That guy was calling me a "Troll", NOT encouraging you to become one!

John
--
Sit down the six-pack!!! STEP AWAY!!! ...and go do something...

"Joel Kolstad" wrote in message
...
| Hi John,
|
| "John Smith" wrote in message
| ...
| Do a search of the net, you will see some of the designs, circuits,
boards
| there...
|
| Any pointers to 802.11b/g amplifiers? Most of the results I get Googling
are
| for the more "traditional" designs (from RF component vendors,
booksellers,
| etc.) -- I didn't see any homebrew 2.4GHz amp schematics aimed at the
casusal
| WiFi enthusiast.
|
| ... and while they mention the microwave oven--I don't think anyone is
| attempting it!!!
|
| Someone claiming they can take a magnetron from a $59 Wal*Mart microwave
oven
| and turn it into a reasonably linear power amplifier has a pretty poor
| understanding just what it is that (1) amplifiers and (2) magnetrons from
| cheap microwave ovens are meant to do. :-)
|
|

Let us reset to reality here--before real myths are generated... actually
the system, in digital form--already exists in my home--and even most of
yours (unless you are webtv.)

A sw receiver card (order it off ebay) and a xmitter card (might have to
construct your own here) slapped into a PCI bus--appropiate connections to
antennas--and I am off into the ether.... the soundcard is my audio, both
xmit and recv, recv software is provided with the card--software for a
homebrew xmit card would need to be constructed and problems would exist in
interfacing software between the recv card and xmit card--all DO-ABLE...

The fact that it can be done easily has already been demonstrated--if you
choose to deny this, do this at the risk of having others doubt your
sanity...


Warmest regards,
John
--
Sit down the six-pack!!! STEP AWAY!!! ...and go do something...

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
| Decades have brought us moon landing, mars landings,masers, lasers, lets,
| fets, mosfets, computers, etc...
|
| But the shape of radio equip. has remained virtually stagnant.
|
| One "innovation" would be to just copy what the IBM clone has taught us.
|
| Build a radio of "cards." Just like the computer, a standard case which
you
| can plugin various power supplies, frontend board "cards", intermediate
| board "cards", buffer amp board "cards", IF board "cards", audio board
| "cards", xmitter board "cards", final amp board "cards", etc.... I think
| you get the pic
|
| One radio case can/could virtually be any radio you can imagine.... new
| design in a frontend? Plug in a new front end "card", new audio offering?
| Plug in a new audio board "card."
|
| Someone really should get off a dead duff somewhere and DO IT!!!!
|
| Kinda makes ya wonder why not? Doesn't it?
|
| Warmest regards,
| John
|
| --
| I AM ONE-IN-A-MILLION!!!!!
| Too bad the other 999,999 got there first.. frown
|
|

Well, a quick check of ebay turned up NO SW RCVR cards, naturally--here is a
like which describes the one I use...
http://www.thiecom.de/english/g313i/

Regards,
John
--
Sit down the six-pack!!! STEP AWAY!!! ...and go do something...

"John Smith" wrote in message
news | Let us reset to reality here--before real myths are generated... actually
| the system, in digital form--already exists in my home--and even most of
| yours (unless you are webtv.)
|
| A sw receiver card (order it off ebay) and a xmitter card (might have to
| construct your own here) slapped into a PCI bus--appropiate connections to
| antennas--and I am off into the ether.... the soundcard is my audio, both
| xmit and recv, recv software is provided with the card--software for a
| homebrew xmit card would need to be constructed and problems would exist
in
| interfacing software between the recv card and xmit card--all DO-ABLE...
|
| The fact that it can be done easily has already been demonstrated--if you
| choose to deny this, do this at the risk of having others doubt your
| sanity...
|
|
| Warmest regards,
| John
| --
| Sit down the six-pack!!! STEP AWAY!!! ...and go do something...
|
| "John Smith" wrote in message
| ...
|| Decades have brought us moon landing, mars landings,masers, lasers, lets,
|| fets, mosfets, computers, etc...
||
|| But the shape of radio equip. has remained virtually stagnant.
||
|| One "innovation" would be to just copy what the IBM clone has taught us.
||
|| Build a radio of "cards." Just like the computer, a standard case which
| you
|| can plugin various power supplies, frontend board "cards", intermediate
|| board "cards", buffer amp board "cards", IF board "cards", audio board
|| "cards", xmitter board "cards", final amp board "cards", etc.... I
think
|| you get the pic
||
|| One radio case can/could virtually be any radio you can imagine.... new
|| design in a frontend? Plug in a new front end "card", new audio
offering?
|| Plug in a new audio board "card."
||
|| Someone really should get off a dead duff somewhere and DO IT!!!!
||
|| Kinda makes ya wonder why not? Doesn't it?
||
|| Warmest regards,
|| John
||
|| --
|| I AM ONE-IN-A-MILLION!!!!!
|| Too bad the other 999,999 got there first.. frown
||
||
|
|

Decades have brought us moon landing, mars landings,masers, lasers, lets,
fets, mosfets, computers, etc...

