Re: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR

[Jim Lux]

Quoting Brian Lloyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on Wed 25 Jun 2008  
09:33:17 PM PDT:

>
> On Jun 25, 2008, at 9:08 PM, Bob McGwier wrote:
>
>> Brian:
>>
>> The firmware is indeed closed as this IS REQUIRED to be in
>> compliance with
>> law.  We are not violating any FSF rules because the firmware runs
>> under .
>
> I didn't mean to imply that. It sounded like it might be hidden/
> proprietary or something, which would be a company policy thing. Jim
> Lux has been giving me a much deeper explanation in private email. I
> understand a lot better now.


Well.. that whole SDR regulatory compliance is an area of some  
negotiation, winks and nods, etc.  The FCC hasn't really figured out  
how to deal with it for smaller volume than Wal-mart but larger volume  
than tinkering experimental stuff.

For real large production items, you're on the hook for full  
compliance, which essentially means locked down software,  
authentication for uploads, etc.

For tinkering hackers, with volumes in the tens, they don't much care.

It's that in-between area that gets them a bit testy... From the  
various folks I've talked to, it's a matter of sitting down with the  
local (or DC) regulators and sort of coming to an agreement on a by  
the each basis.




>> We know what is going on with the debounce, qsk, etc. issues.  It
>> will only
>> require the rewrite of thousands of lines of the closed firmware.
>
> SMOP
>
>> That is a
>> major undertaking,  which will be joined by both volunteer (me, Frank,
>> others) and the ONE paid software writer empowered to do this work
>> at Flex.
>> Since this clearly became much more important than the open linux
>> API (since
>> it was going to change anyway because of this) it has been put in
>> back of
>> this development.

Interesting... so, will the MIDI message interface also change?  Or  
does that remain fixed (i.e. fixing debouncing, etc., wouldn't  
normally change the note messages..)


>
> Ah. It wasn't clear to me what the relationship was between DttSP and
> the Flex5000. Seems things are closer than I realized from the
> discussions on the DttSP mailing list.


___
FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/

Re: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR

[Brian Lloyd]

On Jun 25, 2008, at 9:08 PM, Bob McGwier wrote:

> Brian:
>
> The firmware is indeed closed as this IS REQUIRED to be in  
> compliance with
> law.  We are not violating any FSF rules because the firmware runs  
> under .

I didn't mean to imply that. It sounded like it might be hidden/ 
proprietary or something, which would be a company policy thing. Jim  
Lux has been giving me a much deeper explanation in private email. I  
understand a lot better now.

> We have been promised a full technical manual, which would include  
> the API.
> My old pal Brian needs to join dttsp-linux where the developments,  
> including
> the API for the fully open control of the 5000 are being undertaken.

Actually, I am there. Not a lot of discussion. And you keep using this  
Linux thing -- my least-favorite OS ... next to Windows. :-)

(And, no, I don't have a favorite OS ... right now. I am using MacOS  
and Solaris pretty much out of desperation.)

> We know what is going on with the debounce, qsk, etc. issues.  It  
> will only
> require the rewrite of thousands of lines of the closed firmware.

SMOP

> That is a
> major undertaking,  which will be joined by both volunteer (me, Frank,
> others) and the ONE paid software writer empowered to do this work  
> at Flex.
> Since this clearly became much more important than the open linux  
> API (since
> it was going to change anyway because of this) it has been put in  
> back of
> this development.

Ah. It wasn't clear to me what the relationship was between DttSP and  
the Flex5000. Seems things are closer than I realized from the  
discussions on the DttSP mailing list.

> PATIENCE my old friend.  It is in the works but life keeps wandering  
> in the
> way with more fires than firemen.  Flex is still a small start up  
> that did
> NOT use Venture capital and has kept its burn rate less than cash  
> flow but
> is heavily investing in the future.

So you are telling me I should go ahead and pull-the-trigger on a  
Flex5000 then? As I said in my original post, I finally decided that,  
as nice as the K3 is, its software is closed and its architecture is  
too retro for my tastes. Not a lot of room for really new stuff. (And  
I love the K2 and will keep using that.) I figured that the Flex5000  
was a platform that had potential but if it had closed hardware,  
undocumented interfaces, and tied to PowerSDR and only PowerSDR,  
well ...

So, I stand corrected. I want to thank all of you for answering my  
questions and setting me straight.


--

73 de Brian, WB6RQN
Brian Lloyd - brian HYPHEN wb6rqn AT lloyd DOT com




___
FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/

Re: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR

[Bob McGwier]

Brian:

The firmware is indeed closed as this IS REQUIRED to be in compliance with
law.  We are not violating any FSF rules because the firmware runs under .
We have been promised a full technical manual, which would include the API.
My old pal Brian needs to join dttsp-linux where the developments, including
the API for the fully open control of the 5000 are being undertaken.

We know what is going on with the debounce, qsk, etc. issues.  It will only
require the rewrite of thousands of lines of the closed firmware.  That is a
major undertaking,  which will be joined by both volunteer (me, Frank,
others) and the ONE paid software writer empowered to do this work at Flex.
Since this clearly became much more important than the open linux API (since
it was going to change anyway because of this) it has been put in back of
this development.

