[digitalradio] Re: Vista Run-time error - with new mode

[Tony]

David,

> I have installed the program after using WinRAR to open the archive. 
> However, when trying to run the program I get this error
> message Run-time error '53': File not found: Switch(16638-29712).ocx I am 
> using Vista 32 bit English OS David JG1CYJ

I'm getting the same error message with Vista.

Tony -K2MO








Try Hamspots, PSKreporter, and K3UK Sked Page 
http://www.obriensweb.com/skedpskr4.html
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] Re: Vista

[Peter G. Viscarola]

> How about a free open source Windows replacement?
http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html

This is not a serious effort... Think kids playing in their bedrooms as
mom cooks dinner.  And that's not even considering the complexity of the
Intellectual Property issues involved.

de Peter K1PGV

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Vista

[Rick]

I looked at this only a few weeks ago when I first heard about it. The 
concept is very interesting since it would give you a faster and lighter 
Windows 2000 kind of OS. The problem is that it has been worked on for 
10 years and has a long way to go as it is only now reaching late alpha 
at version 0.4. There is a great deal of further work to be done and it 
is difficult to know how many people are behind this effort or whether 
it could ever become practical to use. Even the TCP/IP stack is very 
poor from reading some of the reviews, and in order to make the OS 
successful, many disparate parts have to be rewritten and optimized. An 
OS needs the synergy of all the parts working simultaneously in order 
for it to work successfully.

73,

Rick, KV9U


Howard Brown wrote:
> How about a free open source Windows replacement? 
> http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html
>
> "ReactOS ® is an advanced free 
> open source  operating system 
> providing a ground-up implementation of a Microsoft Windows® XP 
> compatible operating system 
> ."

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Vista

[Rick]

I might draw the attention of of those interested in software written 
for Vista by looking at KR1ST's multimode text digital program, Airlink 
Express. He must have worked out any sound issues since he is actually 
using Mako Mori's MMVari DSP engine.

As he puts it in his help file (which works under Vista), it has 
backward compatibility with XP SP2, support for multiple soundcards, 
instant replay for up to 60 seconds.

It does not have sophisticated rig control such as you find on DX 
Commander interfaced with Multipsk or Ham Radio Deluxe/Digital Master 
780, but overall it seems like a very nice program.

More information available at:

http://www.airlinkexpress.org/

73,

Rick, KV9U



rojomn wrote:
> The only real issue I see frequently is for users of MMTTY and PsKcore 
> that want to use other than the default sound card. In Vista they 
> cannot. Other than that I see no problems.
>  
>
> Gil, W0MN http://webpages.charter.net/gbaron
> N 44.082147  W 92.513085 1050'
> Hierro Candente, Batir de repente
>
>  
>
> 
> *From:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *On Behalf Of *Ronald Collins
> *Sent:* Thursday, March 27, 2008 1:21 PM
> *To:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> *Subject:* Re: [digitalradio] Re: Vista
>
> Well let's see, Vista does duplex sound, as a matter of fact I use
> it every day the games I play online in the games voip capability.
> Also it depends on if your sound card or hardware supports it. For
> the last year I have not had any issues with using any software on
> Vista Ultimate which is what i'm using as long as it's 32 bit.
> Some people are still stuck in the DOS days. I've seen people
> claim that Vista can't do this can't do that and all they are
> doing is repeating word of mouth.  Heck i've seen most of the
> people who claim bad experiences with it, never even tried the OS.
> I still have a version of Pacterm 1.5 that runs stable as can be
> on Vista. So people unless you actually tried the operating system
> to see if it handled everything ok, because you will all get a
> different answer from every person you talk to especially those
> with biases about certain software from the get go.
>  
>  
>  R Collins
>
>  
>
> 
> 
>
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG. 
> Version: 7.5.519 / Virus Database: 269.22.1/1347 - Release Date: 3/27/2008 
> 7:15 PM
>   

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Vista

[Howard Brown]

How about a free open source Windows replacement? 
http://www.reactos.org/en/index.html

 "ReactOS® is an advanced free open source operating system providing a 
ground-up implementation of a Microsoft Windows® XP compatible operating 
system."

- Original Message 
From: Dave Bernstein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 7:59:01 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Vista

>>>AA6YQ comments below

--- In digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com, "n7zxp"  wrote:

I have been sitting here reading all this things about Vista. Now 
lets go back to when XP was new. Everyone said and wrote all this 
stuff about XP. 

>>>That's not true, Lane. At birth, Windows XP was broadly praised 
for its stable kernel (inherited form NT), strong device support, and 
freedom from the architectural "resource exhaustion" defect in the 
Windows 9X family.

Before that it was Win98 and so on. I am heavy into 
the computer industry and a programmer. Most all of the people that 
write all this neg about Vista have no idea about what they are 
talking about.

>>>I spent days tracking down the runtime defect that results in the 
Vista File Manager completely corrupting the screen if an application 
updates its title bar with any frequency (e.g. to present the current 
UTC time). Fortunately, I'd recently met with the manager  
responsible for these runtimes and sent him a minimal faulting 
program; as a result, Microsoft issued a hotfix and (I hope) included 
the correction in SP1. The fact that his dad was a ham helped a 
little... 

>>>The change in the sound APIs that limits the use of PSKCORE and 
MMTTY is similarly cut-and-dried and indefensible violation of upward 
compatibility.

Vista is a good program and is superior to XP. 

>>>None of the "pillars of Longhorn" -- the key sources of end user 
value -- made it out the door in Vista. All that's left is Aero's eye 
candy and the immensely intrusive User Account Control (UAC). If 
Vista offered any significant advantages, enterprise adoption 
wouldn't be well below 5%, and Microsoft wouldn't be dropping the 
price a year after launch.

If people take the time to update drivers and software that is 
normaly free they would have no problems. But they would rather grip. 
I run MANY Ham related programs and have updated and no problems. The 
one's that are not updated yet are being worked on by the software 
makers.

>>>The technical and financial litmus test for an operating system is 
not "some programs work". Its *all* programs work.

The amount of work involved in a new OS is behond the comprihention 
of most all people. If you think this is wrong sit down right now and 
write a program that will play a simple card game. Now imagine what 
goes into a program as complex as Vista or XP.

>>>As an operating system, Vista is conceptually trivial; it 
implements nothing that wasn't well understood 30 years ago. Its 
complexity arises from the absence of a resilient architecture, long-
term accretion without refactoring, and a poor software software 
development process. All of these were and are avoidable. Microsoft 
finally appears to be addressing some of this with MinWin (see for 
example http://www.crn. com/software/ 202404947 ).

As far as he goverment  goes they are happy with Vista as they are he 
one's who requested to have all the security features in the Vista.

>>>Everyone wanted Microsoft to produce a more secure implementation 
of Windows. But UAC is so annoying that most users disable it. That's 
hardly progress.

Do you really think Bill Gates makes a new OS and does not talk to 
them as for as what they want. Think people... 

>>>Then how would you explain the extraordinarly low adoption rate of 
Vista by companies -- around 3% when last I checked. The primary 
driver for Vista adoption has been PC manufacturers bundling it with 
new models, much to their user's unhappiness. Microsoft has already 
extended the "XP is no longer available on new PCs" date by 6 months, 
and has dropped the price of Vista to encourage sales. If there were 
anything of compelling value in Vista, none of that would be 
necessary -- even with all of Vista's defects.

No matter who makes a new program knows it will have bugs.

>>>That's a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you're a programmer and you 
think that way, then your work is practically guaranteed to  contain 
defects. 

They turn it lose on the public becouse instead of having just the 
Microsoft crew give reports they have the world. When people give 
reports on the OS they mke changes. Thats what a update is. If they 
did not do it this way we would all be using DOS. Would that not be 
fun. 

