VHF/UHF is envisioned just the way it is now. That is the vision of the average ham. Short range voice and a few niche areas with weak signal voice and digital. But actually less weak signal now than in the past! Odd when you consider the enormous numbers of new hams who can run 1500 watts on 2 meter SSB but they have zero interest in ever doing this like was much more popular a decade or two ago.
We would not be having this conversation via some ham networks since it would be impractical to do so. VHF packet filled up with the equivalent of spam with "ALL USA" messages, etc. so not much different in a way from the spam we have now. I run several groups on Yahoo and I don't allow any spam. I get them frequently but the members of the groups are not subjected to that as moderators remove the offending material and the perpetrators as needed. 9k6 was the minimum usable speed for TCP/IP via ham radio in my view. It was moderately expensive, but as you know, many rigs came along that could do it. Most synthesized rigs can now, I have one here in the shack, but it will never be connected because there is no interest locally, and the signals have to be very good in order to get 9k6 speeds through. Actually, I was interested in 56K stuff too, but that was just not going to happen. We had the roadmap with ARRL publications such as "Packet: Speed, More Speed, and Applications." But there just was not enough interest in this by the packet radio hams. As far as Linux goes, I am only looking at the desktop. For embedded apps, servers, etc., Linux has made large inroads. I just got off PSK31 with an older ham who is trying fldigi on Linux. Had some problems but then got better. The new hams who are interested in Linux will use it if they are interested in doing so and will certainly add to the expertise level. But I have not personally met a lot of them. One of the local hams is an engineer and is talking about using Linux. Another software developer who took my Tech class and got his Technician License has a 4 computer KVM with a couple of Linux variants, MS Windows, and I think Sun OS or BSD. But these folks are not your average ham. From past discussions on this group and others, porting of some of the software is not going to happen. The two software packages I use the most are DXLab Suite (especially Commander for rig control) along with Multipsk which is the current killer app for digital modes on HF due to the recent invention of the FAE mode, and Ham Radio Deluxe with the Digital Master 780 module. Neither of these programs will be ported. However, we may be able to use them on Linux. I spent hours today to see if I could do that, and did make some progress under WINE. But not full progress. Any of the new digital modes can be used on HF or VHF in most cases. Actually the new Linux program by none other than Skip Teller, for emergency messaging, is specifically targeted for VHF since the speed is too fast. It probably won't go anyplace because it is not cross platform and only a few hams could ever run it. I could not use it here in my area for our emergency activities since we would need to have everyone on the same program, even if not on the same OS. Since many of the hams that tend to volunteer for emergency communications, do not work on HF, new digital VHF capabilities might be helpful in some situations. 73, Rick, KV9U keyesbob wrote: > > I think that this really depends on the way VHF/UHF digital radio is > envisioned. It's really not so good in its role as a replacement for a > broadband Internet connection, or even a modem. With the advent of > WiFi and mobile data services, packet radio suffered even more in its > comparison with commercial Internet services. Yet, at the same time, > the cost of long distance telephone calls has fallen drastically, and > there is still many QSOs in voice modes. Certainly PSK31 and other > conversation modes on HF can't hold a candle to instant messanging in > terms of convenience and utility, so why are they so popular? There's > something more than just 'the Internet killed packet'. > > We might also want to ask ourselves: Why do we want the Internet? Back > when the Internet was the realm of geeks and experimenters it was a > good match for amateur radio, but now it's become commercial, and > quite polluted. Just look at UseNet (a.k.a. Google Groups) - ugly. The > Internet inundates us with spam, viruses, security problems, chain > letters, and more. Yes, it is making it possible for us to have this > conversation right now, but wouldn't old fashioned packet have > functioned just as well? Or even a 1980s style computer bulletin board > on a telephone dialup? But of course I wouldn't want amateur packet at > the expense of giving up my Internet connection, just as I haven't > stopped using my telephone just because I have the Internet. > > > By faster speeds I assume you mean 9600 and higher. Yes, equipment was > quite expensive. You couldn't just use an off-the-shelf rig and run > and 9600 baud. Radios with native 9600 bps did appear, but I recall > hearing that the synthesized radios didn't generally perform to well, > and the crystal radios were just not cheap enough to become popular. > BUT both of these problems could have been fixed if there had been > more interest from the ham community (in my opinion). > > > > Depending on how usage is measured, it has already exceeded this. It > is difficult to calculate the installed base of Linux. Certainly in > servers and industrial uses, Linux is far greater than 1%. For > instance, Google is built entirely out of Linux. I did hear that much > of yahoo is built on FreeBSD, though I don't know if this is currently > the case. > > In terms of Linux on the Desktop, at my University, it makes up 1/3 of > the systems in the computer labs (these are labs for the general > student population). In the computer science department, more than 50% > of desktops are Linux, with another 30% or so being Mac OSX or a BSD > variant. Solaris and Windows bring up the rear (What's funny is, that > Gates and Ballmer donated the money for the computer science > building..!). This is typical of many universities. If amateur radio > wants to attract and keep new generations of technologically talented > hams, we must be aware that many of these young people will not use > Microsoft products, if given the choice. > > Ubuntu is a version of Linux that has made great progress on the > desktop in just a few years. Anyone who has tried Linux and been > frustrated in the past, might want to try Ubuntu. It's really slick. > They'll even ship you an installation CD for free, even shipping costs > included, to anywhere in the world! Or you can just download a CD image. > > > Perhaps what we need is some people to volunteer to port software from > one platform to another, or to configure emulators to run this software. > > > > There are so many ideas in digital radio technology that are new and > exciting, but most of them are currently being applied to WiFi. I know > this, because this is what I do professionally. Many of these > inventions could be applied to HF/VHF/UHF, and some of them would even > work better on these bands than on microwave. > > >> Contrary to what you are saying there are many new digital modes >> developed over the past decade or more. >> > > For VHF/UHF? Which ones? Where are they hiding? > > >> But digital technology seems to >> have one serious achilles heel, which is the "Tower of Babel syndrome." >> We have so many modes, that it is difficult to find anyone to >> communicate on a given mode, except for the most popular. >> > > This is the flip side of experimentation - it leads to chaos. But this > isn't all bad. As long as we can revert to known-working modes, we can > experiment and advance the state of the art. Isn't that what we're > used to doing? We spend most of the time on the radio, talking about > radios! > > >> And since they >> can not intercommunicate, they tend to be in independent silos. I am >> > not > >> saying that is all bad, but it does make it difficult to reach a >> critical mass for any one mode, whether it be voice, text, or image. >> > > What we need is interoperability. I think we can manage this to the > degree we need to. > > 73, > Bob > N1YRK > > > > Announce your digital presence via our Interactive Sked Page at > http://www.obriensweb.com/drsked/drsked.php > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > >
