John Smith wrote:
gb:

Well, we certainly need to examine the "bottle neck" and remove it... before
we are doomed...

If we can't institute this "radical" idea here, we need to look at Canada,
Mexico, So. America, China, India, etc...

When there are as many functional radios (or "cards") hitting the dumpster
as there are functional computers and related equip. (replaced with
upgrades) we will know the right idea has prevailed and radio has come
home...

I hope you are kidding, John. That is the absolutely worst part of the
PC paradigm. Thousands of perfectly good electronics thrown out, often
made obsolete due to software that is bloated and poorly written (mostly
OS software. At least old radios are still useable

I would think there must be some EXCELLENT argument/reasoning serving as a
road block, or else, others are simply going to pass us by...

The PC paradigm is a poor one, and not to be emulated. PC's will
finally be mature when we don't have to replace them on almost a yearly
basis. At that point, software writers will be able to write good software.

- Mike KB3EIA -

To make a positive posting about why the "board" receiver doesn't exist.
.. . First, I consider my PC. While my very first PC had a bunch of
cards, my current one has none except the RAM. The video adapter,
Ethernet capability, sound system, modem, serial, parallel, and USB
ports are all on a single board, built in.

Why? Simple -- it's cheaper.

I worked at Tektronix for many years. During that time, Tek made both
portable scopes and laboratory scopes, the latter having a mainframe and
plug in modules. For a given configuration with the same features, the
lab scope was always considerably more expensive than the equivalent
portable. Why? Well, the lab scope was always overdesigned for any
particular job. The bandwidth of the interface had to handle the highest
frequency plugin. The power supplies had to handle the highest current
plugins, in any combination -- enough current at 5 volts for a digital
analyzer plugin, enough higher supply voltage current for a spectrum
analyzer plugin, and so forth. There had to be enough connector pins and
supporting circuitry to handle all possible controls on all possible
plugins. No single configuration ever used more than a fraction of the
built-in mainframe capability. While the portable scope's stages could
have optimal gain, in the lab scopes, the signals always had to be
normalized to the levels specified for the interface. This often
required an extra stage or two for each of the signals being passed
(vertical, Z axis, horizontal, and many controls). Power supplies had to
be decoupled in each plugin at the interface. And finally, good quality,
reliable connectors are much more difficult to find, much more expensive
to buy than you'd think -- and even so, they can easily be the least
reliable components in the system.

Then there's the problem of trying to predict what would be developed in
the future when you design the mainframe, so you can build in the
necessary interface circuitry. And every new plugin (I've designed them)
has to be compatible with every tweak and trick used by all plugins in
the past which it might be used with.

The fact is that hams, for sure, wouldn't pay all the extra money a well
designed plug in system would cost. Of course, I might be wrong --
anyone who thinks so (one particular person comes to mind) should get
busy designing and developing one. Perhaps there's a fortune to be made.
Certainly there's a market for a much simpler plug in system with much
less versatility than the oscilloscope system I described, as a few
manufacturers have shown. The question is, how far can this be taken
before the market dries up due to the increased cost?

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

The fact is that hams, for sure, wouldn't pay all the extra money a well
designed plug in system would cost. Of course, I might be wrong --
anyone who thinks so (one particular person comes to mind) should get busy
designing and developing one. Perhaps there's a fortune to be made.
Certainly there's a market for a much simpler plug in system with much
less versatility than the oscilloscope system I described, as a few
manufacturers have shown. The question is, how far can this be taken
before the market dries up due to the increased cost?

Roy Lewallen, W7EL
=========================================
Would a relatively 'low cost ' plug in card system perhaps be possible by
using standard PCI (computer) or similar card connections for the 'non RF'
connections ,with standard 50 Ohms miniature connectors for all RF
connections.
It would mean that all RF card modules would have a standard RF in- and
output connector using 'miniature coax'.
It would of course mean that all the card modules involving RF would have a
universal 50 Ohms in- and output impedance.
The latter is already promoted by looking at designs in the book
'Experimental Methods in RF Design'

The above referred type of PCI card connections (or any other agreed card
standard )could then be standardised with specific 'edge connections' used
for 'ground' , +5V , -5V , +12 to15 V ,-12 to 15 V , etc

The above would facilitate home brewing and make it possible to combine home
brewed modules with specialised commercial modules. It also would enable
testing modules with standardised (impedance wise) test equipment.
Ready made or blank (single or double sided) PCBs would have identical 'card
fingers' also those supplied as part of a complete kit.

I feel that the amateur radio community would very much benefit of such a
standardised card system.

Although the amateur radio market place is relatively small , with modules
physically standardised , there would be an opportunity for a modest
'cottage industry' .

Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH

Exactly my point....

We break into two groups of thought here...