>>>That is not true. Had Microsoft used modern software en

RE: [digitalradio] Re: Vista

[rojomn]

Nobody could have said it better Dave. You have put it exactly where it
belongs.

> >>>The change in the sound APIs that limits the use of PSKCORE and
> MMTTY is similarly cut-and-dried and indefensible violation 
> of upward compatibility. 

This paragraph of yours really says it all.

Gil, W0MN http://webpages.charter.net/gbaron
N 44.082147  W 92.513085 1050'
Hierro Candente, Batir de repente  

> -Original Message-
> From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com 
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dave Bernstein
> Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 7:59 PM
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Vista
> 
> >>>AA6YQ comments below
> 
> --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "n7zxp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 


SNIPPED>>


 

RE: [digitalradio] Re: Vista

[Dave AA6YQ]

That was supposed to be 'The cost of poor quality software to the
organization that produces and maintains it is enormous."

73,

   Dave, AA6YQ

-Original Message-
From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Behalf Of Dave Bernstein
Sent: Friday, March 28, 2008 8:59 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Vista


>>>AA6YQ comments below

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "n7zxp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I have been sitting here reading all this things about Vista. Now
lets go back to when XP was new. Everyone said and wrote all this
stuff about XP.

>>>That's not true, Lane. At birth, Windows XP was broadly praised
for its stable kernel (inherited form NT), strong device support, and
freedom from the architectural "resource exhaustion" defect in the
Windows 9X family.

Before that it was Win98 and so on. I am heavy into
the computer industry and a programmer. Most all of the people that
write all this neg about Vista have no idea about what they are
talking about.

>>>I spent days tracking down the runtime defect that results in the
Vista File Manager completely corrupting the screen if an application
updates its title bar with any frequency (e.g. to present the current
UTC time). Fortunately, I'd recently met with the manager
responsible for these runtimes and sent him a minimal faulting
program; as a result, Microsoft issued a hotfix and (I hope) included
the correction in SP1. The fact that his dad was a ham helped a
little...

>>>The change in the sound APIs that limits the use of PSKCORE and
MMTTY is similarly cut-and-dried and indefensible violation of upward
compatibility.

Vista is a good program and is superior to XP.

>>>None of the "pillars of Longhorn" -- the key sources of end user
value -- made it out the door in Vista. All that's left is Aero's eye
candy and the immensely intrusive User Account Control (UAC). If
Vista offered any significant advantages, enterprise adoption
wouldn't be well below 5%, and Microsoft wouldn't be dropping the
price a year after launch.

If people take the time to update drivers and software that is
normaly free they would have no problems. But they would rather grip.
I run MANY Ham related programs and have updated and no problems. The
one's that are not updated yet are being worked on by the software
makers.

>>>The technical and financial litmus test for an operating system is
not "some programs work". Its *all* programs work.

The amount of work involved in a new OS is behond the comprihention
of most all people. If you think this is wrong sit down right now and
write a program that will play a simple card game. Now imagine what
goes into a program as complex as Vista or XP.

>>>As an operating system, Vista is conceptually trivial; it
implements nothing that wasn't well understood 30 years ago. Its
complexity arises from the absence of a resilient architecture, long-
term accretion without refactoring, and a poor software software
development process. All of these were and are avoidable. Microsoft
finally appears to be addressing some of this with MinWin (see for
example http://www.crn.com/software/202404947 ).

As far as he goverment goes they are happy with Vista as they are he
one's who requested to have all the security features in the Vista.

>>>Everyone wanted Microsoft to produce a more secure implementation
of Windows. But UAC is so annoying that most users disable it. That's
hardly progress.

Do you really think Bill Gates makes a new OS and does not talk to
them as for as what they want. Think people...

>>>Then how would you explain the extraordinarly low adoption rate of
Vista by companies -- around 3% when last I checked. The primary
driver for Vista adoption has been PC manufacturers bundling it with
new models, much to their user's unhappiness. Microsoft has already
extended the "XP is no longer available on new PCs" date by 6 months,
and has dropped the price of Vista to encourage sales. If there were
anything of compelling value in Vista, none of that would be
necessary -- even with all of Vista's defects.

No matter who makes a new program knows it will have bugs.

>>>That's a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you're a programmer and you
think that way, then your work is practically guaranteed to contain
defects.

They turn it lose on the public becouse instead of having just the
Microsoft crew give reports they have the world. When people give
reports on the OS they mke changes. Thats what a update is. If they
did not do it this way we would all be using DOS. Would that not be
fun.

>>>That is not true. Had Microsoft used modern software engineering
practice to build Windows, its engineers would be spending a far
greater fraction of their time introd

[digitalradio] Re: Vista

[Dave Bernstein]

>>>AA6YQ comments below

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "n7zxp" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

I have been sitting here reading all this things about Vista. Now 
lets go back to when XP was new. Everyone said and wrote all this 
stuff about XP. 

>>>That's not true, Lane. At birth, Windows XP was broadly praised 
for its stable kernel (inherited form NT), strong device support, and 
freedom from the architectural "resource exhaustion" defect in the 
Windows 9X family.

Before that it was Win98 and so on. I am heavy into 
the computer industry and a programmer. Most all of the people that 
write all this neg about Vista have no idea about what they are 
talking about.

>>>I spent days tracking down the runtime defect that results in the 
Vista File Manager completely corrupting the screen if an application 
updates its title bar with any frequency (e.g. to present the current 
UTC time). Fortunately, I'd recently met with the manager  
responsible for these runtimes and sent him a minimal faulting 
program; as a result, Microsoft issued a hotfix and (I hope) included 
the correction in SP1. The fact that his dad was a ham helped a 
little... 

>>>The change in the sound APIs that limits the use of PSKCORE and 
MMTTY is similarly cut-and-dried and indefensible violation of upward 
compatibility.


Vista is a good program and is superior to XP. 

>>>None of the "pillars of Longhorn" -- the key sources of end user 
value -- made it out the door in Vista. All that's left is Aero's eye 
candy and the immensely intrusive User Account Control (UAC). If 
Vista offered any significant advantages, enterprise adoption 
wouldn't be well below 5%, and Microsoft wouldn't be dropping the 
price a year after launch.


If people take the time to update drivers and software that is 
normaly free they would have no problems. But they would rather grip. 
I run MANY Ham related programs and have updated and no problems. The 
one's that are not updated yet are being worked on by the software 
makers.

>>>The technical and financial litmus test for an operating system is 
not "some programs work". Its *all* programs work.


The amount of work involved in a new OS is behond the comprihention 
of most all people. If you think this is wrong sit down right now and 
write a program that will play a simple card game. Now imagine what 
goes into a program as complex as Vista or XP.

>>>As an operating system, Vista is conceptually trivial; it 
implements nothing that wasn't well understood 30 years ago. Its 
complexity arises from the absence of a resilient architecture, long-
term accretion without refactoring, and a poor software software 
development process. All of these were and are avoidable. Microsoft 
finally appears to be addressing some of this with MinWin (see for 
example http://www.crn.com/software/202404947 ).


As far as he goverment  goes they are happy with Vista as they are he 
one's who requested to have all the security features in the Vista.

>>>Everyone wanted Microsoft to produce a more secure implementation 
of Windows. But UAC is so annoying that most users disable it. That's 
hardly progress.


Do you really think Bill Gates makes a new OS and does not talk to 
them as for as what they want. Think people... 

>>>Then how would you explain the extraordinarly low adoption rate of 
Vista by companies -- around 3% when last I checked. The primary 
driver for Vista adoption has been PC manufacturers bundling it with 
new models, much to their user's unhappiness. Microsoft has already 
extended the "XP is no longer available on new PCs" date by 6 months, 
and has dropped the price of Vista to encourage sales. If there were 
anything of compelling value in Vista, none of that would be 
necessary -- even with all of Vista's defects.


