D-Star

[vk4tux]

Thanks Eric, A concise response from you as always. Now to change subject I
saw your callsign on a Californian D-Star server log some time back, and it
was evident that you have used the mode. I was big on it a few years back
and I still have all the gear. However my participation on D-Star waned with
my HF interest, and especially the K3 coming along.

My question is; Has Elecraft ever entertained the idea of incorporation of
DV mode in any of their 2m - 70cm gear?
The ambe chip is proprietary codec, but that utilised any manufacturer could
provide a module to provide for the mode?

Adrian ... vk4tux


Most of our moderation comes from posts I make here gently suggesting that
threads end etc.

73,
Eric
Elecraft List Moderator from time to time.
www.elecraft.com
_..._




______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Greg Troxel]

"Adrian" <[hidden email]> writes:

> Thanks Eric, A concise response from you as always. Now to change subject I
> saw your callsign on a Californian D-Star server log some time back, and it
> was evident that you have used the mode. I was big on it a few years back
> and I still have all the gear. However my participation on D-Star waned with
> my HF interest, and especially the K3 coming along.
>
> My question is; Has Elecraft ever entertained the idea of incorporation of
> DV mode in any of their 2m - 70cm gear?
> The ambe chip is proprietary codec, but that utilised any manufacturer could
> provide a module to provide for the mode?

I would hope that Elecraft would not add D-Star support; I think it's
against the spirit of amateur radio, and particularly contrary to the
kit culture, to have an on-air specification that an individual amateur
is precluded from implementing without obtaining a patent license.
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Tim Tucker]

There are quite a few D-STAR repeaters and hot spots on the air that are
non-Icom and required no patent to build.  D-STAR is an evolving technology
and it wouldn't be too far fetched for an enterprising company to build a
radio using similar chipsets and firmware currently being used in the
repeaters and hotspots being built by hams.


> I would hope that Elecraft would not add D-Star support; I think it's
> against the spirit of amateur radio, and particularly contrary to the
> kit culture, to have an on-air specification that an individual amateur
> is precluded from implementing without obtaining a patent license.
> ______________________________________________________________
>


-----------------------------------------
Owner, worldwidedx.com
AE6LX, Amateur Radio
NNN0ITA, Navy MARS
NNN0GAF FOUR, Southern CA Director Assistant for Training, Navy MARS
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Don Wilhelm-4]

I agree fully, despite the article in the May issue of QST which glosses
over the proprietary nature of D-Star.

I am opposed to the use of proprietary protocols in ham radio.  Ham
radio to me is free radio.  I have passed my license requirements, and
should be able to use whatever modulation techniques are authorized by
the FCC.  The thought of paying for a license (even though that payment
may be bundled with a transceiver purchase) is foreign to my views of
ham radio.

Certainly, I buy computers with Windows loaded, but I do not buy Icom
transceivers with D-Star loaded.  That is what is foreign to my view of
ham radio.

Until someone comes up with an open source and free to use substitute
for the AMBE Codec that is owned by Digital Voice Systems, Inc., I will
not be using D-Star.

73,
Don W3FPR

On 4/28/2012 9:17 PM, Greg Troxel wrote:
> I would hope that Elecraft would not add D-Star support; I think it's
> against the spirit of amateur radio, and particularly contrary to the
> kit culture, to have an on-air specification that an individual amateur
> is precluded from implementing without obtaining a patent license.
>
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Matthew Pitts]

Greg,


You don't need to purchase a patent license; all you need to do is order the AMBE chips from DVSI (minimum quantity of 6, price per unit is $20US) and incorporate them into your design. Having said that, I don't forsee Elecraft doing this, as there are other sources of hardware for this, that are likely to be of a similar quality to what Elecraft produces.

Matthew Pitts
N8OHU

>________________________________
> From: Greg Troxel <[hidden email]>
>To: Adrian <[hidden email]>
>Cc: [hidden email]
>Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2012 9:17 PM
>Subject: Re: [Elecraft] D-Star
>
>
>"Adrian" <[hidden email]> writes:
>
>> Thanks Eric, A concise response from you as always. Now to change subject I
>> saw your callsign on a Californian D-Star server log some time back, and it
>> was evident that you have used the mode. I was big on it a few years back
>> and I still have all the gear. However my participation on D-Star waned with
>> my HF interest, and especially the K3 coming along.
>>
>> My question is; Has Elecraft ever entertained the idea of incorporation of
>> DV mode in any of their 2m - 70cm gear?
>> The ambe chip is proprietary codec, but that utilised any manufacturer could
>> provide a module to provide for the mode?
>
>I would hope that Elecraft would not add D-Star support; I think it's
>against the spirit of amateur radio, and particularly contrary to the
>kit culture, to have an on-air specification that an individual amateur
>is precluded from implementing without obtaining a patent license.
>______________________________________________________________
>Elecraft mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
>This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
>

... [show rest of quote]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[w5tvw]

Amen, amen!  Ditto for the Proprietery PACTOR III !!!!  Or anything else
"Proprietary" PERIOD!

