On Sat, 2010-04-10 at 01:12 -0600, Nate Duehr wrote:
Note how they added MORE features to the latest rig that didn't play
nicely with D-PLUS. Are they stupid?
#1. They currently have a monopoly and know we'll buy even if D-Plus
become incompatible in some way.
#2. They believe their solution
Chris Fowler wrote:
We have US based D-Star reps. Talk to them and ask if ICOM Japan is
stupid.
Last year, I was in a meeting with the head of Icom's D-STAR development
from Japan. I tried to explain to him how DD could be more effectively
marketed in the US (a lower cost unit with an
On 4/9/2010 8:48 AM, Woodrick, Ed wrote:
Nate,
Please get your fact straights before spreading FUD.
FUD means Fear, Uncertainty, and Doubt, none of which I am spreading.
D-PLUS was created before the DVDongle. D-PLUS is NOT REQUIRED for a
D-STAR repeater, or one that is connected to the
Nate WY0X wrote:
Guess what... None of the public safety folks in the big cities care, or
even know, what D-STAR is... Oh, that's that Ham Radio thing if you're
lucky. I hung out at the largest Fire/Medical dispatch center in the Denver
Metro area last night. No one there had even heard of
From: dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com [mailto:dstar_digi...@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Nate Duehr
Sent: Saturday, April 10, 2010 3:13 AM
To: dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Linking vs. Source Routing
On 4/9/2010 8:48 AM, Woodrick, Ed wrote:
Nate,
Please get
...@yahoogroups.com] On
Behalf Of Nate Duehr
Sent: Thursday, April 08, 2010 3:59 PM
To: dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Linking vs. Source Routing
Over here, D-PLUS is virtually a requirement so a private company can sell and
offer DV-Dongle... gateway operators
D-PLUS was created before the DVDongle. D-PLUS is NOT REQUIRED for a D-STAR
repeater, or one that is connected to the Trust Server.
Chronologically dplus appeared before the dongle, but conceptually? The dongle
market certainly appears to drive dplus development since.
Again, DPLUS IS NOT
I can with good conscious, state that without DPLUS, DSTAR would
probably have died. Or at least be at significantly lower levels of
penetration than today. A LOT of people enjoy listening to REF001C and
the nets. A lot of grant money has been spent with the capability to
link repeaters
: [DSTAR_DIGITAL] Re: Linking vs. Source Routing
I can with good conscious, state that without DPLUS, DSTAR would probably
have died. Or at least be at significantly lower levels of penetration than
today. A LOT of people enjoy listening to REF001C and the nets. A lot of
grant money has been
I don't think so, I fully agree with Ed, I have
seen many user´s drop off dstar, due to callsign routing technique not
satisfying their desire to listen in on a qso first before joining in.
Good point. Hams love listening. It's part and
parcel of the hobby, whether people like it or
not.
On Apr 7, 2010, at 5:54 PM, ki4umx wrote:
Hi Nick,
I see several have answered the technical side of your question, so I'll
limit myself to why I WOULD NOT use source routing except in emergencies.
With source routing, you have no idea what is going on at the target
repeater, and you
At 05:59 AM 4/9/2010, you wrote:
This is more a sign of really poor integration of the regular
features vs. the add-on features, than anything. If the two were
aware of each other in any way, a message could be sent back to
the user who is barging in saying the remote system is linked
Hello all!!!
Okay, so I got some great info. To follow up, when I am using our local
repeater, in the middle of a QSO, the repeater will vacillate between linkking
and unlinking. I'm not controlling anything. It really gets my hackles up when
it knocks me out of my QSO and my transmissions is
interpreter...@gmail.com wrote:
If they made the registration process uncomplicated by just typing in
your name, call sign and password, instead of registering with a club,
and putting in the necessary sp
aces, asterisks and #'s, everything would be much simpler and less
confusion for un
At 03:59 PM 4/8/2010, Nate Duehr wrote:
... All the current Icom rigs reset the four callsign fields anytime you
tune to a new memory channel.
A small correction - they don't reset the MY CALL field - that one stays
put until you change it.
...Callsign routing obviously is a fully-workable
--- In dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com, Nate Duehr n...@... wrote:
On 4/7/2010 4:40 PM, Nicholas wrote:
I may be asking a question that has already been answered. What is
the
difference between Linking (UR: KJ4MMCCL) and Source Routing (UR:
/KJ4OXTC)? This is something I have yet to
--- In dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com, Tony Langdon vk3...@... wrote:
At 08:40 AM 4/8/2010, you wrote:
I may be asking a question that has already been answered. What is
the difference between Linking (UR: KJ4MMCCL) and Source Routing
(UR: /KJ4OXTC)? This is something I have yet to figure
--- In dstar_digital@yahoogroups.com, Nicholas ngra...@... wrote:
I may be asking a question that has already been answered. What is the
difference between Linking (UR: KJ4MMCCL) and Source Routing (UR: /KJ4OXTC)?
This is something I have yet to figure out.
Thank you and 73s,
Nick
18 matches
Mail list logo