No matter who makes a new program knows it will have bugs.

>>>That's a self-fulfilling prophecy. If you're a programmer and you 
think that way, then your work is practically guaranteed to  contain 
defects. 


They turn it lose on the public becouse instead of having just the 
Microsoft crew give reports they have the world. When people give 
reports on the OS they mke changes. Thats what a update is. If they 
did not do it this way we would all be using DOS. Would that not be 
fun. 

>>>That is not true. Had Microsoft used modern software engineering 
practice to build Windows, its engineers would be spending a far 
greater fraction of their time introducing useful new functionality 
onto a framework designed to accomodate it rather than chasing down 
thousands of defects after the fact, regression testing their fixes, 
and issuing patch releases week after week.  The cost of poor to the 
organization that produces and maintains it is enormous.

>>>You can't test quality into the kinds of applications we build 
today; the only way to build quality software at this scale is to 
establish high-performance teams, create a high-quality architecture, 
and use modern software engineering 

RE: [digitalradio] Re: Vista

[rojomn]

The only real issue I see frequently is for users of MMTTY and PsKcore that
want to use other than the default sound card. In Vista they cannot. Other
than that I see no problems.
 
 

Gil, W0MN http://webpages.charter.net/gbaron
N 44.082147  W 92.513085 1050'
Hierro Candente, Batir de repente 

 


  _  

From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Ronald Collins
Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2008 1:21 PM
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Vista


Well let's see, Vista does duplex sound, as a matter of fact I use it every
day the games I play online in the games voip capability. Also it depends on
if your sound card or hardware supports it. For the last year I have not had
any issues with using any software on Vista Ultimate which is what i'm using
as long as it's 32 bit. Some people are still stuck in the DOS days. I've
seen people claim that Vista can't do this can't do that and all they are
doing is repeating word of mouth.  Heck i've seen most of the people who
claim bad experiences with it, never even tried the OS. I still have a
version of Pacterm 1.5 that runs stable as can be on Vista. So people unless
you actually tried the operating system to see if it handled everything ok,
because you will all get a different answer from every person you talk to
especially those with biases about certain software from the get go.
 
 
 R Collins

 

 

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Vista

[Ronald Collins]

Well let's see, Vista does duplex sound, as a matter of fact I use it every day 
the games I play online in the games voip capability. Also it depends on if 
your sound card or hardware supports it. For the last year I have not had any 
issues with using any software on Vista Ultimate which is what i'm using as 
long as it's 32 bit. Some people are still stuck in the DOS days. I've seen 
people claim that Vista can't do this can't do that and all they are doing is 
repeating word of mouth.  Heck i've seen most of the people who claim bad 
experiences with it, never even tried the OS. I still have a version of Pacterm 
1.5 that runs stable as can be on Vista. So people unless you actually tried 
the operating system to see if it handled everything ok, because you will all 
get a different answer from every person you talk to especially those with 
biases about certain software from the get go.


 R Collins

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Vista

[Rick]

Alan, Nathan, and those interested,

I responded to both you and Nathan, KD5BLZ and he clearly stated "I an 
now do everything I need in Linux." That is a clear statement to me that 
he is either figuring out a way to run the top end digital (and other) 
programs for ham radio. Or going without. Going without is just not an 
option for me personally, but others may see it differently.

My experience with WINE has been fairly disappointing thus far (several 
years) but every so often I try to see what might run on Linux. I have 
asked others if they can run Multipsk, HRD/DM780, and the DXLab suite 
under WINE but no one seems to have had good success ... yet.  The last 
time I tried WINE was within the last couple of months. I do not use Mac 
and never will even consider a total lock in hardware/OS solution since 
we thankfully have alternatives.

After trying out various work arounds, virtualization, etc., I have come 
to the conclusion that this is not a viable way to operate cross 
platform. I do think that WINE is the best way to go and I applaud the 
years of work in attempting to run Windows programs without emulation 
and sincerely hope it can get good enough to work with more programs. If 
you look at the winehq.org web site appDB, you start to realize how few 
programs are really platinum, much less even golden, or even silver. 
Note that the main interest is in gaming, which is understandable.

I don't share your analogy of the Ford/Chevy comparison. The difference 
is much more than that between operating systems, and it really will 
affect us significantly if we make changes or are forced to do so. I 
recall comments from someone that Vista is a huge change with the 
interface. To me, it is pretty much the same except there are certain 
file structure changes, (some are a good idea for security, but I really 
would prefer to do it my way instead). I don't even have a problem with 
the real Chevy vs Ford argument and that is GNOME vs KDE on Linux!

Also, the subject I was concerned with was indeed the use of Linux (or 
any other OS) for amateur radio. For other things, it can easily be 
done. If I ever make up another "simple" computer for my mother, it will 
almost for sure be a Linux box since all she needs is the web. As it is 
she clicks on the orange thingy (Firefox) to access the web. To her 
mind, the web is the computer. Her e-mail is done through web based 
access. For these basic uses, Linux works really well as long as you are 
not too concerned about the font rendering and viewing experience. Based 
on some comments, I am beginning to realize that some may not even 
realize the difference since you would need to have side by side 
comparisons. But when driving my monitor with XP, it is quite a bit 
better than Linux and Vista is better than XP. This is the primary 
reason that I will not be moving toward Linux as my main general purpose 
computer for the foreseeable future. If the font quality was equal to 
Vista, or maybe even to XP, I would likely move my programs to Linux for 
general use which I tried to do about a year ago but was not able to do 
so and reloaded Vista on my moderately high end machine.  But as I have 
said before, the more I used Linux, the less I liked it and the more I 
used Vista, the more I liked it. And I did not expect this considering 
all the hype for Linux and the anti hype for Vista. Maybe it is partly 
due to the doom and gloom and FUD promoters claims did not seem to be a 
serious problem for me.

This evening I moved my digital connections back to the XP box since it 
has some very nice conveniences in that I can set up the sound card for 
digital use (add-on Soundblaster Live! card) since the built in card is 
a low quality RealTek and not very accurate timing. Also, my legacy 
Radio Shack USB to COM adapter is not supported by Vista and probably 
never will. I need two COM ports because I run some programs with rig 
control only to my ICOM CI-V port and others (that don't support rig 
control) via a plain vanilla COM selection. This works very well for 
running several programs at once and not having conflicts:) 
Alternatively I could just reach over the monitor and switch the 9 pin 
connector to the RS-232 cable of choice. HI HI.

I am currently using Kubuntu 7.10, installed in late October 2007 so not 
too far behind the curve. This was a breakthrough product for me because 
it was the first Linux variant that could drive my monitor reasonably 
well. Maybe not as good as MS Windows products, but good enough for many 
users who are not too picky. I expect that things will get better.

Your reference web article doesn't seem to outline the claimed problems 
of Vista, but mostly indicates that the author is following up. 
Interestingly, just below it has an article on how much improved Vista's 
networking ease is compared with XP and how it is nearly competitive 
with Mac. Linux is another thing altogether:(

All of the ham programs that I have used

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Vista

[Alan Barrow]

Rick wrote:
> Let's discuss some of the FUD mentioned below.
>
> 1. If you can do "everything" in Linux then you are the exception to 
> most of us. My personal experience is that I have to forgo too many 
> amateur radio programs to move away from the MS Windows OS's. Obvious 
> examples being Ham Radio Deluxe/Digital Master 780, Multipsk, and the 
> DXLab suite of programs. 
Never said I can do it all on linux, just that I'm slowly moving that 
direction. And have moved some PC's at my house entirely to Ubuntu, and 
love it.

My shack computer is still W2k due to the exact programs you mentioned 
above.

I will move it to OEM XP only when forced to.

