In article et, robert casey
writes:

Besides, if something is digital, why would you have to try so hard to
make it computer compatible?

Telling "S" from "O" is hard if you don't already
know from looking at other characters what the speed
must be. Something easy for the brain but hard for
computers to do when the sender varies his speed.

It is not "hard" for a semi-modern computer to do. All it means
is that the programmer has to write more source code to perform
a task called "rate adaption."

Lay folk take the very easy approach to visualizing what the
computer does (via its programming) as simple decoding of
groups of binary state combinations. That's common
observation. What isn't so obvious is that, with a clock rate
of 20 MHz or better, the computer [program] can test a time
sequence for relative occurances of On versus Off by periodic
sampling.

Segregation of a single O from a single S in morse code can
be done by comparing the time length of the On. That is
different in morse code for an approximately equal character
bit group time. [dashes are supposed to be longer in duration
than dots] At a dot rate of 1 KHz (faster than 100 WPM
equivalent), the repetitive period is 1000 microseconds. The
computer hardware (under program control) can sample that at
a, say, 10 microsecond period. That allows 100 samples of
each dot or dash which can be stored in temporary computer
memory. [that's more memory than is actually needed but this
is just an example] Already knowing the sample rate (from
the hardware and the time of execution of the iterative routine),
another routine can test each sample in turn and accumulate
the relative length of each On versus a character group's total
time length. That would differentiate dashes from dots.

The difficulty for the programmer is setting up a set of rules to
determine the relative lengths. Such does NOT have to be
precisely 3:1 in ratio of dashes to dots. It can be as coarse as
2:1, which would be called "sloppy" manual sending. :-)

Once there has been a differentiation of dashes versus dots, a
variation of the rate-adaptive routine can be used to differentiate
the longer time between character spaces. Again, the routine's
testing can use a wide range of time intervals. When spaces
between characters are determined, the much-simpler task of
decoding character combinations into ASCII (or equivalent)
character combinations can be done (probably by a look-up
table stored in memory). With that completed, the computer-
handleable characters can be displayed on a screen or sent to
a paper print device.

I've not done the above but am describing what a programmer
acquaintence had already done some years ago using a desktop
computer having a 20 MHz clock rate CPU and very moderate
RAM for temporary program memory. My (then-new) Icom R-70
was lent to him for some on-air real-time testing on amateur as
well as commercial morse code signals (there were very few
non-amateur morse signals heard then). With a simple audio-
to-digital interface (peak detector with quick fall time), it would
"read" every morse signal with a 2:1 dash-dot ratio or better, even
in moderate noise. The first few characters of a string of characters
might be lost until the rate-adaptive routine adjusted itself, but
otherwise was quite acceptible.

You might ask "why" do that at all? Answer: It was someone
else's personal intellectual exercise to accomplish a seemingly
difficult task. Just a fun task for him and of some interest to
others who liked to program. It was a hobby project and it proved
what was set out to prove to the programmer.

That morse decoder wasn't carried to any perfection. It could have
been developed further to be quicker in rate-adaption, to add more
noise-elimination and so forth. There was NO DEMAND for that
commercially, nor was it done for prospective program sales in the
future. [hardware already existed to do all the rate-adpation and
decoding of repetitive teleprinter codings in a single IC a decade or
so ago] Program notes and source code printouts filled a large
loose-leaf notebook and were freely shown. Of particular note was
the flow-diagrams of the various iterative subroutines, much more
readable to me than the C source code (maybe it was Pascal?) of
the executive program. The same executable program would work
fine with modern desktops or portables having 2 GHz clock rates
and 100 MHz rate memory fetch cycles...even to using already-
established routines to determine real-time hardware execution
times necessary to determine word-per-minute equivalent rates.

[portions of this example description were already in this
newsgroup a few years ago, principally in reply to Ed Hare and
some others]

It is less a matter of "adapting morse code to computers" than it
is making the computer adapt to decoding morse. A big question
is WHY BOTHER?

Morsemen, hoping to show they are "superior" to mere machines
as well as modern technology, will insist and insist that their human
abilities (honed to a fine edge) are oh-so-much-better than any (hack,
ptui) computer thingy. They can evidently work miracles using
morse code mode communications, far beyond the best that can be
done by all other radio services and commercial communications.
:-)

"Morse code gets through when all other modes do." - Brian Burke



"Today is the tomorrow you worried about yesterday..." - anon.

Len Anderson wrote:

Morsemen, hoping to show they are "superior" to mere machines
as well as modern technology, will insist and insist that their
human
abilities (honed to a fine edge) are oh-so-much-better than any
(hack,
ptui) computer thingy.

So far, it's true. Do you have a problem with the truth, Lennie?

Oh...wait...That was a rhetorical question...never mind.

They can evidently work miracles using
morse code mode communications, far beyond the best that can be
done by all other radio services and commercial communications.

So far, Lennie, you're the only one saying that.

"Today is the tomorrow you worried about yesterday..." - anon.

"Today is the tomorrow that Lennie's surprised to have made it to
considering how many people he's lied to and ticked off in his life"
~~ Steve Robeson

Steve, K4YZ