WB8NUT Blog RSS Feed

///////////////////////////////////////////
Why DMR is succeeding

Posted: 14 Feb 2017 02:33 PM PST
http://wb8nut.com/blog/files/Februar...ue-entry-id-83

A Happy Valentine's Day to everyone!

As many of you know, I am a big fan of DStar. Sure it has some limitations,
but for versatility, it is the best for ham radio in my opinion, because it
was designed for ham radio. Fusion can make that same claim, but I do not
see the versatility there.

DMR is a commercial standard adapted to amateur radio. It seems to be the
least flexible for amateur radio, but seems to be growing the fastest at
this point. The reason why is what I will try to answer.

DStar was the first digital mode that received wide acceptance in the ham
community. It has a slow start, but after a few years, really began to take
off. It had P25 as some competition, but P25 never really caught on. Radios
were expensive and really appealed to a group in ham radio that felt they
needed to have interoperability with police, fire, EMA and other government
agencies. I know a lot of emergency agency people and they wanted nothing
to do with interoperability with amateur radio. They are the professionals
and we are amateurs and the radio kingdom was not going to be intermixed.

DStar caught on with many of the amateurs who like to be on the leading
edge and willing to pay for the equipment to be on the leading edge.
Because of DStar's design, there were also hams on jumped on the app
development bandwagon and created applications for chat and emergency
communications like D*Chat and D-RATS. DStar also integrated into APRS very
well with gateway software referred to as DPRS.

Because Icom continued to be the only provider of DStar equipment (only
recently did Kenwood create a DStar radio) the prices stayed very high.too
high for too long and this is where I believe Icom made a critical
marketing error.

People began to deploy DMR repeaters. Mostly used Motorola repeaters taken
out of commercial operation. They were pretty reasonable and there were
used DMR radios coming to market as commercial owners upgraded their radios
to newer DMR technology. But then the Chinese entered the market with
digital handhelds for under $200. The leading edge crowd started to buy
into DMR. Then when the Chinese started shipping handhelds like the MD-380
for a little over $100, many of the trailing edge hams and more budget
minded hams (aka cheap) started entering into DMR.

DMR repeaters really started to grow. New networks developed. Hotspots were
developed for DMR (and also Fusion) and more people started to flock to DMR.

When hams were looking to try digital, they had a choice of DStar at over
$400 a radio, or DMR for a little over $100. Heck, now you can buy an
MD-380 for under a $100.

Icom did reduce the price of their radios around $300, but it was too late,
DMR had taken the momentum away from DStar.

While all this was going on, about a little over a year ago, Yaesu entered
with Fusion. Yaesu offered clubs Fusion repeaters for $500. The issue is
that Fusion repeaters can do FM or Digital and many clubs bought them as
cheap replacements for FM repeaters. Our club has three with only only just
recently being enabled for digital in addition to FM. Now Yaesu did price
their radios a bit better than Icom. I think their cheapest mobile Fusion
radio is around $139 now and I bought mine when it first came out for
around $169 at Dayton in 2016.

Yaesu was too late to the table. Fusion use is rather limited. Most people
are still venturing into DMR and to a lesser degree, DStar now.

Here is what is sad. I have said this before, manufacturers should have
backed ONE standard.

Second, manufacturers have the capability to make a radio that does
multiple digital modes. Why not do it people?

Yaesu, you can hang onto Fusion and Icom can hang onto DStar, but the
majority of hams going into digital today are going with DMR because it is
affordable. Icom, you kept the DStar radio prices too high for too long.
Yaesu, you just took too long to enter the digital marketplace. You would
have been better served by backing DStar.

Now the best thing for all the manufacturers to do is to come out with a
DStar/DMR/Fusion capable radio at an affordable price. If not, DStar and
Fusion may become the next Betamax (old folks will understand that
reference).

So in summary, the reason DMR is succeeding right now is the price of the
radios. It will continue to grow for that very reason.

In article , rec-radio-amateur-
says...

WB8NUT Blog RSS Feed

///////////////////////////////////////////
Why DMR is succeeding

Posted: 14 Feb 2017 02:33 PM PST
http://wb8nut.com/blog/files/Februar...ue-entry-id-83

A Happy Valentine's Day to everyone!

