NICELY PUT BOB! I think that makes the most sense, amongst the myriad of possibilities there are out there. I guess that probably means a "major re-assembly kit" For those of us that cannot afford another radio. :-) I don't know how that fits in with HPSDR efforts though... hmm
73, Fred ----- Original Message ----- From: "Bob McGwier" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Flex Radio Reflector" <FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, January 03, 2007 9:38 AM Subject: [Flexradio] (A peek behing the curtain) was Re: vSound update from Phil C. - Windows Vista problems > IGNORE THAT MAN BEHIND THE CURTAIN. > > > User space drivers, behind Vista layers and layers of bulk and > protection of digital media rights, is possible. It is just awful so > why would we do it? I have a strong opinion. It is my strongest > possible opinion that for the future, Flex should build stand alone > radios running Linux on the computer inside the box and then we can > support the control/GUI on ALL machines as add ons to the stand alone > radio which more capability, etc. The radio performance will then not > be harmed by XP, Vista, 2000, Windows 98 or even ME and 95. We can > have a GUI on ALL of them. This to me is the best of all possible > worlds. This is typical of the enterprise model these days. Servers > running Linux AND sometimes Windows Server (but Linux is doing very well > in the server market) and here, the desktop is typically Windows. > Linux has penetrated the desktop market very poorly. It is just too > much perceived work for people to be sysadmins on their desktops. To > me, it is just something new. Ubuntu is busting their humps with > Shuttleworth's billion to make a difference and I hope they succeed. > Until we break the mold of Linux always playing catchup to the hardware > and software that Microsoft orders built, I perceive this will always > be the case. It is my heart felt belief that this is Microsoft's > approach. Constantly be the leader given their huge share of the market > and force all others to play catch up and stay one step behind. Until > this is broken, we are doomed to follow MS. BUT, with this radio, > we can break a large part of that paradigm. > > If we follow this distributed, the developers can all run free tools to > their utter delight and be free from 666 land: Redmond, Wa. This has > been Frank's model as the chief architect of the software model since > day 1. We compromised (rather I presented Frank with a fait d'accompli) > which I believed was necessary for the survival of Flex. It has > survived and is thriving. Now, we are going to do things in a > revolutionary manner, supporting Frank's vision. There is no Windows, > linux, OSX, XP, NT, 98,95, etc. controversy for the future. We are > using them all and using them where appropriate. > > After we have the radio running either stand alone with a Linux box in > it (or in the case of SDR-1000, by it) we can then work out the delivery > of audio across the room, across town, across the planet. It will > simply be a different connection for the Linux box, running jack, > providing the ultimate in audio service and delivered to the registered > client managed by the erlang core. > > CAPTURE THE VISION. Do not be trapped by your standard view of radios. > This is a revolution and one for the betterment of all of radio but > especially ham radio. Bob Cowdery has given you a glimpse as has John > Melton, Edson Pereira, Leif Asbrink, etc. They have all used SDR > cores as stand alone tools. Melton and Pereira and now Cowdery have > become masters of wrapping these core processes with other things to > deliver the end service. Leif Asbrink is delivering audio, etc. over > IP/LAN's. We can do this too officially. And we should. With your > SDR-1000 and the SDR-X,Y, and Z, you are about to be able to break > out and fly beyond the traditional view of radio. I hope you will think > of the radio as a computer service when we are done. You will still > have your fancy console but it will be capable of so much more. I > think we can get there with DttSP, GnuRadio, and more all talking to > Flex Radio hardware, USRP, HPSDR, Quicksilver, AMSAT satellites, > SoftRocks, etc. > > This really is the goal behind the distributed computing and the reason > for learning a new language designed expressly for this purpose. I want > the revolution and I want it now and I want to be a leader in it with my > friends pushing, pulling, arguing, and helping and yes, even your > complaining and support are aids. It is my opinion, we are about to > realize the promise of all of this and to leave the lack of imagination > from Asia and their (primarily US) competitors well behind us. > > Happy New Year > Bob N4HY > > > > Brad A. Steffler wrote: >> Re: Bob McGwier's post: >> >> With the advent of the twisted /trusted computing /and the DRM signed >> driver requirements as well as new >> hardware requirements for Vista compatible boards, we may be in deep >> weeds in the future. The great strength of Software Defined >> Radio can also be its Achilles heel, if Vista is any indication. The >> radio could be held hostage to Microsoft's dictates. >> It appears, near as I can tell, in this convoluted (to me) scheme of >> Microsoft's that we WILL be held hostage to the >> whims of Microsoft with increased costs and loss of freedom to use our >> computers as we see fit when we install >> Vista. >> >> The philosophy behind SDR is individual flexibility and freedom by using >> infinitely configurable software to be the "guts" >> of the radio. The use of software allows almost infinite flexibility. >> This presupposes that the OS and the hardware (PC) >> itself is constructed/made with no "built-in" restrictions. When we get >> hardware and software requirements that add >> such restrictions, the law of unintended consequences will really >> increase the complexity of our systems in the future >> and potentially severely limit our options. Development costs for both >> software and hardware could potentially soar, >> making our SDR's as, or more, expensive than the rigs competing with SDR >> (such as IC-7800, etc). >> >> Maybe I am crying wolf here. But if I am not, the conversion of SDR to >> Linux is of paramount importance. Dependence >> upon Microsoft/Apple may be a severe mistake for SDR for the masses. >> >> My wife just promised me an SDR, and other goodies, early in 2007. Now I >> am not so sure... >> >> What do Eric, Gerald and the others think? >> >> Brad >> KE4XJ >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> FlexRadio mailing list >> FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz >> http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz >> Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ >> FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com >> >> > > > -- > Robert W. McGwier, Ph.D. > Center for Communications Research > 805 Bunn Drive > Princeton, NJ 08540 > (609)-924-4600 > (sig required by employer) > > > > _______________________________________________ > FlexRadio mailing list > FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz > http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz > Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ > FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/ > > FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/ > > > > -- > No virus found in this incoming message. > Checked by AVG Free Edition. > Version: 7.5.432 / Virus Database: 268.16.3/614 - Release Date: 1/2/2007 > 2:58 PM > > _______________________________________________ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/ FlexRadio Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/ FlexRadio Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/