PATIENCE my old friend.  It is in the works but life keeps wandering in the
way with more fires than firemen.  Flex is still a small start up that did
NOT use Venture capital and has kept its burn rate less than cash flow but
is heavily investing in the future.

73's
Bob




-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Dale Boresz
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 9:07 AM
To: Brian Lloyd
Cc: flexradio@flex-radio.biz
Subject: Re: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR

Hello Brian,

This is the future, and it is actively in development. It continues to 
be open source, and is not tied in any way to MS Windowss. The 
modular/component architecture is the perfect platform for what you 
describe.

< http://support.flex-radio.com/Downloads.aspx?id=223 >

73, Dale
WA8SRA


Brian Lloyd wrote:
> On Jun 25, 2008, at 4:52 AM, Tim Ellison wrote:
>
>   
>> Nope.  Not for the FLEX-5000.
>>
>> There are some non-Windows alternatives for the SDR-1000.  They are  
>> not as feature rich as PowerSDR.
>> 
>
> There are features and there are features. To me the most important  
> feature would be a good set of published interfaces thus allowing  
> someone to hack whatever feature they decide they need.
>
> This is powerfully frustrating. I have been considering getting a  
> Flex5000 or an Elecraft K3. The K3's software environment is closed  
> which makes me uncomfortable. It is also limited by the bandwidth of  
> its analog first IF so in spite of its stellar RX performance, it  
> doesn't look like a big enough technology jump to make me think that  
> it will be the right platform to be playing with 5 years from now.
>
> Along comes the Flex5000 which looks like the answer but its hardware  
> and firmware environment is closed. Now it appears that there is no  
> alternative to PowerSDR which is Windows based. I am just so tired of  
> spending time trying to keep Windows running and uh-hacked. Not only  
> that but windows just performs poorly in a real-time environment. Too  
> much latency in response to events. I suspect this is where the QSK  
> problems lie with the Flex5000.
>
> Is Flex planning to publish the interface to the Flex5000 so that  
> other packages can be made to run with it?
>
> I wish someone would make a top-notch radio that is usable on a daily  
> basis but is still open for experimentation. It sounds like, for the  
> nonce, the SDR-1000 is the only answer for an HF rig that runs  
> reasonably well in the ham bands but is still completely open.  
> Unfortunately it has that silly parallel-port interface.
>
>  I want to buy a new radio now that I can keep doing new things  
> with 5 years from now. I refuse to be locked into Windows except as an  
> interim solution.
>
> --
>
> 73 de Brian, WB6RQN
> Brian Lloyd - brian HYPHEN wb6rqn AT lloyd DOT com
>
>
>
>
> ___
> FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
> FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
> http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
> Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
> Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage:
http://www.flex-radio.com/
>
>
>
>   


___
FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage:
http://www.flex-radio.com/


___
FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/

Re: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR

[Lee A Crocker]

I had a QSK contact last night at 40 wpm with my F5K and I didn't notice any 
problems.   Worked as well as my Orion or my FT-1000 on QSK.   

I don't see the K3 as anything but a transition radio between the old 
technology of half duplex transceivers and the future.  It has some SDR 
character to it, but it basically is as fixed in stone as a KWM 2.  You can 
change it at the margins, add a little box her or a filter there but it will be 
the same radio in 30 years it is today.  

The flex radio is not that radio.  It started its life as a visual basic 
program, has progress to what we have today and is on the verge of becoming 
platform independent.  It is truly a work in progress.  Its operation can be 
changed radically in form and function.  Its potential is not even scratched 
yet.

Bill pretty well summed it up, the K-3 is a knob radio that can be kludged up 
to bridge itself a little ways into the future.  Its what I call one of the 
transition radios along with the Ten Tec radios.  In my book it belongs on the 
trash heap of antiquity because its design philosophy is out of last century.  
Its interesting that to bridge itself to this century the K-3 uses the open 
source PSDR software

The F5K has a closed firmware because in order to become type accepted the FCC 
required that.  N8VB will come up against the same problem when he tries to get 
his radio type accepted.   Without meeting that firmware condition there would 
be no F5K.  

There are several branches of the code written by individuals.  As people's 
ideas come to fruition they are incorporated into the main trunk, improving the 
experience for all users.   Basically you pays your money and gets what you 
gets.   I like what I got.

73  W9OY



  
___
FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/

Re: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR

[Frank Brickle]

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 12:26 PM, Peter G. Viscarola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:


> Oh... here we go again.  That's just nonsense.
>
> It simply means that SOME people, having no other alternative, WILL read
> the source and create derived works from it.  Which means the task is
> not insurmountable.


Sigh.

Is it really necessary to spell this out?

The development process is the way it is, precisely to set the barrier of
entry high, high enough that opinions alone won't get you to the other side.
There are lots of opinions, lots of would-be managers. There are very few
who actually show up to work.