As many of you know, I am a big fan of DStar. Sure it has some limitations,
but for versatility, it is the best for ham radio in my opinion, because it
was designed for ham radio. Fusion can make that same claim, but I do not
see the versatility there.

DMR is a commercial standard adapted to amateur radio. It seems to be the
least flexible for amateur radio, but seems to be growing the fastest at
this point. The reason why is what I will try to answer.


DMR took over just as Microsoft did in the computer years. MS wasnted
about $ 50 and the other company (believe Digital Research) that I
forget the name of wanted about $ 150.

I company can not come out with a system for the population and keep
everything in house. Thatis what happened to D-Star, Betamax and some
of the eairly computer such as Texas Instruments. It also has to be the
less expensive, especially for hams. Copper wire was invented by 2 hams
arguing over a penny.

On 17/02/2017 06:09, Ralph Mowery wrote:
In article , rec-radio-amateur-
says...

WB8NUT Blog RSS Feed

///////////////////////////////////////////
Why DMR is succeeding

Posted: 14 Feb 2017 02:33 PM PST
http://wb8nut.com/blog/files/Februar...ue-entry-id-83

A Happy Valentine's Day to everyone!

As many of you know, I am a big fan of DStar. Sure it has some limitations,
but for versatility, it is the best for ham radio in my opinion, because it
was designed for ham radio. Fusion can make that same claim, but I do not
see the versatility there.

DMR is a commercial standard adapted to amateur radio. It seems to be the
least flexible for amateur radio, but seems to be growing the fastest at
this point. The reason why is what I will try to answer.


DMR took over just as Microsoft did in the computer years. MS wasnted
about $ 50 and the other company (believe Digital Research) that I
forget the name of wanted about $ 150.

I company can not come out with a system for the population and keep
everything in house. Thatis what happened to D-Star, Betamax and some
of the eairly computer such as Texas Instruments. It also has to be the
less expensive, especially for hams. Copper wire was invented by 2 hams
arguing over a penny.



I'm no fan of DSTAR but how has it been kept 'in-house'? The overall
system isn't Icom's invention, in came out of work done by the JARL.
Icom did build the first kit based on the spec. and Kenwood offered the
odd one or two models.

The high price of DSTAR kit, certainly in the UK, is a large factor. A
DMR handheld can be bought (new) for about £100 ($150) a fraction of the
cheapest DSTAR radio. Unlike the US, surplus DMR kit isn't that common.

An interesting thing to notice: amateurs tend to like 'bells and
whistles' on their radios- memories, flashy displays, ...... which the
manufacturers are happy to 'feed' them. (Look at the new Kenwood DStar
handheld.) However, the cheap DMR radios are the Model T Fords - mass
produced for the wider market and functional. How long before amateurs
notice their don't need a colour display with a built in coffee maker?

Brian Reay wrote:
I'm no fan of DSTAR but how has it been kept 'in-house'? The overall
system isn't Icom's invention, in came out of work done by the JARL.

It has been kept "in the amateur radio house".
DMR is mainly used outside of that, so there is a source of surplus
equipment, a large market with competition, and some manufacturers that
make amateur equipment as a special version of devices they also sell
on their regular market. This makes it easier for them to sell devices
at a lower pricepoint than amateur radio equipment manufacturers can.

On 17/02/2017 13:00, Rob wrote:
Brian Reay wrote:
I'm no fan of DSTAR but how has it been kept 'in-house'? The overall
system isn't Icom's invention, in came out of work done by the JARL.

It has been kept "in the amateur radio house".
DMR is mainly used outside of that, so there is a source of surplus
equipment, a large market with competition, and some manufacturers that
make amateur equipment as a special version of devices they also sell
on their regular market. This makes it easier for them to sell devices
at a lower pricepoint than amateur radio equipment manufacturers can.



That is a fair point but it is true of much of our other kit yet we
don't see the same situation we do with DSTAR and DMR.

The nearest parallel would be the availability of cheap 'Chinese'
analogue radios which have undercut the offerings from the traditional
amateur manufacturers which tend to offer more bells and whistles etc.
The latter are still on sale in the UK but, I suspect, are suffering.

