Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
To be able to provide the remarkable number of modes in MultiPSK *and* have a UI conforming to the Windows usability guidelines is verging on the impossible, especially once you factor in supporting users and maintaining websites. IMO the user community should be very grateful to Patrick for the work he does no matter how appealing the UI may be. To provide the ultimate software would require a team of three or four programmers; herding cats would be easier. Simon Brown, HB9DRV - Original Message - From: Tooner [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Kevin O'Rorke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Those who complain about the UI really need to go away and use another Program. Sorry Kevin, in this country, our opinions are equal. In theory at least. Those who complain.. don't just get up and leave we bitch about it until someone fixes it!
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
To do everything users want could easily take several years at 60 hours a week plus the associated costs which are not inconsiderable. Simon Brown, HB9DRV - Original Message - From: Simon Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED] To provide the ultimate software would require a team of three or four programmers; herding cats would be easier.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
User Interface, also known as GUI (Graphical User Interface) when compared with an old VT-100 type terminal interface or even a teletype for those of a 'certain age'. Simon Brown, HB9DRV - Original Message - From: John Bradley qu'est-ce que UI?
RE: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
qu'est-ce que UI? John VE5MU From: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Simon Brown Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 2:00 AM To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK To be able to provide the remarkable number of modes in MultiPSK *and* have a UI conforming to the Windows usability guidelines is verging on the impossible, especially once you factor in supporting users and maintaining websites. IMO the user community should be very grateful to Patrick for the work he does no matter how appealing the UI may be. To provide the ultimate software would require a team of three or four programmers; herding cats would be easier. Simon Brown, HB9DRV - Original Message - From: Tooner [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:defaultprofile%40gmail.com --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio%40yahoogroups.com , Kevin O'Rorke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Those who complain about the UI really need to go away and use another Program. Sorry Kevin, in this country, our opinions are equal. In theory at least. Those who complain.. don't just get up and leave we bitch about it until someone fixes it!
RE: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
ahh I am of that certain age but UI could also apply to me as (u)n(i)tiated hi hi tnx Simon John VE5MU User Interface, also known as GUI (Graphical User Interface) when compared with an old VT-100 type terminal interface or even a teletype for those of a 'certain age'. Simon Brown, HB9DRV - Original Message - From: John Bradley mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] qu'est-ce que UI?
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
Tooner wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Jose A. Amador [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: ... but what it does and how it does. ... And certainly MultiPSK does its stuff WELL ... as a peek at its specs will show you. How about telling us what that 'stuff' is, as you are more familiar than I? Specifics would be nice. It is not the first time that Vista FAILS with an otherwise working software. True, but the applications need to keep up with the operating system, not the other-way-around. That's one of the reasons Windows has so many issues, the demand for backwards compatibility. If Microsoft would just start over, from scratch, and offer no recourse for older apps, then we'd have an O/S closer to what a modern PC can really do. Yes, the 640 kB of RAM original sin, the 528 MB HD limit...etc. 20 years ago, that would be the kiss-of-death for a company. But as ingrained as Windows O/S is, I imagine it would hardly dent their pocketbook. Anyway, we'll be booting to the Internet before long and what operating system your computer will run will be a moot point. It depends on where you are. I have no Internet at home, and we have a bastillized proxy at work with just the imprescindible ports open. Here at home, it is much easier to sync my PC using Clock tuned to CHU, thanks to Patrick, who accepted my suggestion and it is a superb way to sync my PC to UTC. CHU has an almost bulletproof protocol in its time packets, far better than WWV, and still better than WWVB here. Of course, that is my specific situation, and every case may be different. I used DOS until 1998, then jumped to Linux in a very resource deprived 486, and later began using Win98 and Linux in a dual boot Pentium. I still keep many of my old DOS programs, and quiet a few still work under XP or DOSEMU on Linux. Here, it is not easy to keep up with hardware, as you may already know. There, is so far, no NEED for Vista, as XP or other OS's may do well too. Windows has had a bad influence on the Linux world. What was an extremely light OS has become quite heavy too when using a GUI, specially with KDE. Meanwhile, I can still do many things in seconds that takes even a skilled operator quite a bit longer in a Linux box. (For instance, try setting up dual monitors in Linux!) That is another specific situation... Yes, Windows isn't the most stable operating system. It is however, the most usable for the masses. No matter how skilled you are at your preferred O/S, you'll more likely sit down to a Windows PC vs any other flavor. Except maybe at your personal station/s. Like everything else in this world, everything has its pros and its cons...I will not hesitate to use Linux for a server...forget about service packs, and antivirus. To me, those are the two most burdensome activities to keep a server going. And it seems, so far, that it is preferable to migrate a server to another machine rather than upgrading a live server. Generally, a good server dies when its hardware dies. I write from a dual boot machine. I used to run a packet BBS, and