This isn't what ham radio is all about!  Can't agree with you more Don!

73,

Sandy W5TVW

-----Original Message-----
From: Don Wilhelm
Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2012 8:42 PM
To: Greg Troxel
Cc: [hidden email]
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] D-Star

I agree fully, despite the article in the May issue of QST which glosses
over the proprietary nature of D-Star.

I am opposed to the use of proprietary protocols in ham radio.  Ham
radio to me is free radio.  I have passed my license requirements, and
should be able to use whatever modulation techniques are authorized by
the FCC.  The thought of paying for a license (even though that payment
may be bundled with a transceiver purchase) is foreign to my views of
ham radio.

Certainly, I buy computers with Windows loaded, but I do not buy Icom
transceivers with D-Star loaded.  That is what is foreign to my view of
ham radio.

Until someone comes up with an open source and free to use substitute
for the AMBE Codec that is owned by Digital Voice Systems, Inc., I will
not be using D-Star.

73,
Don W3FPR

On 4/28/2012 9:17 PM, Greg Troxel wrote:
> I would hope that Elecraft would not add D-Star support; I think it's
> against the spirit of amateur radio, and particularly contrary to the
> kit culture, to have an on-air specification that an individual amateur
> is precluded from implementing without obtaining a patent license.
>
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html


-----
No virus found in this message.
Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2411/4965 - Release Date: 04/28/12

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Gary Gregory]

*There are also many digital signals that require the purchase of the
decode software and I do not support these also.

Downloaded some software just the other day, found out it would cost 29.95
to make it work. So I went to remove it and guess what?....yep, a message
popped up saying sorry to see you go, however, as a special incentive you
can have it for 9.95...Hmmmmm...ya gotta wonder.....

After all, it is only a hobby for the majority of amateur's?

73's
Gary
*
On 29 April 2012 12:13, Sandy <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Amen, amen!  Ditto for the Proprietery PACTOR III !!!!  Or anything else
> "Proprietary" PERIOD!
>
> This isn't what ham radio is all about!  Can't agree with you more Don!
>
> 73,
>
> Sandy W5TVW
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Don Wilhelm
> Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2012 8:42 PM
> To: Greg Troxel
> Cc: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] D-Star
>
> I agree fully, despite the article in the May issue of QST which glosses
> over the proprietary nature of D-Star.
>
> I am opposed to the use of proprietary protocols in ham radio.  Ham
> radio to me is free radio.  I have passed my license requirements, and
> should be able to use whatever modulation techniques are authorized by
> the FCC.  The thought of paying for a license (even though that payment
> may be bundled with a transceiver purchase) is foreign to my views of
> ham radio.
>
> Certainly, I buy computers with Windows loaded, but I do not buy Icom
> transceivers with D-Star loaded.  That is what is foreign to my view of
> ham radio.
>
> Until someone comes up with an open source and free to use substitute
> for the AMBE Codec that is owned by Digital Voice Systems, Inc., I will
> not be using D-Star.
>
> 73,
> Don W3FPR
>
> On 4/28/2012 9:17 PM, Greg Troxel wrote:
> > I would hope that Elecraft would not add D-Star support; I think it's
> > against the spirit of amateur radio, and particularly contrary to the
> > kit culture, to have an on-air specification that an individual amateur
> > is precluded from implementing without obtaining a patent license.
> >
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
> -----
> No virus found in this message.
> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
> Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2411/4965 - Release Date: 04/28/12
>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

... [show rest of quote]

--
Gary
VK4FD - Motorhome Mobile
Elecraft Equipment
K3 #679, KPA-500 #018
Living the dream!!!
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Jim Brown-10]

On 4/28/2012 6:42 PM, Don Wilhelm wrote:
> I am opposed to the use of proprietary protocols in ham radio.