But for my household applications ubuntu is working peachy keen. With 
less hassle, better driver support, and higher security than the 
household windows machines.

Much of this is due to the excellent WINE capability. I click on an 
install exe, linux see's it as win32, and wraps it with a support layer 
to match the windows system calls with equiv linux. Works great for 
pretty much all but .net applications, which unfortunately rules out DX 
Labs and some others. But MS office, and most of my other household apps 
work transparantly and at same or faster speed than on windows directly. 
(WINE is not emulation, it executes at native system speed)

Don't want to convert anyone. use what you want. It's a 
ford/chevy/import preference as far as I'm concerned. There are pro's 
and con's to all the offerings.

> Also, for those experimenting with new digital 
> (and other ham programs) e.g., RFSM, Outpost, Q-Forms, etc., there are 
> no Linux equivalent at this time. 
MARSALE runs under WINE. Some do work, some do not.

Again, the subject is not why Linux is great for ham radio usage. It's 
that Vista has some real issues that make it even harder than linux to 
use for radio

> And speaking from my experiences with 
> virtualization, I question whether many will even attempt this approach! 
> WINE may be a possible solution, but consider that they have been 
> working on this for 15 years and still do not have version 1.0 quite 
> there yet?
>   
You clearly have not used WINE recently. I have, and am amazed at how 
clean it is. Again, unless the program uses proprietary .net calls, it's 
click and run. And even .net is being mapped.
> 2. Most of us just want to load the software and have it work. Windows 
> does this extremely well. Linux is far more difficult due to the many 
> steps required unless you are installing from a repository and that 
> often means older software versions. A
You've not used current Ubuntu releases. I've got it on three machines. 
What you are describing is simply not an issue. It's magic, it updates 
cleanly, and with much less interaction than needed on Windows.

And vista addresses this how? It updates all your applications 
automatically how? (Hint: It does not)
>  4. Where did this claim come from that Vista can not do duplex sound? 
> When the original ISA (Industry Standard Architecture) bus was first 
> developed, it is true that the early soundcards were only half duplex. 
> Over the years the technology improved so that PCI cards were full 
> duplex. What information does anyone have that factually states that 
> Vista can no longer do full duplex?
>   

Not a claim, it's a fact that there are significant changes in vista 
soundcard operation and modes. Which forces many programs which are used 
to having record and play functions open at the same time to be 
rewritten. Or like MixW, run in virtual XP mode using virtualization.

Even heavily used programs like Skype were stopped dead by Vista, and 
only now sort of working. (results seem to vary, and it took from 
version 3.2 to version 3.6 of skype to even get the current mixed results)

At the minimum, many ham soundcard programs required changes to work 
with vista (I recall multipsk did) Some are still not working, and not 
likely to.

Many, many audio editing programs lost critical functionality if they 
work at all.

None of this was due to old drivers, etc. It was a specific design 
choice MS made caving to the RIAA and other big media to try to close a 
lame & little used piracy loophole. (Someone might record a streamed 
media during playback)

Likewise, here's some background on the network performance DRM related 
issue:
< http://blogs.zdnet.com/hardware/?p=724 >

It's real, is a problem, sort of was address in the very late SP1. And 
entirely due to caving to big media. You'll never see serious server 
operation on Vista with issues like this!
> 5. WinXP software does not require major rewrites to run on Vista. There 
> can be some issues with sound, since that has been changed. But 
> certainly less issues than the on-going sound problems with sound 
> programming in Linux! 
Funny, I can get some of my ham soundcard programs running in WINE, and 
they are locked out under Vista.


> 6. Bottom line is that if you have an existing XP machine, you will want 
> t

[digitalradio] Re: Vista

[jhaynesatalumni]

We conspiracy theorists can always believe that Microsoft
deliberately made Vista so bad so that there will be lots
of buyers for the next version of Windows.  Gotta keep the
revenue stream flowing.

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Vista

[Rick]

Let's discuss some of the FUD mentioned below.

1. If you can do "everything" in Linux then you are the exception to 
most of us. My personal experience is that I have to forgo too many 
amateur radio programs to move away from the MS Windows OS's. Obvious 
examples being Ham Radio Deluxe/Digital Master 780, Multipsk, and the 
DXLab suite of programs. Also, for those experimenting with new digital 
(and other ham programs) e.g., RFSM, Outpost, Q-Forms, etc., there are 
no Linux equivalent at this time. And speaking from my experiences with 
virtualization, I question whether many will even attempt this approach! 
WINE may be a possible solution, but consider that they have been 
working on this for 15 years and still do not have version 1.0 quite 
there yet?

2. Most of us just want to load the software and have it work. Windows 
does this extremely well. Linux is far more difficult due to the many 
steps required unless you are installing from a repository and that 
often means older software versions. And you still may be required to 
manually install other dependencies. In fact, it is this serious 
shortcoming of Linux that will make it a non-starter for most potential 
users. It may be addressed some time in the future, but not the way it 
currently is designed.

3. Vista works OK with newer and more powerful computers with adequate 
RAM and video, but I can not think of any reason anyone would want to 
upgrade their current XP machine to Vista, especially with older 
hardware that may not meet the requirements. While I currently have 
both  XP and Vista machines side by side with a KVM switch, I generally 
run my ham programs on XP since I don't have to worry about any upgrade 
issues for now. In a few years, maybe there will be difficulties and we 
will have a similar situation just as we now have with running Win XP 
programs on Win 98 or older OS's.   Microsoft has been telling 
programmers for years that they were making certain programming changes 
and that some code had to be written in a different way.This is not a 
negative thing as some might suggest, but often done to improve security.
 
4. Where did this claim come from that Vista can not do duplex sound? 
When the original ISA (Industry Standard Architecture) bus was first 
developed, it is true that the early soundcards were only half duplex. 
Over the years the technology improved so that PCI cards were full 
duplex. What information does anyone have that factually states that 
Vista can no longer do full duplex?

5. WinXP software does not require major rewrites to run on Vista. There 
can be some issues with sound, since that has been changed. But 
certainly less issues than the on-going sound problems with sound 
programming in Linux! The one annoyance is that they did not include the 
software to read the older kind of help files. You can download the 
necessary support file, but that should have been left in. But there is 
also a backward compatible mode to help run some legacy software. I have 
not had to do this and I run mostly the same freeware and open source 
software on my two XP machines and my one Vista machine.

6. Bottom line is that if you have an existing XP machine, you will want 
to keep using it with XP. If you have Win 98 or older, you will not be 
able to run all the software available now since it is not adequate. And 
if you buy a new computer, other than Mac, from most sources, Vista will 
be on that machine. Before you spend money to buy a new XP license or 
install a Linux variant I would ask you to take a look at the quality of 
the screen, particularly the font rendering. It is better than XP and 
much better than Linux. Some may not care that much about this issue if 
they use the computer for casual use, but for heavy computer use, it may 
be quite welcome.

