[digitalradio] Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages)
I was disturbed when the ROS author suggested that he was considering legal action against N3TL for merely raising the question of legality in the USA. I am even more disturbed that the author of the software has an apparent plan to include the callsign of certain hams in a non-grata list , suggesting that the software would not allow them to make QSOs . Thus, I am removing support that I have provided via the K3UK Sked pages. People are free to post and chat about ROS on the Sked Pages but my prominent mention of ROS , and support by listed calling frequencies, will be removed. The message from Jose on his Some people think to keep telling lies on Internet blogs is going to go free. People still trying to outlaw ROS although the FCC has given approval will not be able to make any QSO with ROS or any of the projects I have designed for the future. “Non Grata” List: K5OKC, AA6YQ, M6RDP,PE4BAS,KQ7W,ZL4PLM,DL4PLM,GM4PLM,NN4RH This reflector helped catapult ROS 16 in to a world-wide experiment after Jose had not been able to generate much interest in his first few announcements on other forums. While the fuss created by questions about the legality may have understandably frustrated Jose, the above behaviour is not in keeping with the spirit of ham radio project development and is not within the generally accepted ethics espoused by this email group. I have been proud of the openness that software developers have shown of the past 10 years on this email list. Patrick, Simon, Skip, Dave B, Dave F Rein, Murray, Joe, Leigh, Pawel, Nino, Vojtech, Bob, , Stelios, Mako, Rick, Tom, HB9TLK, and many others have provided us with enjoyable applications and have openly accepted varying opinions on this forum . When you start making absurd legal threats against a ham that was simply safeguarding his well earned radio operating privileges, and become thin skinned to the point of excluding hams from using the software, it is time to take the software to the commercial world and remove it from amateur radio use. I have enjoyed ROS as an application and may still use if from time to time, too bad we have a rather volatile author whose overreactions are ruining the benefits of his considerable talents. Andy K3UK Digitalradio Owner CC: rosdigitalmodemgr...@yahoogroups.com Try Hamspots, PSKreporter, and K3UK Sked Page http://www.obriensweb.com/skedpskr4.html Suggesting calling frequencies: Modes 500Hz 3583,7073,14073,18103, 21073,24923, 28123 . Wider modes e.g. Olivia 32/1000, ROS16, ALE: 14109.7088. Yahoo! Groups Links * To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/ * Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional * To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join (Yahoo! ID required) * To change settings via email: digitalradio-dig...@yahoogroups.com digitalradio-fullfeatu...@yahoogroups.com * To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: digitalradio-unsubscr...@yahoogroups.com * Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Re: [digitalradio] Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages)
On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 07:56 -0500, Andy obrien wrote: Some people think to keep telling lies on Internet blogs is going to go free. People still trying to outlaw ROS although the FCC has given approval will not be able to make any QSO with ROS or any of the projects I have designed for the future. “Non Grata” List: K5OKC, AA6YQ, M6RDP,PE4BAS,KQ7W,ZL4PLM,DL4PLM,GM4PLM,NN4RH We dare not point out that the Emperor is not wearing any clothing... Pathetic.
[digitalradio] Re: Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages)
Somehow in the last generation or so, we have lost the ability to understand the meaning of some words. Lie is one of them. It has become a catchall for honest mistake, difference of opinion, misunderstanding, etc. Or perhaps there is an inability to to consider someone could be acting with other than malevolent intent. I am not certain which is more troubling. Alan WA4SCA
Re: [digitalradio] Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages)
Wow, I hadn't been looking at these messages for a few days as they were flooding my e-mail software faster than I could be bothered to read. From what I read here Andy, that is really shocking, to actively place code into a software to disable it from being used by a particular callsign. The mind boggles as they say. It seemed an interesting experimental mode, I agree. But to be honest I don t think I shall bother too now as there seems much to much grief happening from this. Like I say, it seemed a fair experimental mode but it is wider than most and their isn't much room on the bands anyway. Shall probably stick to CW, PSK, RTTY, JT65, OLIVIA and a few others. It'd be nice to see something other than ROS comments on the digi reflector group. For a change. Toby MM0TOB ---Original Message--- From: Andy obrien Date: 03/03/2010 12:57:37 To: digitalradio; rosdigitalmodemgr...