Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net

   Home   Help Search  
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 Next   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: An exercise in futility  (Read 15840 times)
W6RMK
Member

Posts: 651




Ignore
« Reply #15 on: July 01, 2011, 01:59:35 PM »


Looking through the DttSP code, the only copyrights are for N4HY and AB2KT.  There is not a mention or any comment about anyone else contributing or even making changes to the code. 
The requirement for marking went away some years ago.  It's necessary if you want to collect statutory damages in some cases.  There's lots of copyrighted works with no indication of who the authors were, which makes the licensing "due diligence" tough to do, unless the licensor offers some sort of indemnification.

There's also the problem of something that's been sold.  I have lots of books marked as copyright some publisher or another, and that publisher has long since ceased to exist, but the copyright has been transferred.

--> take home message.. you can't rely on markings to know who owns the copyright

Quote
It would only take N4HY and AB2KT to agree to different licensing terms than GPL.  Flex would then be free to develop the rest of their Deep Impact code around DttSP as the DSP engine without having to make it open source provided they don't use any other GPL code.  They could always use LGPL code if they wanted to.

Maybe..  My gut feel is that Frank and Bob are pretty Stallman'esque in their distribution philosophy.. but everyone has a price.
Logged
M0HCN
Member

Posts: 473




Ignore
« Reply #16 on: July 01, 2011, 02:20:08 PM »

They would also need to buy a commercial license from MIT for fftw (The  fast fourier library used) at a minimum, it is at least available,  and possibly sort out some other dependencies.
Generally taking code with free software dependencies closed source is a pain unless you have planned to be able to do it from the get go.

Regards, Dan.
Logged
W4HIJ
Member

Posts: 367




Ignore
« Reply #17 on: July 01, 2011, 07:47:59 PM »

I think "Deep Impact" or whatever it ends up being named will become a reality at some point.  It's a natural evolution but PowerSDR is pretty dang stable right now.
 As far as paying for software, I don't mind that at all if the performance/functionality warrants it and I think "Deep Impact" will when it's released.  Flex knows it will have to deliver or the consumers will speak and the software won't survive. Lot of difference in developing free software and software people actually pay for. The thing is though that some lunatic fringe tiny minority won't keep it from succeeding any more than it has kept Flex radios from succeeding.
73,
Michael, W4HIJ
Logged
KE5JPP
Member

Posts: 0




Ignore
« Reply #18 on: July 02, 2011, 05:39:28 AM »

They would also need to buy a commercial license from MIT for fftw (The  fast fourier library used) at a minimum, it is at least available,  and possibly sort out some other dependencies.
Generally taking code with free software dependencies closed source is a pain unless you have planned to be able to do it from the get go.

Regards, Dan.

They could replace FFTW with any number of other fft libraries that have LGPL or Mit style licensing terms.

Gene
Logged
KE5JPP
Member

Posts: 0




Ignore
« Reply #19 on: July 02, 2011, 05:45:03 AM »

It is definitely in Flex's plans to go completely closed source and to start to charge money for the software.
So you are now a Flex insider and know what they are definitely going to do? You are officially speaking for Flex now?

73 de Brian, WB6RQN/J79BPL


No I don't have inside access like you, Mr. 2010 Flex Goodwill Ambassidor. 

I am going on this statement by the big boss in addition to others statements that have been made on the Flex radio list:

http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexedge_flex-radio.biz/2010-May/003912.html

Gene
Logged
PJ2BVU
Member

Posts: 114




Ignore
« Reply #20 on: July 14, 2011, 03:56:44 PM »

Oops! He did it again.

http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexedge_flex-radio.biz/2011-July/009494.html

Brian the Preacher delivered one of his lengthy sermon:

http://mail.flex-radio.biz/pipermail/flexedge_flex-radio.biz/2011-July/009500.html

All the Flexers were ecstatic.

The Rapture is imminent!

Jean-Claude PJ2BVU
Logged
WB6RQN
Member

Posts: 484




Ignore
« Reply #21 on: July 15, 2011, 09:15:37 PM »

It seems like you are trying to say something about me but I'll be damned if I can figure out what it is. Perhaps you should read what I wrote.