But the shape of radio equip. has remained virtually stagnant.

One "innovation" would be to just copy what the IBM clone has taught us.

Build a radio of "cards." Just like the computer, a standard case which you
can plugin various power supplies, frontend board "cards", intermediate
board "cards", buffer amp board "cards", IF board "cards", audio board
"cards", xmitter board "cards", final amp board "cards", etc.... I think
you get the pic

One radio case can/could virtually be any radio you can imagine.... new
design in a frontend? Plug in a new front end "card", new audio offering?
Plug in a new audio board "card."

Someone really should get off a dead duff somewhere and DO IT!!!!

Kinda makes ya wonder why not? Doesn't it?

Warmest regards,
John

Not sure how restrictive your idea is, but it ain't new.

You can even find the odd receiver on e-bay with cards for each function
plugging into a bus - try Plessey for example. Even the ancient Davco DR-30 and
the first solid-state heath transceiver (SB401 IIRC) used plug in RF, IF etc
cards.

Several modern scanners, especially portable ones have a selection of optional
plug in cards for things like, extra channels, digital decoders, tone squelch
etc. etc.

I had an early Yaesu VHF/UHF receiver which had an optional plug in card video
decoder. My Kenwood R-5000 has provision for a plug in VHF front end.

I used to have a RACAL receiver, old enough to be antique now, which used plug
in front ends for various coverage options, and I seem to recall it was a fairly
common idea in those days.

Dave

Snip............

On the down side, the HF bands are NOT a big-
ticket item for communications as they once were.
Today the RF world is deep into cellular
telephony for sites and providers, and some
for users (at companies with large production
lines and consumer marketing structures). The
world of communications has moved UP and over
that mythical, artificial dividing line of
30 MHz.




Just a quick thumbsuck...

The only "significant" HF users these days a
Shortwave broadcasting - except for being HF, their equipment has nothing in
common with ham rigs.
Military - "Black box" rigs with a minimum of knobs&buttons - most also
feature secure spread spectrum - so not much commonality with Ham equipment
here either
Then there's Hams - most of us want the maximum possible bells, whistles,
knobs and buttons. Hi tech features with everything" user
adjustable/selectable.

Maritime and Aviation users are moving / have already moved to satellite for
"longer than VHF range" comms.
Other commercial HF users are very few and far between.

So it really is quite amazing that we get the rigs we do.

My experience of "professional" 2-way radio users: I'm a member of the
Police Reserve here in South Africa (quite similar to military reserves).Not
a single one of them (30-40 people) has a clear understanding of the concept
of frequency. All they (need to) know is how to select channel number and
adjust the volume - their radios only have those 2 knobs. They also know not
to start talking before the beeps have stopped. That is the sum total of
their "technical" radio knowlege. (No wait! - Some of them also know how to
swap a HT battery pack.) Everything else: channel programming, CTCSS,
repeater offset, etc. (internal controls) is done by the techies at the
provincial headquarters.

73
Roger ZR3RC

Len Anderson gets it right. Roy gets it right. Several others show that
they understand. He is an anonymous provocateur who has nothing but free
time and spends it on causing foam.

Can not give any credence to someone who does not give their real name.
Mac N8TT

--
J. Mc Laughlin; Michigan U.S.A.
Home:

wrote in message
oups.com...
snip

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! :-)

snip

From: "Michael A. Terrell" on Thurs,May 12 2005 10:16 am

wrote:

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

Way to go! :-)

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

Tsk, he's a poseur, an imitator, a wannabe who needs a
"rep." :-)


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.

A problem in discussing things in diverse groups is
that the vast majority does NOT have such experience.

[there's a short pause while a few regulars become
overheated with indignation... :-) ]

The vast majority get their "experience" from READING
about it - AFTER all the development fuss and fury has
been done. If the writers and editors are good at words,
they create the fantasy that the reader has been there
"too." [there's a whole lot of 20-20 hindsight going
on with those readers]

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.

You said it, brother! :-) The PR splashes and articles
in QST just do NOT go into days, weeks, months, week-
ends, deferred days off, sweaty times on the bench
with "stubborn" things (finding out little annoying
things one might have forgotten to include) or finding
that a component is NOT in tolerance, "fix" days in
having to work around a problem caused by someone ELSE
not doing their job quite correctly and being stuck
with finding the cure. Neither does it include some
total fascination in seeing a creation come to LIFE,
bit by bit and working AS designed, the pride in one's
self for having done so (a quite kind, most
satisfactory, adding one more mark on self-confidence).
It is a satisfaction in having been given an arduous
responsibility and achieving success in meeting it.
Besides, it can be fun! :-)


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.