@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages) I was disturbed when the ROS author suggested that he was considering Legal action against N3TL for merely raising the question of legality In the USA. I am even more disturbed that the author of the software Has an apparent plan to include the callsign of certain hams in a non-grata list , suggesting that the software would not allow them To make QSOs . Thus, I am removing support that I have provided via The K3UK Sked pages. People are free to post and chat about ROS on The Sked Pages but my prominent mention of ROS , and support by Listed calling frequencies, will be removed. The message from Jose on his Some people think to keep telling lies on Internet blogs is going to Go free. People still trying to outlaw ROS although the FCC has given Approval will not be able to make any QSO with ROS or any of the Projects I have designed for the future. Non Grata List: K5OKC, AA6YQ, M6RDP,PE4BAS,KQ7W,ZL4PLM,DL4PLM,GM4PLM,NN4RH This reflector helped catapult ROS 16 in to a world-wide experiment After Jose had not been able to generate much interest in his first Few announcements on other forums. While the fuss created by Questions about the legality may have understandably frustrated Jose, The above behaviour is not in keeping with the spirit of ham radio Project development and is not within the generally accepted ethics Espoused by this email group. I have been proud of the openness that Software developers have shown of the past 10 years on this email List. Patrick, Simon, Skip, Dave B, Dave F Rein, Murray, Joe, Leigh, Pawel, Nino, Vojtech, Bob, , Stelios, Mako, Rick, Tom, HB9TLK, And many others have provided us with enjoyable applications and have Openly accepted varying opinions on this forum . When you start Making absurd legal threats against a ham that was simply safeguarding His well earned radio operating privileges, and become thin skinned to The point of excluding hams from using the software, it is time to Take the software to the commercial world and remove it from amateur Radio use. I have enjoyed ROS as an application and may still use if from time to Time, too bad we have a rather volatile author whose overreactions are Ruining the benefits of his considerable talents. Andy K3UK Digitalradio Owner CC: rosdigitalmodemgr...@yahoogroups.com Try Hamspots, PSKreporter, and K3UK Sked Page http://www.obriensweb.com/skedpskr4.html Suggesting calling frequencies: Modes 500Hz 3583,7073,14073,18103, 21073 24923, 28123 . Wider modes e.g. Olivia 32/1000, ROS16, ALE: 14109.7088. Yahoo! Groups Links
[digitalradio] Re: Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages)
... considering legal action ... has an apparent plan ... may have understandably frustrated Jose --- So as far as I understand it the developer with a Spanish temperament is understandably frustrated by actions of some people making baseless fuss. Baseless since the FCC position is actually opposed to the claims that were made that created the fuzz. It is conclcuded hat Jose's behaviour is not in line with the spirit of ham radio. I ask myself if banning someone's software from amateur radio use, is in line with the ham radio spirit. I think it isn't either. So I think this advice on a public group to ban the use of ROS, is of the same order. And thus I can't understand why even more fuzz is created by banning ROS. Why not apologize for the unnecessary fuzz created around ROS while there was no definitive position from the FCC. I think Jose will then apologize for his apparent plans. Then all the fuzz is over. I hope this fuzz is showing us that we all have far to big ego's, and a lack of patience, understanding and compassion for others. And are apparently merely judging others' behavior in the context of the Ham Radio Spirit but do not scrutinize our own no support threats along the same line. This is hypocrite I think. So let's forget all the fuzz, and continue beta testing further in the name of the HAM Radio Spirit I would say.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages)
WELL SAID 73 de Ron W4LDE On 3/3/2010 10:36 AM, pd4u_dares wrote: ... considering legal action ... has an apparent plan ... may have understandably frustrated Jose --- So as far as I understand it the developer with a Spanish temperament is understandably frustrated by actions of some people making baseless fuss. Baseless since the FCC position is actually opposed to the claims that were made that created the fuzz. It is conclcuded hat Jose's behaviour is not in line with the spirit of ham radio. I ask myself if banning someone's software from amateur radio use, is in line with the ham radio spirit. I think it isn't either. So I think this advice on a public group to ban the use of ROS, is of the same order. And thus I can't understand why even more fuzz is created by banning ROS. Why not apologize for the unnecessary fuzz created around ROS while there was no definitive position from the FCC. I think Jose will then apologize for his apparent plans. Then all the fuzz is over. I hope this fuzz is showing us that we all have far to big ego's, and a lack of patience, understanding and compassion for others. And are apparently merely judging others' behavior in the context of the Ham Radio Spirit but do not scrutinize our own no support threats along the same line. This is hypocrite I think. So let's forget all the fuzz, and continue beta testing further in the name of the HAM Radio Spirit I would say.
