|
Important Research at TAPR
According to the latest TAPR "Packet Status Register", thier quarterly
newsletter, the folks at TAPR have discovered that they are adrift, with no purpose and direction to guide their activities. As is often the case, the "leadership" at TAPR were the last ones to acknowlege a situation that hams have been noticing and remarking upon for over a decade. It appears the TAPR BoD put their heads together, discussed the question thoroughly, and discovered that they still had no idea as to what TAPR is supposed to be doing. At last they threw up thier hands and hired somebody to investigate - To try to determine what TAPR might be good for. "Uh, TAPR does technical stuff." was the conclusion the investigator returned. It is revealing that during the entire article describing the confusion and debate as to what TAPR might be good for and the "answer" thier investigator eventually turned up, the words "packet radio" were never even mentioned. That's right; At no time did anybody in the TAPR organization or the investigator they hired mention the words "packet radio" while working to sovle the mystery as to what TAPR might be good for. Those words also are lacking in the investigator's conclusion, "Uh, TAPR does technical stuff." - So why do some people think of TAPR as a packet radio organization? TAPR doesn't. Charles Brabham, N5PVL Director: USPacket.Net http://www.uspacket.net |
"Some people" will always live in the past.
Could be they (TAPR) don't want to limit themselves to a technology that is now fully obsolete, and 90% of Hams have abandoned. Personally, I don't care about packet (ax.25), and "digital" to me means vocoders, PSK, and OFDM. ax.25 would be the "misc" of this "digital" forum. I also don't need your sniveling about your most hated organization. Get over it. Even wireless devices have abandoned Spread Spectrum, and gone for OFDM for speed (802.11g). AOR has an OFDM modem for HF that does 2400 baud with 1200 baud of FEC. Why would anyone use packet anymore? Gene "charlesb" wrote - So why do some people think of TAPR as a packet radio organization? TAPR doesn't. |
"Some people" will always live in the past.
Could be they (TAPR) don't want to limit themselves to a technology that is now fully obsolete, and 90% of Hams have abandoned. Personally, I don't care about packet (ax.25), and "digital" to me means vocoders, PSK, and OFDM. ax.25 would be the "misc" of this "digital" forum. I also don't need your sniveling about your most hated organization. Get over it. Even wireless devices have abandoned Spread Spectrum, and gone for OFDM for speed (802.11g). AOR has an OFDM modem for HF that does 2400 baud with 1200 baud of FEC. Why would anyone use packet anymore? Gene "charlesb" wrote - So why do some people think of TAPR as a packet radio organization? TAPR doesn't. |
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 08:01:25 -0600, Gene Storey wrote:
"Some people" will always live in the past. Could be they (TAPR) don't want to limit themselves to a technology that is now fully obsolete, and 90% of Hams have abandoned. Personally, I don't care about packet (ax.25), and "digital" to me means vocoders, PSK, and OFDM. ax.25 would be the "misc" of this "digital" forum. I also don't need your sniveling about your most hated organization. Get over it. Even wireless devices have abandoned Spread Spectrum, and gone for OFDM for speed (802.11g). AOR has an OFDM modem for HF that does 2400 baud with 1200 baud of FEC. Why would anyone use packet anymore? TAPR has been doing a good job in the last couple years with kits. The DSP-10 is a MAJOR undertaking, and they did great with it. The DSPx and KDSP10 are also very nice - I've been playing around with them the last few days. I've had a T238 for quite a while, and it's perfect. So, I'm MORE than happy with them as a kit vendor. When it comes to general packet radio, then, no, I don't look to them as a leader. |
On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 08:01:25 -0600, Gene Storey wrote:
"Some people" will always live in the past. Could be they (TAPR) don't want to limit themselves to a technology that is now fully obsolete, and 90% of Hams have abandoned. Personally, I don't care about packet (ax.25), and "digital" to me means vocoders, PSK, and OFDM. ax.25 would be the "misc" of this "digital" forum. I also don't need your sniveling about your most hated organization. Get over it. Even wireless devices have abandoned Spread Spectrum, and gone for OFDM for speed (802.11g). AOR has an OFDM modem for HF that does 2400 baud with 1200 baud of FEC. Why would anyone use packet anymore? TAPR has been doing a good job in the last couple years with kits. The DSP-10 is a MAJOR undertaking, and they did great with it. The DSPx and KDSP10 are also very nice - I've been playing around with them the last few days. I've had a T238 for quite a while, and it's perfect. So, I'm MORE than happy with them as a kit vendor. When it comes to general packet radio, then, no, I don't look to them as a leader. |
