Bob George wrote:
> There are a few guys I've worked with over the years who, no matter what
> the challenge, immediately start working on a technical solution without
> bothering to understand first what the requirements are. I always like
> to start with "What does it (whatever it is) need to do?"
>
> So same question here: WHAT is this 'thing' supposed to do when it's all
> done? The same functions as that $70 linux-on-linksys solution? Act as a
> DOS-based modem or radio transmitter/receiver?
The Linksys is high frequency. wont do many of us rural users any good.
Since we already have PCs with operating systems, why would we need
anything more than dos to run the transceiver?
> I'm sure there are chips that will let you set a frequency. That isn't
> what you described, but OK. They DO exist. So your device sets the
> output frequency of (presumably) a radio device of some sort?
Electronic software control of the transmitter offers more adaptability
in future...
> Sure. Or you could use a knob to set a frequency. You presumably want to
> talk TO someone and not just broadcast (or?) so it would be handy if you
> and your pals agreed to some reasonably small number of potential
> channels. Unless you want to run scanner-style and hop around until you
> find someone yammering, then "connect" somehow?
Not broadcast, *narrowcast*. That's the thing about a high db tuned
Yagi. It is *very* directional... to a host with wire access to the
telco/fibre/internet grid.
>> But if, as below you used more than one antenna, or for whatever
>> reason, like trying different setups out, being able to conveniently
>> change the frequencies would be useful.
>
Another antenna, another direction, another source if the usual host
goes down or is unreliable, or acts like the ISP outfits available to us
now. Competition becomes an option for the customer.If the one or more
antennas are tied to the same transmitter, it doesn't
> matter WHAT frequency you're using. Or do you really mean more than one
> RADIO (transmitter/receiver)?
Well, I could see the home customer's system being used as a repeater.
You see the same at isp-wireless.com, where they'll put a repeater on
one customer's roof to serve the whole neighborhood. And I dont see that
you could not have a simple switch to a microphone and talk.
> So you're going to tie the analog output from the radio to the
> soundcard, and have the DOS machine do A/D conversion? Via the
> soundcard? Or are you going to talk on one end and use some bizarre
> 'speech-to-text' engine under DOS? (I like that one. :)
I spoze that could be done, but I'd expect most people would just use
the dos platform to run the transceiver, and take the data feed into a
win or linux platform which could do the VOIP. They mentioned how puny
the Linksys mthbd was, 200mhz cpu. And another guy said he didnt even
have a monitor or keyboard attached. But all that crap is so cheap, why
not have a kybd and monitor on the dos box to use in case the windoz
crashed?
> OK, so far we have a machine running DOS that can set radio frequencies
> via DOS software, and doo 'something' to a recieved analog signal coming
> in via that radio.
>
> You just described an expensive, DOS-based version of a tabletop radio,
> unless there's more to it.
I rather thot it was obvious. scuze me. but if you have *data* from the
soundcard, couldnt you output it thru a NIC or whatever to your win or
nix system?
>>> What data? What are you doing here? You surely don't "need" a GUI
>>> to use the web! Lynx runs on DOS today.
>>
I guess we surf in different directions. And I guess you missed it, but
let me try again. There is *no* DOS software which will 'connect' with
any of my local ISPs. So, I cant surf with Lynx. or Arachne. But even
when I could, I kept getting error messages about what it could not render.
> OK, so you NOW are going to be talking to someone other than your band
> of ASCII-ueberalles rebel compadres, eh? So this thing needs to actually
> make it from your wonderland to "the real world." How does that happen?
> Does this behemoth end up plugging into another device (the
> linux-on-linksys perhaps?) that actually does the "real work?"
At this point, all I hope for is a wireless link to the ADSL grid in
Clinton AR. Linksys is not going to get me there. there is a mountain...
Or- maybe go north, further, about 10 miles, to Leslie, which also has
ADSL, but also lots of friends we often call long distance to. The
[EMAIL PROTECTED] guys mention this ability to cross the
LATA lines.
> So you're using the Xandros Linux OS now. No more DOS? The entire
> DOS-based gizmo described so far winds up talking to a Linux box in
> the end?
right. too many of the electronics hardware and other websites I visit
cannot be rendered with a dos browser.
> EVERYTHING stops until the software lets go. You have described a
> DOS-based system that is going to have to handle a lot
No, let's start with one. why not just one incoming analogue?
> of incoming
> analog signals and convert them to digital... BEFORE it even determines
> whether those signals are of genuine interest.
