At 7/22/2010 07:53 AM, Scott Reed wrote:
Zoom is there. Rubberband and area and right click.
To save you searching the archive, here a couple of the tutorial sites:
<http://radiomobile.pe1mew.nl>http://radiomobile.pe1mew.nl
www.pizon.org/radio-mobile-tutorial/index.html
Thanks for the pointer. That's about half way what I had in mind,
but is more cosmetic. That zoom function takes the underlying
picture at its original resolution and explodes its pixels, But it
loses the "volatile" layers above it, and doesn't necessarily (as far
as I can see) expose the underlying SRTM detail. At least it lets me
redraw the networks above it though.
Fred Goldstein wrote:
Brian,
Please don't misunderstand me. I am very appreciative of the work
done on RadioMobile and the fact that it's free! And, having
worked with RF for a long time, I'm well aware of how complex the
issues are. Which is why searching a Yahoo group doesn't strike me
as an ideal way to learn the program.
Some of what concerns me about RM are my general concerns with most
"free" software, and this is especially true for Linux stuff, where
"free as in speech" is a religious argument that often doesn't
result in this much of a product. The RF core of the RM package is
wonderful. I can just see a lot of ways in which the whole thing
could be even nicer if the UI were updated. Decisions that got the
job done up front may not be ideal in the long term. (You can see
a lot of that in how TCP/IP itself was written.) Commercial
vendors generally work on these issues -- somebody is paid to do
the boring crap -- because it helps them sell.
So if I am making suggestions, it is in the spirit of constructive
criticism, not putting down anyone's efforts. As a user, I can see
ways that it could be better. I am not a coder and don't know how
much work any such changes would be to implement.
But -- as a user -- wouldn't it be nice if it had a zoom function,
for instance, so you could blow up a detail of a
combined-cartestion coverage map or show-networks view without
having to redraw the whole thing? This might be practical if the
computations were done on SRTM points (to make the underlying map)
but then to display it, those results stayed put while you moved
around and rescaled your view of it. Lots of picture-manipulating
programs do this. Heck, I'd pay to have it, though I guess Roger's
employment situation makes it impossible to sell a premium version.
I hate how many Linux coders, when confronted with a problem in the
code, whine, "you have the sources, luser, fix it". Mozilla, at
least, pays rewards for some bugs, and it's constantly improving
(argh, another "important" update this morning!). Commercial
software companies pay for ideas to improve the product. I'm not
whining; I just spend a lot of time with RM (I've been using it for
several years) and just have ideas how it could be even better. As
no doubt do others. ;-) I'm sorry if you think I'm sounding
unappreciative of the work that went in to it.
At 7/22/2010 02:00 AM, Brian Webster wrote:
I'd like to chime in as one who does professional RF engineering
for a living. I have worked with Roger for the last 10 years
helping to improve radio mobile. There are so many features that
the program supports now compared to when I started it just
boggles the mind. That being said, it should be put in to
perspective that commercial software packages for RF engineering
cost from $15,000 to $70,000 dollars and do not perform any better
than Radio Mobile. As a professional RF Engineer who has had to
learn these commercial tools, I can tell you it takes a huge
amount of time to learn any RF propagation software package and
that there are no shortcuts or dummies guides. There is no
substitute for time and persistence in learning any RF software
package. Much of this will be spent in trial an error and reading
the archives and tutorials. There are no shortcuts, mouse over or
quick start guides. If RF design was as easy as an idiot proof
software package, then anyone with a mouse could do it, there
would be no need for expertise in the field. Spend the time to
read the archives in the yahoo group and the tutorials. Impatience
will not speed up anything and whining about a set of
documentation or quick tools tips will not make you and RF design
expert. Just because a person can point and click does not mean
you can generate RF coverage maps. Some knowledge of RF theory
helps so that one may understand the methods and settings within a
program. If you want hand holding, cough up the 35 grand or so to
purchase a commercial software package. I'm sure that is easier
than reading a little bit
.. If I seem sarcastic it is because I
really get annoyed at people who complain about a free
lunch
..This software package is free, quit complaining to the
author about your lack of ambition to read the many manuals
available on line. For those of us who understand the value of
this free product, we dislike those who would say things to
possibly discourage the author who donates his time and effort for
free giving a product that would otherwise cost in the thousands
of dollars
.those who think they are entitled just because they
sit behind a keyboard and can complain, need a reality check. If
you don't like the product that you paid nothing for
simply move
on and be quiet. This was never meant to be a for profit
program
..accept it for what it is and be thankful rather than
complain. Any other options are far worse
Brian
From:
<mailto:[email protected]>[email protected] [
mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Fred Goldstein
Sent: Wednesday, July 21, 2010 3:25 PM
To: WISPA General List
Subject: Re: [WISPA] Ping --- Radio Mobile Hates Me.
At 7/21/2010 12:37 PM, Scott Reed wrote:
If you have, join the Yahoo RM group. Lots of help there. Plus
links to at least 2 tutorials.
I've been there, and it helps. But it is not a substitute for a
good collection of documentation. There's useful stuff on Roger's
web site too, but it isn't always easy to figure out certain
things, like when to use which mode to use for a network (spot,
accidental, broadcast...) and what settings make the most
sense. I use MapInfo a lot and it has thick manuals, the
unabridged one being PDF only. Yes, it's expensive commercial
software. I'm spoiled. ;-) I suppose a wiki might be a way for
the community to collect its thoughts.