Linux is better for that, no doubt. It is also easier for remote administration, on a bandwidth restricted link. Anyway, that's not really the point here. I'm just trying to nail someone down with specifics of what MultiPSK offers that would make someone reconsider what they're currently using. Well, one of the most useful features of MultiPSK is its panoramic decoders. I have a vague memory that Digipan does it too, but I have not used Digipan in ages... Usually I would like to have some more free time, and I work a lot from home...it is easier than the hectic environment in my University. I can be working in a new presentation with MultiPSK working in the background and check periodically if a friend or a needed DX pops up. Again, no one has given specifics yet to what MultiPSK does better than other digital software? For the most common modes, it translates about as well as any other. What, besides the different modes available and costs, keeps one a die-hard MultiPSK fan? Well, Sholto has done an extensive description, and I use MultiPSK mostly for PSK and Olivia, and sometimes, exceptionally, use one of the not so common modes. I have used Voice ocassionally on semi local QSO's on 40 meters, and it works very well, far better print than PSK or RTTY, while being slightly faster than Olivia. (Nevertheless, I keep an old version of Mix for decoding some of the weird combinations of Olivia that Multipsk does not cover. But I have not used it recently...) I have used its oscilloscope and spectrum analyzer to capture waveforms and signals from the real life to include in my work, ocassionally. A real voice waveform is so peculiar that I like my students to take that into account when they have to deal with modulators. Or when evaluating why I had so many difficulties receiving WWV, I realized that the 100 Hz
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
Hello Frank, Windows - No Disk Exception Processing Message 0xc013 Parameters Did you have this problem at the second starting? Or is it permanent each time you start it? but still kinda clunky and cluttered. You see it cluttered, I see it in perfect order. Here is the way I see things: This GUI corresponds to what I need i.e.: * not to waste time in searching the wished command or to switch of mode or sub-mode (minimum of menus, maximum of buttons, panel of modes...), * always the maximum of information directly available on the screen (many hints, contextual help with right click, QRGs, actual configuration...). 73 Patrick - Original Message - From: Tooner To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 2:57 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK MultiPSK gives an error in Vista 64-bit: Windows - No Disk Exception Processing Message 0xc013 Parameters ... Cancel, Try Again, Continue Selecting either will still pull up the program. Seems to work fine. Not a biggie, but in case someone else is using the same O/S, let us know if you see anything similar. Meanwhile, it's aood program for the 'rarer' modes like PAX or CHIP, but still kinda clunky and cluttered. You can tell the same author designed the web-site. Any big fans of MULTIPSK that might like offer why they use it? I'm guessing you're using it for the ALE applications? Frank, K2NCC
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
Hi Frank, The reason that many of us use Multipsk is because it really is the only available program of its kind. No other program has all those modes available in one program at any price. In addition, some of the modes are specific to Multipsk and not available anywhere else. So if you want to use these modes, you must use Multipsk even if there might be other things about the program that you dislike. This is particularly true of the FAE modes, the RSID system, and the constant development by Patrick. No other developer has invented so many modes or tweaked existing modes. Otherwise, it really is a Fords vs Chevy thing (as we might say here in the U.S.:) But even there, the answer is very easy as Chevy's are almost always better:) As time goes on, there will be more choices. The Ham Radio Deluxe Program, which used to be limited to a PSK31 module, now has a full blown digital add on (Digital Master 780) which is superior from an interface and operational standpoint even when compared to programs that cost money. It does seem to require some substantial computer power. The flDigi (Linux) and VBDigi (Windows) programs along with flarq to make up the NBEMS system has seen the addition of many of the most commonly used modes and I can recommend this package. If you are a DXer or contester, you may want to stay with one program and really become proficient with its use. The issue of logging is also a concern since having many different programs and combining logs is not that easy. Multipsk has another feature that provides interoperability with DXLab DX Keeper logging module, via the DXLab Commander module. For those who use the ARRL LoTW this is likely important as I am not sure how many other digital programs can do this. From a personal perspective, my long term goal is to move at least some of my computing to Linux, not so much because I like Linux, but because MS has made so many bad decisions with their current OS and the explosive situation that is going to continue happening in developing countries and other countires outside the U.S. with Linux adoption. While I have not really considered reloading the Vista OS again using the vLite program, (Vista is the easiest OS I have ever reloaded), I am impressed that some of the top programming people at Microsoft have admitted that Vista is bloated and Windows 7 is planned to have a very big change in drastically slimming down. It appears that they will ask, or are already asking programmers to think differently and use a stripped down version of the new OS. However, this new OS is not planned until 2010 so that likely really means 2015 or beyond. Because the world is moving toward free and open software, including the OS, Linux or something evolving from it is very likely in the long term. That means that if you move some of your applications to the new OS, and the programs you now use can not follow as native mode applications, you must move to new ones. That is why almost all the programs my wife and I use have moved or are moving toward open source/cross platform as much as we can. We are probably too old really to be overly concerned, but may we have another 10 or 20 years, you never know. The two stumbling blocks for me - the much better visual rendering that Vista does on my equipment, which is slightly better than XP and much better than Linux at this time. - the access to ham radio programs that are only available on MS Windows at this time. So for now I am going to primarily use the programs that have the modes I want to use, or can legally use. If they become available on Linux as a native mode someday, then that could change. At this time only Multipsk has almost all of the sound card modes in one program and that is only available on MS Windows. 