Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

On Tue, 2006-08-29 at 23:32 -0400, Frank Brickle wrote: > Bob -- > > If it's OK with you I'm taking the conversation public again, for the > time being anyway. > No problem with that at all. > > Could we for example agree that there is a distributed infrastructure > > (regardless of language, pr

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

Bob -- If it's OK with you I'm taking the conversation public again, for the time being anyway. > Could we for example agree that there is a distributed infrastructure > (regardless of language, protocol or encoding formats) in which services > are hosted and that services communicate with each o

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

On Sun, 2006-08-27 at 20:23 -0400, Frank Brickle wrote: > On Sun, 2006-08-27 at 23:10 +0100, Bob Cowdery wrote: > > > Ok. But something in this system has to be *the* application. > > Yes, we're on very different wavelengths, because I don't see this at > all, not at all. I see the system as a co

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific? http://sourceforge.net/projects/pyerlbridge/

On Sun, 2006-08-27 at 21:28 -0500, Allen Boehm wrote: > http://sourceforge.net/projects/pyerlbridge/ > >I had found this site while searching Python sources. Don't know if > it will be of help or interest, but decided to post it anyway as I was > following the thread. >

[Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific? http://sourceforge.net/projects/pyerlbridge/

On 8/27/06 2:38 PM, "Bob Cowdery" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 2006-08-27 at 13:33 -0400, Frank Brickle wrote: >> On Sun, 2006-08-27 at 16:13 +0100, Bob Cowdery wrote: >> >>> 2> I don't know if this is a real difference in topology or not. I >>> didn't envisage a central service but more

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

On Sun, 2006-08-27 at 23:10 +0100, Bob Cowdery wrote: > Ok. But something in this system has to be *the* application. Yes, we're on very different wavelengths, because I don't see this at all, not at all. I see the system as a collection of services, and the VR is merely a convenient way of coord

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

On Sun, 2006-08-27 at 16:56 -0400, Frank Brickle wrote: > On Sun, 2006-08-27 at 20:38 +0100, Bob Cowdery wrote: > > > I haven't seen anything for Python apart from the ports tutorial that > > uses pipes. > > Have a look at py_interface, which is an all-native-Python > implementation of an Erlang

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

On Sun, 2006-08-27 at 16:11 -0400, Frank Brickle wrote: > On Sun, 2006-08-27 at 20:38 +0100, Bob Cowdery wrote: > > > I can't see how you move that back to the UI > > without having duplicate data and a lot of issues. > > To expand on the last point just a little, the UI also has a much more > co

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

On Sun, 2006-08-27 at 16:01 -0400, Frank Brickle wrote: > On Sun, 2006-08-27 at 20:38 +0100, Bob Cowdery wrote: > > > I've done a bit more digging. There seems to be three options for > > integration: > > 1. The arms length pipes (I think this can be TCP/IP as well and > > possibly some others (ac

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

On Sun, 2006-08-27 at 20:38 +0100, Bob Cowdery wrote: > I haven't seen anything for Python apart from the ports tutorial that > uses pipes. Have a look at py_interface, which is an all-native-Python implementation of an Erlang node, linked to from 73 Frank AB2K

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

On Sun, 2006-08-27 at 20:38 +0100, Bob Cowdery wrote: > I can't see how you move that back to the UI > without having duplicate data and a lot of issues. To expand on the last point just a little, the UI also has a much more complex idea of what the VFO wants to be (VFO A+B, switching, RIT, XIT,

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

On Sun, 2006-08-27 at 20:38 +0100, Bob Cowdery wrote: > I've done a bit more digging. There seems to be three options for > integration: > 1. The arms length pipes (I think this can be TCP/IP as well and > possibly some others (according to some papers I read)). Pipes only work > for *nix so it me

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

On Sun, 2006-08-27 at 13:33 -0400, Frank Brickle wrote: > On Sun, 2006-08-27 at 16:13 +0100, Bob Cowdery wrote: > > > 2> I don't know if this is a real difference in topology or not. I > > didn't envisage a central service but more a peer-to-peer network where > > the VR is just a node even if tha

