Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

37Re: Hang out frequencies - 4 what?

Expand Messages
  • marc_pd4u
    Dec 3, 2010
      Hi Rick,

      TNX 4 ur reply. And I already guessed that since it was asked several times to include a K2K facility for winmor. So now there is V4 for those.

      But I sure hope that V4 is not going to take too much development time for winmor, since winmor still has some hick-ups every now and then. But you also said you were going to focus again on winmor in the coming time. So PSE have a look at the "memory issue" (i.e. memory not released/variables not reset after a connect)

      GD LK

      Marc, PD4U

      --- In V4Protocol@yahoogroups.com, "Rick Muething" <rmuething@...> wrote:
      >
      > Marc,
      >
      > There is no point speculating on these things....It should be fairly obvious from the performance figures and the V4 and V4Chat paper that V4 is intended strictly as a keyboard mode. It is limited to text, doesn’t use compression and is slower and less adaptive (but more robust and narrower) than WINMOR ....all by design. It is designed to do keyboard to keyboard at normal typing speeds with fairly good “slickness” (RX to TX turn over) and be more robust than modes like PSK (especially in poor multipath). It is the result of many requests and several vain attempts to use WINMOR for keyboarding.
      >
      > There are good reasons why modes are (or should be) designed for specific purposes. With DSP it is much easier to design and optimize a mode that does a specific function well. When you try and make one thing fit all applications (Keyboard, files, messages, HF, VHF, wideband, narrow band, etc) you end up with a Camel (aka the Horse designed by committee!)
      >
      > There is absolutely no logic that would suggest that V4 compete with WINMOR or be morphed to have WINMOR capability. They do 2 different things just like CW and SSB voice.
      >
      > The theory and early testing on the simulator suggests that V4 should fit the keyboarder’s requirements well though of course it will take time and work to optimize this.
      >
      > Rick KN6KB
      >
      > From: marc_pd4u
      > Sent: Friday, December 03, 2010 12:40 PM
      > To: V4Protocol@yahoogroups.com
      > Subject: [V4Protocol] Re: Hang out frequencies - 4 what?
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > --- In mailto:V4Protocol%40yahoogroups.com, "va3lki" <va3lki@> wrote:
      > ><..> but sticking in the same area as the other keyboard operations are, does make some sense. I suspect there may be a comfortable niche there, and the 'battles for spectrum' already fought, won, or lost.
      > >
      > > If V4 is really just another keyboard method of doing the same thing in a little different way, then should it not still play in the keyboard sandbox? A bit like faster modes of PSK staying within the PSK area, or CW at 25, 35 and 50 wpm all playing nice together.
      > >
      >
      > I fully agree if V4 is merely intended for K2K (keyboard to keyboard) use. Then a center of activity and eventual skeds via http://www.obriensweb.com/sked/ or any other suggested sked page is sufficient it seems to me.
      >
      > But it begs the question is V4 merely intended for K2K use, since it originates from the WL2K team? Or is it (also) going to fit in the Wl2K set of programs in the future (that is my primary focus of interest)? In other words: Is the K2K alpha test a preliminary for the ARQ V4 Mode?
      >
      > Marc, PD4U
      >
    • Show all 13 messages in this topic