Prompted to write by Glen Langston's post, I'm an old man resurrecting
an old moan, and in a minority that (I believe) is just not catered for:
* Windows user
* Non-programmer (of any great consequence)
A couple of years ago I became hooked on GRC after watching Balint
Seeber's YouTube videos that convinced me this was a great
non-programming solution to a long-standing problem of mine.
True, after 6 months I managed to fumble my way to a flowgraph that
sort-of got the job done. But there were serious limitations, such as WX
widget deficiencies including only mono audio stream for some
sources/sinks (just how out-of-date can you be in the 21st century?).
So I tried to migrate to QT, and what happens? Every one of the
replacement widgets looks and behaves differently from its predecessor
and, in several cases, has significantly reduced functionality.
Add in inexplicable control gaps like decade "thumb-wheels" (for tuning)
or command buttons (e.g. to increment a variable by a preset amount) and
it's clear that Gnu Radio Companion fails to replicate anything like a
basic RADIO front panel.
I won't even start moaning about changes to Python versions and
libraries.
What kind of a development strategy is that? It's no excuse that you
rely on a team of volunteers. If you want quality you need leadership,
direction and team players - every programmer following his own whim to
produce "cool stuff" on his own agenda is a recipe for disaster. I've
been a "volunteer" myself for 15 years, trying to put something back
into the radio community I love, with never a cent in return, and don't
do "cool stuff".
BTW under "cool stuff", I include the disgraceful self-promotion and
waste of valuable time in the YouTube video
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bHjITd2HR-g&ab_channel=GNURadio.
The golden rules for development include doing the basics well,
backwards compatibility, not breaking what already works, incremental
improvement, giving priority to fixing bugs/defects, and testing,
testing, testing. GRC has broken all of these big time over the years.
If during my working life I had been so cavalier in my attitude, I would
have lost my job many times over.
I suppose the real problem (for me) is that GRC is written by DSP
experts for DSP students who get by with a little help from their
friends, adding a bit of Python here and C++ there. In other words, GRC
is *not* the general purpose learner's tool that comes across in the
Balint intro.
As for the lack of support for Windows, how can you possibly ignore
(more-or-less) the No. 1 operating system with its large pool of users
hungry for GRC-type tools? If your fundamentalist fixation on *nix
prohibits contact with the unclean, please have the honesty to label
your product accordingly.
I repeat my acceptance of being in a minority, apologise too for the
rant, and realise it will not make any difference. But best wishes for
the future.
Paul White