73, Rick, KV9U Tooner wrote: I understand the specifications, as also found in Sholto's excellent post of Here's a rundown What I haven't seen a reply that answers the original question of Any big fans of MULTIPSK that might like offer why they use it?. If it's the unique modes it offers, what modes have you successfully used? If it's the layout, what do you like about it compared to others? Again, this wasn't about Fords-vs-Chevys. We all have our tastes. I was trying to find out what others like. I hope I didn't offend anyone in this pursuit of curiosity. It wasn't meant to devalue as it was to raise awareness. If only my own. 73. Frank K2NCC
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
Hello Frank and all, I don't think Multipsk deserves all these mails. However thanks to all who present, in a better way that I could do it, this program. Here's a screenshot of what I get to stare at for hours on end: http://evokefrank.googlepages.com/psk31qso Notice the full screen waterfall (with spectrum analysis), the quick access to other components of a QSO like instant logging, and the... You are right. It is very nice and Simon is talented. But nobody oblige you to use a program. You can simply uninstall it and that's all. It reminds me this saying Vouloir le beurre, l'argent du beurre et la crémière which means to want the butter, the money of the butter and the lady who sells the butter. 73 Patrick - Original Message - From: Tooner To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 4:23 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Sholto Fisher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MultiPSK has a lot more in it than just the ALE Frank. That's cool, and I can appreciate that. I've played with most of the common digital modes software and have to say MultiPSK has a lot of 'meat' to it. However, as a casual HF digital modes user, and my particular setup, MultiPSK doesn't do anything more for me than what I'm using. ... rather than wasting it on making the program look like something Microsoft developed. True, but there's something to be said about having a clean layout. Here's a screenshot of what I get to stare at for hours on end: http://evokefrank.googlepages.com/psk31qso Notice the full screen waterfall (with spectrum analysis), the quick access to other components of a QSO like instant logging, and the ability to separate the program windows for optimal layouts. There's plenty more, but that can be discovered (detailed signal analysis, etc.) by the more industrious. Not that this is a feature comparison, as much as a visual representation. If a user unfamiliar with either program compared the two, which do you think would be more appealing? The difference in 'abilities' is minor for all most the most active hams. Maybe even then. Also, if one wants the full features of MultiPSK (like the spectrum analyzer or oscilloscope) you'll have to fork up $45.00). It's kinda like homebrewing a qrp radio... True, as the creator of the QRP rig. As a hand-me-down it might not hold the same feelings. I think it's more like the hard-core DOS or CW guys that refuse to let go of to what they're accustomed. Technology requires that one adapts often and adapts quickly. There are always some drawback to letting go of what worked for so long, but the benefits usually (or eventually) outweigh the disadvantages. Digital TV isn't as good as analog, but now I have 400 channels of junk instead of six! 8-) Who cares what it looks like it's how well it does the job There's a lot to be said for looks and ease-of-use! I'd much rather have the best of both worlds Meanwhile, what 'job' does MultiPSK do for you personally? Or, if someone else wants to pipe in with their answer. This shouldn't turn into a Fords-vs-Chevys battle, but I am interested in the exchange of opinions and information. I reserve the right to adapt and change my mind with new information! ;) 73. Frank K2NCC http://groups.yahoo.com/group/radiointerference/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
Hi Patrick I think the GUI is great . I have no trouble using it. Keep up the good work ! 73 de LA5VNA Steinar Patrick Lindecker skrev: Hello Frank and all, I don't think Multipsk deserves all these mails. However thanks to all who present, in a better way that I could do it, this program. Here's a screenshot of what I get to stare at for hours on end: http://evokefrank.googlepages.com/psk31qso http://evokefrank.googlepages.com/psk31qso Notice the full screen waterfall (with spectrum analysis), the quick access to other components of a QSO like instant logging, and the... You are right. It is very nice and Simon is talented. But nobody oblige you to use a program. You can simply uninstall it and that's all. It reminds me this saying Vouloir le beurre, l'argent du beurre et la crémière which means to want the butter, the money of the butter and the lady who sells the butter. 