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

Re: [softrock40] Re: SD Software?

Expand Messages
  • 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 1 of 19 , Apr 1, 2008
    • 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
    • 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 2 of 19 , Apr 1, 2008
      • 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 3 of 19 , Apr 1, 2008
        • 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 4 of 19 , Apr 2, 2008
          • 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 5 of 19 , Apr 2, 2008
            • 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 6 of 19 , Apr 2, 2008
              • 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 7 of 19 , Apr 5, 2008
                • 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.