I don't have an axe to grind here, I'm not in the business nor pro or
anti either DSTAR or DMR (I do have a DMR radio). I'm just trying to
understand where things are going.

73
Brian
www.g8osn.net

Brian Reay wrote:
I don't have an axe to grind here, I'm not in the business nor pro or
anti either DSTAR or DMR (I do have a DMR radio). I'm just trying to
understand where things are going.

Me neither. I am not QRV on any of the digital voice modes, as I consider
the voice quality of the typical codecs too low.

However, when looking at the state of the network here it is clear that
the initial deployment was on D-Star but it has largely been overtaken
by DMR. Especially now that free software is available to run the network
and there is no dependence on MARC and its policies anymore.

Fusion is a failure. Yaesu has failed to provide usable firmware for
the first repeater, and "to fix that" they have released new hardware,
essentially leaving those that bought the original kit in the cold.

As a result, people are now ripping out the controller hardware and
converting them to plain voice repeaters using a working controller.

On 19/02/2017 01:29, Rob wrote:
Brian Reay wrote:
I don't have an axe to grind here, I'm not in the business nor pro or
anti either DSTAR or DMR (I do have a DMR radio). I'm just trying to
understand where things are going.

Me neither. I am not QRV on any of the digital voice modes, as I consider
the voice quality of the typical codecs too low.

I resisted for some time but decided to try DMR. I did try DStar using
other people's radios and have never been impressed.


However, when looking at the state of the network here it is clear that
the initial deployment was on D-Star but it has largely been overtaken
by DMR. Especially now that free software is available to run the network
and there is no dependence on MARC and its policies anymore.

I would say DMR will 'win' here, mainly due to price I suspect.


Fusion is a failure. Yaesu has failed to provide usable firmware for
the first repeater, and "to fix that" they have released new hardware,
essentially leaving those that bought the original kit in the cold.

We have some Fusion boxes but it seems like madness for Yaesu to go for
another system.



As a result, people are now ripping out the controller hardware and
converting them to plain voice repeaters using a working controller.


If you mean analogue, I've not heard of that here.

73
Brian
G8OSN/W8OSN

Brian Reay wrote:
Fusion is a failure. Yaesu has failed to provide usable firmware for
the first repeater, and "to fix that" they have released new hardware,
essentially leaving those that bought the original kit in the cold.

We have some Fusion boxes but it seems like madness for Yaesu to go for
another system.

Sure, but what really nailed is is their failure to implement it.
The repeater firmware and associated network application sucks, updates
have been promised for a long time and every time they were postponed,
and finally a new repeater appeared to solve the problem.
Most people here feel that they were lured into buying a cheap repeater,
understanding that Yaesu did this to promote sales of mobiles and portables,
and not knowing that they only did this to dump unusable hardware before
releasing a new type.

As a result, people are now ripping out the controller hardware and
converting them to plain voice repeaters using a working controller.


If you mean analogue, I've not heard of that here.

Usually analogue, but I have seen a tweet about multimode use as
well (MMDVM).

https://twitter.com/KC2VRJ

On 20/02/2017 16:26, Rob wrote:
Brian Reay wrote:
Fusion is a failure. Yaesu has failed to provide usable firmware for
the first repeater, and "to fix that" they have released new hardware,
essentially leaving those that bought the original kit in the cold.

We have some Fusion boxes but it seems like madness for Yaesu to go for
another system.

Sure, but what really nailed is is their failure to implement it.
The repeater firmware and associated network application sucks, updates
have been promised for a long time and every time they were postponed,
and finally a new repeater appeared to solve the problem.
Most people here feel that they were lured into buying a cheap repeater,
understanding that Yaesu did this to promote sales of mobiles and portables,
and not knowing that they only did this to dump unusable hardware before
releasing a new type.

I wasn't aware of that, I confess to not following the progress of
Fusion, or lack of it, in detail.


As a result, people are now ripping out the controller hardware and
converting them to plain voice repeaters using a working controller.


If you mean analogue, I've not heard of that here.

Usually analogue, but I have seen a tweet about multimode use as
well (MMDVM).

https://twitter.com/KC2VRJ



Interesting.



73
Brian