I did see some interesting discussions on the Yahoo group about
the nodes, and about the land cover. I roughly doubled the forest
loss numbers, from Roger's default. This still might not be
adequate, though, since it makes it seem *possible* to blast 5.8
GHz through the woods. Is 180 a good setting for most forests?
Roger does this for a living and his employer sells a very nice
commercial package. They have been nice enough to allow him to to
RM for free, so we get a super program at no cost. This also
means that Open Source is out, as I am sure the source is too
similar to their commercial package. If you want the pay version,
I am sure an e-mail to him would get you company contact information.
What is the commercial product? He certainly hides any mention of
it. If it's reasonable, I might look. I remember seeing an
add-on for MapInfo, though. The price was roughly similar to the
price of the local calling area database license. My car cost less, new.
SPLAT looks to be a somewhat similar open source program, but much
more limited in scope and not nearly as well updated. This is
complicated stuff, I know. About 3/4 of the confusion might be
solved by having a "mouse-over help" function, where you could
right-click on a box and pop up a tutorial on what the values mean
and how to set them. That could be an interesting volunteer
project. Of course Roger's primary market is 2 meter repeaters,
so the parameters we use in the WISP bands are a bit different...
...The only time I would see a need for antenna patterns is if you
have a fixed-base AP and mobile CPE. If both are fixed-base, I am
not sure what the patterns will gain you. I do the same thing; I
have a 5.8 network, a 2.4 network and a 900 network. Most of my
POPs are setup with 3 120* sectors, so all POPs are setup with an
omni of the same gain as the sector antenna. In my experience so
far, the results are fairly accurate when there is clear
line-of-sight. If there are a significant number of trees in the
path, it obviously is not so good. I suppose if you have 2 90*
sectors trying to cover 360* you would want patterns to find the
nulls and edges, but if you have antennas for full coverage, the
pattern probably is not so important. For point to point links,
antenna pattern does not matter , assuming you are planning to aim
the antennas directly at each other as that is the assumption RM makes.
Not all of the sectors need full-circle coverage, so I was
thinking about using the model to see how it looked with partial
coverage on some poles. This would save radios and antennas... In
fact, with three sector radios and two backhaul radios (not to
mention needing three backhaul radio "degrees" at mesh junctions),
that exceeds the four-slot maximum of any one Routerboard,
right? So do you often put back-to-back radios in one box?
I think the only way to do sectors in RM is to treat them as
separate radios, So if Unit 10 was three sectors, it might end up
as say Units 10, 91, and 92, in the access network, right?
The Yahoo group has also had discussions about exports and
imports. There are several things you can do. Again, check out the tutorials.
I would have to disagree about the need for many
improvements. Granted, I have been using it for over 5 years, but
I find everything to be where expected and do what it
should. Roger is open to suggestion, though. Let him know what
you would like to see.
I don't want to disparage Roger and his great work; it's just
little things. I just hate drop-downs, which RM's UI makes me use
too often, especially for selecting radios. But also the fact that
adding a radio requires going to both the unit properties and then
the network properties is counter-intuitive and a bit
clumsy. These sorts of things aren't show-stoppers, just places
where it helps reduce one's sanity just a bit more. Which can be
in short supply...
Fred Goldstein wrote:
At 7/21/2010 11:41 AM, MarlonS wrote:
Radio Mobile hates everyone that doesn't use it every day.
It's a great tool, but boy is it frustrating! Roger has done a
wonderful thing by putting this out there for free and improving
it as he has. But there are so many things that could be done to
improve it, especially the clumsy user interface. If it were an
open source project, then more people could contribute to the
effort. If he had a premium payware version, then he'd have
incentive to at least prettify the pay version.
Documentation wouldn't hurt either...
My current project has set up three "networks" using the same
batch of nodes. One is 5.8 GHz backhaul. One is 900 MHz backhaul,
for heavy-forest paths. One is 5.8 GHz access. When it does the
"show networks", it doesn't seem to find the best path, but it's
not terribly predictable as to which common "network" it's
using. So I end up having to do path-by-path comparisons anyway.
My next chore is to add antenna patterns. I think this means
taking each node and turning it into two or three nodes, if it has
two or three separate sectors. I can "save network" as a CSV, but
that seems to only save the node locations. Copying network
parameters between projects seems impossible. :=(
grin
marlon
----- Original Message -----
From: <mailto:[email protected]>Robert West
To: <mailto:[email protected]>WISPA General List
Sent: Tuesday, July 20, 2010 7:38 PM
Subject: [WISPA] Ping --- Radio Mobile Hates Me.
Ping.
(Had to)
Bob-
Still fighting the animal that is Radio Mobile.
--
Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
ionary
Consulting <http://www.ionary.com/>http://www.ionary.com/
+1 617 795 2701
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wireless List: <mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/
+1 617 795 2701
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
<http://signup.wispa.org/>http://signup.wispa.org/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wireless List: <mailto:[email protected]>[email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
<http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless>http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives:
<http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/>http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
Scott Reed
Sr. Systems Engineer
GAB Midwest
1-800-363-1544 x2241
1-260-827-2241
Cell: 260-273-7239
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
--
Fred Goldstein k1io fgoldstein "at" ionary.com
ionary Consulting http://www.ionary.com/
+1 617 795 2701
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wants You! Join today!
http://signup.wispa.org/
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WISPA Wireless List: [email protected]
Subscribe/Unsubscribe:
http://lists.wispa.org/mailman/listinfo/wireless
Archives: http://lists.wispa.org/pipermail/wireless/