The point is this: the barrier isn't so high that motivated individuals
can't get across it, fairly easily in fact, even those without a lot of
prior experience or education. Those who do, don't need hand-holding. And
they get all the help and encouragement they ask for.

Anything else is a diversion of time and energy that's more profitably spent
elsewhere.

73
Frank
AB2KT

-- 
"This is the Voice of Moderation. I wouldn't go so far as to say we've
actually SEIZED the radio station . . . " -- Obsidian Wings
___
FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/

Re: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR

[Peter G. Viscarola]

> 
> The "read the source code" trope has yielded at least six working,
> sophisticated spin-off SDR projects. By any empirical standard, the
argument
> against it has to be regarded as temperamental and speculative, not
> substantive. In other words, it's an easy criticism to level, but it
has few
> correlates in the real world. The counterexamples are enough to show
the
> flimsiness of the argument.
> 
 
Oh... here we go again.  That's just nonsense.

It simply means that SOME people, having no other alternative, WILL read
the source and create derived works from it.  Which means the task is
not insurmountable.

It says nothing at all about what would have happened if documentation
was provided.  And it provides no weight whatsoever to the argument
AGAINST documentation and good engineering process.

It's a little like saying that (given infinite gas and time), if a
couple of people can find their way from Manhattan to Poughkeepsie
without a road map, the desirability of having such a map is flimsy,
"temperamental and speculative."

(Cough...) THIS is why these type of discussions have been moved off the
reflector.

Peter K1PGV


___
FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/

Re: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR

[Jim Lux]

At 11:57 AM 6/25/2008, Frank Brickle wrote:
>On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 7:09 AM, Jim Lux 
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>I hate to fall back on the "read the source code" trope, because I
>genuinely believe that source code is a terrible way to document
>interfaces, but, as it sits, that's all there really is.
>
>
>The "read the source code" trope has yielded at least six working, 
>sophisticated spin-off SDR projects. By any empirical standard, the 
>argument against it has to be regarded as temperamental and 
>speculative, not substantive. In other words, it's an easy criticism 
>to level, but it has few correlates in the real world. The 
>counterexamples are enough to show the flimsiness of the argument.

My comment was NOT that "read the source code" isn't a way to create 
spin off products, but rather that it is a poor way to document interfaces.

I will also readily concede that knowledge of the interfaces is not a 
necessary condition to create new stuff.  Interface descriptions, 
though, are a way to bring about wider acceptance and familiarity.  I 
would say that we greatly benefit from interface standards such as 
RS-232 and the PC-Parallel Printer Port, and, in fact, the without 
the latter, the SDR1K would likely not have existed.

If one has a desire to document interfaces or consume such 
documentation(and I grant that this may or may not be true for any 
particular person), neither a bare recitation of the interface 
specifications nor a working example alone do a good job.

Inevitably, the bare recitation of specifications(if of reasonable 
length) cannot be complete enough to explain all side-effects and 
preferred usage.  (e.g. if you read the AD9854 data sheet, you know 
how to program the DDS at the register level, but that doesn't tell 
you much about how the system that the 9854 is in will work, nor what 
a "good" sequence of programming instructions is.)


Likewise, the working example provides only a single instance of the 
interface usage that works, and doesn't tell you much about what 
won't work.  If you want to go beyond what's in the example, it's 
nice to have some guidance. (To take the AD9854, if you only had 
PowerSDR to look at, you wouldn't know that it's possible to adjust 
the phase of the DDS independently, because that function is never 
used, and not exposed in the include files or API calls)

Particularly in integrated systems, there's a lot of subtlety in 
making it work that isn't always in the data sheets, or the data 
sheets don't even exist.  The timing of the PC parallel port and the 
latches in the SDR1K, in connection with Windows's assumptions about 
how printers work, is a fine example. (otherwise, we wouldn't be 
worrying about whether a particular USB/Parallel adapter works)

There's also the documentation aspect of defining "currently unused, 
but you shouldn't use them" aspects. The source code for the F5K 
interface gives you a fair amount of information about the MIDI 
messages that ARE used to control the F5K, but not much, if anything 
about ones that shouldn't be used (or, even, if there are such 
things.. maybe the F5K is robust and ignores things that don't make sense)..

And, then, the source code doesn't tell you much about the structure 
of the calibration parameters stored in the F5K and how they work, 
without having to fully understand how the calibration process works, 
how the software interaction between dttsp and the F5K works, 
etc..  One might argue that nobody really *needs* to know this, and 
if you do, you can figure it out with a bit of work and some good 
guesswork, and some test equipment.  There might also be a regulatory 
reason to keep it a bit opaque.

On the other hand, this makes it pretty tough to write a good 
replacement for PowerSDR, because a replacement would have to 
duplicate most of that functionality, and your replacement might not 
have a similar enough architecture that you could just wholesale 
borrow the code from PowerSDR as a "black box".