[digitalradio] Re: Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages)
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Toby Burnett ruff...@... .. But to be honest I don'' t think I shall bother too now as there seems much to much grief happening from this. Like I say, it seemed a fair experimental mode but it is wider than .. It'd be nice to see something other than ROS comments on the digi reflector group. For a change. Yeah let's stop our support for ROS on this group as well as on K3UK's sked page... Let us created two camps: the ROS haters and the ROS lovers...the good guys and the bad guys, and all in the name of the ham radio spirit of course!! :-O Marc, PD4U
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages)
Marc, I'm not saying that, I'd be happy to support ROS and I do think it's a rather good experimental mode. Ok so it is wide but as I said experimental I think Jose did a fantastic job of making a software package for a completely new type of ham radio mode. BUT, The debate is getting out of hand (period) There are reports of much QRM with the mode as no one seems to know where to operate. Or they just don't give a damn where they operate. Have you checked your messages? How many on this subject since the software came out a few weeks ago. 1000+? Is there nothing else we can talk about. People are worried about their operating privileges in certain countries. And why not if there is a problem. There shouldn't be and I don't think there are real ROS haters, just those who probably want nothing more to do with it, this discussion and I can see some people un subscribing from the group or sticking it to the junk filter In keeping with ham radio, I think everyone should calm down a bit and maybe do a bit of operating now that cycle 24 is in progress, rather than worrying about this. Oh and I just had a listen and I cant hear the beacons due to ROS and a packet station. 14.101 is just too close I think. Listen on 14.100 and you will hear. Toby mm0tob ---Original Message--- From: pd4u_dares Date: 03/03/2010 15:59:33 To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages) --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Toby Burnett ruff...@... .. But to be honest I don'' t think I shall bother too now as there seems much to much grief happening from this. Like I say, it seemed a fair experimental mode but it is wider than .. It'd be nice to see something other than ROS comments on the digi reflector group. For a change. Yeah let's stop our support for ROS on this group as well as on K3UK's sked page... Let us created two camps: the ROS haters and the ROS lovers...the good guys and the bad guys, and all in the name of the ham radio spirit of course!! :-O Marc, PD4U
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages)
pd4u_dares wrote: ... considering legal action ... has an apparent plan ... may have understandably frustrated Jose I really have mixed feelings about how this all played out as well. While I don't agree with ban lists, I can see where the software author could get very frustrated at what could be perceived as an attempt to get a new mode banned. My observation is that when an arms length ham goes to the ARRL/FCC with an is this legal it nearly always results in a at first glance we do not think so. Historically, this is nearly always done by people opposed to the new mode, and looking to see it banned. Having seen this happen more than once, and having detailed information on two of those cases, it's the wrong way to handle such a query, even if done in good faith. And like most times this occurs, with more detail, and maybe a bit more objective presentation (like making it clear it's ssb bandwidth with an audio sample), the FCC Input is reversed. (it was never a decision, just an opinion based on the facts at hand) In this particular case it's made much worse by the sparse, poor wording in the fcc regs. The issue was not that ROS technically used SS type techniques. Or even could clearly be called SS using the ITU definition. Instead, the core issue was: did ROS behave like traditional SS in a way that would cause interference and thus was banned under 220 mhz. And the answer to that is clearly no. It behaves like many other AFSK'ish modes that use an SSB bandwidth. Other legal modes use randomization in a way that by very strict interpretation could be called SS. Had it hopped across 100khz, using vco rf stages, it'd clearly be illegal. Personally, I think it's unfair to compare to the other authors, as they have never had such a (real or perceived) attack on their software, the product of many hours of work. And we had cross language/culture issues at play here as well. This was not an I don't like it, or it does not work well, all authors have to deal with that. It was a we don't think it should be used debate. And much more personal and at risk. So my view is that we should all learn from this, put the swords back in the scabbards, and not alienate someone who took the time to create something innovative, and made it available for use. For free. And think real hard next time before calling the FCC. Ham radio was the net loser in this episode. We are already viewed as squabbling children at the FCC, and this type of episode just reinforces that view of amateur radio. Sincerely, Alan km4ba
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages)
In spite of temperaments (my roots are spanish somewhere in the past) it has gone to extremes it never should have got even near to. Statements like FCC will have to pay me to see my code, the threat of legal action to someone who just was looking for his own spectrum management administration approval, the threat of banning certain callsigns, plus the following spanish statement in his web page: --- FCC: ROS LEGAL IN USA http://rosmodem.wordpress.com/2010/03/02/fcc-ros-legal-in-usa/ 2 March, 2010 by José Alberto Nieto Ros It ended the controversy about whether ROS is legal in USA or not. For which they insisted on it was illegal: A mamarla --- I understand he meaning of the final part like Suck my p , which is not exactly nice or well mannered. From my point of view, just stating It ended the controversy about whether ROS is legal in USA or not was enough. Jose, CO2JA --- El 03/03/2010 11:16 a.m., Toby Burnett escribió: Marc, I'm not saying that, I'd be happy to support ROS and I do think it's a rather good experimental mode. Ok so it is wide but as I said experimental I think