No, dont need that either. It can just pump the data out a NIC.
> Assuming your machine is
> fast enough to do that (not a problem) anything other software on the
> system is going to have to wait until this (raw) decoding occurs. Sure,
> you can stive for 'efficient' code. You also need to buffer the other
> stuff that's coming in whilst this is all occurring (in real-time via
> the IRQ interrupts generated by the sound card.) It's starting to sound
> like the system is going to be VERY VERY busy just contending with this
> inbound (you haven't described outbound) traffic.
It's just a dumb *wireless* terminal, that in the event of a crash or
whatever, still allows me access to other sources of info to solve my
problem.
>> All the saboteurs nowadays aim their weapons at windoz;
>
>
> An equally determined crowd aims at the network and infrastructure, or
> raw TCP/IP traffic. NOTHING is untouched that's on the Internet. If this
> contraption talks to anybody outside, it will probably get hit.
Hit with what? It can boot DOS off a *locked* floppy. How do you get a
virus to infect that?
> Yes,
> they may not know what your system consists of (this is the argument
> used by proprietary wireless vendors) but 'security by obscurity' is
> little guarantee.
1- obscurity. 2- read only boot sectors. 3- lots of handwired assy
programs in an era when all the saboteurs dont know diddly about
assembly. 4- even if you do know assembly, then you know that unless you
have the assembly *source code* it'll take the next hundred years to crack.
>> {COMMO} and the other DOS termcoms *could not* respond to a
>> virus.
>
>
> They were also SERIAL. Not networked. If a terminal-type interface is
> all you need, then great. But SOMETHING has to talk on the network to
> get to those web pages you mentioned. What will do that? If it's
> network, it may well be vulnerable to some of the same exploits that
> target TCP/IP stacks on Windows, *nix and Cisco gear. *NOTHING* is
> immune to attack if it's connected to anything else.
Well, I dunno why a BBS host attached to the town's ADSL, could not
simply pipe the data to the wireless from that ISP. It dont havta render
the pages. I remember some BBSes that had internet portals. The only
commands which would affect the behavior of the host would have to come
from the sysop. As far as the ADSL ISP is concerned, the town transiever
looks like an ordinary PC.
> That's [failure to connect] as likely a failure of the DOS market to
> continue development to
> keep otherwise perfectly viable products up to current standards. ISPs
> presumably have weighed the risks of losing the ever-shrinking
> population of DOS-only customers against the ever-growing need for
> enhanced capabilities to increase profitability in an ever-increasingly
> complex and competitive environment. They live or die by pennies.
I see it more as planned obsolescence and the abandonment of backwards
compatability. As you imply, the profit motive. None of the older
versions of Linux will logon either. I need something with the Linux 2.4
kernel. It looks like the windoz servers are complicating the handshake
to encourage people to just go out to buy a new PC. My daughter hadda
give up on her Mac. But there is no intrinsic reason not to let a local
user logon thru the 56k modem.
they dont needa run the authentication, they can use the Telco caller ID
to know that it is from my home computer and not a saboteur. No, the
reason is corporate profits.
But in other areas we see where the market has responded to gouging by
developing alternative sources, in this case, for data. And the wireless
technolgies offer the home users the ability to establish their own
networks with their own rules based on the hardware folks already have.
This has something to do with why community coop ISPs are forming- often
using high-frequency wireless gear like the Linksys.
> I'm trying hard to follow: Are you saying you could do everything the
> $70 Linux-on-Linksys system does more cheaply and reliable under DOS?
> Are you including the voice capabilities? Spread spectrum radio?
I already have the VOIP on the Linux install. But I'd like to be able to
push a button, and talk over a mic if need be. It is an FM radio aint it?
You need spread spectrum in urban areas where the bandwidth is
cluttered. As I *said* several times already, out in the boonies, dead
air is all over the TV and radio bands. You dont *need* spread spectrum,
just find a quiet corner and use it.
The FCC dont care. They dont care about the Springfield Christian Fundy
FM station walking all over the Little Rock PBS station, despite people
complaining. Nobody will complain if users use some dead air. And, now
that ADSL is in the local towns, a few watts would be more than
sufficient to 'connect'.
> Day, you've thrown out a good smattering of solutions. What problems are
> they to solve?
>
> DOS can do a LOT of things, and many VERY WELL. However, a single DOS
> system (nor a handful) can't necessarily do EVERYTHING that you seem to
> be alluding to.
Caveat lector. If you see anything useful, good for you. If not, then
not. no biggie.
>
>
