wrote:

...
Post, fax or e-mail your response by 1900 UTC, May 15, 2007, to ARRL
Chief Technology Officer Paul Rinaldo, W4RI, 3545 Chain Bridge Rd --
Suite 209, Fairfax, VA 22030; Fax: 703-934-2079.


My goodness, now they attempt to jump into the present millennium!

Well, at least they have a starting point. Strange though, all they
have to do is look where 56K modem technology dropped off when HS came
about and 90% of their work is done. Not to mention just duping the HS
technology.

Ogg Vorbis is an example of sound compression/encoding technology which
matches or exceeds the quality of MP3's and it is NON-proprietary.

Linux or windows is suitable as the OS, but Linux is free ...

What I don't like is the arrl immediately jocking for front position in
the development of the technology. Let the little amateurs who are
capable develop the technology. If you listen up at a VHF and beyond,
you will already see that some didn't wait and such voice packet
communications go on--WITHOUT the arrl.

I believe the CRC32 cyclic redundancy check is still used and is proved
and non-proprietary.

JS
--
http://assemblywizard.tekcities.com

John Smith I wrote:

...

Probably the most important aspect of all, the source code should be
open and download-able right along with the compiled
application--allowing personal "tweaking" by individuals.

Also, it should be easily compilable by some free compiler available for
download on the net. And, should probably use a sound card with line
out or mic outputs. This way anyone can pull a computer out of a
dumpster and run it ...

This would guarantee that rich or poor alike have equal access to the
new developments.

The free borland command line tools is one excellent example of a free
32 bit compiler, and uses the C\C++ language. This would guarantee the
ease of making it available on both windows and linux platforms (as long
as the source is NOT heavily based on win dll's, scripting, dot net,
com, etc.)

JS
--
http://assemblywizard.tekcities.com

On Mar 4, 9:52�am, John Smith I wrote:
John Smith I wrote:

* ...

Probably the most important aspect of all, the source code should be
open and download-able right along with the compiled
application--allowing personal "tweaking" by individuals.

Also, it should be easily compilable by some free compiler available for
download on the net. *And, should probably use a sound card with line
out or mic outputs. *This way anyone can pull a computer out of a
dumpster and run it ...

This would guarantee that rich or poor alike have equal access to the
new developments.

JS, you've overlooked some of the regulatory-political aspects.
This isn't about the ARRL "jockeying for position in leader-
ship" but a potential REGULATION CHANGE of Part 97.

This isn't about "freedom" (or neo-anarchy as you seem to
want) but a very real pumping for MODE CHANGE (going
for higher rates) in REGULATIONS. There's the real
POLITICAL issue of allowing radio amateurs too much
freedom and possibly "using means to obscure the content
of communications" (more or less) as given in ITU radio
regulation S25. The USA is a signatory to the ITU and
takes that seriously. It should.

LIke it or not, the ARRL does have some POLITICAL
clout. It has a DC law firm on retainer plus a lobbyist
business. While we both have expressed misgivings
about the ARRL they still have an effect on Regulation
Changes. The League is a NAME even though it is
small compared to hundreds of other, bigger special-
interest groups in the DC area. That's where the law
of the land is run.

If you want to pump up Linux and Freeware, fine, go
ahead. I can't agree with you despite your longer
experience with software. I can't agree with academic
types who put "freedom" ahead of commercial interests
because they think they are "better" than crass
capitalists. shrug That's just the usual lot of hooey
which is disguised self-defined, self-centered "better-
than-othersism."

One BIG proposal by a Name group that has both
researchable technical smarts and proper Legalese
language is going to do more and has a better chance
of passing the FCC's scrutiny on mode advancement
than any retreaded 60s-style rhetoric. The FCC has
more smarts there than all the "me-firsters" think and
they have a LARGE task in managing ALL civil radio
in the USA. FCC R&Os show that they DO think
about things from their lawful regulation role. It may
not be what YOU like in their decisions but it IS a
decision coupled with all the reasons of that decision.

The ARRL hasn't submitted that proposal yet. That's
why they put that notice out...they are gathering
material to put into a Petition for Consideration. I
will side with the ARRL's effort on improving the
technical side of US amateur radio regulations. It is
a good sign of their (finally) leaving the old 1930s
style of hamming behind. Don't knock it.

73, LA

wrote:

...
technical side of US amateur radio regulations. It is
a good sign of their (finally) leaving the old 1930s
style of hamming behind. Don't knock it.

73, LA


Don't kid yourself Len. They are there and right up front because they
are PROFESSIONAL politicians, they are magicians-extraordinaire, their
sleight of hand will make yer head spin and leave ya a wonderin' how
that happened???

It is all about control ... and like any "arrl product", it ain't worth
havin' if their hand has been involved!

JS
--
http://assemblywizard.tekcities.com

On Mar 4, 12:04�pm, John Smith I wrote:
wrote:

* ...

* *technical side of US amateur radio regulations. *It is
* *a good sign of their (finally) leaving the old 1930s
* *style of hamming behind. *Don't knock it.

* *73, LA

Don't kid yourself Len. *They are there and right up front because they
are PROFESSIONAL politicians, they are magicians-extraordinaire, their
sleight of hand will make yer head spin and leave ya a wonderin' how
that happened???

Sorry, JS, they are good with the usual marketing tricks
and wordsmithing, but I know exactly how they do it.

In order to SURVIVE in the getting-more-competitive with
fewer amateur radio buyers, they MUST keep that big
publishing house going. To do that they have to resort
to actually (gasp!) "walk on the wild side" with the
majority opinions...not the minority of the code-tested
olde-tymers. The ARRL isn't stupid OR despotic.
Signs of tyranical conduct once in a while, though...

It is all about control ... and like any "arrl product", it ain't worth
havin' if their hand has been involved!

Obviously the "control" part has been there for decades.

But on the "product" I disagree with you. However,
everyone's "mileage may vary."

73, LA




JS
--http://assemblywizard.tekcities.com

wrote:

...
Sorry, JS, they are good with the usual marketing tricks
and wordsmithing, but I know exactly how they do it.

...

Well, I think what you are looking at is their "escape" into the
software publishing arena, only they want others to do the hard work
(coding) for 'em, then they steal the stuff and sell it.

But, we'll see, we'll see ...

JS