Jose did a fantastic job of making a software package for a completely new type of ham radio mode. BUT, The debate is getting out of hand (period) There are reports of much QRM with the mode as no one seems to know where to operate. Or they just don't give a damn where they operate. Have you checked your messages? How many on this subject since the software came out a few weeks ago. 1000+? Is there nothing else we can talk about. People are worried about their operating privileges in certain countries. And why not if there is a problem. There shouldn't be and I don't think there are real ROS haters, just those who probably want nothing more to do with it, this discussion and I can see some people un subscribing from the group or sticking it to the junk filter In keeping with ham radio, I think everyone should calm down a bit and maybe do a bit of operating now that cycle 24 is in progress, rather than worrying about this. Oh and I just had a listen and I cant hear the beacons due to ROS and a packet station. 14.101 is just too close I think. Listen on 14.100 and you will hear. Toby mm0tob /---Original Message---/ /*From:*/ pd4u_dares mailto:p...@hotmail.com /*Date:*/ 03/03/2010 15:59:33 /*To:*/ digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio@yahoogroups.com /*Subject:*/ [digitalradio] Re: Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages) --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com, Toby Burnett ruff...@... .. But to be honest I don'' t think I shall bother too now as there seems much to much grief happening from this. Like I say, it seemed a fair experimental mode but it is wider than .. It'd be nice to see something other than ROS comments on the digi reflector group. For a change. Yeah let's stop our support for ROS on this group as well as on K3UK's sked page... Let us created two camps: the ROS haters and the ROS lovers...the good guys and the bad guys, and all in the name of the ham radio spirit of course!! :-O Marc, PD4U -- MSc. Ing. José Angel Amador Fundora Profesor Auxiliar Departamento de Telecomunicaciones Facultad de Ing. Eléctrica, CUJAE Calle 114 # 11901 e/119 y 127 Marianao 19390 Ciudad de la Habana, Cuba Tel: (53 7) 266-3445 Mail: amador at electrica.cujae.edu.cu
[digitalradio] Re: Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages)
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Toby Burnett ruff...@... wrote: The debate is getting out of hand (period) I think we can all agree on that, so let's stop it here. And let's go on with our hobby. Though I have some doubts that there actually was a debate. There have been arguments as in all debates. But the figurative meaning of the arguments was getting the overhand over the literal meaning of arguments in a debate...HIHI Marc
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages)
I really don't think there any ROS haters. ROS is a mode that is fun to use and works well. There may be some who complain that it interferes with the NCDXF beacon network, but the suggested frequency was then moved upward, in the true spirit of cooperation. However, there is a misconception about those whose motives are only to obey the regulations they MUST live under, and the understandable need to clarify what is legal or not, so they do not risk penalties or citations for illegal operation. The problem was created by the author himself by first posting a seven page document purportedly claiming it was FHSS (and in no uncertain terms!), and then totally revising the description to say it is actually FSK144 (at the suggestion of someone who said that would make it legal somehow). It was the author that first characterized that anyone who is not with me is against me and that anyone even questioning the legality of ROS should be banned ( such as myself) or punished ( locked out of using the mode by being singled out and included in a non grata list). I do feel sympathy for Jose, and appreciation for his very fine work, but it was HIS mistake in the beginning and continuing to make more mistakes that made it even worse that has led to the current situation. He is not being banned by Andy, only not actively promoted, which I think is a totally appropriate and diplomatic response to the banning of others. Especially in an open forum and world of amateur radio, banning or punishing anyone for their stated opinions is simply unacceptable. An apology from Jose might result in forgiveness from those harmed and we could then can get on with the job of either using the mode, or being sure we use it in accordance with our own administrations, or petition for use under whatever limitations are necessary to accomodate other users of the same bands in a cooperative manner. 73 - Skip KH6TY pd4u_dares wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com, Toby Burnett ruff...@... .. But to be honest I don'' t think I shall bother too now as there seems much to much grief happening from this. Like I say, it seemed a fair experimental mode but it is wider than .. It'd be nice to see something other than ROS comments on the digi reflector group. For a change. Yeah let's stop our support for ROS on this group as well as on K3UK's sked page... Let us created two camps: the ROS haters and the ROS lovers...the good guys and the bad guys, and all in the name of the ham radio spirit of course!! :-O Marc, PD4U
RE: [digitalradio] K3UK hogwash statement(s) or just a childish adult food fight
Toby MM0TOB Jose gave all Amateurs a gift in my view. My copy was free es latest beta version was free. My payment was improvement suggestions es reports of bugs to Jose. Man what a deal! Jose is not the enemy es never was, but better described as a hero in my book. Giving the hobby a bit of needed hope, shot-in-the-arm for our struggling brotherly existence. Personally, I am envious of José's hard earned telecommunications engineering knowledge, programming skills the end results of his effort. Bravo Jose, well done. [their isn't much room on the bands anyway.] sadly true. My employees, the FCC, are not going to grant Amateurs additional spectrum without some serious prodding by Amateurs es ARRL es powers that be. Amateurs' take a FCC back seat, we are not wealthy corrupt uncaring greedy corporate giants dolling out political favors in the form of greenbacks. My FCC eagerly sleeps with the Amateurs enemy. I believe the FCC see Amateurs as something similar as annoying gum on the bottom of their wingtip shoes on a hot summer day. The FCC could care less whether Amateurs continue to hang around or suddenly disappear tomorrow. The instant we disappear, I predict the FCC displaying glowing devilish dollar sign eyes feverishly scrambling , immediately begin to sell off our hard earned, well deserved, hard earned miniscule es now quite spectrum sliver. The FCC views Amateurs as a road block to multi millions (if not multi billions) to their coffer. Amateurs can rightfully claim they paid dues in full a long time back, the proverbial check was in the mail a century ago, many of Amateurs have more than paid their dues to get to your current Amateur status, could rightfully demand some change ($) back. If it's not to much to expect, perhaps some additional usable, practical spectrum. 