Halt at this point, and lay all plans on that halting (and, if ALL the
others don't agree--be bypassed anyway)...

Or, stay with the pack, realizing if that day ever comes (technology ceases
to innovate/obsolete)--we will regret it...

Progress, obsolete equip., is the most desirable thing I can imagine! It is
a given, not all will agree... Indeed, at 52 years of age, my place in the
"scope of the world" is becomming smaller--it only gets worse from now on--I
am not ready to quit and attempt to force others to that "quitting" with
me...

When the "Dick Tracy Wrist Radio" is finally designed and
implemented--perhaps there will be a "death of homebrewers" (I myself am NOT
much of a 'watchbuilder')--but until then we can have fun!

Warmest regards,
John
--
When Viagra fails to work--you are DOOMED!!!

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
| John Smith wrote:
| gb:
|
| Well, we certainly need to examine the "bottle neck" and remove it...
before
| we are doomed...
|
| If we can't institute this "radical" idea here, we need to look at
Canada,
| Mexico, So. America, China, India, etc...
|
| When there are as many functional radios (or "cards") hitting the
dumpster
| as there are functional computers and related equip. (replaced with
| upgrades) we will know the right idea has prevailed and radio has come
| home...
|
| I hope you are kidding, John. That is the absolutely worst part of the
| PC paradigm. Thousands of perfectly good electronics thrown out, often
| made obsolete due to software that is bloated and poorly written (mostly
| OS software. At least old radios are still useable
|
| I would think there must be some EXCELLENT argument/reasoning serving as
a
| road block, or else, others are simply going to pass us by...
|
| The PC paradigm is a poor one, and not to be emulated. PC's will
| finally be mature when we don't have to replace them on almost a yearly
| basis. At that point, software writers will be able to write good
software.
|
| - Mike KB3EIA -

From: "John Smith" on Sun,May 8 2005 1:39 pm

Exactly my point....

We break into two groups of thought here...

...which seems to be YOUR whole point... :-)

Halt at this point, and lay all plans on that halting (and, if ALL the

others don't agree--be bypassed anyway)...

Nihilism. Tsk, tsk...

Or, stay with the pack, realizing if that day ever comes (technology
ceases
to innovate/obsolete)--we will regret it...

What "pack?" What "regrets?" What "ceasing?!?"

Progress, obsolete equip., is the most desirable thing I can imagine!
It is
a given, not all will agree... Indeed, at 52 years of age, my place
in the
"scope of the world" is becomming smaller--it only gets worse from now
on--I
am not ready to quit and attempt to force others to that "quitting"
with
me...

Tsk. Then your card doesn't seem to be plugged in to
the right slot. I have 20 years on you and began in
HF radio communications 52 years ago. What you have to
understand is that EVERYTHING can be made "obsolete"
in the marketplace...HF is NOT used nearly as much for
communications now as back a half century ago. So, you
are "suddenly realizing" your "place in the world" is
getting smaller? Pass me your TS card and I'll punch it.

When the "Dick Tracy Wrist Radio" is finally designed and
implemented--perhaps there will be a "death of homebrewers" (I myself
am NOT
much of a 'watchbuilder')--but until then we can have fun!

I'm wearing one right now. Made by La Crosse. Cost all
of $30 with shipping. "Tunes in" every night to WWVB
and sets itself to the correct time from a kilomile away,
even adjusts for Daylight Savings time. shrug

I'm not sure what everyone is talking about in this thread
but, like Roy and a few others, I've seen some innovative
(and sometimes inventive) work in the many and various
disciplines of "radio" and electronics in the past half
century.

You want "modularity" a la a PC? WHY?!? Because it is
"familiar?" Because it is "cheap?" Here's a clue: This
newsgroup is NOT a "production design and marketing
newsgroup." It isn't a political science discussion
place to whine and moan over some middle-aged anguish
angst attack.

MODULARITY has been going ON in electronics ALL OVER
since the designers stopped trying to use transistors as
if they were vacuum tubes. I have a nicely working Icom
R-70. It is VERY modular, built NOTHING like what a PC
is, NOR SHOULD IT BE. A cast frame and cover that has
a rectangular box form...for convenience on a desk ...but
everything inside is MODULAR, grouped to take different
boards for different models, different functions. Those
MODULES are mostly soldered together, those MODULES
"sitting" in unlikely positions within that box. I have
another receiver, a National NC-57, all tubes, all boat-
anchor, purchased in 1948 with my own money (about $95)
and it works, to be polite, like BADLY in comparison.

Icom has done the MODULAR thing, so has Yaesu, and
Kenwood, and Collins Radio, and even Heathkit. All did
it DIFFERENTLY than any IBM-clone PC. I think ALL the
"radio" makers have done things differently AND done
the MODULARLY...even those that had only ONE module.