"user" wrote in message ... TAPR has been doing a good job in the last couple years with kits. The DSP-10 is a MAJOR undertaking, and they did great with it. The DSPx and KDSP10 are also very nice - I've been playing around with them the last few days. I've had a T238 for quite a while, and it's perfect. So, I'm MORE than happy with them as a kit vendor. When it comes to general packet radio, then, no, I don't look to them as a leader. Yes, TAPR has been good about the kits and technical articles for some time, but they are not really a packet radio organization as their name and web-site implies. The popular conception that TAPR is a packet radio organization is incorrect. TAPR has no interest in packet radio and does not support it. Many of the movers 'n shakers involved in TAPR despise packet radio in fact, and several are downright rude to hams who express an interest in it. The fact that TAPR marketed the TNC2 kit long ago has nothing to do with what they are now. I think we can safely allow Gene Story to be the TAPR poster-child with his response here, displaying the sort of attitude about packet radio that you can expect to find within TAPR. USPacket.Net is a genuine packet radio organization, dedicated to that aspect of the hobby. We do not feel that it is necessary to run down other aspects of amateur radio, in order to promote packet. Naturally, we at USPN would not want hams to mistakenly go to TAPR for packet information, only to be discouraged or derided by TAPR folk who share many opinions with our poster-boy Gene, here. It would be just as inappropriate for hams to go to USPN looking for kits or highly technical articles, as we do not offer any. What we do offer is support and usable, useful information for hams who are interested in amateur packet radio and most especially packet radio networking in the USA. Gene Story accused me of "hating" TAPR in his nastygram-post, but my feelings about TAPR do not run that strongly. As a technical organization that puts out kits, TAPR does a great job. What I do "hate" though, is to see hams being confused into thinking that TAPR is a packet radio organization when they are not. Personally, I applaud TAPR's reassessment of itself. It is accurate, and now only a name change is needed in order to reduce any remaining confusion as to what TAPR is, and what it does for the hobby. Charles Brabham, N5PVL Director: USPacket.Net http://www.uspacket.net |
"user" wrote in message ... TAPR has been doing a good job in the last couple years with kits. The DSP-10 is a MAJOR undertaking, and they did great with it. The DSPx and KDSP10 are also very nice - I've been playing around with them the last few days. I've had a T238 for quite a while, and it's perfect. So, I'm MORE than happy with them as a kit vendor. When it comes to general packet radio, then, no, I don't look to them as a leader. Yes, TAPR has been good about the kits and technical articles for some time, but they are not really a packet radio organization as their name and web-site implies. The popular conception that TAPR is a packet radio organization is incorrect. TAPR has no interest in packet radio and does not support it. Many of the movers 'n shakers involved in TAPR despise packet radio in fact, and several are downright rude to hams who express an interest in it. The fact that TAPR marketed the TNC2 kit long ago has nothing to do with what they are now. I think we can safely allow Gene Story to be the TAPR poster-child with his response here, displaying the sort of attitude about packet radio that you can expect to find within TAPR. USPacket.Net is a genuine packet radio organization, dedicated to that aspect of the hobby. We do not feel that it is necessary to run down other aspects of amateur radio, in order to promote packet. Naturally, we at USPN would not want hams to mistakenly go to TAPR for packet information, only to be discouraged or derided by TAPR folk who share many opinions with our poster-boy Gene, here. It would be just as inappropriate for hams to go to USPN looking for kits or highly technical articles, as we do not offer any. What we do offer is support and usable, useful information for hams who are interested in amateur packet radio and most especially packet radio networking in the USA. Gene Story accused me of "hating" TAPR in his nastygram-post, but my feelings about TAPR do not run that strongly. As a technical organization that puts out kits, TAPR does a great job. What I do "hate" though, is to see hams being confused into thinking that TAPR is a packet radio organization when they are not. Personally, I applaud TAPR's reassessment of itself. It is accurate, and now only a name change is needed in order to reduce any remaining confusion as to what TAPR is, and what it does for the hobby. Charles Brabham, N5PVL Director: USPacket.Net http://www.uspacket.net |
You would never know it by looking through their website. I see
packet radio all over the place. I have always considered TAPR to be the "father" of today's TNC's. Dick - W6CCD On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 22:50:43 GMT, "charlesb" wrote: Gene Story accused me of "hating" TAPR in his nastygram-post, but my feelings about TAPR do not run that strongly. As a technical organization that puts out kits, TAPR does a great job. What I do "hate" though, is to see hams being confused into thinking that TAPR is a packet radio organization when they are not. |
