Kudos for the properly formatted document you've created, your
english teachers would have been proud....
Anyone playing with the idea of use LMDS type "packet" ? Commercially
they use a 1.2 GHz signal at 28 GHz for passing high bandwidth voice and
data. The cost is still ridiculous at this point, but maybe we should
mimic what the commercial engineers are building. At a conference
recently a company was showing a product to use on LMDS systems.
Basically you get a 10Mbps ethernet and 2 POTS lines on this box.
I think LMDS is all ATM cell based, so it would take a little work
getting our Linux boxes to play nice... So what do you think ??
"Karl F. Larsen" wrote:
> Ham Packet Radio is Dead
>
> Karl Larsen K5DI
>
> February 14, 1999
>
> I got started on Packet in 1986 when I and another ham bought
> the Pac-Comm TNC-2 kit. I went through the era of digipeating and
> then the advent of Net-Rom from Software 2000.
>
> We rushed around and put up netrom nodes that were simplex
> single nodes even though the booklet with Net-Rom stated clearly you
> should use 2 TNC and 2 Radios with antenna etc. The nodes worked
> much better than digipeating. They would have been 3 times faster if
> we had done it properly.
>
> At this time there was no Internet. There was a telephone
> based Fido Network which I was part of, but telephone long distance
> rates were terrible! Computers were of the XC PC style with DOS
> version 3.x as the operating system. I had a 300 baud telephone
> modem.
>
> It was a pleasure to have a route to distant towns via Netrom
> nodes and I quit the Fido Net and became a Packet Radio BBS. Put up
> my own nodes and did many things fun to try and get The Wonderful
> Packet Radio BBS Network working. It ran at 1200 baud to my users and
> they were many.
>
> Ten years later the world of communications had changed to a
> point we could not even imagine in 1986. The Fido Network was dead.
> Everyone was getting on the Internet with new 14,000 baud modems and
> downloading all manner of things over the Internet.
>
> We Hams had upgraded part of the ax25 networks to 9600 baud
> which was nice, but what it connected to was not as nice as a new web
> site found on the Internet. We began to talk faster nodes and better
> bbs software and...but it all not worth the effort.
>
> In 1999 a 56,000 baud modem costs $40.00 and the local
> Internet providers are putting in digital modems which allow users to
> achieve about 44,000 baud over the current telephone lines. The
> Internet costs $20.00/mo and in todays income that is cheap.
>
> In 1999 the same ax25 9600 baud path is working but it's
> about 8 years old now. The many users I had on my bbs are all on the
> Internet and not on my bbs. The only bright spot in this picture is
> that the wife complains when the ham ties up the telephone using it
> on the Internet to get dx spots. So the DX Cluster makes sense to
> some people.
>
> But when I talked to AT&T about Internet service they said it
> will be just a year and you can buy your telephone(s) and Internet
> from the TCI cable company who is owned by AT&T. This will free the
> telephone and everyone can have T-1 access to the Internet. Price
> will be about the same as it is now. I now have 2 telephone lines now
> and only need one if the Internet comes in via cable.
>
> This year is the end of Amateur Radio Packet for me. I hate
> to see it go, but it will go. It no longer holds anything for anyone.
> I feel the problems already and it has made me less and less
> interested in packet radio. It has been hard to kill but in me it's
> dead now.
>
> Ham radio repeaters are in deep trouble too. I have a
> cell-phone that costs me 10 cents a minute week days and is free on
> week ends. I can call 911 anytime free. The cell-phone cost under
> $100 and I have a *REAL* antenna on my RV so it works better than
> most current cell systems.
>
> My last Ham Radio VHF/UHF Hand Held cost me $400.00 and it
> works no better than the cell-phone.
>
> So I plan to drop all Packet work as I write this and plan to
> have it all turned off by March 31, 1999. I want to be able to
> dual-boot this computer with win-98 and Linux. I want to be able to
> turn it off at night. In my opinion keeping it on and operating is
> just putting off the event for no good reason. I expect to have zero
> users by 2001 anyway.
>
>
>
> Best wishes
>
> - Karl F. Larsen, [EMAIL PROTECTED] (505) 524-3303 -
-- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Tim Connolly
-- kb8eht@kb8eht.#ncwv.wv.usa.noam Morgantown, WV
-- ICQ# 601237 by request only aka: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- '94 Suzuki GSX750F-CA "Katana"