1 and/or 2 things need to happen in our favor, (safe to say, longtime overdue) my voice the ARRL (a dues paying member es I donate to the ARRL spectrum fund) needs to locate their cajones es actively, aggressively acquire rightfully owed privileges, (many frequencies collecting dust as world communications move towards reliable satellite communications) those lonely neglected spectrum spots not being actively utilized es wasted. Aggressively hounding the International Telecommunication Union and/or International Amateur Radio Union if required. Frankly, the allocated channelized 60 meters is a slap in the face, amounts to nothing more then table scraps or leftovers. I believe Norway/Bangladesh are not rock bound es times have changed. The second option for favorable, revolution, nothing else will force changes to our genuine legitimate Amateur desires. I guess there is a third consideration, we sit on our proverbial asses *%$ing away whining our lives away, hopeful for a vy unlikely GOD like miracle while holding out both hands to see which fills first. rgrds Craig kq6i Peace, long-life, es gud DX! © P.S. Free advice, Grow up... -Original Message- From: Toby Burnett [mailto:ruff...@hebrides.net] Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2010 6:09 AM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages)
Re: [digitalradio] Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages)
Hi Phil, I have followed this from the beginning and to be honest it sickens me. People raise a legitimate question because of the author's own wording and Jose became hostile over it. Now he is going to ban people from his program and all future programs that he writes. Why are we putting up with this small minded arrogant person? He gives amateurs a bad name and I have no intension of using his program, so if he wants to ban me go right ahead it's no skin off my nose. Amateurs in the US have to abide by the FCC rules, period. We have no choice even if they are not inline with the rest of the world, so raising a legitimate question was not wrong. In my opinion Jose can take his toys and go home we don't need him in the sandbox. 73 de k1eg Mike Phil Barnett wrote: On Wed, 2010-03-03 at 07:56 -0500, Andy obrien wrote: Some people think to keep telling lies on Internet blogs is going to go free. People still trying to outlaw ROS although the FCC has given approval will not be able to make any QSO with ROS or any of the projects I have designed for the future. “Non Grata” List: K5OKC, AA6YQ, M6RDP,PE4BAS,KQ7W,ZL4PLM,DL4PLM,GM4PLM,NN4RH We dare not point out that the Emperor is not wearing any clothing... Pathetic. Try Hamspots, PSKreporter, and K3UK Sked Page http://www.obriensweb.com/skedpskr4.html Suggesting calling frequencies: Modes 500Hz 3583,7073,14073,18103, 21073,24923, 28123 . Wider modes e.g. Olivia 32/1000, ROS16, ALE: 14109.7088. Yahoo! Groups Links
[digitalradio] ROS
Earlier this morning, I called the FCC to confirm the FCC: ROS LEGAL IN USA assertion made in http://rosmodem.wordpress.com/ I asked for confirmation that the FCC had deemed ROS legal for use on HF by US amateurs. When asked for a case number, I provided the case number given on the above web page -- but was informed that this case number refers to a password reset request, not ROS. I asked if I could speak with agent 3820, and was immediately connected; her name is Dawn. I gave Dawn the above URL, and read her the salient paragraph. She said that the information about ROS legality posted on the above web site was not accurate. Dawn went on to say that FCC staff members were working on this issue, and asked me to not make public comments until further progress had been made. She offered to call me at that time. Dawn called me a few minutes ago, and stated that FCC staff consider the information on the above web page to be out of context and misleading. She further stated that FCC staff is working with the ARRL on this issue, and that the outcome will be publicized by the ARRL. Dawn expects this to happen soon; there is nothing related to ROS posted on http://www.arrl.org/ as of a few minutes ago. Note that all telephone conversations with FCC personnel are recorded. 73, Dave, AA6YQ
[digitalradio] Re: ROS
installed a new version? Rebooting PC and restarting ROS again helped me when no text appeared. When you push the PTT button anyway ROS transmit idle tones until you push the stop buttun again. Running version 2.2.2 FB here. Marc --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, David Michael Gaytko // WD4KPD wd4...@... wrote: of a sudden, when i click on any of the buttons, i see no text show up in the window. i seem to be transmitting and got some email feedback for my last transmissions, but nothing shows the text going out. wierd...opened the Fuentes folder, and see the Teletype TTF font file. when i open it, it shows empty ! anyone run into this yet ? david/wd4kpd
[digitalradio] Re: ROS
even more reason to stop this debate, because no definitive position of the FCC is published. Basta!
[digitalradio] Re: ROS
So we all know that we don't know if ROS is legal in the land of the free and the brave... or not. Thus there is no debate possible anymore that makes any sense without an official publication of the FCC. Since it is not legal, nor illegal, to beta test ROS in the US at the moment. I see no reason to not continue ROS beta testing for [free and brave] US stations. And I see a very good reason in ur [recorded] in inquiry to stop the discussion here for the moment. Marc, PD4U p.s. we had those !#$%^% Spaniards all over the place and making theit=r own rules in the low country for 80 years!! So we Dutch appreciate freedom now, and go for holidays to Spain.