73,

Rick, KV9U


nathan wrote:
> Hi
>  Talk about hitting the nail on the head about Vista. If I purchase a PC 
> with Vista on it.
> It will be removed as soon as I arrive home. I have ran a dual boot pc 
> windows Ubuntu for about 3 years .
> I can now do everything I need in Linux. and in the past few years it 
> has really improved.
> Getting ready to purchase a laptop and I will load Linux for pskmail and 
> psk31 etc.
> 73's
> Nathan
> KD5BLZ
>   
>> 
>> Folks need to know, there are some pretty severe design decisions which
>> impact usability of Vista for ham radio usage. This has nothing to do
>> with driver availability, old code, etc.
>>
>> One prime example involves MS design decisions capitulating to big
>> media. As I understand the problem, soundcards can no longer be opened
>> for read and write simultaneously. A form of full duplex operation so to
>> speak. This is due to the chance that a pirate could playback protected
>> media and also record it via analog loopback to an MP3. Now every
>> previous version of windows, macs, linux, etc all allowed that.
>>
>> And it turns out that most soundcard based ham programs require that
>>

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Vista

[nathan]

Hi
 Talk about hitting the nail on the head about Vista. If I purchase a PC 
with Vista on it.
It will be removed as soon as I arrive home. I have ran a dual boot pc 
windows Ubuntu for about 3 years .
I can now do everything I need in Linux. and in the past few years it 
has really improved.
Getting ready to purchase a laptop and I will load Linux for pskmail and 
psk31 etc.
73's
Nathan
KD5BLZ
>
>
> >
> Folks need to know, there are some pretty severe design decisions which
> impact usability of Vista for ham radio usage. This has nothing to do
> with driver availability, old code, etc.
>
> One prime example involves MS design decisions capitulating to big
> media. As I understand the problem, soundcards can no longer be opened
> for read and write simultaneously. A form of full duplex operation so to
> speak. This is due to the chance that a pirate could playback protected
> media and also record it via analog loopback to an MP3. Now every
> previous version of windows, macs, linux, etc all allowed that.
>
> And it turns out that most soundcard based ham programs require that
> capability, as you need to have both open even if not running full duplex.
>
> So many just simply do not work without major rewrites. I'm sure Dave,
> Simon, Patrick, and the other developers are aware of this, and some may
> even have already addressed.
>
> But the issue is that it's a conscious design choice which broke many
> sound applications from speakerphone type operation to ham radio apps.
>
> And for what? If you were going to do an audio loopback and pirate, you
> could do it with two Vista machines. Or just about any other single
> computer. Or an Ipod. Or phone, etc. Or just rip the CD, which is what
> real pirates do.
>
> So they seriously broke something without offering any serious
> protection, much less an advantage to the user.
>
> Or how bout the same anti-piracy vista issue that had 100Mbit lan
> performance drop to a crawl if an mp3 is played, due to the new
> anti-piracy DRM hooks.
>
> There is a whole laundry list of compromised design decisions in Vista
> all to appease Big media.
>
> For corporate users, it's worse. I work for the largest computer
> supplier in the world. We sell vista to consumers, not by choice, but
> because MS required us to. It was a fight to be able to still sell XP
> only recently won. So here's the kicker. hundreds of thousands of
> company computers in operation. Due to a combination of functionality,
> unaddressed defects, and (yet even more) bad MS design choices, the IT
> department has elected to push off moving to Vista indefinitely. To the
> point that if possible they may wait for a successor. So Vista has the
> real possibility of being the next Windows ME dead end.
>
> The IT decision centers around the expense of moving to new
> infrastructure due to MS design changes with no functionality increase,
> and in many aspects, some decreases. The only one who benefits from the
> change is MS.
>
> But then, guess what. Large corporate users don't get locked out of XP
> if it does not pass validation due to a replaced hard drive, etc. So
> there was already a precedent where consumers have to accept MS
> constraints which would never fly with corporate users.
>
> At any rate, Vista issues are more than anti-MS linux zealots slinging
> mud. There are real issues that are going to be very difficult for
> developers to resolve. MS's answer is "sorry, just deal with it".
>
> Me, I use XP on the work laptop, and will indefinitely. Most of the
> house PC's are (licensed) W2K, running just fine. If they are forced
> into retirement due to non-support, they will move to Ubuntu. Main
> email/web/ebay/programming/drawing house pc is Ubuntu. My family uses
> it, and does not know it's not windows. It's that close. But it runs for
> weeks rather than days without reboot. MS Office runs transparently
> under WINE, as do many of my ham programs. I recently moved an older
> laptop from XP to Ubuntu, and was stunned at how smoothly it operates.
>
> Meanwhile, my old scanners and printers are 100% supported plug and play
> under Ubuntu, yet drivers are not available for Vista. (and even XP on
> my flatbed scanner and graphics tablet)
>
> I'm not a Linux zealot, and will readily admit it was not ready for
> desktop usage in the past. I'd use XP across the board if I did not have
> to be concerned it may stop working when MS discontinues support for it.
> But I'm slowly being forced to alternatives by stuff like the Vista
> design choices, the bizarre "Genuine Windows" phone home validation
> schemes, etc.
>
> My dad is using Vista, and it works for him. Huge learning curve, but
> he's happy. I'm sure others will post that logger32 works fine for them,
> etc. But there are some fairly well respected ham programs which do not,
> and it's not the developer's or user's fault! :-)
>
> Have fun,
>
> Alan
> km4ba
>
>  

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Vista

[Alan Barrow]

Rick wrote:
> As one who daily monitors the various OS issues, I had seen both of the 
> articles beforehand. The PCMag article gave you a comparison of sorts. I 
> think they were a bit light on Vista. They need to discuss the invasive 
> issues of DRM which some claim is taking up a lot of computer resources, 
> among other things such as "phoning home". I don't know what it is doing 
> for sure, but the hard drive is rarely not doing a read or write every 
> second or so. XP does not do this.
>   
Folks need to know, there are some pretty severe design decisions which 
impact usability of Vista for ham radio usage. This has nothing to do 
with driver availability, old code, etc.

One prime example involves MS design decisions capitulating to big 
media. As I understand the problem, soundcards can no longer be opened 
for read and write simultaneously. A form of full duplex operation so to 
speak. This is due to the chance that a pirate could playback protected 
media and also record it via analog loopback to an MP3. Now every 
previous version of windows, macs, linux, etc all allowed that.

And it turns out that most soundcard based ham programs require that 
capability, as you need to have both open even if not running full duplex.

So many just simply do not work without major rewrites. I'm sure Dave, 
Simon, Patrick, and the other developers are aware of this, and some may 
even have already addressed.

But the issue is that it's a conscious design choice which broke many 
sound applications from speakerphone type operation to ham radio apps.

And for what? If you were going to do an audio loopback and pirate, you 
could do it with two Vista machines. Or just about any other single 
computer. Or an Ipod. Or phone, etc. Or just rip the CD, which is what 
real pirates do.

So they seriously broke something without offering any serious 
protection, much less an advantage to the user.

Or how bout the same anti-piracy vista issue that had 100Mbit lan 
performance drop to a crawl  if an mp3 is played, due to the new 
anti-piracy DRM hooks.

There is a whole laundry list of compromised design decisions in Vista 
all to appease Big media.

For corporate users, it's worse. I work for the largest computer 
supplier in the world. We sell vista to consumers, not by choice, but 
because MS required us to. It was a fight to be able to still sell XP 
only recently won. So here's the kicker. hundreds of thousands of 
company computers in operation. Due to a combination of functionality, 
unaddressed defects, and (yet even more) bad MS design choices, the IT 
department has elected to push off moving to Vista indefinitely. To the 
point that if possible they may wait for a successor. So Vista has the 
real possibility of being the next Windows ME dead end.

The IT decision centers around the expense of moving to new 
infrastructure due to MS design changes with no functionality increase, 
and in many aspects, some decreases. The only one who benefits from the 
change is MS.

But then, guess what. Large corporate users don't get locked out of XP 
if it does not pass validation due to a replaced hard drive, etc. So 
there was already a precedent where consumers have to accept MS 
constraints which would never fly with corporate users.

At any rate, Vista issues are more than anti-MS linux zealots slinging 
mud. There are real issues that are going to be very difficult for 
developers to resolve. MS's answer is "sorry, just deal with it".

Me, I use XP on the work laptop, and will indefinitely. Most of the 
house PC's are (licensed) W2K, running just fine. If they are forced 
into retirement due to non-support, they will move to Ubuntu. Main 
email/web/ebay/programming/drawing house pc is Ubuntu. My family uses 
it, and does not know it's not windows. It's that close. But it runs for 
weeks rather than days without reboot. MS Office runs transparently 
under WINE, as do many of my ham programs. I recently moved an older 
laptop from XP to Ubuntu, and was stunned at how smoothly it operates.

