No need to disagree gently. You should hear it when we disagree in not
a gentle manner. It can be heard for two counties.
Something has been misunderstood. Frank has been the leading proponent
of the rapid movement to modularity and has been everyone's adviser on
matters related to the GPL. Frank has spent 35+ years doing computer
generated music, having studied synthesis since he was an undergraduate
at Princeton. I think you misintepreted something he said.
Bob
N4HY
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unless I've missed the point, I have to gently disagree with Frank on the
modularity issue in that I think it has very real practical benefit.
You've only got to check out the music software scene to see how fruitful
and mutually beneficial Steinberg's VST modular 'plug-in' technology has
been. Fair enough, the quality varies enormously, but the rich variety of
work out there would never have happened otherwise. This utility has
extended far beyond the original authors' ideas, I'm sure. The end result
is that musicians now have an enormous number of instruments and effects
freely available for use. The dross gets discarded and the good stuff
perpetuates.
The VST interface is very well defined and there is an SDK which provides
an empty 'plug-in ' project and plenty of examples to provide guidance for
budding programmers.
I'm not saying that VST is directly applicable - but why not this concept
on a modest scale with SDR? We haven't really begun to see the diverse
applications people will put this kind of radio to, given the right
interfaces are present.
Does it all boil down as to whether this degree of open architecture is a
commercial benefit or not? From the experimenter's point of view it would
certainly seem to be a good thing in order to widen the application of the
radio.
What do you think?
Cheers, Bob G4BBY
_______________________________________________
FlexRadio mailing list
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