You're also going to have to live with the risk that Flex could up 
and change the way things are done, roll out a rev to PowerSDR that 
is compatible with the new way, and you'd be stuck looking at the new 
software trying to figure how it differed from the old software.  On 
the other hand, if there were a published interface description, it 
would likely be shorter and more concise, and understanding what 
changed would likely be easier than looking through dozens of changes 
in thousands of lines of code and figuring out which ones are 
relevant and which ones aren't.

It is the "database import/export" problem in spades, eh?



Jim, W6RMK

___
FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: http://www.flex-

Re: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR

[Jim Lux]

At 10:41 AM 6/25/2008, Bill Tippett wrote:


>  Given the rate of change of SDR technology, (e.g.
>N8VB's QS-1R), you may have unrealistic expectations that
>*any* platform today will still be viable in 5 years!
>
>  73,  Bill  W4ZV

In fact, this is the dominant aspect to SDR.  As Flex-radio says, the 
radio keeps getting better, but in reality, it's also that the radio 
keeps changing.

The key is in providing suitable interfaces between functions so that 
as various parts of the system change, the rest can remain the 
same.  For instance, if I have a box that generates an I/Q data 
stream, all the downstream parts should be sufficiently parameterized 
that they can accommodate various data rates, bit precisions, and 
frequency offsets.  Likewise, controlling that I/Q box should be 
exposed through a generic interface that says "set frequency", not 
"set DDS bit 32".  A hardware abstraction layer (either in software, 
firmware, or hardware...it matters not) turns frequency into whatever 
the box needs, be it DDS control words, GPIB commands to a 
synthesizer, etc.  The box returns the actual center frequency 
achieved (so that granularity and step sizes can be accommodated)

It would be a great service if someone were to start to define 
suitable abstracted attributes of such boxes.  For some commonly used 
devices, such things have been done.  For instance, in the digital RF 
modem world, there is a JTRS MHAL (Modem Hardware Abstraction Layer) 
definition that defines various common attributes such as modulation 
types (BPSK/QPSK/etc), RF chain stuff like AGC behavior, etc., as 
well as sort of generic data shoveling stuff like FIFO lengths, 
generic sources/sinks

With the abstraction and well defined interfaces will inevitably come 
some CPU and memory resource consumption, but that's always getting cheaper.

If such a standardized set of interfaces is available, then new 
software might eventually start to use them, if they are sufficiently 
clean and useful.  The danger is in setting the level of abstraction 
and specification too high or low.  For instance, if you make it 
really complete and complex, then the casual hacker will look at the 
200 page spec with the same sort of horror that you get when 
contemplating the Windows API.  If you make it too simple, it doesn't 
bring any value, because it's either meaningless or because it 
doesn't accommodate the usual scenarios.

The other thing that is absolutely necessary is a "reference 
implementation" that uses and demonstrates the standard.  You need to 
have some simple radio implementation that uses the proposed 
standards that can serve as a starting point for a rookie 
developer.  Again, we look to the traditional model.. nobody starts 
totally from scratch to write, say, a serial port to TCP/IP 
handler.  You take someone else's simple serial port handler and 
start modifying and adding your unique functionality to 
it.  Actually, you need multiple reference implementations (aka 
"examples") so that you don't wind up trying to show ALL possible 
features in one big example.

In some ways, this is the problem with pointing someone to the 
current PowerSDR.  It's so big, so complex, and so functional that 
it's very difficult to know where to start.  If one had, say,  a 
single function SSB transceiver that talked to the flex hardware, 
with a very rudimentary user interface, it would be a lot easier to 
experiment with or drop in a new function.  You wouldn't have to 
worry about inadvertently breaking another function like CW or pan 
adapters, etc.

Make no mistake.. creating such a thing is a lot of work. And a lot 
of work that doesn't directly meet a pressing need for the 
radio.  It's there to enable future work and lay the foundation.  It 
doesn't meet any of Flex-radio's needs, for instance.  Their needs 
are met adequately by PowerSDR.. they have enough people to keep its 
development and maintenance moving along, people who have climbed the 
huge initial step of familiarization and don't need clearly defined 
interfaces and examples, because they have the code sitting in front of them.

Frank AB2KT, et al., are working towards this goal, but it's not 
clear that their objectives are aligned with the casual ham who's 
interested in supporting multiple hardware platforms with the same 
application. I have the feeling that they're taking on a bit larger 
goal of creating a generic way to build radios, a framework, if you 
will, and leaving the details of individual platform support to 
others.   There will, of course, be a reference implementation for 
the VR-kernel, etc. which may serve as a starting point.  On the 
other hand, there hasn't been much mentioned in the presentations and 
open discussion about defining specific abstracted functionality 
(e.g. what attributes should a generic AGC function have).  To be 
fair, I'm not involved in that development at all, and for all I 
know, t

Re: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR

[Frank Brickle]

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 7:09 AM, Jim Lux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:


> I hate to fall back on the "read the source code" trope, because I
> genuinely believe that source code is a terrible way to document
> interfaces, but, as it sits, that's all there really is.