Meanwhile, my old scanners and printers are 100% supported plug and play 
under Ubuntu, yet drivers are not available for Vista. (and even XP on 
my flatbed scanner and graphics tablet)

I'm not a Linux zealot, and will readily admit it was not ready for 
desktop usage in the past. I'd use XP across the board if I did not have 
to be concerned it may stop working when MS discontinues support for it. 
But I'm slowly being forced to alternatives by stuff like the Vista 
design choices, the bizarre "Genuine Windows" phone home validation 
schemes, etc.

My dad is using Vista, and it works for him. Huge learning curve, but 
he's happy. I'm sure others will post that logger32 works fine for them, 
etc. But there are some fairly well respected ham programs which do not, 
and it's not the developer's or user's fault! :-)

Have fun,

Alan
km4ba

[digitalradio] Re: Vista another view

[Pete Flynn]

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Ross Biggar" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi all,
> Just to add another twist to the comments, I am now running all my 
ham programs digital and otherwise
> on Vista machines, using both Vista Ultimate and Vista business, all 
>with SP1. Which by the way went in perfectly.
BIG SNIP!

Howdy Ross;
Were all these programs XP "legacy" software that predated Vista? 
I'd suspect that there are quite a few aps that are so "vanilla" as 
far as their low level of system resources and OS elements that Vista 
isn't challenged.
I just bought a Vista laptop to run packet with the intent of whacking 
Vista and installing XP Pro, but am going to wait and see if the 
packet ap will run. I patched to SP1 and the computer ran noticeably 
quicker, so the update is a "must do".
73
Pete
K5BCG

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Vista

[AA0OI]

Hello:
PC mag is no longer a pc mag.. It deals with many things that have nothing to 
do with computers..most are getting away from it.
try Maxium PC. cutting edge..  Also everything points to the demise of Vista.  
we hope all the mistake made in Vista we be fixed with "system 7", but then agn 
its MS. who really knows.. I will not invest in Vista in any way shape for 
form.. its circling the drain and about to go under... TRUST ME, it will be 
gone within 2 years.!!

 
Nostradamus / AA0OI



- Original Message 
From: Rick <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 5:57:35 PM
Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: Vista

As one who daily monitors the various OS issues, I had seen both of the 
articles beforehand. The PCMag article gave you a comparison of sorts. I 
think they were a bit light on Vista. They need to discuss the invasive 
issues of DRM which some claim is taking up a lot of computer resources, 
among other things such as "phoning home". I don't know what it is doing 
for sure, but the hard drive is rarely not doing a read or write every 
second or so. XP does not do this.

The problem with these kinds of reviews as they are looking at the 
overall usability of the OS for the average users who need basic e-mail, 
web browsing, media software, etc. And all of the OS's have that for the 
most part.

The problem is that if you run ham programs, and that includes most of 
us on this group, you are mostly going to want to run MS Windows 
programs since they are overwhelmingly better than anything available on 
Linux or Mac. Windows development is perhaps 95% of the ham market from 
what I can see. And by that I mean freeware and open source software as 
well as commercial software.

There just are no programs on Linux or Mac that are remotely equal to 
HRD/DM780, the DXLab suite, Multiipsk, and many others. Looking at 
things long term will can expect more Linux programs and improvements. 
Many countries are moving toward Linux, particularly the developing 
world, but software development of this type could take a decade or two. 
Consider that there were built in ham radio capabilities early in Linux 
and yet the programming efforts actually decreased for many years and 
are only recently becoming more active again with programs such as 
PSKmail and fldigi.

While I do enjoy reading Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols articles (sometimes 
several per week) it would not be fair to claim that he has a balanced 
view since he is very pro-Linux and has mostly used Linux for quite a 
few years. Without question, he is more balanced than some of the 
comments made by the typical Linux zealots who are truly 
misunderstanding what it is that most of us want for an OS.

The question we might ask outselves is whether a given OS does the 
things we want it to do and not do the things we don't want it to do? 
No OS can fulfill those requirements, but at this time MS Windows does 
it the best for much of ham radio needs.

73,

Rick, KV9U

Howard Brown wrote:
> Did you read it? Does it seem slanted or just reporting?
>
> - Original Message 
> From: Tooner 
> To: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com
> Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 2:00:07 PM
> Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Vista
>
> --- In digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com 
> <mailto:digitalradi o%40yahoogroups. com>, Howard Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> wrote:
> >
> > It appears your opinion is shared by others:
> >
> > http://www.desktopl inux.com/ news/NS854183741 2.html?kc= 
> EWKNLNAV032408ST R4 
> <http://www.desktopl inux.com/ news/NS854183741 2.html?kc= EWKNLNAV032408ST 
> R4>
> >
>
> One can hardly consider a Linux site to be fair-and-balanced towards
> it's slant on Windows.
>
>
> 


 


  

Looking for last minute shopping deals?  
Find them fast with Yahoo! Search.  
http://tools.search.yahoo.com/newsearch/category.php?category=shopping

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Vista

[Rick]

As one who daily monitors the various OS issues, I had seen both of the 
articles beforehand. The PCMag article gave you a comparison of sorts. I 
think they were a bit light on Vista. They need to discuss the invasive 
issues of DRM which some claim is taking up a lot of computer resources, 
among other things such as "phoning home". I don't know what it is doing 
for sure, but the hard drive is rarely not doing a read or write every 
second or so. XP does not do this.

The problem with these kinds of reviews as they are looking at the 
overall usability of the OS for the average users who need basic e-mail, 
web browsing, media software, etc. And all of the OS's have that for the 
most part.

The problem is that if you run ham programs, and that includes most of 
us on this group, you are mostly going to want to run MS Windows 
programs since they are overwhelmingly better than anything available on 
Linux or Mac. Windows development is perhaps 95% of the ham market from 
what I can see. And by that I mean freeware and open source software as 
well as commercial software.

There just are no programs on Linux or Mac that are remotely equal to 
HRD/DM780,  the DXLab suite, Multiipsk, and many others. Looking at 
things long term will can expect more Linux programs and improvements. 
Many countries are moving toward Linux, particularly the developing 
world, but software development of this type could take a decade or two. 
Consider that there were built in ham radio capabilities early in Linux 
and yet the programming efforts actually decreased for many years and 
are only recently becoming more active again with programs such as 
PSKmail and fldigi.

While I do enjoy reading  Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols articles (sometimes 
several per week) it would not be fair to claim that he has a balanced 
view since he is very pro-Linux and has mostly used Linux for quite a 
few years. Without question, he is more balanced than some of the 
comments made by the typical Linux zealots who are truly 
misunderstanding what it is that most of us want for an OS.

The question we might ask outselves is whether a given OS does the 
things we want it to do and not do the things we don't want it to do?  
No OS can fulfill those requirements, but at this time MS Windows does 
it the best for much of ham radio needs.

73,

Rick, KV9U



Howard Brown wrote:
> Did you read it? Does it seem slanted or just reporting?
>
> - Original Message 
> From: Tooner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 2:00:07 PM
> Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Vista
>
> --- In digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com 
> <mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com>, Howard Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
> wrote:
> >
> > It appears your opinion is shared by others:
> >
> > http://www.desktopl inux.com/ news/NS854183741 2.html?kc= 
> EWKNLNAV032408ST R4 
> <http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS8541837412.html?kc=EWKNLNAV032408STR4>
> >
>
> One can hardly consider a Linux site to be fair-and-balanced towards
> it's slant on Windows.
>
>
> 

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Vista

[Howard Brown]

Did you read it? Does it seem slanted or just reporting?

