;Colby Boyer"
> To: "Alexander Chemeris"
> Cc:
> Sent: Monday, May 09, 2011 21:33
> Subject: Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Why Isn't GNU Radio Used More?
>
>
> > On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 11:21 AM, Alexander Chemeris
> > wrote:
> >> On Mon, May 9,
Martin-
> On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 09:07:38AM -0500, Jeff Brower wrote:
>> Martin-
>>
>> > To a non GPL-philic, non-nerd, why choose GNU Radio? There is no reason:
>> > - Matlab is generally free of charge for universities
>> > - Matlab is used by the industry
>> > - Matlab is better documented and
On Tue, May 10, 2011 at 09:07:38AM -0500, Jeff Brower wrote:
> Martin-
>
> > To a non GPL-philic, non-nerd, why choose GNU Radio? There is no reason:
> > - Matlab is generally free of charge for universities
> > - Matlab is used by the industry
> > - Matlab is better documented and has a wider use
Martin-
:
:
> To a non GPL-philic, non-nerd, why choose GNU Radio? There is no reason:
> - Matlab is generally free of charge for universities
> - Matlab is used by the industry
> - Matlab is better documented and has a wider user base
> - Simulink has more blocks already incorporated
> - Mat
schrieb Marcus D. Leech am 2011-05-09 17:12:
> The documentation, as Tom observed, is disorganized and incomplete.
> This is rather an inevitable result of a system that grows organically
> as it has--99% of the contributing participants are largely coders, and
> not so much document writers.
I d
On Mon, May 09, 2011 at 11:33:32AM -0700, Colby Boyer wrote:
> One of big reasons I think that people struggle with GNURadio is that
> is jams so many different fields of expertise into one package.
>
> 1. Digital Comms people (aka the Maths people) cannot program
> themselves out of a wet paper b
I think that you'll find many people who cross multiple fields of expertise on
this list -- I think that's part of the fun of SDR and GNU Radio to many of us.
Your point that SDR encompasses many disciplines is valid, and certainly leads
to a steep learning curve for some people. I have, in ge
On May 9, 2011, at 5:12 PM, Ben Reynwar wrote:
> I'm pretty sure you only have to release the source to people who you
> are giving/selling the software too, and only if they ask for it. So
> if you're developing the software for one customer there is no issue
> at all. If you have more than one
> 4.) Make sure I don't have to publish the source if I write some
> specific block or application for/with GNURadio. My boss and our
> customers are kinda sensitive about giving out information that are
> operatively relevant :).
I'm pretty sure you only have to release the source to people who y
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 1:49 PM, Michael Dickens wrote:
> On May 9, 2011, at 4:42 PM, Marcus D. Leech wrote:
>> Gnu Radio, to me, is a DSP engine that happens to live on a general-purpose
>> compute platform.
>
> True. But the GNU Radio model is build on data-flow, while the Octave model
> is no
Gregory-
> On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Andrew Lentvorski wrote:
>> No embedded engineer who values his job will touch a GPL piece of code with
>> a 10 foot pole. Â Period.
>
> and these are folks who will be out-competed in the marketplace by
> competitors who are more agile and less phobic.
On May 9, 2011, at 4:42 PM, Marcus D. Leech wrote:
> Gnu Radio, to me, is a DSP engine that happens to live on a general-purpose
> compute platform.
True. But the GNU Radio model is build on data-flow, while the Octave model is
not -- and, that might be a key difference. People have grown, for
On 09/05/2011 2:25 PM, Michael Dickens wrote:
I often use GRC for simple tasks -- it's a LOT faster than writing Python scripts, and it
"just works" for these tasks. Admittedly, these are simple -- such as reading
a file of audio data, adding in gain, and then both displaying a waterfall FFT
On 09/05/2011 2:22 PM, Alexander Chemeris wrote:
Is it that hard to re-license it under LGPL? Really.
