My point was that the cost of the current implementation isn't prohibitive vs. the "codec2" implementation. Not too many people are not going to buy an AMBE implemented D-Star radio because of the $13 difference between that and yours.
The "codec2" fantasy is an answer in search of a problem. 73, Scott, N9AA --- In dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com, "e_l_green" <ki6...@...> wrote: > > --- In dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com, "n9aa" <scott.manthe@> wrote: > > Reduce the $$$ barrier? The D-Star chip costs about $25. No one is going to > > be able to manufacture an open source vocoder chip for less than that. > > I can implement a vocoder in a commonly available 32-bit microcontroller for > roughly, hold on, let me check... ah yes, quantity 100 that'd be $13.35 thank > you very much. And said microcontroller could also run the rest of the radio. > The problem is that I legally *can't* implement a D-Star-compatible vocoder > that way... > > BTW, the cost of the extra vocoder chip is only part of the cost involved in > making a radio D-Star compatible. There is also the cost of the larger > battery and charge circuit needed to power this extra chip, the cost of the > additional circuit board layers needed to cram an extra chip into common > radio formfactors, and so forth. If ICOM had chosen something other than > AMBEC, none of this would be a problem... but apparently they felt taking a > short cut and gluing an extra chip into their designs was worth more to them > in terms of quicker design turnaround than the alternative of finding a > provider who was willing to license an algorithm for a reasonable cost that > could be integrated into the main CPU of the radio. >
