There are two possible explanations for why we don't see PC-hosted
Pactor 3 running on the bands today, even though its technically
feasible:
1. a PC-based implementation makes little financial sense
2. information sufficiently detailed to implement Pactor 3 has not
been publicly released
Until I checked the price of SCS modems a few days ago, I'd assumed
that #1 was the issue: the number of users interested in dedicating a
$500 PC to Pactor would be low if one could purchase an SCS modem for
$300. But SCS modems cost $1000, so a PC-based implementation would
have some financial appeal.
I suspect that the real explanation is #2.
73,
Dave, AA6YQ
--- In [email protected], John Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> >
> >Wrong I think. With the right operating system, running on the
right/correctly configured computer (hardware) and with the right
software, you can do what Pactor II/III or almost any other mode used
can do.
>
> Really ?
> If this was true we would be running it today.
> And I just don't see it on the bands. Everyone I run into
> running Amtor or Pactor is using a TNC.
>
Need a Digital mode QSO? Connect to Telnet://cluster.dynalias.org
Other areas of interest:
The MixW Reflector : http://groups.yahoo.com/group/themixwgroup/
DigiPol: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Digipol (band plan policy discussion)
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/
<*> Your email settings:
Individual Email | Traditional
<*> To change settings online go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/digitalradio/join
(Yahoo! ID required)
<*> To change settings via email:
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