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

On Sun, 2006-08-27 at 16:13 +0100, Bob Cowdery wrote: > 2> I don't know if this is a real difference in topology or not. I > didn't envisage a central service but more a peer-to-peer network where > the VR is just a node even if that node is 'hidden' in the sense that > all commands from other nod

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

Frank Firstly, thank you for the reply and secondly thank you for leaving an open discussion. I have been labouring in the garden all morning but as that occupies only my muscles and not my brain I have a response in my head which goes something like this. 1. I will put aside the issue of languag

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

Bob -- It's very good you brought this up, because the issues are truly important. > I have an onion skin model of what I want to do... I think we're imagining different topologies. The model we've been assuming is a graph. The various different processing components (DSP, hardware control, UI,

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

On Fri, 2006-08-25 at 23:29 -0400, Robert McGwier wrote: > Frank Brickle wrote: > > On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 08:37 +0100, Bob Cowdery wrote: > > > >> On Tue, 2006-08-22 at 22:54 -0700, Jim Lux wrote: > >> > >> > >>> I've been waiting for the long > >>> anticipated UI/backend split with a well

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

Frank Brickle wrote: > On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 08:37 +0100, Bob Cowdery wrote: > >> On Tue, 2006-08-22 at 22:54 -0700, Jim Lux wrote: >> >> >>> I've been waiting for the long >>> anticipated UI/backend split with a well defined interface, as announced, >>> gosh, several times over the past

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics

[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > Slow down! Not so fast! > > The skins do look great, but if I want to operate a radio that looks like my > FT 1000, I'll turn off my SDR-1000 and turn on the black box. > > I'm tired of the old paradigm. The SDR is new, fresh and unconventional. > Don't m

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

At 02:17 PM 8/23/2006, Bob Cowdery wrote: > > Perhaps it's a difference between expectations and reality? > > We've been hearing about a well defined (i.e. documented) interface > between > > the realtime radio code and the control interface for some months now. > > (Version 1.7?) > > > > Is ther

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 07:35 -0700, Jim Lux wrote: > At 12:37 AM 8/23/2006, Bob Cowdery wrote: > >On Tue, 2006-08-22 at 22:54 -0700, Jim Lux wrote: > > > > > I've been waiting for the long > > > anticipated UI/backend split with a well defined interface, as announced, > > > gosh, several times over

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 18:16 +0100, James Courtier-Dutton wrote: > So, a typical reason for NOT using erlang is "signal processing". Why is > dttsp therefore using erlang? The kernel is not doing signal processing. That, the DSP, is in sdr-core, in C. The kernel implements the "virtual radio" --

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

Frank Brickle wrote: > FWIW, the DttSP radio kernel is being developed and implemented in > erlang. Barring unforeseen potholes, erlang will be the platform for the > virtual radio. > Why was erlang choosen? The FAQ at www.erlang.org states: <<>> 1.4. What sort of problems is Erlang not particul

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

At 12:37 AM 8/23/2006, Bob Cowdery wrote: >On Tue, 2006-08-22 at 22:54 -0700, Jim Lux wrote: > > > I've been waiting for the long > > anticipated UI/backend split with a well defined interface, as announced, > > gosh, several times over the past couple years. That way, I can do what > > *I* want t

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

On Wed, 2006-08-23 at 08:37 +0100, Bob Cowdery wrote: > On Tue, 2006-08-22 at 22:54 -0700, Jim Lux wrote: > > > I've been waiting for the long > > anticipated UI/backend split with a well defined interface, as announced, > > gosh, several times over the past couple years... > > > Am I the only o

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

On Tue, 2006-08-22 at 22:54 -0700, Jim Lux wrote: > I've been waiting for the long > anticipated UI/backend split with a well defined interface, as announced, > gosh, several times over the past couple years. That way, I can do what > *I* want to do, without having to insert it into the middle

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

OK, Jim. You keep writing specs. We'll keep writing radios. It's hard to avoid the impression you haven't been keeping up with developments. To echo the end of your previous note, 'nuff said. 73 Frank AB2KT On Tue, 2006-08-22 at 22:54 -0700, Jim Lux wrote: > " > > And when will those specs be

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

" > And when will those specs be published? RSN? As soon as you've finished them, Jim. " I don't think you want me writing specs that you'll have to conform to, Frank. Defining specifications and architectures for abstract software defined radios, especially the external interface, is what I