- Original Message 
From: Tooner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 2:00:07 PM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Vista

--- In digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com, Howard Brown <[EMAIL 
PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It appears your opinion is shared by others:
> 
> http://www.desktopl inux.com/ news/NS854183741 2.html?kc= EWKNLNAV032408ST R4
> 

One can hardly consider a Linux site to be fair-and-balanced towards
it's slant on Windows.

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Vista

[Darrel Smith]

Here is a couple of articles on various OS's:-

PC Magazine view
http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,2704,2273486,00.asp

Linux view
http://desktoplinux.com/news/NS6727964977.html

Darrel, VE7CUS

On 25-Mar-08, at 12:00 PM, Tooner wrote:


--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Howard Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It appears your opinion is shared by others:
>
> http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS8541837412.html?kc=EWKNLNAV032408STR4
>

One can hardly consider a Linux site to be fair-and-balanced towards
it's slant on Windows.

[digitalradio] Re: Vista

[Tooner]

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Howard Brown <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> It appears your opinion is shared by others:
> 
> http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS8541837412.html?kc=EWKNLNAV032408STR4
> 


One can hardly consider a Linux site to be fair-and-balanced towards
it's slant on Windows.

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Vista

[AA0OI]

Hi Frank:
VISTA is dead,  read artical in Maxium PC, US government will not use it and MS 
has advanced the release date of "System 7" to 2009 ( a year earlier than 
planed).. But Vista is such a bust ( 20% slower than XP that they are going to 
let it die the slow death).  The best way IS ( as you said) to build your ouwn 
machine.. Really not that hard.

 
Garrett / AA0OI



- Original Message 
From: Tooner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com
Sent: Tuesday, March 25, 2008 4:37:04 AM
Subject: [digitalradio] Re: Vista

--- In digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com, "wa0elm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm looking at purchasing a new laptop, and I can't find anything that 
> doesn't come with Vista. Is anyone having success running digital 
> software 

Hey Eric,

I'm using Vista here (64-bit if that matters) and have had zero
problems running MultiPSK, MixW or (my favorite, and free!) Digital
Master 780 (Comes with Ham Radio Deluxe, see link below.) I've also
had only minor problems with other common applications. But then
again, I'm a geek and a good troubleshooter so was able to overcome.

Don't let people talk you out of Vista. Particularly if you're at all
computer saavy; you'll appreciate the benefits and improvements. I
work on computers for a living, and have seen with each new version of
Windows, people complaining about compatibility, price, upgrades,
bugs, ad naseum.

Vista has settled in just fine and should serve you well. Especially
on a new computer.

It's not Microsoft's problem when companies don't want to re-write
software to be supported in the newer operating systems. The demand
will be ever-diminishing to do so.

That's probably the biggest pitfall for a new O/S; backwards
compatibility. It makes more sense to start over and leave legacy
devices behind than it is to add the millions of lines of code to
support it. Not always the cheapest way for consumers who want to use
the new O/S. But technology is perpetually self-supporting, no?

Meanwhile, if you insist on using XP, which is fine, computers
purchased with some versions of Vista (Business and Ultimate, if
memory serves) have the option to 'downgrade' to XP at no extra cost.

You'll be able to buy XP for years to come. Even today, you can still
buy sealed copies of Windows 98 on eBay. If you're buying a new
computer, have someone locally build you a 'white box' instead of
wasting your money on a Dell, dude. I'm sure they'll find a solution
to have XP on it.

Finally, all these comparisons between operating systems will be a
moot point soon. We'll all be booting to the Internet, saving our
files on a Microsoft or Google server, and you'll be paying for it
like all our other utilities. You'll also never see another progress
indicator! Instant on, like your TV.

Life is reflected well in computers; Adapt quick and often!

Frank, K2NCC
http://evokefrank. googlepages. com

Digital Master 780:
http://hrd.ham- radio.ch/ DM780/DM780. htm


 


  

Be a better friend, newshound, and 
know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.  
http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ

[digitalradio] Re: Vista

[Tooner]

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "wa0elm" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> I'm looking at purchasing a new laptop, and I can't find anything that 
> doesn't come with Vista.  Is anyone having success running digital 
> software 

Hey Eric,

I'm using Vista here (64-bit if that matters) and have had zero
problems running MultiPSK, MixW or (my favorite, and free!) Digital
Master 780 (Comes with Ham Radio Deluxe, see link below.)  I've also
had only minor problems with other common applications.  But then
again, I'm a geek and a good troubleshooter so was able to overcome.

Don't let people talk you out of Vista.  Particularly if you're at all
computer saavy; you'll appreciate the benefits and improvements.  I
work on computers for a living, and have seen with each new version of
Windows, people complaining about compatibility, price, upgrades,
bugs, ad naseum.

Vista has settled in just fine and should serve you well. Especially
on a new computer.

It's not Microsoft's problem when companies don't want to re-write
software to be supported in the newer operating systems.  The demand
will be ever-diminishing to do so.

That's probably the biggest pitfall for a new O/S; backwards
compatibility.  It makes more sense to start over and leave legacy
devices behind than it is to add the millions of lines of code to
support it.  Not always the cheapest way for consumers who want to use
the new O/S.  But technology is perpetually self-supporting, no?

Meanwhile, if you insist on using XP, which is fine, computers
purchased with some versions of Vista (Business and Ultimate, if
memory serves) have the option to 'downgrade' to XP at no extra cost.

You'll be able to buy XP for years to come.  Even today, you can still
buy sealed copies of Windows 98 on eBay.  If you're buying a new
computer, have someone locally build you a 'white box' instead of
wasting your money on a Dell, dude.  I'm sure they'll find a solution
to have XP on it.

Finally, all these comparisons between operating systems will be a
moot point soon.  We'll all be booting to the Internet, saving our
files on a Microsoft or Google server, and you'll be paying for it
like all our other utilities.  You'll also never see another progress
indicator!  Instant on, like your TV.

Life is reflected well in computers; Adapt quick and often!

Frank, K2NCC
http://evokefrank.googlepages.com

Digital Master 780:
http://hrd.ham-radio.ch/DM780/DM780.htm

Perpetuum Mobile [was [digitalradio] Re: VISTA and PSK)

[Jose A. Amador]

>  And now... back to discussing the FCC and Winlink,




__

V Conferencia Internacional de Energía Renovable, Ahorro de Energía y Educación 
Energética.
22 al 25 de mayo de 2007
Palacio de las Convenciones, Ciudad de la Habana, Cuba
http://www.cujae.edu.cu/eventos/cier

Participe en Universidad 2008.
11 al 15 de febrero del 2008.
Palacio de las Convenciones, Ciudad de la Habana, Cuba
http://www.universidad2008.cu

[digitalradio] Re: VISTA and PSK

[wd4elg_base]

Another way around software issues is to run the program in
"compatibility mode":

http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/windows-vista/using-windows-vista-compati\
bility-mode/

Re: [digitalradio] Re: VISTA and PSK

[kv9u]

Martin,

The newest version of Multipsk works well with Vista as the only change 
was to have it look for the newly renamed sound card driver.

If you use DX Lab Commander, which does rig control, you should be able 
to handle most any rig.

The Linux software may not be as good as MS OS Windows for ham radio, 
but it is getting better. However, I would not be willing to give up the 
DX  Lab suite of programs and Multipsk any time soon.