73 Patrick - Original Message - *From:* Tooner mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] *To:* digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio@yahoogroups.com *Sent:* Thursday, January 31, 2008 4:23 AM *Subject:* [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com mailto:digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Sholto Fisher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MultiPSK has a lot more in it than just the ALE Frank. That's cool, and I can appreciate that. I've played with most of the common digital modes software and have to say MultiPSK has a lot of 'meat' to it. However, as a casual HF digital modes user, and my particular setup, MultiPSK doesn't do anything more for me than what I'm using. ... rather than wasting it on making the program look like something Microsoft developed. True, but there's something to be said about having a clean layout. Here's a screenshot of what I get to stare at for hours on end: http://evokefrank.googlepages.com/psk31qso http://evokefrank.googlepages.com/psk31qso Notice the full screen waterfall (with spectrum analysis), the quick access to other components of a QSO like instant logging, and the ability to separate the program windows for optimal layouts. There's plenty more, but that can be discovered (detailed signal analysis, etc.) by the more industrious. Not that this is a feature comparison, as much as a visual representation. If a user unfamiliar with either program compared the two, which do you think would be more appealing? The difference in 'abilities' is minor for all most the most active hams. Maybe even then. Also, if one wants the full features of MultiPSK (like the spectrum analyzer or oscilloscope) you'll have to fork up $45.00). It's kinda like homebrewing a qrp radio... True, as the creator of the QRP rig. As a hand-me-down it might not hold the same feelings. I think it's more like the hard-core DOS or CW guys that refuse to let go of to what they're accustomed. Technology requires that one adapts often and adapts quickly. There are always some drawback to letting go of what worked for so long, but the benefits usually (or eventually) outweigh the disadvantages. Digital TV isn't as good as analog, but now I have 400 channels of junk instead of six! 8-) Who cares what it looks like it's how well it does the job There's a lot to be said for looks and ease-of-use! I'd much rather have the best of both worlds Meanwhile, what 'job' does MultiPSK do for you personally? Or, if someone else wants to pipe in with their answer. This shouldn't turn into a Fords-vs-Chevys battle, but I am interested in the exchange of opinions and information. I reserve the right to adapt and change my mind with new information! ;) 73. Frank K2NCC http://groups.yahoo.com/group/radiointerference/ http://groups.yahoo.com/group/radiointerference/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
Hi Patrick, I agree. You do an awesome job. Thank you so much for your hard work on our behalf! 73 Al WB2JEP -- Original message -- From: Demetre Valaris [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Lindecker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Frank and all, I don't think Multipsk deserves all these mails. Hi Patrick, I find the GUI in MULTIPSK the best of all. It looks like a DIGITAL MODEM and I can go to any mode I want with a single click. I think this is the best GUI I have ever seen on any soundcard DIGITAL MODE program. Don't take any notice of all this whining. What really matters most is the way this program decodes the various modes. 73 de Demetre SV1UY
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
Frank, I will see if I can find this on a Vista computer. One other solution would be to see what happens with a test program (with a lot of flags). If you are interested, PSE send me a mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] 73 Patrick - Original Message - From: Tooner To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 7:53 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Lindecker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Frank, Windows - No Disk Exception Processing Message 0xc013 Parameters Did you have this problem at the second starting? Or is it permanent each time you start it? Every time I start it. f
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
Hey Patrick!! Cud u give me the URL: to download this pgm? Appreciate!! 73 Les At 02:05 PM 1/31/2008, you wrote: Frank, I will see if I can find this on a Vista computer. One other solution would be to see what happens with a test program (with a lot of flags). If you are interested, PSE send me a mail to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED][EMAIL PROTECTED] 73 Patrick - Original Message - From: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]Tooner To: mailto:digitalradio@yahoogroups.comdigitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 7:53 PM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK --- In mailto:digitalradio@yahoogroups.comdigitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Patrick Lindecker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello Frank, Windows - No Disk Exception Processing Message 0xc013 Parameters Did you have this problem at the second starting? Or is it permanent each time you start it? Every time I start it. f No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.14/1247 - Release Date: 1/28/2008 10:59 AM
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
I began using MultiPSK a few months ago when Sholto was looking for help with some propagation monitoring on 30 meters. He has a program that works in conjunction with MultiPSK to automatically post spots on http://www.projectsandparts.com/30m/. Prior to trying and registering MultiPSK I had almost always used a registered copy of MixW. The performance of MultiPSK in the modes I've tried is very good. I especially like the panoramic reception as it makes it easy to copy the mail while I'm in the shack reading or working on other projects. The user interface for MultiPSK is very busy/cluttered in my opinion. An alternative I think might work well would be a tabbed system where each mode had its own tab and you only saw controls and displays for the mode you had selected. I think this might also make new additions easier because you would add a new tab vs. deciding where to squeeze in the new mode/button/slider. My suspicion is that people new to MultiPSK may be put off because of the learning curve. There is a LOT there to figure out for a new user that has not been with it as it has evolved. Couple that with a person's natural tendency to be comfortable with the old program they used no matter what new modes and features it doesn't have and you have a powerful tool that some people will just not put forth the effort to learn. That's not a bad thing, it's just a choice they make. Remember, it's a hobby. Hobbies are supposed to be enjoyable! 73, Tim, N9PUZ Tooner wrote: I understand the specifications, as also found in Sholto's excellent post of Here's a rundown What I haven't seen a reply that answers the original question of Any big fans of MULTIPSK that might like offer why they use it?. If it's the unique modes it offers, what modes have you successfully used? If it's the layout, what do you like about it compared to others? 73. Frank K2NCC
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