I feel the same way.

73, Jim K9YC
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Matthew Pitts]

Leaving aside the proprietary codec, much of the specification has been implemented as open source software; for those that don't like the codec, there is work progressing on a replacement, which I am following closely. For what it's worth, this is the second time today I've had this debate, and hopefully I'm making sense about it.

Matthew Pitts
N8OHU

>________________________________
> From: Sandy <[hidden email]>
>To: [hidden email]; Greg Troxel <[hidden email]>
>Cc: [hidden email]
>Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2012 10:13 PM
>Subject: Re: [Elecraft] D-Star
>
>Amen, amen!  Ditto for the Proprietery PACTOR III !!!!  Or anything else
>"Proprietary" PERIOD!
>
>This isn't what ham radio is all about!  Can't agree with you more Don!
>
>73,
>
>Sandy W5TVW
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Don Wilhelm
>Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2012 8:42 PM
>To: Greg Troxel
>Cc: [hidden email]
>Subject: Re: [Elecraft] D-Star
>
>I agree fully, despite the article in the May issue of QST which glosses
>over the proprietary nature of D-Star.
>
>I am opposed to the use of proprietary protocols in ham radio.  Ham
>radio to me is free radio.  I have passed my license requirements, and
>should be able to use whatever modulation techniques are authorized by
>the FCC.  The thought of paying for a license (even though that payment
>may be bundled with a transceiver purchase) is foreign to my views of
>ham radio.
>
>Certainly, I buy computers with Windows loaded, but I do not buy Icom
>transceivers with D-Star loaded.  That is what is foreign to my view of
>ham radio.
>
>Until someone comes up with an open source and free to use substitute
>for the AMBE Codec that is owned by Digital Voice Systems, Inc., I will
>not be using D-Star.
>
>73,
>Don W3FPR
>
>On 4/28/2012 9:17 PM, Greg Troxel wrote:
>> I would hope that Elecraft would not add D-Star support; I think it's
>> against the spirit of amateur radio, and particularly contrary to the
>> kit culture, to have an on-air specification that an individual amateur
>> is precluded from implementing without obtaining a patent license.
>>
>______________________________________________________________
>Elecraft mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
>This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
>-----
>No virus found in this message.
>Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2411/4965 - Release Date: 04/28/12
>
>______________________________________________________________
>Elecraft mailing list
>Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
>This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>
>
>

... [show rest of quote]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Don Wilhelm-4]

Gary,

That is "sort-of" OK, but until they offer it at no cost, I an not going
to "buy".  Even a $20 discount for what ought to be free is not
appealing to me.

OK, you did not say it was ham radio software, nor did you say it was
some proprietary codec, and that is OK with me (it does not interfere
with my ham radio operation).  Software authors who want to make a
profit from their work are OK with me - I like to make a profit from my
efforts too, but those who develop ham radio protocols and want to
protect them with patents and copyrights just does not rest well with me.
The spirit of amateur radio is sharing.  You see what I share here on
this reflector and the QRP-L reflector - that is my view of how amateur
radio should be - one ham helping another.  Where I was introduced to
ham radio, that fact was the "glue that binds"  I am deeply indebted to
those hams who helped me along in my beginning years.  Their efforts
helped me with my homebrewing efforts (age = 15), and with my sense of
what ham radio was all about (Google W8GMM for information about this
unique club).  This was in a town in Ohio with only 5000 residents, but
over 20 of them were hams.  Those hams taught me that whatever
information that existed in ham radio circles was something free to
share.  Proprietary code does not mesh with that concept that I learned
very early in my ham career.

73,
Don W3FPR

On 4/28/2012 10:54 PM, Gary Gregory wrote:

> *There are also many digital signals that require the purchase of the
> decode software and I do not support these also.
>
> Downloaded some software just the other day, found out it would cost 29.95
> to make it work. So I went to remove it and guess what?....yep, a message
> popped up saying sorry to see you go, however, as a special incentive you
> can have it for 9.95...Hmmmmm...ya gotta wonder.....
>
> After all, it is only a hobby for the majority of amateur's?
>
> 73's
> Gary
> *
> On 29 April 2012 12:13, Sandy<[hidden email]>  wrote:
>
>> Amen, amen!  Ditto for the Proprietery PACTOR III !!!!  Or anything else
>> "Proprietary" PERIOD!
>>
>> This isn't what ham radio is all about!  Can't agree with you more Don!
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Sandy W5TVW
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Don Wilhelm
>> Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2012 8:42 PM
>> To: Greg Troxel
>> Cc: [hidden email]
>> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] D-Star
>>
>> I agree fully, despite the article in the May issue of QST which glosses
>> over the proprietary nature of D-Star.
>>
>> I am opposed to the use of proprietary protocols in ham radio.  Ham
>> radio to me is free radio.  I have passed my license requirements, and
>> should be able to use whatever modulation techniques are authorized by
>> the FCC.  The thought of paying for a license (even though that payment
>> may be bundled with a transceiver purchase) is foreign to my views of
>> ham radio.
>>
>> Certainly, I buy computers with Windows loaded, but I do not buy Icom
>> transceivers with D-Star loaded.  That is what is foreign to my view of
>> ham radio.
>>
>> Until someone comes up with an open source and free to use substitute
>> for the AMBE Codec that is owned by Digital Voice Systems, Inc., I will
>> not be using D-Star.
>>
>> 73,
>> Don W3FPR
>>
>> On 4/28/2012 9:17 PM, Greg Troxel wrote:
>>> I would hope that Elecraft would not add D-Star support; I think it's
>>> against the spirit of amateur radio, and particularly contrary to the
>>> kit culture, to have an on-air specification that an individual amateur
>>> is precluded from implementing without obtaining a patent license.
>>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>>
>> -----
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2411/4965 - Release Date: 04/28/12
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>
>

... [show rest of quote]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Don Wilhelm-4]

Matthew,

No need for debate - just need for open source software to replace the
D-Star proprietary stuff.

When that open source software is available, I will strongly consider
it.  There is a lot of function (particularly for ECOMM) that is useful.
In the meantime, I stand by my position that proprietary codecs (or
software or anything) do not have a proper place in ham radio.  I guess
this comes from my mental stance that the airways are free within the
limits of our license privileges - I was a ham back in the mid-1950's,
when things were not as complex - the big decision was AM or SSB at that
time.

73,
Don W3FPR

On 4/28/2012 11:07 PM, Matthew Pitts wrote:

> Leaving aside the proprietary codec, much of the specification has been implemented as open source software; for those that don't like the codec, there is work progressing on a replacement, which I am following closely. For what it's worth, this is the second time today I've had this debate, and hopefully I'm making sense about it.
>
> Matthew Pitts
> N8OHU
>
>
>
>
>> ________________________________
>> From: Sandy<[hidden email]>
>> To: [hidden email]; Greg Troxel<[hidden email]>
>> Cc: [hidden email]
>> Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2012 10:13 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] D-Star
>>
>> Amen, amen!  Ditto for the Proprietery PACTOR III !!!!  Or anything else
>> "Proprietary" PERIOD!
>>
>> This isn't what ham radio is all about!  Can't agree with you more Don!
>>
>> 73,
>>
>> Sandy W5TVW
>>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Don Wilhelm
>> Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2012 8:42 PM
>> To: Greg Troxel
>> Cc: [hidden email]
>> Subject: Re: [Elecraft] D-Star
>>
>> I agree fully, despite the article in the May issue of QST which glosses
>> over the proprietary nature of D-Star.
>>
>> I am opposed to the use of proprietary protocols in ham radio.  Ham
>> radio to me is free radio.  I have passed my license requirements, and
>> should be able to use whatever modulation techniques are authorized by
>> the FCC.  The thought of paying for a license (even though that payment
>> may be bundled with a transceiver purchase) is foreign to my views of
>> ham radio.
>>
>> Certainly, I buy computers with Windows loaded, but I do not buy Icom
>> transceivers with D-Star loaded.  That is what is foreign to my view of
>> ham radio.
>>
>> Until someone comes up with an open source and free to use substitute
>> for the AMBE Codec that is owned by Digital Voice Systems, Inc., I will
>> not be using D-Star.
>>
>> 73,
>> Don W3FPR
>>
>> On 4/28/2012 9:17 PM, Greg Troxel wrote:
>>> I would hope that Elecraft would not add D-Star support; I think it's
>>> against the spirit of amateur radio, and particularly contrary to the
>>> kit culture, to have an on-air specification that an individual amateur
>>> is precluded from implementing without obtaining a patent license.
>>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>>
>> -----
>> No virus found in this message.
>> Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
>> Version: 2012.0.1913 / Virus Database: 2411/4965 - Release Date: 04/28/12
>>
>> ______________________________________________________________
>> Elecraft mailing list
>> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
>> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>>
>> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>>
>>
>>
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html
>

... [show rest of quote]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[N8MSA]

Don -

I am not suggesting that you include D-Star in your products, and I am not going to change your mind, but I tend to disagree with the concern about D-Star over the proprietary nature of ABME...

