D-STAR illegal in France

Sounds like the main argument against D-Star here is the use of a proprietary vocoder. Cheap or not; it's closed and single sourced.

 

Hello there my Indiana Primo... LOL! The thing about D-STAR "proprietary technology" that confuse me the most is when it relates to FCC definition of Amateur Radio Services; "The amateur and amateur-satellite services are for qualified persons of any age who are interested in radio technique solely with a personal aim and without pecuniary interest. These services present an opportunity for self-training, intercommunication, and technical investigations."

Those Icom's D-STAR comply with the aforementioned statement?

 

The reason the proprietary chip is used, is to get a 2400 baud vocoder.

Hams could use an open source vocoder if they went to higher baud rates. The reason D star is a failure, is all it does is connect a 4800 baud modem to a discriminator output/FM modulator.

If a radio is junk at analog, it will be junk at digital.

 

Yes, it does comply with the aforementioned statement. Where it could fall into problems is the encryption clause of Part 97 (Here in the US). Just because you are selling the encryption keys to anyone who has money, does not make it not encryption.

The reason a proprietary chip is used is because it's the "easy way". That's all.

Proprietary chip, I really don't care too much about, if it were a standard that anyone could implement (I like P25 is like that, open standard, anyone can implement, however, I could be wrong); along the lines of firmware for radios.

Sure, the firmware for every radio (Pretty much) is closed and proprietary. But, anyone can implement the standard (FM, SSB, etc).

 

To implement the P25 CAI (common air interface), you still must buy your codec from DVSI.

73,
Mark N5RFX

 

Show me a 2400 baud vocoder that sounds as good (easy way, or hard way) and I'll believe you.

2400 bps + 1200 bps FEC with combined DTMF. All for less than $25 USD.

 

Speex. Slighty sub-par, due to not having FEC. But, it will work. And it cost $0.

But, as I said, it was just the "easiest way". The best way would have been working on an open vocoder from the start that serves the needs.

 

Failure to read

Didn't read the post immediately under the one you quoted, did ya?

-WY3X

 

Just because someone writes it on the internet, does not make it true.

One can put a D-Star repeater up, and not connect it to the internet. You get a plain Digital-Voice repeater, where users of the system can also have a data channel.

It does not need an internet connection. It can have one, but that is entirely different.

You haven't read any of the tech docs on D-Star, have you? You just assume whatever a person who doesn't like D-Star says is true, huh?

 

Even as a plain digital repeater not connected to the internet, a DStar repeater has a lot of neat features.

 

Exactly. While I don't particularly like the closed system of D-Star, using asinine arguments against it which are patently untrue just makes a person look like an uninformed idiot.

 

Nope, you didn't read what I posted. Here, let me repost it for you.

I'd say that if you read what I wrote, you'd realize that I'm aware that the nearby system we have is not internet-connected, at least for now.

-WY3X

 

So does attacking someone for being anti-D-star who just made a pro-D-star post.

-WY3X

 

Yea, I hear some guy has been trying to make a 2400 baud one for a few years now. Hasn't made one yet though.

Oh well, I think 2400 baud is a waste of time anyway. I think a 9600 baud modem will work just as well as a 4800 baud modem.

Why piss around with 2400 when you can do 7200+ now.

 

This is what makes you look uninformed:

"But the moment I discovered the D-star repeater connected to wired infrastructure and depending on that for primary emergency communications, I'd drop it like a hot rock."

It doesn't depend on wired infrastructure, unless the repeater designer set it up that way.