Nice post Jose. I must also add that the algorithms written by Patrick are some of the most sophisticated I have ever seen for software based audio decoding. His A1A decoder is one of the best I have ever used. -- JT Croteau, N1ESE - Manchester, NH (FN42gx) Contest Manager, TARA Skirmish
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
On Jan 31, 2008 6:59 PM, Les Warriner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey Patrick!! Cud u give me the URL: to download this pgm? Appreciate!! Les, the main mirror site is Earl's, N8KBR: http://multipsk.eqth.info/index.html (click on United States Download Site #1). -- JT Croteau, N1ESE - Manchester, NH (FN42gx) Contest Manager, TARA Skirmish
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
Touche!! Patrick. I enjoy using your program. Rick W3BI - Original Message From: Patrick Lindecker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: digitalradio@yahoogroups.com Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 2:00:03 PM Subject: Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK Hello Frank and all, I don't think Multipsk deserves all these mails. However thanks to all who present, in a better way that I could do it, this program. Here's a screenshot of what I get to stare at for hours on end: http://evokefrank. googlepages. com/psk31qso Notice the full screen waterfall (with spectrum analysis), the quick access to other components of a QSO like instant logging, and the... You are right. It is very nice and Simon is talented. But nobody oblige you to use a program. You can simply uninstall it and that's all. It reminds me this saying Vouloir le beurre, l'argent du beurre et la crémière which means to want the butter, the money of the butter and the lady who sells the butter. 73 Patrick - Original Message - From: Tooner To: digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com Sent: Thursday, January 31, 2008 4:23 AM Subject: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK --- In digitalradio@ yahoogroups. com, Sholto Fisher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MultiPSK has a lot more in it than just the ALE Frank. That's cool, and I can appreciate that. I've played with most of the common digital modes software and have to say MultiPSK has a lot of 'meat' to it. However, as a casual HF digital modes user, and my particular setup, MultiPSK doesn't do anything more for me than what I'm using. ... rather than wasting it on making the program look like something Microsoft developed. True, but there's something to be said about having a clean layout. Here's a screenshot of what I get to stare at for hours on end: http://evokefrank. googlepages. com/psk31qso Notice the full screen waterfall (with spectrum analysis), the quick access to other components of a QSO like instant logging, and the ability to separate the program windows for optimal layouts. There's plenty more, but that can be discovered (detailed signal analysis, etc.) by the more industrious. Not that this is a feature comparison, as much as a visual representation. If a user unfamiliar with either program compared the two, which do you think would be more appealing? The difference in 'abilities' is minor for all most the most active hams. Maybe even then. Also, if one wants the full features of MultiPSK (like the spectrum analyzer or oscilloscope) you'll have to fork up $45.00). It's kinda like homebrewing a qrp radio... True, as the creator of the QRP rig. As a hand-me-down it might not hold the same feelings. I think it's more like the hard-core DOS or CW guys that refuse to let go of to what they're accustomed. Technology requires that one adapts often and adapts quickly. There are always some drawback to letting go of what worked for so long, but the benefits usually (or eventually) outweigh the disadvantages. Digital TV isn't as good as analog, but now I have 400 channels of junk instead of six! 8-) Who cares what it looks like it's how well it does the job There's a lot to be said for looks and ease-of-use! I'd much rather have the best of both worlds Meanwhile, what 'job' does MultiPSK do for you personally? Or, if someone else wants to pipe in with their answer. This shouldn't turn into a Fords-vs-Chevys battle, but I am interested in the exchange of opinions and information. I reserve the right to adapt and change my mind with new information! ;) 73. Frank K2NCC http://groups. yahoo.com/ group/radiointer ference/ Never miss a thing. Make Yahoo your home page. http://www.yahoo.com/r/hs
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
Thanks Much!!! At 04:45 PM 1/31/2008, you wrote: On Jan 31, 2008 6:59 PM, Les Warriner mailto:leswa7ham%40earthlink.net[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey Patrick!! Cud u give me the URL: to download this pgm? Appreciate!! Les, the main mirror site is Earl's, N8KBR: http://multipsk.eqth.info/index.htmlhttp://multipsk.eqth.info/index.html (click on United States Download Site #1). -- JT Croteau, N1ESE - Manchester, NH (FN42gx) Contest Manager, TARA Skirmish No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG Free Edition. Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.19.14/1247 - Release Date: 1/28/2008 10:59 AM
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
Tooner wrote: MultiPSK gives an error in Vista 64-bit: Windows - No Disk Exception Processing Message 0xc013 Parameters ... Cancel, Try Again, Continue Selecting either will still pull up the program. Seems to work fine. Not a biggie, but in case someone else is using the same O/S, let us know if you see anything similar. Meanwhile, it's aood program for the 'rarer' modes like PAX or CHIP, but still kinda clunky and cluttered. You can tell the same author designed the web-site. Any big fans of MULTIPSK that might like offer why they use it? I'm guessing you're using it for the ALE applications? Frank, K2NCC MultiPSK has a lot more in it than just the ALE Frank. It takes time to learn what it can do but is well worth the effort. Quite honestly I don't mind the interface - been using it for 3 years and you learn to live with the quirks. I like the fact that Patrick F6CTE (the author) spends his time inventing, developing and improving digi-modes rather than wasting it on making the program look like something Microsoft developed. It's kinda like homebrewing a qrp radio using dead-bug or Manhattan construction. Who cares what it looks like it's how well it does the job that matters. 73, Sholto KE7HPV.