73,

Rick, KV9U


martin beekhuis wrote:
>> Hello all
>> This is my first post here because now I have a problem. My wife got
>> me a new laptop with, of course Vista installed. None of the PSK
>> software I have tried and used on my old 2000 system will work because
>> they can't find the sound card. Any solution? Any PSK/RTTY software
>> already Vista compatable?
>> 
>
> When my wive gives me a Vista box I thinks she hates me.
> try UBUNTU and fldigi.
> Not so beautiful but stable as a rock.
>
> 73 martin pa3dsc
>
>   

[digitalradio] Re: VISTA and PSK

[martin beekhuis]

> Hello all
> This is my first post here because now I have a problem. My wife got
> me a new laptop with, of course Vista installed. None of the PSK
> software I have tried and used on my old 2000 system will work because
> they can't find the sound card. Any solution? Any PSK/RTTY software
> already Vista compatable?

When my wive gives me a Vista box I thinks she hates me.
try UBUNTU and fldigi.
Not so beautiful but stable as a rock.

73 martin pa3dsc

[digitalradio] Re: VISTA and PSK

[Dave Bernstein]

Does DEP include a busy frequency detector?

   73,

   Dave, AA6YQ

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Peter G. Viscarola" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> >
> > that MS is finally getting things right with some pretty strong
> > security, including DEP (Data Execution Prevention).
> >
> 
> Not to nit-pick, but for the sake of clarity: Data Execution 
Prevention
> isn't a Vista feature. It was introduced in Windows XP (SP2, I think).
> The reason more people don't "see" it is it requires a CPU that 
supports
> the No-Execute page protection bit.
> 
> And now... back to discussing the FCC and Winlink,
> 
> de Peter K1PGV
>

[digitalradio] Re: VISTA and PSK

[Dave Bernstein]

I have not personally done testing, but several users have announced 
that they are successfully running all DXLab applications on Vista. So 
you might give WinWarbler a try; it supports PSK31, PSK653, and RTTY, 
is free, and is available via www.dxlabsuite.com .

   73,

   Dave, AA6YQ

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "jerloch" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hello all
> This is my first post here because now I have a problem. My wife got
> me a new laptop with, of course Vista installed. None of the PSK
> software I have tried and used on my old 2000 system will work because
> they can't find the sound card. Any solution? Any PSK/RTTY software
> already Vista compatable?
> Thanks for any help.
> 
> Jerry KT5TT
>

[digitalradio] Re: Vista emphasizes security over compatibility

[Dave Bernstein]

Actually, there was quite a bit of focus on security back in the 70s 
and 80s, but the topology employed for scalable computing was 
vulnerable to different threats. The prevailing notion was that ever 
larger CPUs would be timeshared as computing utilities by multiple 
organizations. The concern was thus on protecting one running 
application from another sharing the same CPU and memory; this was 
the genesis of Saltzer's work on mutually suspicious subsystems, ring-
based protection mechanisms, and capability-based architectures. 
Multics was the poster child for this approach, and survived some 
close encounters with MIT hackers, as mentioned in 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multics . Many of these ideas were later 
implemented in the DEC VAX and DG Eagle.

Unix was developed by members of ATT's Multics team inspired by the 
idea that lots of overhead could be eliminated by running on a less 
expensive CPU dedicated to one user -- initially, a DEC PDP-7. 
Security was one of the first things they threw overboard! Many 
operating systems designed in the 80s made this tradeoff, encouraged 
by the explosive price/performance increases of single-user 
microprocessor-based machines; Microsoft's DOS and Windows were no 
exception.

It was the Internet that pulled the rug out. Suddenly, PCs running 
operating systems that assumed physical security were being attached 
to uncontrolled networks. Microsoft never claimed that Windows 95 
provided the appropriate protection for an internet-based world. Home 
users can be forgiven for not understanding the impact of this 
shortcoming, but the commercial world certainly understood the risks 
of deploying Windows on open networks, if for no other reason that 
Sun, Apollo, HP, and DEC sales reps were screaming about it at the 
top of their lungs. As usual, short-term thinking prevailed. 

Comparing the current positions of Sun, Apollo, HP, DEC, and 
Microsoft, who made the right business decision? I hate it when that 
happens.

It would have been nice if Microsoft had followed up on its 
impressive mid-90's "internet shift" with a version of Windows 
designed from the ground up to handle the internet's threat 
environment, but software engineering at this scale has never been 
their forte, as Cairo/WinFS/Longhorn/Vista has demonstrated.

   73,

   Dave, AA6YQ






--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Peter G. Viscarola" 
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >
> >Unix was *always* secure and Linux flowed out of Unix
> >as did BSD.  Unix is very old.
> >
> 
> I don't know what you're background in the computer field is, and I
> don't mean to turn this into a resume review, but I've been writing
> operating systems and OS-level components since, oh, 1978.  Your
> statement that "Unix was *always* secure" is *entirely* inaccurate.
> 
> First, let me very clearly state my comments are restricted to
> commercial operating systems -- not special purpose military 
operating
> systems.
> 
> Next, I can categorically state that *no* commercial operating 
system
> written in the 70's or 80's was "secure" as we mean the term today.
> When we wrote operating systems code back then, we didn't fully
> appreciate threats such as elevation of privilege, buffer 
overflows, or
> code-injection (to name a few and to keep things simple).  We never 
even
> considered the possibility that some kid in his bedroom in would 
spend
> DAYS sending every undocumented system service code to the OS, or 
every
> possible I/O Function Code to every driver, just to see what it did 
to
> the system.  This was largely because, back then, we could never
> anticipate some kid in his bedroom having access to a computer 
(Heck,*I*
> didn't even have a computer *terminal* in my office back then).  
Cuz,
> back then, the smallest computer was as big as your refrigerator and
> cost $200K (in 1978 dollars).
> 
> I can tell you with absolute certainty that -- back in the day -- 
even
> code written for *highly* secure and sensitive defense department
> systems (NOTE: THAT ARE NO LONGER IN USE) was written in such a way 
that
> it would not pass even the most trivial level of threat analysis 
that is
> routinely performed on almost ANY commercial code today.
> 
> In this way, Unix was *never* any more secure than any other OS 
written
> during that time.  I was there.  I've read the code and I was one 
of the
> people who WROTE the code (mostly device drivers) that ran as part 
of
> these operating systems.
> 
> >
> >MS *chose* to not implement security due to profit
> >considerations and the impossbility of security because
> >of the wide-open-everything-executes-in-root structure.
> >It was a marketing and technological nightmare -- I
> >remember it well as a systems manager and consultant.
> >
> 
> Here are you referring to a different level of "security".  The
> questions of (a) what protections does the OS provide, (b) what 
privs
> are required to do things question, and (3) what are the default 
accoun

Re: [digitalradio] Re: Vista emphasizes security over compatibility

[Simon Brown]

It's part of VISTA - can't remember what it's called but there are example 
of use in the SDK.

Properly written NT/2K/XP code will still work but when running on VISTA 
it's much better to use the VISTA API.

Simon Brown, HB9DRV
(GD4ELI March 2nd - 12th 2006)

- Original Message - 
From: "cesco12342000" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


>> When I get
>> my soundcard DLL written for VISTA I'll make the source available.
>
> This would be great !
> btw, where did you get the new sound API from ?

[digitalradio] Re: Vista emphasizes security over compatibility

[cesco12342000]

> When I get 
> my soundcard DLL written for VISTA I'll make the source available.

This would be great !
btw, where did you get the new sound API from ?

[digitalradio] Re: Vista emphasizes security over compatibility

[Frank Brickle]

--- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, "Simon Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:

> No way matey - I have used UNIX distributions where the username /
password 
> was stored in plain text...

This is a total red herring, of course.

Triple-DES is no more secure than your newspaper cryptogram puzzle if
you leave your keys sitting out on your desk. One of the fundamental
principles of cryptology is that the weakest point in any cryptosystem
is the user.

The point is that it is nearly impossible to make the XP design secure
without winding up with something like Vista. It's a fundamental flaw.

The same is not true of the Unix fundamental design, where
insecurities come from sloppiness, and are fixed incrementally as they
are discovered.

73
Frank
AB2KT