You would never know it by looking through their website. I see
packet radio all over the place. I have always considered TAPR to be the "father" of today's TNC's. Dick - W6CCD On Thu, 13 Nov 2003 22:50:43 GMT, "charlesb" wrote: Gene Story accused me of "hating" TAPR in his nastygram-post, but my feelings about TAPR do not run that strongly. As a technical organization that puts out kits, TAPR does a great job. What I do "hate" though, is to see hams being confused into thinking that TAPR is a packet radio organization when they are not. |
"Dick" wrote in message ... You would never know it by looking through their website. I see packet radio all over the place. I have always considered TAPR to be the "father" of today's TNC's. TAPR kitted the TNC2, twenty years ago. Things have changed since then, and it has turned around to where hardly anybody at TAPR wants anything to do with amateur packet radio, and most especially not with packet radio networking. Packet figured large in TAPR's beginnings, but things change and it is no longer the central focus of interest for that organization that it once was. The "packet radio" stuff in TAPR's name and on their web-site reflect an earlier era in TAPR's history that is long past. It's a millstone around their necks, contributing to their present internal confusion and lack of focus. A lot of the unseemly and un-ham-like nastiness toward other hams (packet enthusiasts) from TAPR folks springs from this dichotomy. This is not doing TAPR any good, and of course it is bad for the hobby as well. If TAPR dropped the "packet" stuff altogether and concentrated on what they do best, both TAPR and the packet radio enthusiasts in the U.S. would be a lot better off. Charles Brabham, N5PVL Director: USPacket.Net http://www.uspacket.net |
"Dick" wrote in message ... You would never know it by looking through their website. I see packet radio all over the place. I have always considered TAPR to be the "father" of today's TNC's. TAPR kitted the TNC2, twenty years ago. Things have changed since then, and it has turned around to where hardly anybody at TAPR wants anything to do with amateur packet radio, and most especially not with packet radio networking. Packet figured large in TAPR's beginnings, but things change and it is no longer the central focus of interest for that organization that it once was. The "packet radio" stuff in TAPR's name and on their web-site reflect an earlier era in TAPR's history that is long past. It's a millstone around their necks, contributing to their present internal confusion and lack of focus. A lot of the unseemly and un-ham-like nastiness toward other hams (packet enthusiasts) from TAPR folks springs from this dichotomy. This is not doing TAPR any good, and of course it is bad for the hobby as well. If TAPR dropped the "packet" stuff altogether and concentrated on what they do best, both TAPR and the packet radio enthusiasts in the U.S. would be a lot better off. Charles Brabham, N5PVL Director: USPacket.Net http://www.uspacket.net |
"charlesb" wrote
If TAPR dropped the "packet" stuff altogether and concentrated on what they do best, both TAPR and the packet radio enthusiasts in the U.S. would be a lot better off. The director is right, he's always right, he's *so* right that everyone else is wrong. |
"charlesb" wrote
If TAPR dropped the "packet" stuff altogether and concentrated on what they do best, both TAPR and the packet radio enthusiasts in the U.S. would be a lot better off. The director is right, he's always right, he's *so* right that everyone else is wrong. |
"Gene Storey" wrote in message news:wYWsb.3$Cb6.1@okepread03... "charlesb" wrote If TAPR dropped the "packet" stuff altogether and concentrated on what they do best, both TAPR and the packet radio enthusiasts in the U.S. would be a lot better off. The director is right, he's always right, he's *so* right that everyone else is wrong. You must have forgotten that time I thought I was wrong! I was wrong about that... ;-D Charles Brabham, N5PVL Director: USPacket.Net http://www.uspacket.net |
"Gene Storey" wrote in message news:wYWsb.3$Cb6.1@okepread03... "charlesb" wrote If TAPR dropped the "packet" stuff altogether and concentrated on what they do best, both TAPR and the packet radio enthusiasts in the U.S. would be a lot better off. The director is right, he's always right, he's *so* right that everyone else is wrong. You must have forgotten that time I thought I was wrong! I was wrong about that... ;-D Charles Brabham, N5PVL Director: USPacket.Net http://www.uspacket.net |
"Gene Storey" wrote in message news:D9Msb.180$4x3.28@okepread03... "Some people" will always live in the past. Could be they (TAPR) don't want to limit themselves to a technology that is now fully obsolete, and 90% of Hams have abandoned. Ah yes, that obsolete technology called ... radio. -- ... Hank Hank: http://horedson.home.att.net W0RLI: http://w0rli.home.att.net |
