Nate, D-STAR Development is NOT CLOSED!
The D-STAR air protocol is published. The network that Icom created is proprietary, but there's nothing that says that it is the only network that can be used. Go look at the stuff that Scott and the X-Trust server team has created. I believe that most all of that is supposed to be open source. (At least that's what "Open Source" Scott keeps saying). So if you know about the other products, then I would expect that you know about Scott's "Open Source" projects. There are a number of successful development activities around D-STAR that are using either readily available or reversed engineered information. D-RATS, D*Chat, DSTARMon, DPlus, DSTARUsers Last Heard List, D-STAR TV, DPRS, HotSpots, Satoshi board, and many more are all "D-STAR" development projects. The list of products developed in what you call a closed, proprietary environment is pretty long. If you indeed want to be nit-picky and look at the network between a few little places, then indeed, there are non-documented areas. But PLEASE DO NOT keep saying that D-STAR development is closed. It is not. As well as I can remember, the ID-1 was the first time that Icom published any of their protocols, does that make it more open than FM and SSB? There are many areas in and around D-STAR where development activities can exist, either in fully or minimally document form. Heck, probably one of the most power interfaces in the D-STAR stable is the Ethernet adapter on the ID-1, it's fully documented and capable of millions of applications. From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Nate Duehr Sent: Monday, May 17, 2010 5:01 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Honest questions ..... On 5/17/2010 1:22 PM, Woodrick, Ed wrote: Nope, they aren't readily available for you to read. Did you see that written anywhere in what I said? Did you see me publish a URL to it? That's all I asked. Thank you for confirming that the answer is no, and that D-STAR development is as closed as any other proprietary product out there. You added a lot of other information and ad-hominem attacks again, that had nothing to do with the question being posed, as usual, Ed. They're not even worthy of a reply. Your assumptions that I didn't know about the other products, was wrong, as usual. Nate WY0X