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
Sholto Fisher wrote: Tooner wrote: MultiPSK gives an error in Vista 64-bit: Windows - No Disk Exception Processing Message 0xc013 Parameters ... Cancel, Try Again, Continue Selecting either will still pull up the program. Seems to work fine. Not a biggie, but in case someone else is using the same O/S, let us know if you see anything similar. Meanwhile, it's aood program for the 'rarer' modes like PAX or CHIP, but still kinda clunky and cluttered. You can tell the same author designed the web-site. Any big fans of MULTIPSK that might like offer why they use it? I'm guessing you're using it for the ALE applications? Frank, K2NCC MultiPSK has a lot more in it than just the ALE Frank. It takes time to learn what it can do but is well worth the effort. Quite honestly I don't mind the interface - been using it for 3 years and you learn to live with the quirks. I like the fact that Patrick F6CTE (the author) spends his time inventing, developing and improving digi-modes rather than wasting it on making the program look like something Microsoft developed. It's kinda like homebrewing a qrp radio using dead-bug or Manhattan construction. Who cares what it looks like it's how well it does the job that matters. 73, Sholto KE7HPV. Sholto, I heartily second that. Well put. Those who complain about the UI really need to go away and use another Program. No it is not all about ALE as it has all the other digital programs and more. Kevin VK5OA
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
Hi Frank, I have had older versions in 32 bit Vista with similar error messages but it seemed to work. I normally have been staying with my WinXP box since I have the sound card and USB ports connected to that computer and moving them back and forth is not trivial. Lately, with version 4.6 I don't seem to have this but right now I don't have USB ports connected to the rig/interface so maybe that makes a difference. For Chip64, which I once thought was no longer used, but have found that some digital nets use the software, especially because it seems to perform well against lightning static, I would have to recommend Nino's program. The digital group in Virginia says that it works the best in decoding. Patrick has been the most inventive of any of the amateur radio software digital program developers. We have mentioned to him about the interface but he prefers to have it this way. He is willing to work with other amazing software developers such as Dave Berstein and interoperate with the DXLab suite. Especially rig control such as the CI-V. My ideal would be to have a simpler interface, especially if I wish to sell digital modes to others for such things as emergency use. I find that I have been often using software that makes up the NBEMS program now that it was ported to Windows with VBdigi, and is the only cross platform Windows/Linux program of its type. The interface is not pretty either, but very functional and of course not as cluttered since it only has a few basic modes plus the ability to ARQ with the flarq program. The main reason for using Multipsk for me now has been the superb FAE 400 mode. No other mode has those features and at the same time has memory ARQ. Now if we could just get more hams to use it. 73, Rick, KV9U Tooner wrote: MultiPSK gives an error in Vista 64-bit: Windows - No Disk Exception Processing Message 0xc013 Parameters ... Cancel, Try Again, Continue Selecting either will still pull up the program. Seems to work fine. Not a biggie, but in case someone else is using the same O/S, let us know if you see anything similar. Meanwhile, it's aood program for the 'rarer' modes like PAX or CHIP, but still kinda clunky and cluttered. You can tell the same author designed the web-site. Any big fans of MULTIPSK that might like offer why they use it? I'm guessing you're using it for the ALE applications? Frank, K2NCC
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
I gave it a try for the first time about a year ago. It was very confusing for a first time user. Rather then have the main screen loaded with all the modes I think it would be a lot better the have a drop down under a mode button with settings. But that just me. I deleted it from the system and have not tried again since. John, W0JAB At 09:23 PM 1/30/2008, you wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Sholto Fisher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MultiPSK has a lot more in it than just the ALE Frank. That's cool, and I can appreciate that. I've played with most of the common digital modes software and have to say MultiPSK has a lot of 'meat' to it. However, as a casual HF digital modes user, and my particular setup, MultiPSK doesn't do anything more for me than what I'm using. ... rather than wasting it on making the program look like something Microsoft developed. True, but there's something to be said about having a clean layout. Here's a screenshot of what I get to stare at for hours on end: http://evokefrank.googlepages.com/psk31qso Notice the full screen waterfall (with spectrum analysis), the quick access to other components of a QSO like instant logging, and the ability to separate the program windows for optimal layouts. There's plenty more, but