On the other hand, I'm typing away at a "slow" PC which
has a processor chugging away at 2.4 GIGAHertz with
memory access rates up in the 100 MEGAHertz range. Now,
from what I've learned and experienced, such frequencies
ARE RADIO. With newer PCs the memory access rates go
above 200 MHz...and the generated RFI is LESS than my
first "powerful" PC with a 20 MHz clock. Why? Better
IC transistor junctions taking LESS operating power.
MUCH LESS. Less power in those state transitions, ergo
less radiated stray RF. Three thousand cheers for that!
I'm looking at an LCD flat screen monitor which is far
better to watch than the old CRT "monitor" and has much
less RFI than that CRT.

I passed 52 some time ago, had maybe 15 minutes of
middle-age angst/worry/regret/etc., shrugged my
shoulders and carried on. There's way TOO MUCH delight
and wonder of all the new things coming out, the
wonderful new (some marvelous improvements on the old)
components, fantastic circuit and system simulation for
"breadboard" trials, all sorts of SOC (systems on a
chip) by mail-order from dozens of vendors. It's a
marvelous fairyland chock full of goodies to use in
all kinds of hobby construction in new and different
ways. Why sit around and contemplate radio navels
and make noises of badness or arouse controversy to
get your anonymous name "known" in a newsgroup?

A very long time ago I learned a truism: Electrons,
fields, and waves don't give a @#$%!!! what humans
think/feel/emote-about. They work by THEIR laws,
NOT by some emotional advertising copy or glossy
looking shelf items nor by the "reviews" in hobby
publications nor by all the cussing at them by
builders who don't know what they should be doing.

Having said that, I'm going to continue putting
together an EPROM burner so that I can complete a
MODULAR SW BC receiver that is single-conversion
with a 21.4 MHz crystal-filtered IF and has a PLL
for the LO. "Auto-bandswitching" just for those
SW BC bands yet the LO tuning range is continuous.
It's in a little BOX made of double-sided PCB
stock, 4" x 8" x 8" in size. Not one microprocessor
in it...done that way on purpose. Could have been
done a decade ago with nearly the same parts.

There's PROGRESS all over the place. If one keeps
one's eyes open. shrug

Yes, the young deserve a better future--one only has to hear the past to be
reminded of that...

Cheaper is better? Yes and no. If it means a superior product and more
affordable and provides the means of putting more radios into more
hands--yes, quite an improvement I would say...

"Planned obsolescence", well, that is one way to look at it--the car
replacing the horse and buggy is another....

Or, you mean we have the technology right now to build and market the
processor we will be using in 10 years? 5 years? 3 years? I think
not--this world is changing much faster than just a decade ago, before this
year has ended--faster yet....

Somehow, the point is being missed, providing such a platform "empowers"
many more minds to contribute... that is really what the IBM clone and
standard case/power supply did--otherwise, there was/is the Mac... ten
years ago I used a 486-100 Mhz, the Pentiums were still pretty new and I had
not upgraded yet, today a 3+ Ghz machine--I think you give "them" far too
much credit if you think that was "planned obsolescence", however, the
faster machine was indeed planned...

If your argument is that I can open the case of my transceiver and start
hacking away--well, I guess I could--but, much better if it were designed so
that the changes were not permanent, could be revoked, or could be changed
again, and back, and quickly...

But, I do keep getting a clearer and clearer answer to why there has been no
progress...

How many here are younger than I? Younger than 40? Younger than 30?
Younger than 20? How many here ask "Why not?" as opposed to "Why?"
Etc...

You know, such an idea is NOT revolutionary, did you notice I really mocked
"innovation" in the first reference?... it isn't innovation really, it is
leaving the stone age after watching others drive by in cars, for years!

This article, over a year old even makes note of similar views...
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/05/17/1/?nc=1

What do the younger guys here think? Or, has he already spoken?

Regards,
John


--
When Viagra fails to work--you are DOOMED!!!

