--- "George, W5YR" <w5yr@att.net> wrote:
<snip>
>
> I am glad that Doug is finally with a manufacturer
> who is strong enough to
> allow him to do a design like it should be done, and
> like the Kachina could
> have been . . .
>
I agree, and to be with a company that maintains a
decently active effort in developing updated firmware
code. In the new world of software defined radios the
importance of an active and aggressive software
development program can't be overstated.
> Of course, a few years have passed since the Kachina
> was conceived and
> parts costs and performance have gone in opposite
> directions so the climate
> is much better now for such a new transceiver
> development.
>
Absolutely correct as well. Assuming that the Kachina
505's development effort began circa 1996, the gains
in raw DSP power would have improved by something on
the order 8X for the same cost since then. I've based
this comment on the now famous Moore's law that should
apply reasonably well to the DSP chip's used in our
beloved radios. The technologies for the analog
specific side of the radio would not have changed
nearly so much over the same time frame.
Duane
N9DG
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Try FREE Yahoo! Mail - the world's greatest free email!
http://mail.yahoo.com/
|