HR2.0 - M17 Project - New Ham Radio Digital Mode

Its being done, see the Reverse Engineering Kenwood TH-D74 Firmware project:
https://kk4vcz.com/posts/th-d74-firmware/

It could use a few more talented persons to work on it though.

 

I also bought my HF rig without any proof of a exam taken. How is this accessibility any different if they will be treated the same way (poorly, with suspicion) by licensed operators?

 

So, the obvious amd reasonable question remains:

What will M17 offer as a superior digital mode (not already available in extant digital modes)?

Again,

Just curious.

 

We all ready have digital mode audio software for the PC and ham radio, this is nothing new

 

Pretty nothing as far as I know.

 

I guess it will not work with my Viking II

 

Well, if you are starting from scratch, then you are not bogged down by the architectures and assumptions of DSTAR and DMR, which are now quite old.

What would you make new and better? You have that versatility....

 

I know it's hard to believe, but cw is still a very effective means of communicating with a minimal amount of equipment and power. The KISS principle is as valid today as 100 years ago.

 

It's my opinion that ALL of these digital voice modes are really missing the boat by not using variable data rates to increase quality and throughput as frequency goes up. Digital voice modes should sound better on 1.2 Ghz than they do at 28 Mhz IMO.

As for HEGEMONY, it's a good thing that Linus Torvalds kept a firm grip on his kernel ( and at the same time open sourcing it ) as that has enabled hundreds of companies to build thousands of products based on Linux including the largest phone operating system ( Android ) and most of the systems running the major cloud computing platforms.

It's not always a bad thing.

 

I am agreeing.

As an inventor I get this silliness all the time, telling me how inventors are a thing of the past and the 'people' are the innovators (read: 'entirely open source'). Inventors are just greedy individuals trying to claim the obvious and 'own' something via patents. Yeh, right.

That was sarcasm on my part -- my point is that ultimately some group calls the shots. But you(others) can't pretend its 'entirely open source'. That just makes no sense.

That group, or any other group, shouldn't hide behind the pretense that the effort is 'entirely open source'-- when a small group calls the shots, does the major thinking, does the major debugging. They should take pride in who they are, rather than insisting that it fit within some socially descriptive cubby hole. MO.

If they want to make it free, well, that is their decision. The point is a GROUP makes the decision. Not 'the people'. Just as you state

73
Chip W1YW

 

Why are you asking here?

Use the contact info on the web page.

 

Why are you asking such an irrelevancy?

Use email if you have a limited and personal question.

 

Yes, that is what YOU should do, to get an answer to your question

What will M17 offer as a superior digital mode (not already available in extant digital modes)?​

From the M17 project people. Assuming you read the material on their website and it didn't answer your question sufficiently.

 

K6CLS--

Thanks for the lecture in what's "socially" acceptable.

I will use my discretion to now flag your call for 'ignore', because you did not use email --as I requested--for a personal point. Please do not contact me at this point, moving forward. Thanks.

 

Holy Mother of Christ! What petty bickering!