[aprssig] weak signal ISS packet

Steve Dimse steve at dimse.com
Tue Jan 13 07:30:37 EST 2015

On Jan 13, 2015, at 4:43 AM, Dave B <g8kbvdave at googlemail.com> wrote:

> why the heck are we 
> not moving Packet/APRS forward to use faster but robust modulation schemes 
> and methods?

I can think of three reasons offhand. First, though far from perfect and farther from state-of-the-art, the system works for most people most of the time.

Second, it is far easier to create a new system and attract users than to entice people to switch to an incompatible system. That's why Windows is still around.

The third you gave yourself: "I wish I knew how to do that sort of stuff myself." Implicit in this answer is "and I'm not going to learn how". Maybe you aren't smart enough to learn how, but I doubt that. Instead, you have things that are more important or that interest you more, and you choose not to learn how. 

No one makes money on APRS development. We do things like put ads on our web sites and charge for software in the hope of stopping the hemorrhage of money we spend to develop and provide our service, maybe even earning a few cents an hour on our time, or providing some justification to significant others for the hours away from them. But any way you look at it, this is something you do as a hobby because it interests you. So, if it isn't something you are willing to waste thousands of hours (and dollars) on, and that decision is repeated a few ten-thousand times by everyone else in APRS, it doesn't get done.

Steve K4HG

More information about the aprssig mailing list