[aprssig] Re: D-STAR video on YouTube

[AE5PL Lists]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Scott Miller
> Posted At: Sunday, September 23, 2007 6:08 PM
> Subject: Re: [aprssig] Re: D-STAR video on YouTube
> 
> And there's nothing wrong for them charging for their IP.  There's
also
> nothing wrong with radio manufacturers using it.  I *do* think it's a
> bad decision to design 'open' amateur systems around proprietary
> technology.

You use proprietary technology every day.  Even your pics and DSPs are
proprietary technology.  And that is exactly what we are talking about
here.  A component called a codec that is proprietary to a specific
company.

> Icom could have chosen some other, standards-based format.  They could
> still pay for a hardware implementation or optimized DSP code, as
could
> anyone else, but we'd still be free to do it ourselves.

Icom did not make the decision to use the AMBE algorithm.  The JARL did.
The D-STAR specification is open, only the codec algorithm is not.  Your
issue is that you don't think software IP should be IP but open to all
even though hardware IP is not?

> But it's different when we start to rely on proprietary IP as the
basis
> for our systems.  How many people would want to run an HF voice mode

We rely on proprietary IP every day in all of our systems.  Do you have
the chip manufacturing plans for all of those proprietary DSPs,
microprocessors, etc. etc. etc.  Of course not.  But because you can
write your own code for those components, you think nothing of paying to
use them.  Yet, because you don't have access to the codec algorithm,
you think that is a sin?

> Maybe the mode's some sort of SSB, maybe it's FM, who knows?  They
> don't
> tell you and you're not allowed to homebrew one of your own unless you
> buy the same black box yourself.

The transmission mode is GMSK.  There are numerous sources for how to do
GMSK.  Make your own radio, you have access to the entire D-STAR
specification.  The only thing you have to do is pay everyone for the
use of their components in your radio including the codec manufacturer.

> but can you imagine how this sort of thing would have been received
> back
> when a good portion of the ham population DID build their own radios?
> And when you were expected to have a working knowledge of the theory
> behind their operation?

I did and do build my own radios and we never had this kind of idiotic
condemnation of companies because they wouldn't share their
manufacturing technology with others.  You conveniently give a pass to
all of the manufacturers that make the components that don't have a
second source yet you condemn a company for making their algorithm
available on a license basis?  And you wrongly condemn the radio
manufacturers for using that algorithm when it was the JARL that made
that decision based on best-available.

Flame away, this is OT for APRS and I am out of here...

73,

Pete Loveall AE5PL
pete at ae5pl dot net