RadioBanter - View Single Post

May 12th 05, 11:16 AM

wrote:

From: "Michael A. Terrell" on Wed,May 11 2005 9:50 am

John Smith wrote:

So, although your original argument was how difficult a bus and
keeping
analog seperate from digital which would share various
signals--would be,
then, when the argument was made that someone just picked up a bunch
of
on-the-shelf items and went ahead and done it... you flip-flop--to
where now
it was so obivious someone should have done such a simple thing LONG
before
them...

I didn't "Flip-Flop" I know what's involved, including the million
dollar plus expense involved in designing one configuration of a
modular
radio.

Michael, don't let this POSEUR bother you. That
anony-mouse "John Smith" hasn't been there, hasn't
done it. He wants to be "Instant Guru" and wants
a "rep" without doing any work for it. From what
he states - all in generalities, no specifics -
he can't think things out close to necessary detail.

You were right to "plonk" him.

You have your head up your sorry ass, and I'm through wasting time
with your nonsense. Its obvious that you don't know a dam thing about
design when you compare the Apple II to a real design project. You
need
to get an education in design and stop trying to blow smoke up
everyone's ass.

Way to go! :-)

At some other time I wouldn't mind having a friendly
argument with you on the Apple ][...but not with this
anony-mouse hanging around trying to intrude and
smoke up the place. I still have my 1980-purchase
Apple ][+ and had a lot of fun with it...including
lots of calculations (Applesoft had 10-digit
accuracy with 5-byte FP variables, muy better than
4-byte single precision). I've gone into the hard-
ware and analyzed it thoroughly, scoped it, written
it up...submitted it as a manuscript only to find out
Howard W. Sams was already in production on a similar
book! :-)

In many ways, the PRODUCTION version of the Apple ][
was the forerunner of the IBM PC out of Boca Raton.
But designed (or rather re-designed) about two years
prior to the IBM PC. Uncanny similarity between the
two in basic structure, expansion slots, and - yes -
"open architecture." PRODUCTION planning went into
the ][ and it wasn't much like the original board-
only Apple.

But, the ][ on up to the Apple //gs were terrific RF
generators! :-) By contrast, a similar structure
using only three main chips (CPU from Western Design,
64K EPROM, 64K/128K Static RAM) can be very nice and
quiet RF wise because of the internal transistor
structures in those chips. [I've already done a
preliminary breadboard setup to verify that] Such a
controller system can adapt itself to many kinds of
"radio controller" applications without any of the
RF coupling problems. It's been done before by the
big three in Japan using older microcontrollers in
many different transceivers, all without disturbing
the receiver or the transmitter specifications.

Too many of the older hams are oriented towards a
"legacy radio" structure...mostly analog. That
just doesn't adapt to "plug-and-play" ease of adding
or modifying an SDR. Trying to use a common PC as
a "model" for an SDR is a bunch of nonsense. The
"bus" and "interface structure" is an analogue only
the broadest sense of the term. Doesn't apply,
either technically or organizationally.

As far as "John Smith" goes, he's gone. He is just another hopeless
wanabee who doesn't understand anything about the real world.

Len, I have worked from DC to 11 GHz on commercial designs and anyone
that thinks any design is easy just doesn't have any idea what's
involved. Its one thing to hack together an almost working prototype,
but its a whole different animal to design from the bottom up to meet
set specifications, make sure the components will be available, and if
the unit is to be sold, to make sure that it will clear the FCC, UL and
other requirements. If you decide to manufacture the equipment for sale
outside of the US you have the CE certification, and ISO 900X to deal
with.

If i had the money I would put together a nice kit to sell, but other
needs come first.

I designed my first receiver in the late '60s while I was still in
high school. It was mostly tubes, and a modular design so I could
replace sections to update the design. I had it almost done when I was
drafted. When I got out of the service my family had torn down my
workshop and the prototype and all my paperwork was gone. I learned a
lot about receiver design at Microdyne, and their telemetry receivers
were all modular. They had to be, because a customer would need
something special, so we would charge them to redesign a module or two
to adapt a standard product, rather than to design a complete receiver.

It would be interesting to set up a group to develop a modular
system, but getting people to agree on the specs can be more work than
the actual design.

--
Former professional electron wrangler.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida