WD8ARZ wrote: > Get good at using what we got the way it currently works, or it is all a big > waste. Many are dedicated to making what we have work, work better, and > evolve over time. > > 73 from Bill - WD8ARZ > http://hflink.net/qso/
Whatever the protocol and network, I still see the need for a better mousetrap, i.e., a better and less costly HF modem. Rick, KN6KB attempted that, and I don't really know what happened, but it got stuck. The need is still there. Network issues are too large and it is risky (in time, effort and probabilities to succeed) to make a radical change from the ground up to expect inmediate success, particularly with an existent legacy network and equipment that somehow works and solves needs the way people are used to. Many decisions in the professional work are tied to existent techniques, standards and existent equipment that do not allow radical changes, and you are cornered to make improvements that do not violate the set standards. After a standard is cast, you are stuck with it. There are many examples in the professional world, be it TV, mobile telephony or any other field. When there is an existent investment in equipment, accumulated knowledge and effort, very compelling reasons are needed for a radical change. At the light of SWOT analysis techniques, a radical network change is a too large threat. The Bell 103 modem for HF packet is a weakness and improving the HF modem is an opportunity. 73, Jose, CO2JA
