Amen to that, Hank...



--
From The Desk Of
Marty Albert, KC6UFM

"Hank Oredson" wrote in message
. net...
"Radio Active" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 18 May 2005 03:45:42 GMT, "Marty Albert"
was heard mumbling in the corner:

You are 100% correct... Lack of interest is, in my opinion, the largest
single factor.

The speed is also a big deal, as you say... 1200 bps vs. a 2-4 Mbps
cable
connection seems to be a slam dunk.

The higher the speed the more the bandwidth needed to support it. We
don't have the bandwidth in any of the spectrum we have to support 2-4
Mbps.

What ??? You are joking, right?

But, keep in mind that we are talking about is an easy to build and use
device that, with a 15+ year old design, was known to 80 Mbps over a
fairly
short path.

How much bandwidth did it use?

That sort of makes mucking about with 802.11 junk sort of a wasted
effort.

ROFLOL!

The mistake was made about 15 years ago when the drive was to
effectively
duplicate the Internet on the ham bands. Simply put, there are not,
never
have been, and likely never will be enough hams in the world to do that.
Besides, why try to duplicate a defective system?

The internet is defective? Interesting. So, your idea of what amateur
radio should be is a national digital communications network? You have
no room for other modes of communications? No SSB? No CW?

For the life of me, I can see no reason why Frank's device could not be
re-designed today to well over 512 Mbps, perhaps very close to gigabit
speeds. If you make the jump to the new copper solutions for 10 Gbps, we
may
even be able to get close to that...

Look at the bandwidth 1200 bps or 9600 bps uses and then figure out
what 512 Mbps would take up. Then read Part 97.

What's the problem?

Imagine a large metropolitan area, like maybe Dallas/Fort Worth, ringed
by
an 8 Gbps nodes with spokes at 8 Gbps "dropping" into and through the
city.
A series of 1 Gbps nodes come off of the spokes to feed into the
neighborhood. In the neighborhoods, picture a bridge node that users can
connect to at, say, 100 Mbps. Lastly, picture these "City Wheels" being
connected to other city wheels at 10 Gbps.

And just where are you going to get that much radio spectrum to do
that?

SHF. We already have the spectrum.

Are you drooling yet?

No, I'm laughing.

Clueless but happy.

--

... Hank

http://home.earthlink.net/~horedson
http://home.earthlink.net/~w0rli