"Gene Storey" wrote in message news:D9Msb.180$4x3.28@okepread03... "Some people" will always live in the past. Could be they (TAPR) don't want to limit themselves to a technology that is now fully obsolete, and 90% of Hams have abandoned. Ah yes, that obsolete technology called ... radio. -- ... Hank Hank: http://horedson.home.att.net W0RLI: http://w0rli.home.att.net |
"Hank Oredson" wrote
"Gene Storey" wrote "Some people" will always live in the past. Could be they (TAPR) don't want to limit themselves to a technology that is now fully obsolete, and 90% of Hams have abandoned. Ah yes, that obsolete technology called ... radio. No. You missed the whole point of my well worded position (and at your age, we can allow for wet pants and confusion). Let me repeat, the thing that is fully obsolete is ax.25 and the forms of FSK used to carry it. |
"Hank Oredson" wrote
"Gene Storey" wrote "Some people" will always live in the past. Could be they (TAPR) don't want to limit themselves to a technology that is now fully obsolete, and 90% of Hams have abandoned. Ah yes, that obsolete technology called ... radio. No. You missed the whole point of my well worded position (and at your age, we can allow for wet pants and confusion). Let me repeat, the thing that is fully obsolete is ax.25 and the forms of FSK used to carry it. |
"Gene Storey" wrote in message news:M43tb.551$Cb6.338@okepread03... "Hank Oredson" wrote "Gene Storey" wrote "Some people" will always live in the past. Could be they (TAPR) don't want to limit themselves to a technology that is now fully obsolete, and 90% of Hams have abandoned. Ah yes, that obsolete technology called ... radio. No. You missed the whole point of my well worded position All that anti-ham drivel you were spouting? (and at your age, we can allow for wet pants and confusion). Let me repeat, the thing that is fully obsolete is ax.25 and the forms of FSK used to carry it. Well now, let's just take a look at what's actually going on... There are two major AX25 networks that cover the entire east coast of the US, going from 200 miles to 1500 miles inland, owned operated and enjoyed by thousands of hams every day, who use those networks to save lives and properties every year.... And then there are the AX25 ARRL skipnets on HF that tie together different sections of the country via amateur radio, along with overseas links of course, and the hundreds of smaller VHF/UHF packet nets scattered around the country, and the new ARES packet radio nets that are popping up here and there, partially funded by the dept. of homeland security.... And then there's uh, uh.... Oh, I forgot what it was that you were saying had "obsoleted" amateur packet radio? Where is your ham radio alternative, and how many hams use it every day? What is obsolete is your nasty anti-ham attitude. Packet Radio is doing just fine, thank you, growing and advancing every day, saving property and lives. You have nothing to show because you are just another miserable anti-ham troll, infesting a newsgroup for ham radio operators. You are real good at running down what other people do and accomplish, but have nothing to show for yourself. Lacking any accomplishment to show, and also lacking in character, your response is to run down the accomplishments of other, better hams. - If you are a ham at all, that is. I don't remember seeing a callsign in your post which says a lot about you, right off the bat. Your ignorant, nasty, lying attitude does not lead me to believe that you are a ham either. If you are a ham, then you shouldn't be. Charles Brabham, N5PVL Director: USPacket.Net http://www.uspacket.net To donate to USPacket.Net, click the link below: https://www.paypal.com/xclick/busine...tem_name=USPac ket.Net&no_note=1&tax=0¤cy_code=USD&lc=US |
"Gene Storey" wrote in message news:M43tb.551$Cb6.338@okepread03... "Hank Oredson" wrote "Gene Storey" wrote "Some people" will always live in the past. Could be they (TAPR) don't want to limit themselves to a technology that is now fully obsolete, and 90% of Hams have abandoned. Ah yes, that obsolete technology called ... radio. No. You missed the whole point of my well worded position All that anti-ham drivel you were spouting? (and at your age, we can allow for wet pants and confusion). Let me repeat, the thing that is fully obsolete is ax.25 and the forms of FSK used to carry it. Well now, let's just take a look at what's actually going on... There are two major AX25 networks that cover the entire east coast of the US, going from 200 miles to 1500 miles inland, owned operated and enjoyed by thousands of hams every day, who use those networks to save lives and properties every year.... And then there are the AX25 ARRL skipnets on HF that tie together different sections of the country via amateur radio, along with overseas links of course, and the hundreds of smaller VHF/UHF packet nets scattered around the country, and the new ARES packet radio nets that are popping up here and there, partially funded by the dept. of homeland security.... And then there's uh, uh.... Oh, I forgot what it was that you were saying had "obsoleted" amateur packet radio? Where is your ham radio alternative, and how many hams use it every day? What is obsolete is your nasty anti-ham