[digitalradio] RE: ROS
For the record, I have no problem with the ROS mode whatsoever. Soon after its announcement, I emailed the developer offering interoperation with DXLab -- an offer that stands. Developing a great new mode or application does not entitle one to threaten, belittle, or mock those who respond with scathing criticism, much less those who simply ask questions. I strongly disagree with attempts to position legitimate concerns about ROS legality on the part of US amateurs as evidence of a bias against innovation in amateur radio. In response to such a claim on the ROS reflector yesterday, I posted the message below. 73, Dave, AA6YQ From: rosdigitalmodemgr...@yahoogroups.com On Behalf Of Dave AA6YQ Sent: Tuesday, March 02, 2010 4:08 PM To: rosdigitalmodemgr...@yahoogroups.com Subject: RE: [ROSDIGITALMODEMGROUP] Experimentation and Amateur Radio 1. The author publicly described ROS as spread spectrum 2. Hams in the US are required to determine whether a mode is legal in the US before using it 3. In the US, spread spectrum is not legal on HF bands #1 was an egregious technical error. A engineer making a mistake of this magnitude should exhibit contrition and patience, not belligerance and outrage. Threatening legal action against a ham attempting in good faith to fulfil obligation #2 was far outside the spirit of amateur radio -- and from a legal perspective, ridiculous. Framing the amateur community's reaction as anti-innovation is disingenuous; we've seen many new digital modes from all quarters over the years, and none produced anything close to this situation. Had the author correctly described ROS from the outset, or had he forthrightly corrected his error without lashing out at everyone who sought to understand what technology ROS actually employs so they could confidently use this attractive new mode, this teapot tempest would never have occurred. You reap what you sow. 73, Dave, AA6YQ
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages)
pd4u_dares wrote: Though I have some doubts that there actually was a debate. There have been arguments as in all debates. But the figurative meaning of the arguments was getting the overhand over the literal meaning of arguments in a debate...HIHI Marc, on many occasions I have had to decide will anything I say alter their opinion and, would anything they say alter mine? If the answer to both parts is 'no' then there is no debate, it's just an argument where neither side will back down. Dave (G0DJA)
[digitalradio] Re: Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages)
Oh ja... someone raises a supposed illegality, and Jose changed the discription BECAUSE of that SUPPOSED illegaly. And he is to blame... I think all of us are to blaim for this flaming thread. No one excluded. So let's continue betatesting since we do not know if it illegal or not, in the through ham spirit. We enjoy experiments as HAM's by definition of the 'ham spirit', isn't it? So let's leave the history of this debate to HAM radio historians, and await their official publication HI. Marc --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, KH6TY kh...@... wrote: I really don't think there any ROS haters. ROS is a mode that is fun to use and works well. There may be some who complain that it interferes with the NCDXF beacon network, but the suggested frequency was then moved upward, in the true spirit of cooperation. However, there is a misconception about those whose motives are only to obey the regulations they MUST live under, and the understandable need to clarify what is legal or not, so they do not risk penalties or citations for illegal operation. The problem was created by the author himself by first posting a seven page document purportedly claiming it was FHSS (and in no uncertain terms!), and then totally revising the description to say it is actually FSK144 (at the suggestion of someone who said that would make it legal somehow). It was the author that first characterized that anyone who is not with me is against me and that anyone even questioning the legality of ROS should be banned ( such as myself) or punished ( locked out of using the mode by being singled out and included in a non grata list). I do feel sympathy for Jose, and appreciation for his very fine work, but it was HIS mistake in the beginning and continuing to make more mistakes that made it even worse that has led to the current situation. He is not being banned by Andy, only not actively promoted, which I think is a totally appropriate and diplomatic response to the banning of others. Especially in an open forum and world of amateur radio, banning or punishing anyone for their stated opinions is simply unacceptable. An apology from Jose might result in forgiveness from those harmed and we could then can get on with the job of either using the mode, or being sure we use it in accordance with our own administrations, or petition for use under whatever limitations are necessary to accomodate other users of the same bands in a cooperative manner. 73 - Skip KH6TY pd4u_dares wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com, Toby Burnett ruffdog@ .. But to be honest I don'' t think I shall bother too now as there seems much to much grief happening from this. Like I say, it seemed a fair experimental mode but it is wider than .. It'd be nice to see something other than ROS comments on the digi reflector group. For a change. Yeah let's stop our support for ROS on this group as well as on K3UK's sked page... Let us created two camps: the ROS haters and the ROS lovers...the good guys and the bad guys, and all in the name of the ham radio spirit of course!! :-O Marc, PD4U
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages)
pd4u_dares wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Toby Burnett ruff...@... .. But to be honest I don'' t think I shall bother too now as there seems much to much grief happening from this. Like I say, it seemed a fair experimental mode but it is wider than .. It'd be nice to see something other than ROS comments on the digi reflector group. For a change. Yeah let's stop our support for ROS on this group as well as on K3UK's sked page... Let us created two camps: the ROS haters and the ROS lovers...the good guys and the bad guys, and all in the name of the ham radio spirit of course!! Unfortunately, Marc, it has happened so many times in the past. In the end, it all boils down to 'do you want to use it, or do you not want to use it?' If you do, then do, if you don't, then don't... Dave (G0DJA)
