> The one of the interesting things about using personal computers for SDR
> is
> imho that generally more people can take part in their development in 
> major
> or minor ways. This is why I just recently decided to purchase the QS1R

I can understand the attraction of that for hams, just as I understand the
attraction of Linux for people interested in what makes computers work. But
from what I have seen of open source type development the old adage about
too many hands can spoil the broth come to mind. Like anything designed by a
committee, it can take ages to get anything done. There is a lot to be said
for having things developed exclusively by a dedicated and focussed team, as
in the case of Microsoft.

> I understand your concern about the rapid rate of obsolescent in the PC
> world. I would argue that with a clever choice of which interface to use,
> some concepts will actually survive many hard- and software cycles. This
> way
> at least the hardware of the radio wouldn't have to be changed. The
> software
> would likely be less stable, but otoh as the hardware becomes more
> powerful,
> newer software come become more complex and offer new features.

I was really more concerned with what support there will be for the current
generation of SDR radios in, say 10 years time. If the PC that runs the
current software dies, and you can't get a new PC that runs XP (or whatever
you need to run that SDR software) what guarantee do you have that any
software that runs on Windows 2020 or whatever will support the 10 year old
box. The manufacturer (if they are still around) will probably have no
interest in supporting obsolete products.

> I personally dislike black boxes. I want to know about what is going on
> inside.

What I really meant by that was that I don't care if it is SDR or analog, as
long as it does what I want. But having said that, and having read this
discussion and seen some of the terminology used, I realize that for me, DSP
technology is way over my head. I understand how analog radios like the K2
work. I understand how most of the K3 works, but there are some black boxes
marked "DSP". Once you start digitising the entire HF spectrum, how you get
from that to your voice coming out of my speaker is beyond me, and probably
beyond most people without a math PhD.

> The choice of user interface has a lot to do with what one wants to do
> with
> the radio, and is one one of the reasons I really love my K3.

I agree, but if you keep the radio separate from the computer and provide
some sort of CAT interface programmers can create any UI that you want,
without having to get involved in the SDR side of things.

-----
Julian, G4ILO. K2 #392  K3 #222.
http://www.g4ilo.com/ G4ILO's Shack   http://www.ham-directory.com/ Ham
Directory    http://www.g4ilo.com/kcomm.html KComm for Elecraft K2 and K3 
-- 
View this message in context: 
http://n2.nabble.com/K3---ADAT-ADT-200A-by-HB9CBU-tp1597981p1614817.html
Sent from the Elecraft mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

_______________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Post to: Elecraft@mailman.qth.net
You must be a subscriber to post to the list.
Subscriber Info (Addr. Change, sub, unsub etc.):
 http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft    

Help: http://mailman.qth.net/subscribers.htm
Elecraft web page: http://www.elecraft.com

Reply via email to