The "read the source code" trope has yielded at least six working,
sophisticated spin-off SDR projects. By any empirical standard, the argument
against it has to be regarded as temperamental and speculative, not
substantive. In other words, it's an easy criticism to level, but it has few
correlates in the real world. The counterexamples are enough to show the
flimsiness of the argument.

73
Frank
AB2KT

-- 
"This is the Voice of Moderation. I wouldn't go so far as to say we've
actually SEIZED the radio station . . . " -- Obsidian Wings
___
FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/

Re: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR

[Jim Lux]

At 11:48 AM 6/25/2008, Frank Brickle wrote:
>As the CID Inspector in Graham Greene's "Ministry of Fear" says, we 
>may hang more spies than you hear about.
>
>This reflector is not the authoritative source of information on 
>development. It's for the benefit  of users or potential users of 
>released products only.


Indeed.. I was just repeating the published statements of Flex 
regarding future releases and commenting on history.


>Development discussions of any kind were long ago moved off the 
>reflector precisely to avoid uniformed speculation. This in no way 
>affects the commitment to Openness in the released products.

 is there a reflector for uninformed (or informed) speculation?



>73
>Frank
>AB2KT
>
>On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 7:11 AM, Jim Lux 
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Quoting Dale Boresz 
><[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on Wed 25 Jun 
>2008 06:07:00 AM PDT:
>
> > Hello Brian,
> >
> > This is the future, and it is actively in development. It continues to
> > be open source, and is not tied in any way to MS Windowss. The
> > modular/component architecture is the perfect platform for what you
> > describe.
> >
> > < 
> http://support.flex-radio.com/Downloads.aspx?id=223
>   
>  >
> >
> > 73, Dale
> > WA8SRA
>
>To be fair to Brian, though, it's not scheduled for release until next
>year's Dayton, and there have been several missed releases for the
>"new architecture" over the past few years.
>
>If you want to tinker today, or any time in the next year or so, your
>best bet is to reverse engineer the existing PowerSDR codebase.
>
>
>Jim, W6RMK

___
FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/

Re: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR

[Frank Brickle]

As the CID Inspector in Graham Greene's "Ministry of Fear" says, we may hang
more spies than you hear about.

This reflector is not the authoritative source of information on
development. It's for the benefit  of users or potential users of released
products only.

Development discussions of any kind were long ago moved off the reflector
precisely to avoid uniformed speculation. This in no way affects the
commitment to Openness in the released products.

73
Frank
AB2KT

On Wed, Jun 25, 2008 at 7:11 AM, Jim Lux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Quoting Dale Boresz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on Wed 25 Jun 2008 06:07:00 AM
> PDT:
>
> > Hello Brian,
> >
> > This is the future, and it is actively in development. It continues to
> > be open source, and is not tied in any way to MS Windowss. The
> > modular/component architecture is the perfect platform for what you
> > describe.
> >
> > < http://support.flex-radio.com/Downloads.aspx?id=223 >
> >
> > 73, Dale
> > WA8SRA
>
> To be fair to Brian, though, it's not scheduled for release until next
> year's Dayton, and there have been several missed releases for the
> "new architecture" over the past few years.
>
> If you want to tinker today, or any time in the next year or so, your
> best bet is to reverse engineer the existing PowerSDR codebase.
>
>
> Jim, W6RMK
>
>
> ___
> FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
> FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
> http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
> Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
> Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage:
> http://www.flex-radio.com/
>
>


-- 
"This is the Voice of Moderation. I wouldn't go so far as to say we've
actually SEIZED the radio station . . . " -- Obsidian Wings
___
FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/

Re: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR

[Bill Tippett]

WB6RQN:
 >This is powerfully frustrating. I have been considering getting a
Flex5000 or an Elecraft K3. The K3's software environment is closed
which makes me uncomfortable. It is also limited by the bandwidth of
its analog first IF so in spite of its stellar RX performance, it
doesn't look like a big enough technology jump to make me think that
it will be the right platform to be playing with 5 years from now.

 Au contraire.  The K3's IF OUT, available on the KXV3
has a wideband buffered IF output at 8.215 MHz before the
roofing filter and is restricted only by the bandwidth
of the K3's bandpass filter on a given band.  You can use
N8LP's LP-PAN I-Q Panadaptor to drive your sound card and
use various SDR programs including PowerSDR-IF by WU2X, CW
Skimmer by VE3NEA or Winrad by I2PHD.  Using the E-MU 0202
sound card, 192 kHz bandwidth is possible with PowerSDR-IF.
This way you can have the best of both worlds...a classical
radio with knobs (and strong signal performance) plus the
advantages of an SDR (e.g. point and click panadaptor and
waterfall).

 http://www.telepostinc.com/LP-PAN.html

 Given the rate of change of SDR technology, (e.g.
N8VB's QS-1R), you may have unrealistic expectations that
*any* platform today will still be viable in 5 years!

