment necessary to acomplish the task is available for pennies at those stores, whose name can not be spoken. and we're still flogging each other with "No-code" lectures. so what if its "consumer electronics" nobody on earth knows how to run it better than us. 73 Harv, N9AI<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On 1/16/07, KV9U <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It is too bad that packet could not have advanced with new technology to make it work well on HF. In order for it to be able to work under many conditions, it needed to have the agility to change baud rates/packet sizes to match those conditions and it was really only designed for VHF and for something very close to the MUF on HF. The other problem seemed to be that when the internet moved to e-mail routing, the hierarchy system of packet was much less useful since it could only go to a home bbs. If they could have extended the system to work with e-mail too, you would have had a system that had some real value. As it stands now, there is no system out there that uses amateur radio links to get to other hams since the shutting down of the old Winlink system which only used amateur radio links and replacing it with the mostly internet based Winlink 2000 system. So we have gone from one extreme to another with no balanced approach that I think is needed so we have access to the best of both worlds. 73, Rick, KV9U Mark Milburn wrote: >Hi Rick.. >You understand it exactly right. There are a few HF >users, but most of the product of our efforts are VHF >stations running bulletin boards who receive the >messages by VHF nodes which are part of the HF packet >station setup. > >We're just a bunch of stubborn folks who think that >packet radio ought to be done by radio. When the >hop-skip-jump of the early years of packet radio >started going away because antenna sites were lost and >nodes were not maintained, HF radio started replacing >the VHF links where possible. It is (IMHO) a losing >battle we are waging, but since internet packet has >not developed a routing system to deliver personal >messages it has a huge flaw in it, in my thinking at >least. The internet users say just don't send >personals, send your message as a bulletin. But that >defeats the purpose in my view and makes it less >attractive. On the other hand, internet has some >advantages...speed and ability to send larger >messages. > >It's all in your point of view. I started out with >packet back in the early years and loved it, and still >love the system that will allow me to read bulletins, >but also to reply with a personal question or comment >where appropriate...and also to send personal messages >to friends I have developed over the years. > >73 Mark KQ0I >Des Moines, IA > > >
