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

RE: [softrock40] SD Software?

Expand Messages
  • Box SisteenHundred
    heh... my 67 Pontiac runs well too... when I can find leaded gas... lol GL OM ES 73 - Bill KA8VIT
    Message 1 of 19 , Apr 1 5:51 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      heh...  my '67 Pontiac runs well too...
       
      when I can find leaded gas...   lol
       
      GL OM ES 73 - Bill KA8VIT


      > To: softrock40@yahoogroups.com
      > From: k5nwa@...
      > Date: Mon, 31 Mar 2008 13:05:55 -0500
      > Subject: Re: [softrock40] SD Software?
      >
      > At 12:28 PM 3/31/2008, you wrote:
      >
      > >Acouple years ago I took an interest in SD Radio but all the FREEBIE
      > >software I could find at the time would not run on W98. I refuse to
      > >update Windows again.
      > >
      > >What software options are available to use with a receiver like the
      > >Softrock40?
      > >
      > >Bob Macklin
      > >K5MYJ
      > >Seattle, Wa.
      >
      > If you are going to insist that you will not change from Win98 then
      > your choices are going to be slim or none. Win 98 does not have the
      > software mechanisms that make SDR software run well I don't know if
      > any of the major players support that OS anymore, less face it that
      > OS is 10 years old and that is forever in the computer business.
      >
      > I can sympathize with you in not wanting to change, Win98 is very
      > lean and runs real well on machines that are not up to current state
      > but programmers won't go out of their way to support it.
      >
      > I'm not sure but you may want to check out M0KGK's software, it's
      > written in Delphi so it could work on Win98, it also uses ASIO4ALL
      > drivers and they work on Win98.
      >
      > < http://www.m0kgk.co.uk/sdr/index.php >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > Cecil
      > K5NWA
      > www.softrockradio.org www.qrpradio.com
      >
      > "Blessed are the cracked, for they shall let in the light."
      >
      >
      > ------------------------------------
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      > <*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/softrock40/
      >
      > <*> Your email settings:
      > Individual Email | Traditional
      >
      > <*> To change settings online go to:
      > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/softrock40/join
      > (Yahoo! ID required)
      >
      > <*> To change settings via email:
      > mailto:softrock40-digest@yahoogroups.com
      > mailto:softrock40-fullfeatured@yahoogroups.com
      >
      > <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
      > softrock40-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
      >
      > <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
      > http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
      >



      Pack up or back up–use SkyDrive to transfer files or keep extra copies. Learn how.
    • Brian Lloyd
      ... It is interesting how people tend to get locked into a viewpoint and then never take a step back to ask, does this make sense? Right now people seem to
      Message 2 of 19 , Apr 1 6:57 AM
      • 0 Attachment
        On Apr 1, 2008, at 2:36 AM, Bill Heverly wrote:
        >
        > Ray,
        >
        > As an old Burroughs guy, you probably don't want to hear this but
        > Linux has some support from a big gun. IBM offers Linux on their
        > mainframe systems. Even though I too am an old Burroughs guy, I
        > think that is pretty big gun support.

        It is interesting how people tend to get locked into a viewpoint and
        then never take a step back to ask, "does this make sense?"

        Right now people seem to get into this MS/Linux (and sometimes MacOS)
        debate without ever asking, "do any of these operating systems really
        do a good job at what they are supposed to do?" Yes, we must move
        forward with something because the goal is to write code that does
        something useful and an OS does nothing useful (from the end-user
        point of view). But it does make the programmer's job easier and,
        hence, may mean that we get useful programs sooner with one or the
        other.

        (And then there is the reliability issue which is a whole other can-of-
        worms.)

        I don't know, I find MacOS to be easier to deal with (from a
        programmers point of view -- there are some pretty decent APIs in
        there) but Apple in its usual style, seems to be hell-bent on making
        their OS as unusable as Microsoft's. They just haven't been at the
        process quite long enough yet.

        And then there is Linux with its abysmal integrated support for
        sampled signal streams. (I was going to say "audio" but we know that
        doesn't apply because it is really our IF, not AF, right?)

        My take on it is that we really need to start with a clean slate but
        we know that isn't going to happen.