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

At 06:32 PM 8/22/2006, Frank Brickle wrote: >On Tue, 2006-08-22 at 17:25 -0700, Jim Lux wrote: > > > The problem I see is that since there is no current specification (or even > > preliminary detailed sketches) of a published UI/Radio interface, everyone > > is sort of working on modifying what's t

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

Jerry, I agree on that. Some of the controls on the console are just used in one mode. Why have a compander control in digital, or any audio controls in CW? Maybe it should be standard to drop controls that are not used in a particular mode, and use that valuable real estate for a control t

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

On Tue, 2006-08-22 at 17:25 -0700, Jim Lux wrote: > The problem I see is that since there is no current specification (or even > preliminary detailed sketches) of a published UI/Radio interface, everyone > is sort of working on modifying what's there now. Jim, I have nothing but respect and adm

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

At 03:00 PM 8/22/2006, Ken N9VV wrote: >Dear Jim, >any more options and you will surely drive many of us right off the >reflector and onto the Ten-Tec webpage about the new Omni-VII (TT is >offering a VB console example as opensource). Hmmm.. we'll see. The real question is whether they publish

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics

Bob et all, this HAS been an interesting discussion! I think no one has pointed out however that the GUI doesn't have to be this way or that way. The use of skins makes it possible for everyone to select the interface that pleases him (or her). Even though the GUI is subjective, it is another a

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

At 08:04 AM 8/22/2006, Jerry Flanders wrote: >We are not operating radios - we are operating _modes_ (i.e., ssb >phone OR cw OR rtty OR psk31 OR ... ). An excellent point! (in the pro SDR world, modes are called "waveforms") >If available, you would probably want several similar consoles, each

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics

- John Brosnahan Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 4:51 PM To: FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz Subject: Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics At 02:33 PM 8/21/2006, you wrote: >>Slow down! Not so fast! >> >>The skins do look great, but if I want to operate a radio that looks like my >>FT 10

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics

The discussion has been very interesting and just shows the diversity of opinion and of course who would expect anything else. User interfaces are so subjective you ain't never gonna please everyone. Heck I can't even agree with myself half the time on what I like and don't like and I have full edi

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics

At 10:12 AM 8/22/2006, you wrote: > >>Here is a link to a friend of mine who has a calculator program with a > >>similar > >>appearance. You can go to the VIEW and then SKINS and make changes in > >>the appearance of the calculator. It would be very nice to have > >>skins (for the SDR...) to al

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics

>>Here is a link to a friend of mine who has a calculator program with a >>similar >>appearance. You can go to the VIEW and then SKINS and make changes in >>the appearance of the calculator. It would be very nice to have >>skins (for the SDR...) to allow I just could not resist: I LOVE your c

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics - maybe mode-specific?

We are not operating radios - we are operating _modes_ (i.e., ssb phone OR cw OR rtty OR psk31 OR ... ). An all-mode console is great when demonstrating the radio to your SWL friend, but when he goes home you operate your radio mostly on your favorite mode, and you might benefit if your consol

[Flexradio] Console Graphics

I really don.t care what it looks like as long as it works and it DOES real well too. BTW the latest svn (652) seems to be more stable the the previous ones. Dave ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/li

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics

At 09:34 AM 8/22/2006, W0UN -- John Brosnahan wrote: >What I want in an SDR is the ultimate in operator convenience and efficiency >for the task at hand along with something that is aesthetically pleasing. > >I am certainly NOT wanting to emulate a "regular" radio for the sake of >copying the "tra

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics

At 08:04 AM 8/22/2006, Charles Greene wrote: >John, > >I was engaged in a conversation about SRDs on the Ten Tec reflector >a couple of days ago. Someone stated that SDRs needed to look like >"real" radios in order to get wide acceptance. These consoles >certainly fill that bill. Well done.