Not to split hairs, but the "mode" of D-Star is Gaussian minimum shift keying, a form of frequency shift keying. The D-Star implementation of GMSK is an "open" standard, and has been implemented at the hobbyist level.

Which brings us to ABME, a proprietary "code-book" protocol (codec). I struggle with the lack of a published, unfettered standard as many do, but...I wonder how large of a practical impact this on me. I think about the other things that I can't make myself but leverage in my station, such as DSP controllers containing proprietary intellectual property and "microprocessor-based" transceivers (e.g. K3) from which I can not, to the best of knowledge, obtain and reuse the code.

I think that one of the things that distinguishes "open" from proprietary is that I could, if I was so inclined, attempt to implement AMBE in software if ABME was "open". I am not so inclined, no more than I am inclined to "hack" my K3 or replace the DSP in one of my "other" radios with a custom FPGA. If the test for ABME is the ability of an individual or organization to implement it at-will and without royalty, then I would have to admit it fails...but...with all of the proprietary IP and non-reproducible components in my "amateur" systems, and knowing of the existence of a number of "modes" (protocols) that are implemented by one seriously-flawed PC application (that I can't decode by ear), I guess I just have a hard time seeing the big difference.

In the end, I think D-Star is fun and probably less of threat to the long-term health of amateur radio than gentrification and apathy, but that's just my opinion...

73,


Mike Alexander N8MSA

[hidden email]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Don Wilhelm" <[hidden email]>
To: "Greg Troxel" <[hidden email]>
Cc: [hidden email]
Sent: Saturday, April 28, 2012 9:42:29 PM
Subject: Re: [Elecraft] D-Star

I agree fully, despite the article in the May issue of QST which glosses
over the proprietary nature of D-Star.

I am opposed to the use of proprietary protocols in ham radio. Ham
radio to me is free radio. I have passed my license requirements, and
should be able to use whatever modulation techniques are authorized by
the FCC. The thought of paying for a license (even though that payment
may be bundled with a transceiver purchase) is foreign to my views of
ham radio.

Certainly, I buy computers with Windows loaded, but I do not buy Icom
transceivers with D-Star loaded. That is what is foreign to my view of
ham radio.

Until someone comes up with an open source and free to use substitute
for the AMBE Codec that is owned by Digital Voice Systems, Inc., I will
not be using D-Star.

73,
Don W3FPR

On 4/28/2012 9:17 PM, Greg Troxel wrote:
> I would hope that Elecraft would not add D-Star support; I think it's
> against the spirit of amateur radio, and particularly contrary to the
> kit culture, to have an on-air specification that an individual amateur
> is precluded from implementing without obtaining a patent license.
>
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft 
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm 
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net 
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html 
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[vk4tux]

Don,  I see the argument against proprietary codec etc, but the $20 actually
buy's you the ambe chip ready to added to your circuit.

If a company came up with a secret battery that would outlast any other by a
factor of two, does that mean you should not place  it in your KX3 because
it has secrets? In any case there are people (a VK5 also) working on an open
source codec for ham use.

I lost interest in the mode here over the years, but it is very effective
for international communicational in mobile use and the repeater/reflector
internet linked network etc. Eric's call came up on Reflector 14C connection
log, linked to his local d-star repeater.

i.e: WA6HHQ (10.195.142.80) registered on K6MDD last heard on K6BJ B

 10.195.142.80 is the calls inside ip address that makes the routing system
Work .

I use to write Linux scripts for D-Star CentOS 5 gateways a few years ago,
so I really did lose interest compared to those days.
I am not sure if Elecraft are looking at selling dedicated 2m/70cm
transceivers in the future in any case.

Adrian ... vk4tux

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Eric Swartz - WA6HHQ]

We're exceeding the OT posting volume limit on this one. (Over ten posts in about 2 hrs, wow..)

In the interest of reducing email list overload for those not interested in this topic, let's end the thread for now. In general ham radio policy topics are best debated on other lists and forums.

Oh, and by the way, we do not have plans to add D-Star capability to the K3 or KX3 any time soon.