that can be discovered (detailed signal analysis, etc.) by the more industrious. Not that this is a feature comparison, as much as a visual representation. If a user unfamiliar with either program compared the two, which do you think would be more appealing? The difference in 'abilities' is minor for all most the most active hams. Maybe even then. Also, if one wants the full features of MultiPSK (like the spectrum analyzer or oscilloscope) you'll have to fork up $45.00). It's kinda like homebrewing a qrp radio... True, as the creator of the QRP rig. As a hand-me-down it might not hold the same feelings. I think it's more like the hard-core DOS or CW guys that refuse to let go of to what they're accustomed. Technology requires that one adapts often and adapts quickly. There are always some drawback to letting go of what worked for so long, but the benefits usually (or eventually) outweigh the disadvantages. Digital TV isn't as good as analog, but now I have 400 channels of junk instead of six! 8-) Who cares what it looks like it's how well it does the job There's a lot to be said for looks and ease-of-use! I'd much rather have the best of both worlds Meanwhile, what 'job' does MultiPSK do for you personally? Or, if someone else wants to pipe in with their answer. This shouldn't turn into a Fords-vs-Chevys battle, but I am interested in the exchange of opinions and information. I reserve the right to adapt and change my mind with new information! ;)
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
Tooner wrote: MultiPSK gives an error in Vista 64-bit: Windows - No Disk Exception Processing Message 0xc013 Parameters ... Cancel, Try Again, Continue Selecting either will still pull up the program. Seems to work fine. Not a biggie, but in case someone else is using the same O/S, let us know if you see anything similar. Meanwhile, it's aood program for the 'rarer' modes like PAX or CHIP, but still kinda clunky and cluttered. You can tell the same author designed the web-site. Any big fans of MULTIPSK that might like offer why they use it? I'm guessing you're using it for the ALE applications? Frank, K2NCC Well, your guessing is misleading you. For me, the most important part of a program of its kind is not the eye candy, but what it does and how it does. And certainly MultiPSK does its stuff WELL, and is among the pioneers in more than one front. It is an innovative communications program that is useful in many modes, as a peek at its specs will show you. It is not the first time that Vista FAILS with an otherwise working software. The list of Vista shortcomings is long, starting with an excessively greedy hardware requirement, and the requirement that the software it runs be rewritten according to its requirements. It is like changing the car controls in a new car model, which requires a new kind of highways. MultiPSK has worked well with XP, Win2000 and I used the previous versions on my old Win98 and now retired PC. Also works well under Linux with Wine. Can you correctly guess now what is flawed? Beauty is on the eye of the beholder. And it does not tell the whole truth. 73, Jose, CO2JA __ Participe en Universidad 2008. 11 al 15 de febrero del 2008. Palacio de las Convenciones, Ciudad de la Habana, Cuba http://www.universidad2008.cu
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
For me personally MultiPSK allows me to enjoy ham radio my way. I like to experiment and be on the edge of new digimode technology and concepts. The learning curve keeps my mind sharp. I can also talk to Patrick as a fellow amateur and suggest things and he takes the time and courtesy to address every point I have ever put to him. Some of my ideas end up in MultiPSK too. I have a registered version of MultiPSK and it was well worth the money. Fantastic deal really if you consider what I ended up with in the 3+ years I have been using it. But I do admit I am still a dyed-in-the-wool CW guy and love nothing more than to turn off the computers (including the old Pentium 200 running DOS) and use a straight key with my QRP radios to my homemade dipoles. This, just like mucking around with MultiPSK, feels like real radio to me. 73, Sholto KE7HPV. Tooner wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Sholto Fisher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: MultiPSK has a lot more in it than just the ALE Frank. That's cool, and I can appreciate that. I've played with most of the common digital modes software and have to say MultiPSK has a lot of 'meat' to it. However, as a casual HF digital modes user, and my particular setup, MultiPSK doesn't do anything more for me than what I'm using. ... rather than wasting it on making the program look like something Microsoft developed. True, but there's something to be said about having a clean layout. Here's a screenshot of what I get to stare at for hours on end: http://evokefrank.googlepages.com/psk31qso Notice the full screen waterfall (with spectrum analysis), the quick access to other components of a QSO like instant logging, and the ability to separate the program windows for optimal layouts. There's plenty more, but that can be discovered (detailed signal analysis, etc.) by the more industrious. Not that this is a feature comparison, as much as a visual