        --

        73 de Brian, WB6RQN
        Brian Lloyd - brian HYPHEN wb6rqn AT lloyd DOT com
      • Brian Lloyd
        ... Hmm, that applies if you think of the OS as an end-user application. If you consider it to be a vehicle for supporting task loading, memory management,
        Message 3 of 19 , Apr 1 7:01 AM
        • 0 Attachment
          On Apr 1, 2008, at 3:55 AM, n3hkn wrote:
          > Linux as a "matured" OS conjures up visions of just another bloated
          > multi-media system. I really would never want it to "mature". Rather
          > it should offer elements that the Linux audience want. Once any
          > software attempts to "appeal" (attract users/customers) it begins to
          > run a muck and we have Windows or MAC OS. All things to all people
          > is precisely what Linux should never become.
          >

          Hmm, that applies if you think of the OS as an end-user application.
          If you consider it to be a vehicle for supporting task loading, memory
          management, inter-process communications, storage system, networking,
          device independence, an API library, and a UI library, it doesn't seem
          nearly has difficult. It also doesn't need to have a "major" release
          every year either.

          --

          73 de Brian, WB6RQN
          Brian Lloyd - brian HYPHEN wb6rqn AT lloyd DOT com
        • Alberto I2PHD
          ... There is a version of Winrad that is still compatible with Windows 98. It is V1.23 From that version on, I started using features of the operating system
          Message 4 of 19 , Apr 1 9:02 AM
          • 0 Attachment
            "Bob Macklin" rottenrobbie0@... k5myj wrote:

            > A couple years ago I took an interest in SD Radio but all the FREEBIE
            > software I could find at the time would not run on W98. I refuse to
            > update Windows again.

            There is a version of Winrad that is still compatible with Windows 98. It is V1.23
            From that version on, I started using features of the operating system that were present only in XP an not in W98, but
            I kept that version frozen and available to all those who still run W98. Of course it has less features than more recent
            versions, but that is a price that must be payed in exchange for backwards compatibility.

            You can find it on Web site http://www.weaksignals.com

            73 Alberto I2PHD
          • Marcus Geselle
            Hmm, I don t want this to become another my OS can beat your OS hands down type of discussion. Just an opinion: Linux is a mature OS -- it s cleanly designed
            Message 5 of 19 , Apr 1 2:25 PM
            • 0 Attachment
              Hmm,

              I don't want this to become another "my OS can beat your OS hands down"
              type of discussion.

              Just an opinion:
              Linux is a mature OS -- it's cleanly designed (almost as clean as BSD)
              and stable.
              Whether Linux-based desktop systems (i.e. OS + lots of other software)
              have reached
              any kind of maturity is still open for discussion -- as a server system
              it is doing a good job.

              What is hurting the amateur (not only radio) communities most is that many
              hardware manufacturers do not provide Linux drivers and do not publish
              details
              about their hardware which would allow third parties to create hardware
              drivers
              for Linux.

              Professionally, I am using Linux (and UNIX systems) quite a lot. For
              those of my hobbies which
              depend on computers (astronomy and, of course, ham radio) I moved back from
              Linux to windoze, because I got fed up with chasing up drivers or even
              hacking existing
              drivers to make them work with the kernel version du jour.


              Just my EUR 0,02.

              Cheers,
              Marcus -- DL7GEM
            • Ray
              Hi Bill, I agree that the big guns need and offer LINUX, Burroughs/UNISYS also offers it on the ES7000 and a few mainframes and it is a superior OS in the big
              Message 6 of 19 , Apr 2 9:48 AM
              • 0 Attachment

                Hi Bill,

                 

                I agree that the big guns need and offer LINUX, Burroughs/UNISYS also offers it on the ES7000 and a few mainframes and it is a superior OS in the big machine arena.  I participated in qualification testing of LINUX on the ES7000 and it was very easy to port onto a 32 way Intel platform with a custom memory and I/O chip set.  I didn’t mean to give the impression that it was less of an OS, it is just that I don’t think into will make it into the average household anytime soon. 

                 

                73, Ray, N0FY

                 


                From: softrock40@yahoogroups.com [mailto: softrock40@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Bill Heverly
                Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 4:36 AM
                To: softrock40@yahoogroups.com
                Subject: RE: [softrock40] Re: SD Software?

                 

                Ray,

                 

                As an old Burroughs guy, you probably don't want to hear this but Linux has some support from a big gun. IBM offers Linux on their mainframe systems. Even though I too am an old Burroughs guy, I think that is pretty big gun support.

                 

                Bill AB3DT

                 

                -----Original Message-----
                From: softrock40@yahoogro ups.com [mailto: softrock40@ yahoogroups. com ]On Behalf Of N0FY
                Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 12:22 AM
                To: softrock40@yahoogro ups.com
                Subject: RE: [softrock40] Re: SD Software?