I don't know. But in the meantime, Linux has such a rich set of IPC
primitives (and programming languages, etc, etc), that using Gnu Radio as
your base and mixing in your own proprietary sec
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 2:59 PM, Andrew Lentvorski wrote:
> No embedded engineer who values his job will touch a GPL piece of code with
> a 10 foot pole. Period.
…and these are folks who will be out-competed in the marketplace by
competitors who are more agile and less phobic.
[From the original
>
> I truly believe that GRC takes away 95% of the need for
> the user to actually code in either Python or C++. To me, the real
> question is how to get that last 5%.
>
I'd say as long as GNU Radio is used for R&D, we'll never be able to get rid
of that last 5%. With R&D people are often trying
On May 9, 2011, at 3:13 PM, Matt Ettus wrote:
> I believe this conversation has strayed quite a bit from GNU Radio
> itself.
Not entirely, because I think a number of us believe that licensing is a real
issue. But, as you say, that ain't gonna change any time soon unless the FSF
decides to do s
I believe this conversation has strayed quite a bit from GNU Radio
itself. Whatever you believe about licensing, IP, versions of the GPL,
etc., the fact is that for better or for worse, GNU Radio is licensed
under GPLv3. The only way that will change is if FSF releases a GPLv4.
It is somethin
d
I wont answer your 2, 3, claims since they are words from an uneducated
user.
Patrik
- Original Message -
From: "Colby Boyer"
To: "Alexander Chemeris"
Cc:
Sent: Monday, May 09, 2011 21:33
Subject: Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Why Isn't GNU Radio Used More?
On 5/9/11 9:08 AM, Philip Balister wrote:
I don't see any point trying to appease the free software is anti IP
crowd. They will just invent new excuses. It is our job to help these
people understand how things really work.
I agree, so let's start at home.
No embedded engineer who values his jo
Good points, Kunal. I know that Tom has talked about having nightly builds for
the major OSs -- as much as anything to make sure that the GIT master always
compiles and passes "make check" at the end of the day. Maybe he could also
set up that system such that it provides those builds as insta
On May 9, 2011, at 2:48 PM, Alexander Chemeris wrote:
> Dual-licensing is a flawed model, it's truly hard to make it working
> right.
>From what I understand, dual licensing mostly works for Qt -- and, I doubt
>that Ettus would be exploring it for UHD if it didn't have some merits. I
>wonder if
Could it also be because GNU Radio has always treated the Windows platform
as a second-class citizen?
I have tried installing GNU Radio on all three major OSes, Linux (RHEL,
Ubuntu), OS X (10.5, 10.6) and Windows (XP, using Cygwin), and I never
managed to get it running on Windows. On the other ha
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 22:25, Michael Dickens wrote:
> On May 9, 2011, at 1:59 PM, Marcus D. Leech wrote:
>> you can isolate your own functionality behind existing IPC mechanisms, and
>> thus avoid
>> binding any of your code to the Gnu Radio libraries.
Well, that this IPC should be very well in
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 11:21 AM, Alexander Chemeris
wrote:
> On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 21:29, Jeff Brower wrote:
>> What I think might translate for GNU Radio is to find ways to support more
>> types of platforms. What about a small
>> USRP for smart phones and tablets? Would that draw in more de
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On 05/09/2011 08:59 PM, Marcus D. Leech wrote:
> I think you (tangentially) touched on an interesting point. Many users
> come to Gnu Radio expecting it to be
> "A turnkey application to solve my radio problems". They don't really
> get that it's a
On May 9, 2011, at 1:59 PM, Marcus D. Leech wrote:
> I think you (tangentially) touched on an interesting point. Many users come
> to Gnu Radio expecting it to be "A turnkey application to solve my radio
> problems". They don't really get that it's a *development* platform for
> *developing* S
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 21:59, Marcus D. Leech wrote:
> On 09/05/2011 1:24 PM, Stefan Gofferje wrote:
>> 4.) Make sure I don't have to publish the source if I write some
>> specific block or application for/with GNURadio. My boss and our
>> customers are kinda sensitive about giving out information
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 21:29, Jeff Brower wrote:
> What I think might translate for GNU Radio is to find ways to support more
> types of platforms. What about a small
> USRP for smart phones and tablets? Would that draw in more developers? A
> "platform broadening" might also make sense
> fro
On May 9, 2011, at 1:22 PM, Marcus D. Leech wrote:
> this is, in fact *software* defined radio. So why is it always a big
> surprise when hardware types encounter an SDR platform and become
> more-than-vaguely-queasy at the though of having to, perhaps, learn a little
> bit about software.
