Edward H Russell wrote:
It is easy to be enthusiastic about something that doesn't exist.
In Graham Greene's Ministry of Fear there's a lady Nazi spy
who's captured but undismayed, remarking that the British don't
hang women.
The detective who captured her replies, We may hang more women
FlexRadio Systems
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
radio.biz] On Behalf Of Jerry Flanders
Sent: Thursday, September 20, 2007 6:32 PM
To: Jim Lux; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Flexradio
Subject: Re: [Flexradio] FLEX CHALLENGE
Will the express freebies
At 01:15 PM 9/21/2007, Eric Wachsmann wrote:
We haven't committed to doing anything with VS Express versions, BUT we ARE
committing to do everything in our power to utilize free tools available to
everyone. This may include VS Express, but will almost surely extend beyond
that at least for OS
Its even more interesting than that. I can envision multiple software radios
controlled by a joystick or maybe 2 joysticks and audio coming from several
directions depending on the RX that is being used with focus growing and
shrinking as needed, and the appropriate hardware coming online just
This radio has the true potential for if you
can think it you can do it. The multidimensional user interface has
barely been addressed.
Yes Agreed!
That's why the underlying architecture used for the functional
decomposition is so darn important. After all, you actually COULD write
any of
Peter G. Viscarola wrote:
I'm just wondering what the PowerSDR devs are planning... what type of
decomposition have they proposed? Is there a draft of an architecture
document or something that we can read and comment on?
I thought it had been mentioned several times on this list and on
Thanks Frank.
The principle we've articulated often is that comments in the form
of working code are gratefully accepted. All others will be
addressed as circumstances permit.
Can you help me with one thing: How does one provide comments on an
architecture in the form of working code?
Peter G. Viscarola wrote:
I suppose the basic
question I'm asking is how the significant architectural decisions about
PowerSDR (especially PowerSDR V2) are made and if the community gets a
chance to review or provide input. I'm fine with being told No, the
community at large doesn't really
Peter G. Viscarola wrote:
Thanks Frank.
The principle we've articulated often is that comments in the form
of working code are gratefully accepted. All others will be
addressed as circumstances permit.
. I'm fine with being told No, the
community at large
The principle we've articulated often is that comments in the form
of working code are gratefully accepted. All others will be
addressed as circumstances permit.
Language? Are the freebies from Microsoft adequate for PowerSDR now?
Jerry W4UK
At 02:26 PM 9/20/2007, you wrote:
Thus, requesting comments in the form of working code would be
equivalent, in my world, to saying comments on the ARCHITECTURE at not
welcome as it has already been decided, but if you have a proposal of
how some of that architecture might be IMPLEMENTED, feel
I've been following this thread about future SDR development with
deliberately muffled interest. However there is one observation I
can't seem to stifle:
It is easy to be enthusiastic about something that doesn't exist.
73 Ed W2RF
___
It's pretty much the same as in any other F/OSS project with a
majority of the developers being unpaid volunteers. If there is
some aspect of the code that displeases you, you are emphatically
encouraged to provide an alternative. Use the source,...
Again, THAT would be implementation.
At 12:55 PM 9/20/2007, Jerry Flanders wrote:
The principle we've articulated often is that comments in the form
of working code are gratefully accepted. All others will be
addressed as circumstances permit.
Language? Are the freebies from Microsoft adequate for PowerSDR now?
No..
Will the express freebies be adequate for the next version of PowerSDR?
Jerry W4UK
At 07:24 PM 9/20/2007, Jim Lux wrote:
At 12:55 PM 9/20/2007, Jerry Flanders wrote:
The principle we've articulated often is that comments in the form
of working code are gratefully accepted. All others
Peter G. Viscarola wrote:
Again, THAT would be implementation. Not architecture.
http://paulgraham.com/progbot.html
73
Frank
AB2KT
___
FlexRadio mailing list
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://paulgraham.com/progbot.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Non_sequitur
___
FlexRadio mailing list
FlexRadio@flex-radio.biz
http://mail.flex-radio.biz/mailman/listinfo/flexradio_flex-radio.biz
Archive Link:
Peter G. Viscarola wrote:
Can you help me with one thing: How does one provide comments on an
architecture in the form of working code? In my world, working code
would imply an implementation, which would come well after an
architecture.
How do you feel about such concepts as illustrate
Hi all,
Someone once said every single person with two hands and two eyes wants a
different GUI. Seems to me, using vCom one can build any GUI wanted or
use any existing GUI, minimize PowerSDR and get on with (ham) life.
In fact one can argue very strongly PowerSDR should apply basic
cq GUI cq GUI cq GUI...
Hi.do you remember these arts ?
This is a very.very old page with some dreams about
PowerSDR GUI interface.
http://www.cqdx.it/sdr1000/sdr1000box.html
73 Beppe
IK3VIG
At 18.30 19/09/2007, you wrote:
Hi all,
Someone once said every single person with
I agree.
While I am not familiar (yet) with the DXLab suite, I would imagine that
it probably doesn't support the panadaptor, probably the most valuable
feature (to me) in day to day operation.
As you note, however, one size does NOT fit all!
Conceptually, a separate path for the panadaptor
In fact one can argue very strongly PowerSDR should apply basic
software
design principles and completely separate the GUI from the controller
(radio.)
Right. The way I understand it, this is what's been discussed for years
now as PowerSDR V2.0 and is what Bob N4HY was talking about.
tells the story about as well as can be. Each process will live in
its
own virtual space and message passing will be the way to talk to each
other.
Interesting and thanks for the clarification.
This is not at all unreasonable and is very much along the lines of some
of the work that I've
Frank (WA1GFZ),
Why don't post your observations/complaints on the Flex Reflector and debate
them with somebody alot more knowlegable than me. I am user/tester that happens
to love the new Flex 5K. I'm sure that Frank, Robert, Tim and some of the other
experts will be glad to debate you on
On 9/18/07, K3PZ [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Frank (WA1GFZ),
Why don't post your observations/complaints on the Flex Reflector and debate
them with somebody alot more knowlegable than me. I am user/tester that
happens to love the new Flex 5K. I'm sure that Frank, Robert, Tim and some of
the
There are multiple things to discuss here but first we have to make sure
we are talking about apples and apples.
Paul's enthusiasm is for the Flex 5000. Frank's problems are not with
that radio. Frank is using the the Janus/Ozzy combo but again, he is not
having a problem with the radio or
26 matches
Mail list logo