                Hi Terry,

                 

                Thanks for putting this in the proper perspective - I agree on everything you have said except for one thing.  I have been watching LINUX try to grow to a full blown OS for many years and while it is superior for specific characteristics I don't think I will hold my breath until it matures.  I have my doubts that it ever will - it seems to lack the management drive that it takes to make a single entity that does it all.  Right or Wrong if it can't at least do what MS OSs (including device support) do then it will never be a big box competitor.

                 

                I hope I am wrong about LINUX because I truly believe it could be king of the hill with the right direction, management and stability, but that has yet to happen.

                 

                73, Ray, N0FY

                 

                 

                 


                From: softrock40@yahoogro ups.com [mailto: softrock40@ yahoogroups. com ] On Behalf Of Terry
                Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 7:10 PM
                To: softrock40@yahoogro ups.com
                Subject: [softrock40] Re: SD Software?

                --- In softrock40@yahoogro ups.com, "Alan Melia" <Alan.Melia@ ...>
                wrote:
                >
                > Hi I am a little amused, that it seems to be the case that one
                should have
                > to spend $300 to run a $15 radio. I can appreciate that developers
                have
                > enough hastle because the latest OS is not downwards
                compatible.. ...but many
                > of us refuse to buy even more bug-ridden software, when the one we
                have does
                > the vast majority of our tasks. So what are the options for
                Linux ?? my next
                > move because I want to run a computer not "media centre", and I am
                aware
                > that some new apps and hw is not going to work on old
                systems....the rip-off
                > conspiracy.
                >
                > BTW I still have machines, doing what they were designed for, that
                are over
                > 15 years old now....working reliably running DOS 4.1....because the
                software
                > apps wont run on a more modern machine..... ..and I dont get "blue
                screens"
                > on them!
                >
                > Alan G3NYK
                >

                Regarding SDR on older computers: try simultaneously running a
                graphical user interface, and the DSP code necessary to decode and
                display CW or SSB on a 386 or 486. Without a dedicated DSP chip, you
                are in for a long wait. Over ten years ago, I wrote DOS-based code
                (in Turbo-C) that displayed an audio spectrum analyzer in a DOS-based
                VGA graphics display. All the DSP was done in either a homebrew
                Motorola 56000 board, or an EVM, with DMA data transfers over the old
                PC bus (homebrew), or fast serial port(EVM).

                I don't want to do that again. But, if you are staying DOS or Win-
                98, kiss the PC doing DSP goodbye. I still have three Moto 56000 EVM
                boards that I'd be glad to sell.

                Regarding Linux: There is some movement afoot there with SDR. There
                are a few programs that will work. Again, you must do a hardware
                upgrade to get the processing necessary to do DSP and on-screen
                graphics.

                I also have a couple 486 computers with Win98, and Win95, and DOS.
                Just in case I ever want to run my 56000 audio spec analyzer.

                But, I also have a working IBM 5-slot computer, and a spare.

                And, I have a working IMSAI CP/M system with Heath H19 terminal, and
                8-inch drives. I boot CP/M and run Wordstar every once in a while.
                How about a nice game of chess? Or the CP/M user-group Adventure?

                I also have two Altair 8800s, and an Altair turnkey (no front panel),
                plus a bunch of S100 boards. No power to them in about three years.

                I don't expect these computers to run SDR software either.

                And, I can still erase and burn 1702A to 2764 EPROMS. Go figure.

                Don't get me started with software. From CP/M, to DOS 1.x to 4.x, to
                the original flight simulator. I even had the paper tapes for Altair
                4k and 8k Basic. Anybody remember Lattice C, or Run-C? Or the CP/M
                Pascal?

                But native SDR on a 4MHz Z80? Probably as likely as on a 266MHz 486.

                Terry

              • Bill Heverly
                Ray, I knew Burroughs offered Unix, but didn t know they also had a Linux offering. My Unix training was done at Penn State s Great Valley Campus at Valley
                Message 7 of 19 , Apr 2 12:18 PM
                • 0 Attachment
                  Ray,
                   
                  I knew Burroughs offered Unix, but didn't know they also had a Linux offering. My Unix training was done at Penn State's Great Valley Campus at Valley Forge, PA. One of my instructors was a Unisys, actually Sperry, old timer who supported Unix on their various systems.
                   