 73,  Bill  W4ZV



___
FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/

Re: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR

[John Melton]

There is some initial code in repos_sdr_linux to control the F5K in 
trunk/hardware/flex5000

Regards,

-- John g0orx/n6lyt



Jim Lux wrote:
> Quoting Brian Lloyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on Wed 25 Jun 2008  
> 05:44:13 AM PDT:
> 
>> On Jun 25, 2008, at 4:52 AM, Tim Ellison wrote:
>>
>>> Nope.  Not for the FLEX-5000.
>>>
>>> There are some non-Windows alternatives for the SDR-1000.  They are
>>> not as feature rich as PowerSDR.
>> There are features and there are features. To me the most important
>> feature would be a good set of published interfaces thus allowing
>> someone to hack whatever feature they decide they need.
> 
> Which interfaces are you interested in..
> 
> I hate to fall back on the "read the source code" trope, because I  
> genuinely believe that source code is a terrible way to document  
> interfaces, but, as it sits, that's all there really is.
> 
> I have figured out and partially documented the interaction with the  
> firmware in the F5K, so if you have a way to send and receive  
> appropriate MIDI messages, you can do most of what you want control  
> wise.  The audio comes in as a standard Windows audio stream.  I  
> suspect that there is a Linux equivalent mechanism, because Frank  
> AB2KT is developing for the F5K target, and I don't think he'd go for  
> a Windows only technique.
> 
> 
> 
> The challenge is, of course, that since the control interface to the  
> hardware via MIDI isn't a published document, Flex is free to change  
> it under your feet if they decide that it needs some different  
> functionality to support something else they are working on.
> 
> 
>> Along comes the Flex5000 which looks like the answer but its hardware
>> and firmware environment is closed. Now it appears that there is no
>> alternative to PowerSDR which is Windows based. I am just so tired of
>> spending time trying to keep Windows running and uh-hacked. Not only
>> that but windows just performs poorly in a real-time environment. Too
>> much latency in response to events. I suspect this is where the QSK
>> problems lie with the Flex5000.
> 
> 
> Windows CAN provide very, very good real time response (probably  
> better than vanilla Linux) but it's very difficult and requires a LOT  
> of work, not to mention a lot of windows specific knowledge. If you're  
> a game designer selling million unit quantities, spending a few  
> hundred K in labor on a hot windows driver coder isn't a big deal.  If  
> you're a hardware mfr with a mostly volunteer software development  
> force, it's a huge deal.
> 
> 
>> Is Flex planning to publish the interface to the Flex5000 so that
>> other packages can be made to run with it?
> 
> Flex hasn't said they are going to do so.   They have said that the  
> source code will be open, so you can always reverse engineer it.  Be  
> forewarned, there's very few comments that help you along, but at  
> least most of the module and routine names make sense.
> 
> The interface and control of the F5K, philosophically, isn't much  
> different than that for the SDR1K.  If you work at an abstracted level  
> along the lines of "set frequency" as opposed to "punch hex number to  
> port" the interface is VERY similar.
> 
> 
> Jim, W6RMK
> 
> ___
> FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
> FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
> http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
> Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
> Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: 
> http://www.flex-radio.com/
> 

___
FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/

Re: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR

[Willi Reppel]

Hi Brian,
I use Winrad with my SDR1000 to find non-directional radio beacons on 
longwave. The waterfall display of Winrad is more suitable for this kind of 
works with weak signal detection. PowerSDR runs in the background but all 
operations are done on Winrad´s console. Winrad can also be used to play 
back recordings made with the SDR1000 without need to run PowerSDR and 
SDR1000 in the background.

vy 73

SM6OMH  Willi

- Original Message - 
From: "Brian Lloyd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Duane - N9DG" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: 
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 2:55 PM
Subject: Re: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR


>
> On Jun 25, 2008, at 5:49 AM, Duane - N9DG wrote:
>
>>
>> Although you should be able to take the W2RF branch of PowerSDR with
>> VAC and feed the wide band I/Q to another program without too much
>> difficulty. Works great with CWSkimmer.. In that case PowerSDR would
>> still be needed as the "driver" UI for tuning and control.
>
> Interesting. Rube Goldberg but interesting.
>
> --
>
> 73 de Brian, WB6RQN
> Brian Lloyd - brian HYPHEN wb6rqn AT lloyd DOT com
>
>
>
>
> ___
> FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
> FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
> http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
> Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
> Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: 
> http://www.flex-radio.com/
>
> 



___
FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/

Re: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR

[Jim Lux]

Quoting Dale Boresz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on Wed 25 Jun 2008 06:07:00 AM PDT:

> Hello Brian,
>
> This is the future, and it is actively in development. It continues to
> be open source, and is not tied in any way to MS Windowss. The
> modular/component architecture is the perfect platform for what you
> describe.
>
> < http://support.flex-radio.com/Downloads.aspx?id=223 >
>
> 73, Dale
> WA8SRA

To be fair to Brian, though, it's not scheduled for release until next  
year's Dayton, and there have been several missed releases for the  
"new architecture" over the past few years.

If you want to tinker today, or any time in the next year or so, your  
best bet is to reverse engineer the existing PowerSDR codebase.


