--- Martin Ewing <martin@aa6e.net> wrote:
> Maybe the way forward is to look at the "API"
> (application programming
> interface) that TT and other vendors provide us.
> Right now, all we get is a
> serial port and analog audio in/out. The serial
> port is enough to let you
> remote the slow parts of the front panel, but you
> can't remote the actual LCD
> panel contents, like the spectrum analyzer display.
I couldn't agree more. By going the API route TT could
continue to focus on what they know best, and that is
great analog RF design, and also making that bridge
between the analog and digital worlds. Let others have
access to the digital data stream to manipulate in
other ways beyond just the traditional CW/SSB/AM/FM
modes.
> "Friendly" vendors like TT or Elecraft should be
> looking toward a higher speed
> API. This would not infringe on their IP. My short
> list of features -
>
> -Digital signal I/O: IF and audio, so we could do
> our own special modulation,
> signal processing, scanning, etc, in software
> without flakey sound cards.
Bingo again.
> -Faster remote of front panel, including display,
> using X11 or similar. (The
> IC-7800 apparently gives you a VGA output, but won't
> let you merge your own
> computer's data.)
It also has a RJ45 connector on it, but it remains to
be seen exactly what that provision on the 7800 will
actually be capable of doing, - never mind its price
tag. My suspicions at this point is that it will be
highly proprietary given the various JA companies past
history.
> -I really don't like to switch between my computer
> display and the radio when
> operating, but I like real knobs and buttons!
> Solution? Let me put my logging /
> qrz.com window on the xcvr's front panel... Maybe I
> should quit here!
My personal belief is to leave the graphic display
duties to tools that are better suited for that task,
namely computers. Putting small graphic displays on
radio front panels is largely an exercises in
frustrating people. There simply is not room enough on
them to do any kind of justice to a genuinely usable
graphic representation of band conditions, either
real-time or historical.
> All this could be done with a platform that looks
> like the Orion with a little
> more CPU horsepower and your choice of high-speed
> interface, and the cost should
> be reasonable. It is a logical direction for a
> company that has already done
> Jupiter/Pegasus.
Or better yet a *no panel* version of the Orion at the
same ~2/3 price ratio of the Pegasus/Jupiter pair. I
really have to believe that the largest part of the
Orion's material production costs are in the front
panel components (also in the Dragonball firmware
development, and not the ADI SHARC DSP code). It was
primarily the front panel control software that held
up the shipping date for the Orion after all.
A no panel version of the Orion at a $2400 price point
would be very appealing to me. That's roughly the same
price that the Kachina 505DSP AT was at 5 years ago,
but a panel-less Orion would be a *far* superior radio
by every measure. In some ways Kachina was just too
far ahead of its time, also they *really* dropped the
ball for not developing new software for it, and/or
not encouraging other 3rd parties to do so either.
Duane
N9DG
__________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Hotjobs: Enter the "Signing Bonus" Sweepstakes
http://hotjobs.sweepstakes.yahoo.com/signingbonus
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|