                  Bill
                   
                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: softrock40@yahoogroups.com [mailto:softrock40@yahoogroups.com]On Behalf Of Ray
                  Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 12:48 PM
                  To: softrock40@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: RE: [softrock40] Re: SD Software?

                  Hi Bill,

                  I agree that the big guns need and offer LINUX, Burroughs/UNISYS also offers it on the ES7000 and a few mainframes and it is a superior OS in the big machine arena.  I participated in qualification testing of LINUX on the ES7000 and it was very easy to port onto a 32 way Intel platform with a custom memory and I/O chip set.  I didn’t mean to give the impression that it was less of an OS, it is just that I don’t think into will make it into the average household anytime soon. 

                  73, Ray, N0FY


                  From: softrock40@yahoogro ups.com [mailto: softrock40@yahoogro ups.com ] On Behalf Of Bill Heverly
                  Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 4:36 AM
                  To: softrock40@yahoogro ups.com
                  Subject: RE: [softrock40] Re: SD Software?

                  Ray,

                  As an old Burroughs guy, you probably don't want to hear this but Linux has some support from a big gun. IBM offers Linux on their mainframe systems. Even though I too am an old Burroughs guy, I think that is pretty big gun support.

                  Bill AB3DT

                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: softrock40@yahoogro ups.com [mailto: softrock40@ yahoogroups. com ]On Behalf Of N0FY
                  Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 12:22 AM
                  To: softrock40@yahoogro ups.com
                  Subject: RE: [softrock40] Re: SD Software?

                  Hi Terry,

                  Thanks for putting this in the proper perspective - I agree on everything you have said except for one thing.  I have been watching LINUX try to grow to a full blown OS for many years and while it is superior for specific characteristics I don't think I will hold my breath until it matures.  I have my doubts that it ever will - it seems to lack the management drive that it takes to make a single entity that does it all.  Right or Wrong if it can't at least do what MS OSs (including device support) do then it will never be a big box competitor.

                  I hope I am wrong about LINUX because I truly believe it could be king of the hill with the right direction, management and stability, but that has yet to happen.

                  73, Ray, N0FY


                  From: softrock40@yahoogro ups.com [mailto: softrock40@ yahoogroups. com ] On Behalf Of Terry
                  Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 7:10 PM
                  To: softrock40@yahoogro ups.com
                  Subject: [softrock40] Re: SD Software?

                  --- In softrock40@yahoogro ups.com, "Alan Melia" <Alan.Melia@ ...>
                  wrote:
                  >
                  > Hi I am a little amused, that it seems to be the case that one
                  should have
                  > to spend $300 to run a $15 radio. I can appreciate that developers
                  have
                  > enough hastle because the latest OS is not downwards
                  compatible.. ...but many
                  > of us refuse to buy even more bug-ridden software, when the one we
                  have does
                  > the vast majority of our tasks. So what are the options for
                  Linux ?? my next
                  > move because I want to run a computer not "media centre", and I am
                  aware
                  > that some new apps and hw is not going to work on old
                  systems....the rip-off
                  > conspiracy.
                  >
                  > BTW I still have machines, doing what they were designed for, that
                  are over
                  > 15 years old now....working reliably running DOS 4.1....because the
                  software
                  > apps wont run on a more modern machine..... ..and I dont get "blue
                  screens"
                  > on them!
                  >
                  > Alan G3NYK
                  >

                  Regarding SDR on older computers: try simultaneously running a
                  graphical user interface, and the DSP code necessary to decode and
                  display CW or SSB on a 386 or 486. Without a dedicated DSP chip, you
                  are in for a long wait. Over ten years ago, I wrote DOS-based code
                  (in Turbo-C) that displayed an audio spectrum analyzer in a DOS-based
                  VGA graphics display. All the DSP was done in either a homebrew
                  Motorola 56000 board, or an EVM, with DMA data transfers over the old
                  PC bus (homebrew), or fast serial port(EVM).

                  I don't want to do that again. But, if you are staying DOS or Win-
                  98, kiss the PC doing DSP goodbye. I still have three Moto 56000 EVM
                  boards that I'd be glad to sell.

                  Regarding Linux: There is some movement afoot there with SDR. There
                  are a few programs that will work. Again, you must do a hardware
                  upgrade to get the processing necessary to do DSP and on-screen
                  graphics.

                  I also have a couple 486 computers with Win98, and Win95, and DOS.
                  Just in case I ever want to run my 56000 audio spec analyzer.