Jim, W6RMK


___
FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/

Re: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR

[Jim Lux]

Quoting Brian Lloyd <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, on Wed 25 Jun 2008  
05:44:13 AM PDT:

>
> On Jun 25, 2008, at 4:52 AM, Tim Ellison wrote:
>
>> Nope.  Not for the FLEX-5000.
>>
>> There are some non-Windows alternatives for the SDR-1000.  They are
>> not as feature rich as PowerSDR.
>
> There are features and there are features. To me the most important
> feature would be a good set of published interfaces thus allowing
> someone to hack whatever feature they decide they need.

Which interfaces are you interested in..

I hate to fall back on the "read the source code" trope, because I  
genuinely believe that source code is a terrible way to document  
interfaces, but, as it sits, that's all there really is.

I have figured out and partially documented the interaction with the  
firmware in the F5K, so if you have a way to send and receive  
appropriate MIDI messages, you can do most of what you want control  
wise.  The audio comes in as a standard Windows audio stream.  I  
suspect that there is a Linux equivalent mechanism, because Frank  
AB2KT is developing for the F5K target, and I don't think he'd go for  
a Windows only technique.



The challenge is, of course, that since the control interface to the  
hardware via MIDI isn't a published document, Flex is free to change  
it under your feet if they decide that it needs some different  
functionality to support something else they are working on.


> Along comes the Flex5000 which looks like the answer but its hardware
> and firmware environment is closed. Now it appears that there is no
> alternative to PowerSDR which is Windows based. I am just so tired of
> spending time trying to keep Windows running and uh-hacked. Not only
> that but windows just performs poorly in a real-time environment. Too
> much latency in response to events. I suspect this is where the QSK
> problems lie with the Flex5000.


Windows CAN provide very, very good real time response (probably  
better than vanilla Linux) but it's very difficult and requires a LOT  
of work, not to mention a lot of windows specific knowledge. If you're  
a game designer selling million unit quantities, spending a few  
hundred K in labor on a hot windows driver coder isn't a big deal.  If  
you're a hardware mfr with a mostly volunteer software development  
force, it's a huge deal.


>
> Is Flex planning to publish the interface to the Flex5000 so that
> other packages can be made to run with it?

Flex hasn't said they are going to do so.   They have said that the  
source code will be open, so you can always reverse engineer it.  Be  
forewarned, there's very few comments that help you along, but at  
least most of the module and routine names make sense.

The interface and control of the F5K, philosophically, isn't much  
different than that for the SDR1K.  If you work at an abstracted level  
along the lines of "set frequency" as opposed to "punch hex number to  
port" the interface is VERY similar.


Jim, W6RMK

___
FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/

Re: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR

[Dale Boresz]

Hello Brian,

This is the future, and it is actively in development. It continues to 
be open source, and is not tied in any way to MS Windowss. The 
modular/component architecture is the perfect platform for what you 
describe.

< http://support.flex-radio.com/Downloads.aspx?id=223 >

73, Dale
WA8SRA


Brian Lloyd wrote:
> On Jun 25, 2008, at 4:52 AM, Tim Ellison wrote:
>
>   
>> Nope.  Not for the FLEX-5000.
>>
>> There are some non-Windows alternatives for the SDR-1000.  They are  
>> not as feature rich as PowerSDR.
>> 
>
> There are features and there are features. To me the most important  
> feature would be a good set of published interfaces thus allowing  
> someone to hack whatever feature they decide they need.
>
> This is powerfully frustrating. I have been considering getting a  
> Flex5000 or an Elecraft K3. The K3's software environment is closed  
> which makes me uncomfortable. It is also limited by the bandwidth of  
> its analog first IF so in spite of its stellar RX performance, it  
> doesn't look like a big enough technology jump to make me think that  
> it will be the right platform to be playing with 5 years from now.
>
> Along comes the Flex5000 which looks like the answer but its hardware  
> and firmware environment is closed. Now it appears that there is no  
> alternative to PowerSDR which is Windows based. I am just so tired of  
> spending time trying to keep Windows running and uh-hacked. Not only  
> that but windows just performs poorly in a real-time environment. Too  
> much latency in response to events. I suspect this is where the QSK  
> problems lie with the Flex5000.
>
> Is Flex planning to publish the interface to the Flex5000 so that  
> other packages can be made to run with it?
>
> I wish someone would make a top-notch radio that is usable on a daily  
> basis but is still open for experimentation. It sounds like, for the  
> nonce, the SDR-1000 is the only answer for an HF rig that runs  
> reasonably well in the ham bands but is still completely open.  
> Unfortunately it has that silly parallel-port interface.
>
>  I want to buy a new radio now that I can keep doing new things  
> with 5 years from now. I refuse to be locked into Windows except as an  
> interim solution.
>
> --
>
> 73 de Brian, WB6RQN
> Brian Lloyd - brian HYPHEN wb6rqn AT lloyd DOT com
>
>
>
>
> ___
> FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
> FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
> http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
> Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
> Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: 
> http://www.flex-radio.com/
>
>
>
>   


___
FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/

Re: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR

[Brian Lloyd]

On Jun 25, 2008, at 5:49 AM, Duane - N9DG wrote:

>
> Although you should be able to take the W2RF branch of PowerSDR with  
> VAC and feed the wide band I/Q to another program without too much  
> difficulty. Works great with CWSkimmer.. In that case PowerSDR would  
> still be needed as the "driver" UI for tuning and control.