73,
Eric
Elecraft List Modulator
www.elecraft.com
_..._



On Apr 28, 2012, at 8:40 PM, [hidden email] wrote:

> Don -
>
> I am not suggesting that you include D-Star in your products, and I am not going to change your mind, but I tend to disagree with the concern about D-Star over the proprietary nature of ABME...
>
> Not to split hairs, but the "mode" of D-Star is Gaussian minimum shift keying, a form of frequency shift keying. The D-Star implementation of GMSK is an "open" standard, and has been implemented at the hobbyist level.
______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

[Don Wilhelm-5]

Mike,

Please disassociate my posts from official Elecraft.  While I do
contract repair work on the legacy products (K1, KX1, K2, etc,)  for
Elecraft, I do not represent Elecraft in any statements that I make here
on the reflector.  What I suggest is my own independent offering.

73,
Don W3FPR.

On 4/28/2012 11:40 PM, [hidden email] wrote:

> Don -
>
> I am not suggesting that you include D-Star in your products, and I am
> not going to change your mind, but I tend to disagree with the concern
> about D-Star over the proprietary nature of ABME...
>
> Not to split hairs, but the "mode" of D-Star is Gaussian minimum shift
> keying, a form of frequency shift keying. The D-Star implementation of
> GMSK is an "open" standard, and has been implemented at the hobbyist
> level.
>
> Which brings us to ABME, a proprietary "code-book" protocol (codec). I
> struggle with the lack of a published, unfettered standard as many do,
> but...I wonder how large of a practical impact this on me. I think
> about the other things that I can't make myself but leverage in my
> station, such as DSP controllers containing proprietary intellectual
> property and "microprocessor-based" transceivers (e.g. K3) from which
> I can not, to the best of knowledge, obtain and reuse the code.
>
> I think that one of the things that distinguishes "open" from
> proprietary is that I could, if I was so inclined, attempt to
> implement AMBE in software if ABME was "open". I am not so inclined,
> no more than I am inclined to "hack" my K3 or replace the DSP in one
> of my "other" radios with a custom FPGA. If the test for ABME is the
> ability of an individual or organization to implement it at-will and
> without royalty, then I would have to admit it fails...but...with all
> of the proprietary IP and non-reproducible components in my "amateur"
> systems, and knowing of the existence of a number of "modes"
> (protocols) that are implemented by one seriously-flawed PC
> application (that I can't decode by ear), I guess I just have a hard
> time seeing the big difference.
>
> In the end, I think D-Star is fun and probably less of threat to the
> long-term health of amateur radio than gentrification and apathy, but
> that's just my opinion...
>
> 73,
>
> Mike Alexander N8MSA
>
> [hidden email]
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From: *"Don Wilhelm" <[hidden email]>
> *To: *"Greg Troxel" <[hidden email]>
> *Cc: *[hidden email]
> *Sent: *Saturday, April 28, 2012 9:42:29 PM
> *Subject: *Re: [Elecraft] D-Star
>
> I agree fully, despite the article in the May issue of QST which glosses
> over the proprietary nature of D-Star.
>
> I am opposed to the use of proprietary protocols in ham radio.  Ham
> radio to me is free radio.  I have passed my license requirements, and
> should be able to use whatever modulation techniques are authorized by
> the FCC.  The thought of paying for a license (even though that payment
> may be bundled with a transceiver purchase) is foreign to my views of
> ham radio.
>
> Certainly, I buy computers with Windows loaded, but I do not buy Icom
> transceivers with D-Star loaded.  That is what is foreign to my view of
> ham radio.
>
> Until someone comes up with an open source and free to use substitute
> for the AMBE Codec that is owned by Digital Voice Systems, Inc., I will
> not be using D-Star.
>
> 73,
> Don W3FPR
>
> On 4/28/2012 9:17 PM, Greg Troxel wrote:
> > I would hope that Elecraft would not add D-Star support; I think it's
> > against the spirit of amateur radio, and particularly contrary to the
> > kit culture, to have an on-air specification that an individual amateur
> > is precluded from implementing without obtaining a patent license.
> >
> ______________________________________________________________
> Elecraft mailing list
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
> Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> Post: mailto:[hidden email]
>
> This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html

... [show rest of quote]

______________________________________________________________
Elecraft mailing list
Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/elecraft
Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
Post: mailto:[hidden email]

This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
Please help support this email list: http://www.qsl.net/donate.html