                  But, I also have a working IBM 5-slot computer, and a spare.

                  And, I have a working IMSAI CP/M system with Heath H19 terminal, and
                  8-inch drives. I boot CP/M and run Wordstar every once in a while.
                  How about a nice game of chess? Or the CP/M user-group Adventure?

                  I also have two Altair 8800s, and an Altair turnkey (no front panel),
                  plus a bunch of S100 boards. No power to them in about three years.

                  I don't expect these computers to run SDR software either.

                  And, I can still erase and burn 1702A to 2764 EPROMS. Go figure.

                  Don't get me started with software. From CP/M, to DOS 1.x to 4.x, to
                  the original flight simulator. I even had the paper tapes for Altair
                  4k and 8k Basic. Anybody remember Lattice C, or Run-C? Or the CP/M
                  Pascal?

                  But native SDR on a 4MHz Z80? Probably as likely as on a 266MHz 486.

                  Terry

                • Ray
                  Hi Bill, There are several sites that talk to the ES7000 capability and LINUX. Here is one http://esj.com/enterprise/article.aspx?EditorialsID=1074 I was
                  Message 8 of 19 , Apr 2 2:41 PM
                  • 0 Attachment

                    Hi Bill,  There are several sites that talk to the ES7000 capability and LINUX.  Here is one http://esj.com/enterprise/article.aspx?EditorialsID=1074   I was very proud and thankful that I had a chance to work with this system – I started on the project 1997 and we delivered 1st piece  1999.  It is an amazing mix of  capabilities and includes LINUX as one of the primary platforms.  Interestingly it can run several different OSs concurrently with dynamic partitioning on an INTEL platform and exceeds mainframe performance. 

                     

                    It was my last job with UNISYS and I elected to leave the company rather than move to California and spend most of my time with off-shore manufacturing.  I really would have liked to stay with the project but family comes first. 

                     

                    73, Ray, N0FY

                     


                    From: softrock40@yahoogroups.com [mailto: softrock40@yahoogroups.com ] On Behalf Of Bill Heverly
                    Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 2:19 PM
                    To: softrock40@yahoogroups.com
                    Subject: RE: [softrock40] Re: SD Software?

                     

                    Ray,

                     

                    I knew Burroughs offered Unix, but didn't know they also had a Linux offering. My Unix training was done at Penn State 's Great Valley Campus at Valley Forge , PA. One of my instructors was a Unisys, actually Sperry, old timer who supported Unix on their various systems.

                     

                    Bill

                     

                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: softrock40@yahoogro ups.com [mailto: softrock40@ yahoogroups. com ]On Behalf Of Ray
                    Sent: Wednesday, April 02, 2008 12:48 PM
                    To: softrock40@yahoogro ups.com
                    Subject: RE: [softrock40] Re: SD Software?

                    Hi Bill,

                    I agree that the big guns need and offer LINUX, Burroughs/UNISYS also offers it on the ES7000 and a few mainframes and it is a superior OS in the big machine arena.  I participated in qualification testing of LINUX on the ES7000 and it was very easy to port onto a 32 way Intel platform with a custom memory and I/O chip set.  I didn’t mean to give the impression that it was less of an OS, it is just that I don’t think into will make it into the average household anytime soon. 

                    73, Ray, N0FY


                    From: softrock40@yahoogro ups.com [mailto: softrock40@yahoogro ups.com ] On Behalf Of Bill Heverly
                    Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 4:36 AM
                    To: softrock40@yahoogro ups.com
                    Subject: RE: [softrock40] Re: SD Software?

                    Ray,

                    As an old Burroughs guy, you probably don't want to hear this but Linux has some support from a big gun. IBM offers Linux on their mainframe systems. Even though I too am an old Burroughs guy, I think that is pretty big gun support.

                    Bill AB3DT

                    -----Original Message-----
                    From: softrock40@yahoogro ups.com [mailto: softrock40@ yahoogroups. com ]On Behalf Of N0FY
                    Sent: Tuesday, April 01, 2008 12:22 AM
                    To: softrock40@yahoogro ups.com
                    Subject: RE: [softrock40] Re: SD Software?

                    Hi Terry,

                    Thanks for putting this in the proper perspective - I agree on everything you have said except for one thing.  I have been watching LINUX try to grow to a full blown OS for many years and while it is superior for specific characteristics I don't think I will hold my breath until it matures.  I have my doubts that it ever will - it seems to lack the management drive that it takes to make a single entity that does it all.  Right or Wrong if it can't at least do what MS OSs (including device support) do then it will never be a big box competitor.