Actually, in this rather lengthy thread, which has no
real consequence to hobby electronics, there really
wasn't any "need" to "develop a radio specification."
It was a mild rant by an anony-mouse who hasn't been
there in real life and wanted to become some kind of
newsgroup age Keroac a la four decade old "protest"
movement.

"Putting together specifications" has been done for
centuries. It is never easy because too many chafe
at "being told what to do" or expect that every spec
is "perfect, something that must be adhered to at all
costs!" Those kinds of critics haven't had to BE
there, working it out daily, weekly, monthly in a
sea of contentious differing-opinion souls all of
whom consider themselves "right." :-)

I doubt (sincerely) that there's any NEED to have
"a radio" modular. The 'radio" already has been a
system built of modular circuit blocks for decades.
All those blocks have to work together to make the
"radio" work and the "radio" designer's task is to
integrate those modules, make them work together.
[replace "radio" with "any electronics" and the
same thing is true]

What seems to be operative in this thread is that
some look at a PC and its very-mass production
"module" pricing and the "plug-and-play" concept
and sales phrase popularized by Microsoft and think
it applies to all electronics. It doesn't. Those
same imaginerers probably would get totally lost
in trying to figure out how a "simple" plug-in card
on a PC works; all such cards nowadays are little
subsystems, complex, a few being little "computers"
all by themselves (if using a microcontroller).
They only look at the overall card specifications
and THINK they "know all about it." [all they've
done is to memorize some data items about the
product...well after the development tasks' end]

Three decades ago, radio amateurs got a taste of
"radio modules" in the burgeoning use of handheld
transceivers. A single Tx-Rx that could be held
in one hand, complete with antenna. A full radio.
(first done about 1940 for the U.S. Army and
dubbed "the handie-talkie") One "module."
A stand-alone communications tool. "Integration"
of that module didn't need other electronics.

Now with Software-Defined Radios, non-thinkers
want to make those like the millions of cheap
personal computers. Most don't know the basics
of either receiving or transmitting radio signals
or how to handle modulation, yet they want to talk
AS IF they did. :-)

[more righteous indignation by some readers here
as they chafe at the bit wanting to vent against
the statement above...heh heh]

SDR is a terrible problem for the FCC in its task
of regulating technical characteristics of civil
radios...and will be for all other radio regulating
agencies internationally in the immediate future.
A very different problem.

The thing is that SDR is ALREADY HERE and has been
for decades...BEFORE the advent of the micro-
processor and microcontroller. [that's a whole
new area of discussion whose birth might have
been in the transition of the regnerative receiver
with audio amplifier into Ed Armstrong's "super-
heterodyne" right after World War One] That the
modern "radios" use "software" (actually digital
control signals) instead of hard-wired manual
control operation lines doesn't matter to the
"radio's" circuit blocks. Those circuit blocks
still have to be integrated to make the whole
"radio" system. Their theory of operation has
NOT changed.

--
Former professional electron wrangler.

I'm still doing that...but not at regular office
hours...and prefer my own lab/workshop area. :-)

Funny, I think I am a guy looking for sources of info./ideas/exchange which
are worth my time--too bad I am so ignorant I can't recognize 'em when I see
'em--well, according to some...

Warmest regards,
John
--
Marbles can be used in models with excellent results! However, if forced
to keep using all of mine up... I may end up at a disadvantage... I seem
to have misplaced some!!!