If
On 09/05/2011 1:24 PM, Stefan Gofferje wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Let me give my 2ct to this from the perspective of a new user :).
First of all, I'm no engineer. I'm a tech guy in the management in a
company which is active in security and defense fields. I have
reaso
Alexander-
Well said.
I would add an additional comment about "Linux as a model" for GNU Radio.
Linux exists at least in part because of
widespread developer anger with Microsoft in the 1990s. Guys like Ballmer
simply couldn't think straight and failed
to respect developers' time and effort.
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Let me give my 2ct to this from the perspective of a new user :).
First of all, I'm no engineer. I'm a tech guy in the management in a
company which is active in security and defense fields. I have
reasonable experience in the radio fields and pretty
On 09/05/2011 12:39 PM, Vijay Pillai wrote:
I completely concur with what you wrote below and what Scott Johnson
wrote some time ago.
USRP is an incredibly powerful platform and substantially low cost - I
am somewhat befuddled by how it has not attained greater prevalence
but at least some of
.
Best regards,
-Vijay
--- On Mon, 5/9/11, Michael Dickens wrote:
From: Michael Dickens
Subject: Re: [Discuss-gnuradio] Why Isn't GNU Radio Used More?
To: "GNURadio Discussion List"
Date: Monday, May 9, 2011, 11:51 AM
On May 9, 2011, at 11:12 AM, Marcus D. Leech wrote:
>
On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 20:08, Philip Balister wrote:
> On 05/09/2011 11:57 AM, Michael Dickens wrote:
>>
>> Intellectual Property: Many people / companies view the GPL as being
>> incompatible with IP -- and, whether true or not, this perception is
>> certainly an issue. To make progress here, ma
On 05/09/2011 11:57 AM, Michael Dickens wrote:
Intellectual Property: Many people / companies view the GPL as being
incompatible with IP -- and, whether true or not, this perception is certainly
an issue. To make progress here, maybe GNU Radio could take Ettus' UHD
dual-license approach, if t
Intellectual Property: Many people / companies view the GPL as being
incompatible with IP -- and, whether true or not, this perception is certainly
an issue. To make progress here, maybe GNU Radio could take Ettus' UHD
dual-license approach, if that is still possible? I don't know if the FSF (
On May 9, 2011, at 11:12 AM, Marcus D. Leech wrote:
> I think there's a significant community out there that learned DSP techniques
> inside the envelope of Matlab/Simulink, and that's what they're comfortable
> with.
True; that's how I did (MATLAB; Simulink wasn't around yet). I'd take that a
In addition to Marcus's comments, a lot of people using GNUradio, myself
included, are not software developers by training. They/we are
electrical engineers interested more in the DSP, communications, and RF
applications than figuring out to put together an application from
hundreds of disparat
On 09/05/2011 8:53 AM, Michael Dickens wrote:
Can we bring Tom's post to this list?
<
http://gnuradio.squarespace.com/home/2011/5/8/why-isnt-gnu-radio-used-more.html>
Yes, I do actually read his posts ;) I hope others do too; he writes with
clarity and has things to say if you're into SDR a
Can we bring Tom's post to this list?
<
http://gnuradio.squarespace.com/home/2011/5/8/why-isnt-gnu-radio-used-more.html
>
Yes, I do actually read his posts ;) I hope others do too; he writes with
clarity and has things to say if you're into SDR and GNU Radio.
I hope Tom's post sparks some go
42 matches
Mail list logo