attitude. Packet Radio is doing just fine, thank you, growing and advancing every day, saving property and lives. You have nothing to show because you are just another miserable anti-ham troll, infesting a newsgroup for ham radio operators. You are real good at running down what other people do and accomplish, but have nothing to show for yourself. Lacking any accomplishment to show, and also lacking in character, your response is to run down the accomplishments of other, better hams. - If you are a ham at all, that is. I don't remember seeing a callsign in your post which says a lot about you, right off the bat. Your ignorant, nasty, lying attitude does not lead me to believe that you are a ham either. If you are a ham, then you shouldn't be. Charles Brabham, N5PVL Director: USPacket.Net http://www.uspacket.net To donate to USPacket.Net, click the link below: https://www.paypal.com/xclick/busine...tem_name=USPac ket.Net&no_note=1&tax=0¤cy_code=USD&lc=US |
"charlesb" wrote
"Gene Storey" wrote "Hank Oredson" wrote "Gene Storey" wrote "Some people" will always live in the past. Could be they (TAPR) don't want to limit themselves to a technology that is now fully obsolete, and 90% of Hams have abandoned. Ah yes, that obsolete technology called ... radio. No. You missed the whole point of my well worded position All that anti-ham drivel you were spouting? (and at your age, we can allow for wet pants and confusion). Let me repeat, the thing that is fully obsolete is ax.25 and the forms of FSK used to carry it. You have nothing to show because you are just another miserable anti-ham troll, infesting a newsgroup for ham radio operators. You are real good at running down what other people do and accomplish, but have nothing to show for yourself. Lacking any accomplishment to show, and also lacking in character, your response is to run down the accomplishments of other, better hams. Your technical defense of FSK is noted. Show me a map of this "network." |
"charlesb" wrote
"Gene Storey" wrote "Hank Oredson" wrote "Gene Storey" wrote "Some people" will always live in the past. Could be they (TAPR) don't want to limit themselves to a technology that is now fully obsolete, and 90% of Hams have abandoned. Ah yes, that obsolete technology called ... radio. No. You missed the whole point of my well worded position All that anti-ham drivel you were spouting? (and at your age, we can allow for wet pants and confusion). Let me repeat, the thing that is fully obsolete is ax.25 and the forms of FSK used to carry it. You have nothing to show because you are just another miserable anti-ham troll, infesting a newsgroup for ham radio operators. You are real good at running down what other people do and accomplish, but have nothing to show for yourself. Lacking any accomplishment to show, and also lacking in character, your response is to run down the accomplishments of other, better hams. Your technical defense of FSK is noted. Show me a map of this "network." |
"Gene Storey" wrote in message news:M43tb.551$Cb6.338@okepread03... "Hank Oredson" wrote "Gene Storey" wrote "Some people" will always live in the past. Could be they (TAPR) don't want to limit themselves to a technology that is now fully obsolete, and 90% of Hams have abandoned. Ah yes, that obsolete technology called ... radio. No. You missed the whole point of my well worded position (and at your age, we can allow for wet pants and confusion). Let me repeat, the thing that is fully obsolete is ax.25 and the forms of FSK used to carry it. So do something better. Others have tried ... and failed ... your turn! -- ... Hank Hank: http://horedson.home.att.net W0RLI: http://w0rli.home.att.net |
"Gene Storey" wrote in message news:M43tb.551$Cb6.338@okepread03... "Hank Oredson" wrote "Gene Storey" wrote "Some people" will always live in the past. Could be they (TAPR) don't want to limit themselves to a technology that is now fully obsolete, and 90% of Hams have abandoned. Ah yes, that obsolete technology called ... radio. No. You missed the whole point of my well worded position (and at your age, we can allow for wet pants and confusion). Let me repeat, the thing that is fully obsolete is ax.25 and the forms of FSK used to carry it. So do something better. Others have tried ... and failed ... your turn! -- ... Hank Hank: http://horedson.home.att.net W0RLI: http://w0rli.home.att.net |
"Gene Storey" wrote (amongst other things)...
Even wireless devices have abandoned Spread Spectrum, and gone for OFDM for speed (802.11g). The many flavours of OFDM are, by definition, spread spectrum. (Please leave me out of the rest of the argument - all of these topics seem to get *way* out of hand and far too personal!) 73, Robert KC8UCH |
"Gene Storey" wrote (amongst other things)...
Even wireless devices have abandoned Spread Spectrum, and gone for OFDM for speed (802.11g). The many flavours of OFDM are, by definition, spread spectrum. (Please leave me out of the rest of the argument - all of these topics seem to get *way* out of hand and far too personal!) 73, Robert KC8UCH |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:32 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com