                    I hope I am wrong about LINUX because I truly believe it could be king of the hill with the right direction, management and stability, but that has yet to happen.

                    73, Ray, N0FY

                    size=2 width="100%" align=center tabIndex=-1>

                    From: softrock40@yahoogro ups.com [mailto: softrock40@ yahoogroups. com ] On Behalf Of Terry
                    Sent: Monday, March 31, 2008 7:10 PM
                    To: softrock40@yahoogro ups.com
                    Subject: [softrock40] Re: SD Software?

                    --- In softrock40@yahoogro ups.com, "Alan Melia" <Alan.Melia@ ...>
                    wrote:
                    >
                    > Hi I am a little amused, that it seems to be the case that one
                    should have
                    > to spend $300 to run a $15 radio. I can appreciate that developers
                    have
                    > enough hastle because the latest OS is not downwards
                    compatible.. ...but many
                    > of us refuse to buy even more bug-ridden software, when the one we
                    have does
                    > the vast majority of our tasks. So what are the options for
                    Linux ?? my next
                    > move because I want to run a computer not "media centre", and I am
                    aware
                    > that some new apps and hw is not going to work on old
                    systems....the rip-off
                    > conspiracy.
                    >
                    > BTW I still have machines, doing what they were designed for, that
                    are over
                    > 15 years old now....working reliably running DOS 4.1....because the
                    software
                    > apps wont run on a more modern machine..... ..and I dont get "blue
                    screens"
                    > on them!
                    >
                    > Alan G3NYK
                    >

                    Regarding SDR on older computers: try simultaneously running a
                    graphical user interface, and the DSP code necessary to decode and
                    display CW or SSB on a 386 or 486. Without a dedicated DSP chip, you
                    are in for a long wait. Over ten years ago, I wrote DOS-based code
                    (in Turbo-C) that displayed an audio spectrum analyzer in a DOS-based
                    VGA graphics display. All the DSP was done in either a homebrew
                    Motorola 56000 board, or an EVM, with DMA data transfers over the old
                    PC bus (homebrew), or fast serial port(EVM).

                    I don't want to do that again. But, if you are staying DOS or Win-
                    98, kiss the PC doing DSP goodbye. I still have three Moto 56000 EVM
                    boards that I'd be glad to sell.

                    Regarding Linux: There is some movement afoot there with SDR. There
                    are a few programs that will work. Again, you must do a hardware
                    upgrade to get the processing necessary to do DSP and on-screen
                    graphics.

                    I also have a couple 486 computers with Win98, and Win95, and DOS.
                    Just in case I ever want to run my 56000 audio spec analyzer.

                    But, I also have a working IBM 5-slot computer, and a spare.

                    And, I have a working IMSAI CP/M system with Heath H19 terminal, and
                    8-inch drives. I boot CP/M and run Wordstar every once in a while.
                    How about a nice game of chess? Or the CP/M user-group Adventure?

                    I also have two Altair 8800s, and an Altair turnkey (no front panel),
                    plus a bunch of S100 boards. No power to them in about three years.

                    I don't expect these computers to run SDR software either.

                    And, I can still erase and burn 1702A to 2764 EPROMS. Go figure.

                    Don't get me started with software. From CP/M, to DOS 1.x to 4.x, to
                    the original flight simulator. I even had the paper tapes for Altair
                    4k and 8k Basic. Anybody remember Lattice C, or Run-C? Or the CP/M
                    Pascal?

                    But native SDR on a 4MHz Z80? Probably as likely as on a 266MHz 486.

                    Terry

                  • Clive Wallis
                    Bob K5MJY wrote - ... My first success was with Alberto s WinRad program. I used it initially because my XP machine had an unsuitable sound card. It s a nice
                    Message 9 of 19 , Apr 5 9:56 AM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Bob K5MJY wrote -

                      >Acouple years ago I took an interest in SD Radio but all the FREEBIE
                      >software I could find at the time would not run on W98. I refuse to
                      >update Windows again.

                      My first success was with Alberto's WinRad program. I used it initially
                      because my XP machine had an unsuitable sound card. It's a nice
                      program and worked well on Win98. It's available from Alberto's web
                      site www.weaksignals.com

                      --
                      73

                      Clive G3CWV

                      Hitchin, North Hertfordshire, UK.
                    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.