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages)
Alan Barrow wrote: And think real hard next time before calling the FCC. Ham radio was the net loser in this episode. We are already viewed as squabbling children at the FCC, and this type of episode just reinforces that view of amateur radio. And so it was in the UK over the endless debates about Packet/AX:25, PSK31 and the use of satellite transponders from VHF to UHF. In the end, all of those debates were ended by a 'don't be so silly' statement that changed not one rule, but told people to 'play nice', in effect. Dave (G0DJA)
[digitalradio] Re: Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages)
--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, KH6TY kh...@... wrote: I really don't think there any ROS haters. Me neither, just using a hyperbole to prevent it becomes that cae in the future. And ur right, Jose has done a good programming job in a short time so far. The rest of his REactions are understandable in Andy's (K3UK) own words, and are irrelevant for the subject matter of this digital radio group. So... what do we have here? A whole lot of nothing. Though that is logically impossible, we ALL have just created it! HI :-) Marc
RE: [digitalradio] Re: Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages)
Gang: I am out of here for now, will try again in a month when the smoke settles.. Fred CIW649/VE3FAL CFARS Member SATERN Member SATERN Amateur Radio Liaison Officer DEC Amethyst District ARES Try Hamspots, PSKreporter, and K3UK Sked Page http://www.obriensweb.com/skedpskr4.html Suggesting calling frequencies: Modes 500Hz 3583,7073,14073,18103, 21073,24923, 28123 . Wider modes e.g. Olivia 32/1000, ROS16, ALE: 14109.7088. Yahoo! Groups Links
[digitalradio] Re: ROS
Interesting ... The text of the FCC: ROS LEGAL IN USA assertion seems to be missing from that site now. --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Dave AA6YQ aa...@... wrote: Earlier this morning, I called the FCC to confirm the FCC: ROS LEGAL IN USA assertion made in http://rosmodem.wordpress.com/ I asked for confirmation that the FCC had deemed ROS legal for use on HF by US amateurs. When asked for a case number, I provided the case number given on the above web page -- but was informed that this case number refers to a password reset request, not ROS. I asked if I could speak with agent 3820, and was immediately connected; her name is Dawn. I gave Dawn the above URL, and read her the salient paragraph. She said that the information about ROS legality posted on the above web site was not accurate. Dawn went on to say that FCC staff members were working on this issue, and asked me to not make public comments until further progress had been made. She offered to call me at that time. Dawn called me a few minutes ago, and stated that FCC staff consider the information on the above web page to be out of context and misleading. She further stated that FCC staff is working with the ARRL on this issue, and that the outcome will be publicized by the ARRL. Dawn expects this to happen soon; there is nothing related to ROS posted on http://www.arrl.org/ as of a few minutes ago. Note that all telephone conversations with FCC personnel are recorded. 73, Dave, AA6YQ
Re: [digitalradio] Re: Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages)
Pst! Marc! Uh, 'scuse me but the only one uttering such thoughts thus far is YOU. No one else, just YOU. You might want to cool down the dramatics and take a breath, less you attract others with the same flair and end up creating a self-fulfilling prophecy. Howard W6IDS Richmond, IN EM79NV OH, and BTW, let me add that, in the spirit of fairness, I have absolutely ZERO desire to BETA test ROS nor any other software suite the author creates for submission to the Amateur Community. That's MY own public declaration, as a group of ONE. AND NO, you can't join. C'mon, Marc. How can you possibly have enough interested parties, in something like ROS, to create GROUPS of haters and lovers? PULEEZE! - Original Message - From: pd4u_dares p...@hotmail.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Wednesday, March 03, 2010 10:45 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Statement on Withdrawal of Support for ROS (K3UK Sked Pages) --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Toby Burnett ruff...@... .. But to be honest I don'' t think I shall bother too now as there seems much to much grief happening from this. Like I say, it seemed a fair experimental mode but it is wider than .. It'd be nice to see something other than ROS comments on the digi reflector group. For a change. Yeah let's stop our support for ROS on this group as well as on K3UK's sked page... Let us created two camps: the ROS haters and the ROS lovers...the good guys and the bad guys, and all in the name of the ham radio spirit of course!! :-O Marc, PD4U
[digitalradio] ROS rationing
Thanks to all those that expressed views, nice to see varying opinions. I will be rationing ROS related posts for the next few days. No email will be censored, I will simply send them through to the group in dribs and drabs, so that we can focus on a wider array of digital mode topics. Andy K3UK
[digitalradio] Re: I second the motion
