> Did anyone else read the closing editorial in the most recent issue of
>Communications Quarterly? It advocated a project which has interested me
>for a couple of years.
>
> The project is to create an "open radio architecture" (ORA). "Open"
>means something like the IBM-compatible PC market: A radio building block
>architecture with standardized interconnects between the building blocks,
How can anyone use "architecture" and "IBM-compatable PC" in the same
paragraph without getting violently ill? Kidding aside, don't use the
IBM-compatable PC as an example of something that has an architecture,
much less one to be emulated. We DO need an ORA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! A GOOD
one.
> Anyone else interested in seeing this come to fruition? Anyone know of
>some real work being done in this area?
Yes. No, but interested in any work that is being done.
I would like to see an environment where it can be profitable for
software vendors to sell their product in a form that is easilly
incorporated into a custom user interface. For example, if the core of
a product like the country identification algorithm in the 2ndOP (GRF
Computing - John Fail KL7GRF/W6) were distributed in DLL form (or
something similar, since DLLs are specific to MS Windows) then you could
buy the 2ndOP, discard the user interface (2ndOP logging and reporting
program) and use the now legitimately licensed DLL with your own user
interface (say a logging program with features not in the 2ndOP, like
accomodation of VHF/UHF bands). Similarly, radio interface routines,
TNC interface routines, etc., from a variety of commercial and free
sources could be integrated into a system.
I'm VERY interested in helping make an ORA come to fruition.
John
W0RUE
|