Interesting. Rube Goldberg but interesting.

--

73 de Brian, WB6RQN
Brian Lloyd - brian HYPHEN wb6rqn AT lloyd DOT com




___
FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/

Re: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR

[Duane - N9DG]

Although you should be able to take the W2RF branch of PowerSDR with VAC and 
feed the wide band I/Q to another program without too much difficulty. Works 
great with CWSkimmer.. In that case PowerSDR would still be needed as the 
"driver" UI for tuning and control.  

Duane
N9DG


--- On Wed, 6/25/08, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> From: Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Subject: Re: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR
> To: "Brian Lloyd" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "flexradio@flex-radio.biz" 
> 
> Date: Wednesday, June 25, 2008, 6:52 AM
> Nope.  Not for the FLEX-5000.
> 
> There are some non-Windows alternatives for the SDR-1000. 
> They are not as feature rich as PowerSDR.
> 
> 
> https://java-sdr.dev.java.net/
> http://javaguifordttsp.blogspot.com/
> 
> http://www.g3ukb.co.uk/archive_index.html
> 
> 
> 
> -Tim
> 
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Brian Lloyd
> Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 12:54 AM
> To: flexradio@flex-radio.biz
> Subject: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR
> 
> Does the Flex5000 work with any software besides PowerSDR?
> 
> --
> 
> 73 de Brian, WB6RQN
> Brian Lloyd - brian HYPHEN wb6rqn AT lloyd DOT com
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ___
> FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
> FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
> http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
> Archives:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
> Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage:
> http://www.flex-radio.com/
> 
> 
> ___
> FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
> FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
> http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
> Archives:
> http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
> Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage:
> http://www.flex-radio.com/


  

___
FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/

Re: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR

[Brian Lloyd]

On Jun 25, 2008, at 4:52 AM, Tim Ellison wrote:

> Nope.  Not for the FLEX-5000.
>
> There are some non-Windows alternatives for the SDR-1000.  They are  
> not as feature rich as PowerSDR.

There are features and there are features. To me the most important  
feature would be a good set of published interfaces thus allowing  
someone to hack whatever feature they decide they need.

This is powerfully frustrating. I have been considering getting a  
Flex5000 or an Elecraft K3. The K3's software environment is closed  
which makes me uncomfortable. It is also limited by the bandwidth of  
its analog first IF so in spite of its stellar RX performance, it  
doesn't look like a big enough technology jump to make me think that  
it will be the right platform to be playing with 5 years from now.

Along comes the Flex5000 which looks like the answer but its hardware  
and firmware environment is closed. Now it appears that there is no  
alternative to PowerSDR which is Windows based. I am just so tired of  
spending time trying to keep Windows running and uh-hacked. Not only  
that but windows just performs poorly in a real-time environment. Too  
much latency in response to events. I suspect this is where the QSK  
problems lie with the Flex5000.

Is Flex planning to publish the interface to the Flex5000 so that  
other packages can be made to run with it?

I wish someone would make a top-notch radio that is usable on a daily  
basis but is still open for experimentation. It sounds like, for the  
nonce, the SDR-1000 is the only answer for an HF rig that runs  
reasonably well in the ham bands but is still completely open.  
Unfortunately it has that silly parallel-port interface.

 I want to buy a new radio now that I can keep doing new things  
with 5 years from now. I refuse to be locked into Windows except as an  
interim solution.

--

73 de Brian, WB6RQN
Brian Lloyd - brian HYPHEN wb6rqn AT lloyd DOT com




___
FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/

Re: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR

[Tim Ellison]

Nope.  Not for the FLEX-5000.

There are some non-Windows alternatives for the SDR-1000.  They are not as 
feature rich as PowerSDR.


https://java-sdr.dev.java.net/
http://javaguifordttsp.blogspot.com/

http://www.g3ukb.co.uk/archive_index.html



-Tim

-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Brian Lloyd
Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2008 12:54 AM
To: flexradio@flex-radio.biz
Subject: [Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR

Does the Flex5000 work with any software besides PowerSDR?

--

73 de Brian, WB6RQN
Brian Lloyd - brian HYPHEN wb6rqn AT lloyd DOT com




___
FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/


___
FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/

[Flexradio] alternatives to PowerSDR

[Brian Lloyd]

Does the Flex5000 work with any software besides PowerSDR?

--

73 de Brian, WB6RQN
Brian Lloyd - brian HYPHEN wb6rqn AT lloyd DOT com




___
FlexRadio Systems Mailing List
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archives: http://www.mail-archive.com/flexradio%40flex-radio.biz/
Knowledge Base: http://kb.flex-radio.com/  Homepage: http://www.flex-radio.com/