73 de Brian, WB6RQN/J79BPL
« Last Edit: July 15, 2011, 09:18:31 PM by WB6RQN » Logged
KE5JPP
Member

Posts: 0




Ignore
« Reply #22 on: July 16, 2011, 06:43:57 AM »

It seems like you are trying to say something about me but I'll be damned if I can figure out what it is. Perhaps you should read what I wrote.

73 de Brian, WB6RQN/J79BPL

Watch out.  Brian is all puffed up because the other Flex cronies on the Flex list agreed with his pro-Flex propaganda once again (surprise, surprise).  Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes

Gene
Logged
WB6RQN
Member

Posts: 484




Ignore
« Reply #23 on: July 16, 2011, 09:52:47 AM »

Ah, the expected ad hominem attack instead of a reasoned analysis or rebuttal.

73 de Brian, WB6RQN/J79BPL


Logged
KE5JPP
Member

Posts: 0




Ignore
« Reply #24 on: July 16, 2011, 12:42:36 PM »

Ah, the expected ad hominem attack instead of a reasoned analysis or rebuttal.

73 de Brian, WB6RQN/J79BPL




See what I mean?

Gene
Logged
PJ2BVU
Member

Posts: 114




Ignore
« Reply #25 on: July 16, 2011, 09:09:24 PM »

It get better everyday on the Flexedge Reflector:
Following G4PNX post regarding FM all Flexers are unanimous: get yourself a El Cheapo Chinese HT if you want to work repeaters.  Cheesy
Why would anyone use such a marvel as a Flex 5K to work repeaters?  Grin
Don't forget, it is a SDR and can do anything possible. If it does not do it today it will do it tomorrow. But repeaters, no way:
Quote
Just my 2 cents .... but using a Flex 5K to light up a repeater is akin to taking a Ferrari Daytona out to plow snow ......

Name withheld
Note: Many EU hams lament the unavailability of the VU5K. They shouldn't: go buy yourself a nice transverter. you can reuse it they day you ditch your Flex 5K.

I love SDR, way better than SNL.

Jean-Claude PJ2BVU
Logged
WB6RQN
Member

Posts: 484




Ignore
« Reply #26 on: July 17, 2011, 08:24:15 AM »

This is truly amazing. Someone says something on the Flexedge Reflector and they are beaten up here where they probably don't even know it is happening. You guys really are a (collective) piece of work.

No, "Flexers" are not unanimous that you should get a cheap Chinese HT to work repeaters. Now that FM works well (yes, FM works well since 2.1.3 RC4 but the UI had bugs) I use it to monitor my local 6m repeater when I am not using it for something else, which isn't often because I would rather use it for WSPR when I am not making contacts.

And it is funny the way you twist the author's words. He was making drawing the parallel between the Flex 5000 and the Ferrari Daytona, not denigrating the Flex's FM performance.

But the point is reasonable, using a $4700 transceiver with a 1dB noise figure to monitor your local repeater is overkill. If you want 100% monitoring of your repeater, a $100 HT does make a lot more sense than tying up your main rig.

Regardless, I do use my different Flex radios on the repeaters now that FM is working.  I don't have a VU5K -- yet -- and I do use a cheap $100 Chinese HT (Wouxun -- it is actually a very nice HT especially at the price) to monitor my local 2m and 440 repeaters.

So, do you want to discuss this rationally or are we in for another bash-fest on Flex? Do you want to talk about FM performance in PowerSDR? I can and will certainly discuss what I believe to be the pros and cons. I personally like that I don't have to buy another radio to operate FM. Buying a Flex or adding a VU5K just to run FM is indeed silly. OTOH, if you already have the radio for something else; e.g. HF, EME, weak-signal tropo, satellites, etc.; why not use it occasionally for FM? That mode shouldn't be precluded any more than it should be the mainstay of the radio.

But that is just my opinion.