wrote in message
oups.com...
| From: "John Smith" on Sun,May 8 2005 1:39 pm
|
| Exactly my point....
|
| We break into two groups of thought here...
|
| ...which seems to be YOUR whole point... :-)
|
| Halt at this point, and lay all plans on that halting (and, if ALL the
|
| others don't agree--be bypassed anyway)...
|
| Nihilism. Tsk, tsk...
|
| Or, stay with the pack, realizing if that day ever comes (technology
| ceases
| to innovate/obsolete)--we will regret it...
|
| What "pack?" What "regrets?" What "ceasing?!?"
|
| Progress, obsolete equip., is the most desirable thing I can imagine!
| It is
| a given, not all will agree... Indeed, at 52 years of age, my place
| in the
| "scope of the world" is becomming smaller--it only gets worse from now
| on--I
| am not ready to quit and attempt to force others to that "quitting"
| with
| me...
|
| Tsk. Then your card doesn't seem to be plugged in to
| the right slot. I have 20 years on you and began in
| HF radio communications 52 years ago. What you have to
| understand is that EVERYTHING can be made "obsolete"
| in the marketplace...HF is NOT used nearly as much for
| communications now as back a half century ago. So, you
| are "suddenly realizing" your "place in the world" is
| getting smaller? Pass me your TS card and I'll punch it.
|
| When the "Dick Tracy Wrist Radio" is finally designed and
| implemented--perhaps there will be a "death of homebrewers" (I myself
| am NOT
| much of a 'watchbuilder')--but until then we can have fun!
|
| I'm wearing one right now. Made by La Crosse. Cost all
| of $30 with shipping. "Tunes in" every night to WWVB
| and sets itself to the correct time from a kilomile away,
| even adjusts for Daylight Savings time. shrug
|
| I'm not sure what everyone is talking about in this thread
| but, like Roy and a few others, I've seen some innovative
| (and sometimes inventive) work in the many and various
| disciplines of "radio" and electronics in the past half
| century.
|
| You want "modularity" a la a PC? WHY?!? Because it is
| "familiar?" Because it is "cheap?" Here's a clue: This
| newsgroup is NOT a "production design and marketing
| newsgroup." It isn't a political science discussion
| place to whine and moan over some middle-aged anguish
| angst attack.
|
| MODULARITY has been going ON in electronics ALL OVER
| since the designers stopped trying to use transistors as
| if they were vacuum tubes. I have a nicely working Icom
| R-70. It is VERY modular, built NOTHING like what a PC
| is, NOR SHOULD IT BE. A cast frame and cover that has
| a rectangular box form...for convenience on a desk ...but
| everything inside is MODULAR, grouped to take different
| boards for different models, different functions. Those
| MODULES are mostly soldered together, those MODULES
| "sitting" in unlikely positions within that box. I have
| another receiver, a National NC-57, all tubes, all boat-
| anchor, purchased in 1948 with my own money (about $95)
| and it works, to be polite, like BADLY in comparison.
|
| Icom has done the MODULAR thing, so has Yaesu, and
| Kenwood, and Collins Radio, and even Heathkit. All did
| it DIFFERENTLY than any IBM-clone PC. I think ALL the
| "radio" makers have done things differently AND done
| the MODULARLY...even those that had only ONE module.
|
| On the other hand, I'm typing away at a "slow" PC which
| has a processor chugging away at 2.4 GIGAHertz with
| memory access rates up in the 100 MEGAHertz range. Now,
| from what I've learned and experienced, such frequencies
| ARE RADIO. With newer PCs the memory access rates go
| above 200 MHz...and the generated RFI is LESS than my
| first "powerful" PC with a 20 MHz clock. Why? Better
| IC transistor junctions taking LESS operating power.
| MUCH LESS. Less power in those state transitions, ergo
| less radiated stray RF. Three thousand cheers for that!
| I'm looking at an LCD flat screen monitor which is far
| better to watch than the old CRT "monitor" and has much
| less RFI than that CRT.
|
| I passed 52 some time ago, had maybe 15 minutes of
| middle-age angst/worry/regret/etc., shrugged my
| shoulders and carried on. There's way TOO MUCH delight
| and wonder of all the new things coming out, the
| wonderful new (some marvelous improvements on the old)
| components, fantastic circuit and system simulation for
| "breadboard" trials, all sorts of SOC (systems on a
| chip) by mail-order from dozens of vendors. It's a
| marvelous fairyland chock full of goodies to use in
| all kinds of hobby construction in new and different
| ways. Why sit around and contemplate radio navels
| and make noises of badness or arouse controversy to
| get your anonymous name "known" in a newsgroup?
|
| A very long time ago I learned a truism: Electrons,
| fields, and waves don't give a @#$%!!! what humans
| think/feel/emote-about. They work by THEIR laws,
| NOT by some emotional advertising copy or glossy
| looking shelf items nor by the "reviews" in hobby
| publications nor by all the cussing at them by
| builders who don't know what they should be doing.
|
| Having said that, I'm going to continue putting
| together an EPROM burner so that I can complete a
| MODULAR SW BC receiver that is single-conversion
| with a 21.4 MHz crystal-filtered IF and has a PLL
| for the LO. "Auto-bandswitching" just for those
| SW BC bands yet the LO tuning range is continuous.
| It's in a little BOX made of double-sided PCB
| stock, 4" x 8" x 8" in size. Not one microprocessor
| in it...done that way on purpose. Could have been
| done a decade ago with nearly the same parts.
|
| There's PROGRESS all over the place. If one keeps
| one's eyes open. shrug
|
|
|