Let's continue the experiment in the true spirit of HAM radio. So far no one has tabled an actual piece of legal document stating the legality of the mode. So continue to use the mode until otherwise told. Mark (VK2KLJ) On 04/03/2010, at 6:33 AM, pd4u_dares p...@hotmail.com wrote: Oh ja... someone raises a supposed illegality, and Jose changed the discription BECAUSE of that SUPPOSED illegaly. And he is to blame... I think all of us are to blaim for this flaming thread. No one excluded. So let's continue betatesting since we do not know if it illegal or not, in the through ham spirit. We enjoy experiments as HAM's by definition of the 'ham spirit', isn't it? So let's leave the history of this debate to HAM radio historians, and await their official publication HI. Marc --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, KH6TY kh...@... wrote: I really don't think there any ROS haters. ROS is a mode that is fun to use and works well. There may be some who complain that it interferes with the NCDXF beacon network, but the suggested frequency was then moved upward, in the true spirit of cooperation. However, there is a misconception about those whose motives are only to obey the regulations they MUST live under, and the understandable need to clarify what is legal or not, so they do not risk penalties or citations for illegal operation. The problem was created by the author himself by first posting a seven page document purportedly claiming it was FHSS (and in no uncertain terms!), and then totally revising the description to say it is actually FSK144 (at the suggestion of someone who said that would make it legal somehow). It was the author that first characterized that anyone who is not with me is against me and that anyone even questioning the legality of ROS should be banned ( such as myself) or punished ( locked out of using the mode by being singled out and included in a non grata list). I do feel sympathy for Jose, and appreciation for his very fine work, but it was HIS mistake in the beginning and continuing to make more mistakes that made it even worse that has led to the current situation. He is not being banned by Andy, only not actively promoted, which I think is a totally appropriate and diplomatic response to the banning of others. Especially in an open forum and world of amateur radio, banning or punishing anyone for their stated opinions is simply unacceptable. An apology from Jose might result in forgiveness from those harmed and we could then can get on with the job of either using the mode, or being sure we use it in accordance with our own administrations, or petition for use under whatever limitations are necessary to accomodate other users of the same bands in a cooperative manner. 73 - Skip KH6TY pd4u_dares wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com, Toby Burnett ruffdog@ .. But to be honest I don'' t think I shall bother too now as there seems much to much grief happening from this. Like I say, it seemed a fair experimental mode but it is wider than .. It'd be nice to see something other than ROS comments on the digi reflector group. For a change. Yeah let's stop our support for ROS on this group as well as on K3UK's sked page... Let us created two camps: the ROS haters and the ROS lovers...the good guys and the bad guys, and all in the name of the ham radio spirit of course!! :-O Marc, PD4U Try Hamspots, PSKreporter, and K3UK Sked Page http://www.obriensweb.com/skedpskr4.html Suggesting calling frequencies: Modes 500Hz 3583,7073,14073,18103, 21073,24923, 28123 . Wider modes e.g. Olivia 32/1000, ROS16, ALE: 14109.7088. Yahoo! Groups Links
[digitalradio] TS-850S and ROS
I downloaded ROS the other day and just tried it for the first time today, but it will not key my transmitter. I have my Kenwood on Com1 but I see there are not other setting for the comm port. Thanks, 73s, Tom
Re: [digitalradio] ROS
I was about to call myself since I couldn't find anything on the FCC site about it, no ROS, no such case number no nothing. From: Dave AA6YQ aa...@ambersoft.com To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com; rosdigitalmodemgr...@yahoogroups.com Cc: Skip Teller KH6TY htel...@comcast.net; Andy K3UK k...@obriensweb.com; Dave Bernstein AA6YQ aa...@ambersoft.com Sent: Wed, March 3, 2010 12:06:06 PM Subject: [digitalradio] ROS Earlier this morning, I called the FCC to confirm the FCC: ROS LEGAL IN USA assertion made in http://rosmodem. wordpress. com/ I asked for confirmation that the FCC had deemed ROS legal for use on HF by US amateurs. When asked for a case number, I provided the case number given on the above web page -- but was informed that this case number refers to a password reset request, not ROS. I asked if I could speak with agent 3820, and was immediately connected; her name is Dawn. I gave Dawn the above URL, and read her the salient paragraph. She said that the information about ROS legality posted on the above web site was not accurate. Dawn went on to say that FCC staff members were working on this issue, and asked me to not make public comments until further progress had been made. She offered to call me at that time. Dawn called me a few minutes ago, and stated that FCC staff consider the information on the above web page to be out of context and misleading. She further stated that FCC staff is working with the ARRL on this issue, and that the outcome will be publicized by the ARRL. Dawn expects this to happen soon; there is nothing related to ROS posted on http://www.arrl. org/ as of a few minutes ago. Note that all telephone conversations with FCC personnel are recorded. 73, Dave, AA6YQ
Re: [digitalradio] TS-850S and ROS
The latest version has support for different comm ports. Andy K3UK On Wed, Mar 3, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Tom wd8...@rocketmail.com wrote: I downloaded ROS the other day and just tried it for the first time today, but it will not key my transmitter. I have my Kenwood on Com1 but I see there are not other setting for the comm port. Thanks, 73s, Tom
[digitalradio] Re: ROS Soundcard select .. missing tx option for usb card
Just installed 2-3-1 .. can see and select the usb sound card (ADS) however ... after clicking on save .. all looked to be ok .. but once the 'ptt' is selected .. the tx audio reverts to the pc on board sound card and the options in the select box are re -set to the motherboard sound card .. will not save the usb card .. com port tx is working ok ... something is re setting the sound card when the tx button is clicked .. rx card can be re selected and prog rx is then ok .. till next click of the ptt close .. so close :) G .. --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, jose alberto nieto ros nietoro...@... wrote: try download v2.2.2 De: wa4sca alanbiddl...@... Para: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Enviado: mié,3 marzo, 2010 01:33 Asunto: [digitalradio] Re: ROS Soundcard select .. missing tx option for usb card  Guessing you have a SignaLink USB card? I found, or better didn't find, the same thing. I checked 3 other programs to see if it had gotten lost, but they found it just fine. No doubt it will be discovered in the next revision. ;) Alan WA4SCA