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics

John, I was engaged in a conversation about SRDs on the Ten Tec reflector a couple of days ago. Someone stated that SDRs needed to look like "real" radios in order to get wide acceptance. These consoles certainly fill that bill. Well done. However, I question the wisdom of filling up a con

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics

Hi Folks, more than one year ago I have proposed my graphics to the Flex user group. My "dream SDR" looking like a "old" japan Radio was a simple provocation to the sw programmes, with a lot of discussions and all stories here: http://www.flex-radio.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1510&highlight=&si

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics

--- W0UN -- John Brosnahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > There is a certain "gee-whiz" look to the current crop of > panels (read, techno-geek) > but they may not be the most efficient and/or intuitive. > BTW I don't like the hassle > of MODERN (analog) radios that require you to drill down > thr

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics

Jim Lux wrote: > And when will those specs be published? RSN? As soon as you've finished them, Jim. 73 Frank AB2KT ___ FlexRadio mailing list FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz Archive Link:

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics

lt;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 8:24 PM Subject: Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics > > Slow down! Not so fast! > > The skins do look great, but if I want to operate a radio that looks like > my > FT 1

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics

At 01:50 PM 8/21/2006, W0UN -- John Brosnahan wrote: >At 02:33 PM 8/21/2006, you wrote: > > > >>Slow down! Not so fast! > >> > >>The skins do look great, but if I want to operate a radio that looks > like my > >>FT 1000, I'll turn off my SDR-1000 and turn on the black box. > >> > >>I'm tired of t

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics

At 01:45 PM 8/21/2006, Tim Ellison wrote: >I agree with the whole new paradigm aspect, but we also have an >opportunity to do something really cool in the retro sense. > >I have never owned a Collins S-line or a pair of Gold Dust Twins, but if >I wanted to operate some vintage hardware, just slap o

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics

At 02:33 PM 8/21/2006, you wrote: >>Slow down! Not so fast! >> >>The skins do look great, but if I want to operate a radio that looks like my >>FT 1000, I'll turn off my SDR-1000 and turn on the black box. >> >>I'm tired of the old paradigm. The SDR is new, fresh and unconventional. >>Don't ma

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics

--- Integrated Technical Services "Lately it occurs to me, what a long strange trip it's been." -Robert Hunter -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of KA5MIR Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 4:38 PM To: flexradio@flex-radio.biz Subject: Re

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics

al Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Jim, W4ATK Sent: Monday, August 21, 2006 4:09 PM To: Flex-radio Reflector Subject: Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics Bob wrote: "Slow down! Not so fast! The skins do look great, but if I want to operate a radio that lo

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics

I frequently see on this list where someone posts a suggestion or a new idea and others say "No, I don't like that. Don't do it." or something to that effect. I don't understand why it has to be this way or that way. Why not both? Why not many different ways? If a person or group wants t

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics

Bob wrote: "Slow down! Not so fast! The skins do look great, but if I want to operate a radio that looks like my FT 1000, I'll turn off my SDR-1000 and turn on the black box. I'm tired of the old paradigm. The SDR is new, fresh and unconventional. Don't make it like all the others. For those

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics

> Slow down! Not so fast! > > The skins do look great, but if I want to operate a radio that looks like > my > FT 1000, I'll turn off my SDR-1000 and turn on the black box. > > I'm tired of the old paradigm. The SDR is new, fresh and unconventional. > Don't make it like all the others. > > Fo

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics

On 8/21/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Slow down! Not so fast! > > The skins do look great, but if I want to operate a radio that looks like > my > FT 1000, I'll turn off my SDR-1000 and turn on the black box. > > I'm tired of the old paradigm. The SDR is new, fresh and unc

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics

Slow down! Not so fast! The skins do look great, but if I want to operate a radio that looks like my FT 1000, I'll turn off my SDR-1000 and turn on the black box. I'm tired of the old paradigm. The SDR is new, fresh and unconventional. Don't make it like all the others. For those t

Re: [Flexradio] Console Graphics

On 8/21/06, W0UN -- John Brosnahan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dear Beppe-- > > > I LOVE the look of your front panel art for the SDR projects. I sure hope > that > someone incorporates the concepts into the console software for both the > FlexRadio and the SoftRock. > > http://www.radioamatore.i

[Flexradio] Console Graphics

Dear Beppe-- I LOVE the look of your front panel art for the SDR projects. I sure hope that someone incorporates the concepts into the console software for both the FlexRadio and the SoftRock. http://www.radioamatore.it/sdr1000/mypowersdr.html Here is a link to a friend of mine who has a calcu