wrote in message
ups.com...
| From: "Michael A. Terrell" on Thurs,May 12 2005 10:16 am
|
| wrote:
|
| From: "Michael A. Terrell" on Wed,May 11 2005 9:50 am
|
| Way to go! :-)
|
| As far as "John Smith" goes, he's gone. He is just another
| hopeless
| wanabee who doesn't understand anything about the real world.
|
| Tsk, he's a poseur, an imitator, a wannabe who needs a
| "rep." :-)
|
|
| 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.
|
| A problem in discussing things in diverse groups is
| that the vast majority does NOT have such experience.
|
| [there's a short pause while a few regulars become
| overheated with indignation... :-) ]
|
| The vast majority get their "experience" from READING
| about it - AFTER all the development fuss and fury has
| been done. If the writers and editors are good at words,
| they create the fantasy that the reader has been there
| "too." [there's a whole lot of 20-20 hindsight going
| on with those readers]
|
| 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.
|
| You said it, brother! :-) The PR splashes and articles
| in QST just do NOT go into days, weeks, months, week-
| ends, deferred days off, sweaty times on the bench
| with "stubborn" things (finding out little annoying
| things one might have forgotten to include) or finding
| that a component is NOT in tolerance, "fix" days in
| having to work around a problem caused by someone ELSE
| not doing their job quite correctly and being stuck
| with finding the cure. Neither does it include some
| total fascination in seeing a creation come to LIFE,
| bit by bit and working AS designed, the pride in one's
| self for having done so (a quite kind, most
| satisfactory, adding one more mark on self-confidence).
| It is a satisfaction in having been given an arduous
| responsibility and achieving success in meeting it.
| Besides, it can be fun! :-)
|
|
| 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.
|
| Actually, in this rather lengthy thread, which has no
| real consequence to hobby electronics, there really
| wasn't any "need" to "develop a radio specification."
| It was a mild rant by an anony-mouse who hasn't been
| there in real life and wanted to become some kind of
| newsgroup age Keroac a la four decade old "protest"
| movement.
|
| "Putting together specifications" has been done for
| centuries. It is never easy because too many chafe
| at "being told what to do" or expect that every spec
| is "perfect, something that must be adhered to at all
| costs!" Those kinds of critics haven't had to BE
| there, working it out daily, weekly, monthly in a
| sea of contentious differing-opinion souls all of
| whom consider themselves "right." :-)
|
| I doubt (sincerely) that there's any NEED to have
| "a radio" modular. The 'radio" already has been a
| system built of modular circuit blocks for decades.
| All those blocks have to work together to make the
| "radio" work and the "radio" designer's task is to
| integrate those modules, make them work together.
| [replace "radio" with "any electronics" and the
| same thing is true]
|
| What seems to be operative in this thread is that
| some look at a PC and its very-mass production
| "module" pricing and the "plug-and-play" concept
| and sales phrase popularized by Microsoft and think
| it applies to all electronics. It doesn't. Those
| same imaginerers probably would get totally lost
| in trying to figure out how a "simple" plug-in card
| on a PC works; all such cards nowadays are little
| subsystems, complex, a few being little "computers"
| all by themselves (if using a microcontroller).
| They only look at the overall card specifications
| and THINK they "know all about it." [all they've
| done is to memorize some data items about the
| product...well after the development tasks' end]
|
| Three decades ago, radio amateurs got a taste of
| "radio modules" in the burgeoning use of handheld
| transceivers. A single Tx-Rx that could be held
| in one hand, complete with antenna. A full radio.
| (first done about 1940 for the U.S. Army and
| dubbed "the handie-talkie") One "module."
| A stand-alone communications tool. "Integration"
| of that module didn't need other electronics.
|
| Now with Software-Defined Radios, non-thinkers
| want to make those like the millions of cheap
| personal computers. Most don't know the basics
| of either receiving or transmitting radio signals
| or how to handle modulation, yet they want to talk
| AS IF they did. :-)
|
| [more righteous indignation by some readers here
| as they chafe at the bit wanting to vent against
| the statement above...heh heh]
|
| SDR is a terrible problem for the FCC in its task
| of regulating technical characteristics of civil
| radios...and will be for all other radio regulating
| agencies internationally in the immediate future.
| A very different problem.
|
| The thing is that SDR is ALREADY HERE and has been
| for decades...BEFORE the advent of the micro-
| processor and microcontroller. [that's a whole
| new area of discussion whose birth might have
| been in the transition of the regnerative receiver
| with audio amplifier into Ed Armstrong's "super-
| heterodyne" right after World War One] That the
| modern "radios" use "software" (actually digital
| control signals) instead of hard-wired manual
| control operation lines doesn't matter to the
| "radio's" circuit blocks. Those circuit blocks
| still have to be integrated to make the whole
| "radio" system. Their theory of operation has
| NOT changed.
|
| --
| Former professional electron wrangler.
|
| I'm still doing that...but not at regular office
| hours...and prefer my own lab/workshop area. :-)
|
|
|

Speaking of "Fractenna", I have place a letter from him on eBay - -

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...MESE%3AIT&rd=1


He's been carrying on in QRZ forums since AOL dropped usenet groups.
Same old Chip.

Mr. Ewald, if you would be so kind as to keep me informed of the value of
this famous letter.

I also have several that I can only hope will bring in enough need funds to
enable me to buy a new pack of Redman!

"Bill" wrote in message
oups.com...
Speaking of "Fractenna", I have place a letter from him on eBay - -


http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll...MESE%3AIT&rd=1


He's been carrying on in QRZ forums since AOL dropped usenet groups.
Same old Chip.