73 de Brian, WB6RQN/J79BPL
Logged
PJ2BVU
Member

Posts: 114




Ignore
« Reply #27 on: July 17, 2011, 08:29:08 PM »

Please mister Preacher! First read what is posted and second try to understand what is said. As noted by Stan many times you rush to judgment and put in the horse's mouth what the horse did not say. It look stupid!

Quote
I have Rc4 and am pleased with it, as far as the repeater testing I have
done. I think the main issue is how the repeater definitions exist in memory
items.
Quote
The person who wrote the "We plan to complete a final
FM feature release within six weeks"  in the release notes broke the
Prime Directive (unless it was Gerald, and he always gets a pass HI HI).

There are some lingering issues in FM and the new memory form that are
being wrapped up.  We received some excellent feedback from the internal
beta testing team and we are incorporating some of those recommendations
into the code.

The TNF feature is slated for PowerSDR v2.2.x.  We're still making
usability improvements in the TNF code.
Quote
I use a 1500 with a transverter, well I would if the FM mode was
workable... as could David with his 5000
And we have 6m repeaters using FM, with shifts and CTCSS codes to deal
with again would be great if FM was usable.
If I am not mistaken RC4 is in the hands of a few select. It looks like there are some problems left - to the general public - contrary to your denials.
Quote
What I said:
Why would anyone use such a marvel as a Flex 5K to work repeaters?
Quote
What you said:
And it is funny the way you twist the author's words. He was making drawing the parallel between the Flex 5000 and the Ferrari Daytona, not denigrating the Flex's FM performance.
Duhhhh! Who is twisting words?
Quote
Buying a Flex or adding a VU5K just to run FM is indeed silly.
Who said JUST to run FM? You did, no one else. Who is twisting words?

You are really a piece of work!

Jean-Claude PJ2BVU
Logged
WB6RQN
Member

Posts: 484




Ignore
« Reply #28 on: July 17, 2011, 10:49:33 PM »

Who rattled your cage?

Clearly you don't know what is going on with the beta code. I am willing to bet that you are not running the beta code. The difference is that I AM running the beta test code so I can speak first-hand as to how it is working. I am not putting any words into anyone else's mouth because my comments have to do with my personal experience.

FM has been "working" for a several beta releases. The first version that had working FM, 2.0.23, was, IMHO, pretty darned ugly. The UI was not particularly usable and you couldn't create memory entries for FM. But it would do FM correctly for the first time. (My definition of working is repeater split, proper preemphasis/deemphasis, and CTCSS.) Subsequent versions have improved the UI and fixed various bugs. The version I am now running, v2.1.4 RC5, seems quite usable. Yes, there are some small things that will probably keep it from being release but from a functional point of view for FM, it is quite usable.

As for the rest of it, perhaps we have a difference of understanding each other's words.

So, my comments have to do with my personal experience with the software, not from what anyone else has said.

73 de Brian, WB6RQN/J79BPL
Logged
KE5JPP
Member

Posts: 0




Ignore
« Reply #29 on: July 18, 2011, 03:54:52 AM »


FM has been "working" for a several beta releases. The first version that had working FM, 2.0.23, was, IMHO, pretty darned ugly. The UI was not particularly usable and you couldn't create memory entries for FM. But it would do FM correctly for the first time. (My definition of working is repeater split, proper preemphasis/deemphasis, and CTCSS.) Subsequent versions have improved the UI and fixed various bugs. The version I am now running, v2.1.4 RC5, seems quite usable. Yes, there are some small things that will probably keep it from being release but from a functional point of view for FM, it is quite usable.


Typical Flex.  It took them how many years to finally get FM working ?  When was PowerSDR first released?  In 2004?  That's 7 years! Roll Eyes Roll Eyes Roll Eyes

On PowerSDR in general: Can you imagine?  They have been putting lipstick on a pig for 7 years now.  Shocked

Gene
« Last Edit: July 18, 2011, 04:00:17 AM by KE5JPP » Logged
Pages: Prev 1 [2] 3 Next   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.11 | SMF © 2006-2009, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!