representation. If a user unfamiliar with either program compared the two, which do you think would be more appealing? The difference in 'abilities' is minor for all most the most active hams. Maybe even then. Also, if one wants the full features of MultiPSK (like the spectrum analyzer or oscilloscope) you'll have to fork up $45.00). It's kinda like homebrewing a qrp radio... True, as the creator of the QRP rig. As a hand-me-down it might not hold the same feelings. I think it's more like the hard-core DOS or CW guys that refuse to let go of to what they're accustomed. Technology requires that one adapts often and adapts quickly. There are always some drawback to letting go of what worked for so long, but the benefits usually (or eventually) outweigh the disadvantages. Digital TV isn't as good as analog, but now I have 400 channels of junk instead of six! 8-) Who cares what it looks like it's how well it does the job There's a lot to be said for looks and ease-of-use! I'd much rather have the best of both worlds Meanwhile, what 'job' does MultiPSK do for you personally? Or, if someone else wants to pipe in with their answer. This shouldn't turn into a Fords-vs-Chevys battle, but I am interested in the exchange of opinions and information. I reserve the right to adapt and change my mind with new information! ;) 73. Frank K2NCC http://groups.yahoo.com/group/radiointerference/
Re: [digitalradio] Re: New release (4.7) of MULTIPSK
Frank, Here's a rundown of some of the more interesting and maybe offbeat things you can do with MultiPSK that you can't do in other programs: Weak signal modes - There are a variety of interesting modes suitable for weak signal/QRP work. These include a modified version of PSK10. In tests with a channel simulator I have had decode down to -20db S/N. Of course in the real world Doppler would probably limit this to around -18dB S/N. PSKAM10, very slow but can work even further into the noise. VOICE an adapted weak signal mode derived from Olivia that is only 168Hz wide. Seems better than Olivia 8/250 and faster too. This mode also has an audio readout of the character using a voice synthesizer if desired (the idea being invented for blind hams). Automatic ID MultiPSK can send a waterfall picture (actually a type of Hellschreiber) with the name of the mode before transmission. It's possible to see this message in just about any other type of program running a waterfall. RS-ID. Automatic mode recognition and precise frequency tuning. This is another type of ID that is a unique Reed-Solomon MFSK sequence that is transmitted before the main transmission and allows the remote copy of MultiPSK (or PocketDigi now) to home in and choose the right mode automatically. This works down to around -14dB s/n and is extremely useful! Soundcard based ARQ --- MIL-STD-188-141A implementations in normal wide bandwidth or narrow 400Hz bandwidth providing a Fast Acknowledged Exchange ARQ mode for semi-duplex QSO's or transferring emails files. The ALE400 mode as you probably know appears to be a very effective mode for error free QSO's. PAX/PAX-2 similar idea but based on AX25 packet structure and features. MFSK modulation. Regular AX25 packet radio. Not a dumb terminal but a full implementation including an autoresponder, APRS (RX TX) and messaging facility. Commercial Modes Of interest to SWL's mainly perhaps. Decoding of DTMF, HF FAX (including false coloring for satellite pictures), GMDSS transmissions, VHF ACARS, SYNOP/SHIP messages and various other formats. Panoramic Decoders -- Decode up to 23 different PSK31, RTTY or CW signals simultaneously. PC Clock Synchronization Synchronize your PC clock to WWV, CHU etc in real time. Experimental Picture Transmission - Using either narrowband MFSK16 SSTV or a simple digital transmission method in various modes. Probably not that useful but fun to try out. Filters --- Various DSP filters for experimentation including a Binaural CW filter. Wide variety of modes - Many modes not found in other software. Miscellaneous - Spectrum Analyzer Oscilloscope Signal analysis Works with SDR and DSB receivers TCP/IP control TCP/IP POP3 SMTP functions for working with your mail program Programming facility - simple language for special applications. Really there is so much in this program to have fun with! I am sure I have not covered everything in this list. 73, Sholto KE7HPV. Tooner wrote: --- In digitalradio@yahoogroups.com, Sholto Fisher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: For me personally MultiPSK allows me to enjoy ham radio my way. I like to experiment and be on the edge of new digimode technology and concepts. The learning curve keeps my mind sharp. I can appreciate that! Simon, with HRD, is similar in his approaches. Good support, constant development and new modes, and takes into consideration user opinions. He's added many features based upon for what a forum like this cheers. Meanwhile, as a digimode fan, be sure to check out Roland Prosch's Technical Handbook for Radio Monitoring. It's a book with the best coverage of digital modes I've ever seen. Introduced me to HUNDREDS of digital modes I've never know. Then again, I've only been a ham for a short while! 8) What are some of your favorite, less common modes Sholto? Frank, K2NCC
