<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
What it all comes down to, is standards are standards, modes are
modes. Because these radios use "repeaters" for broader range
communications, that equipment has to be in place "first", before
there will be any "real" ability to use the user equipment. ICOM
was giving away single frequency repeater systems, because they
finally understood the "chicken and egg" problem. I think it's
vital for amateur radio users to "pick" their battles for "open" in
a way that provides for "the right technology" to win. So far,
D-Star pricing has kept it out of "mass appeal". Yaesu's pricing
will likely not be any "better", because they do have to make money,
and as a "new" company, they won't have "extreme" margins to ride
on, without pricing appropriately, and 'winning' customers with
those prices.<br>
<br>
The most important thing about D-Star is that it is already here,
and already being used. The MOTO-TRBO gear is also, already here,
but not in "HAM packages", but rather pricy, used equipment off of
eBay. If we all go after MOTO-TRBO, and say that's what we want,
then all the D-Star equipment will still be available and being
used, and we'll all have to carry around 2 HTs to be able to use
both standards. Buying tons of extra equipment to deal with
compatibilities just seems nuts to me.<br>
<br>
I think the best thing to do, is send communications to Yaesu and
ICOM, and suggest that the only way that their technology will
succeed, is if they also have radios that support both
technologies. Then the digital standard will be more like a PL-Tone
kind of configuration issue for a particular frequency/repeater, and
not a "whole radio/vendor" deal.<br>
<br>
Then, the two technologies can compete freely, and openly on
additional features, such as FEC to support range, external radio
interfaces for APRS or other digital protocols, price and
reliability of repeater systems etc.<br>
<br>
Gregg Wonderly<br>
<br>
On 1/6/2012 8:56 AM, Amateur Radio WB8NUT wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4F070B80.4050806@wb8nut.com" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
Icom does not own the rights to D-Star and did not develop it.
JARL developed it and it is an open standard. That being said, any
manufacturer can build equipment and NOT pay royalties to Icom or
JARL. The only thing proprietary is the AMBE Codec, about $20 on a
chip. I believe AMBE has developed the Codec for P25 and all the
variants. So it will be same issue for Yaesu.<br>
<br>
You asked who has developed non-Icom DStar equipment? Robin, AA4RC
has developed both the DVDongle and the DVAP. Fred, has been
working on numerous offering, one of which is a D-Star digital
voice adapter. <a moz-do-not-send="true"
class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.dutch-star.eu">http://www.dutch-star.eu</a>.<br>
<br>
Several people have created and sell D-Star hotspots.<br>
<br>
Kenwood remarkets an Icom D-Star radio in Japan.<br>
<br>
I think Yaesu has gone their own way because competing with Icom
would mean competition and price drops. With everyone using their
own digital method means higher radio prices for all of us. One
standard means lower prices and lower profits. <br>
<br>
I do believe what Yaesu will be introducing could well be
completely closed and proprietary.<br>
<br>
Regards,<br>
<br>
Duffy<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="http://www.wb8nut.com">www.wb8nut.com</a><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
On 1/6/12 9:11 AM, Lynn W. Deffenbaugh (Mr) wrote:
<blockquote cite="mid:4F070106.1040405@homeside.to" type="cite">
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
This just reminds me of the moving beam barcode scanner patents
and licensing from years ago. Symbol owned the patent and
manufactured barcode scanners. They offered licenses to others,
but what competitor in their right mind would tool up a
manufacturing plant that paid royalties to their competitor?
So, everyone used Symbol's scanners.<br>
<br>
Fast forward to Dstar. iCom developed it and owns the rights.
I imagine that to appease the powers-that-be, they had to offer
licenses so that they could call it "open". But, again, what
major equipment manufacturer is going to tool up and pay their
direct competitor license fees for Dstar? If anyone was foolish
(aka stupid) enough to do so, iCom could drive them out of the
market by dropping the price of their own equipment. Remember,
they can play numbers games such that they don't have to include
license fees in the cost of their own radios, but their new
competition still has to pay them. iCom gets a win-win by
having an "open" protocol that they are still marketing as a
sole supplier.<br>
<br>
Until a FREE and "Open" digital voice protocol hits the amateur
bands, there won't be any real competition nor multi-vendor
solutions, IMHO.<br>
<br>
Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ - Author of APRSISCE for Windows Mobile and
Win32<br>
<br>
PS. But what does Dstar have to do with APRS? And is the new
Yaesu digital voice radio going to be APRS-capable as well?<br>
<br>
<br>
On 1/6/2012 8:57 AM, Eric Lorenz K9LGE wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:CAEhmdT96=VXEY8NGQg2JNwk6Z-ajvU61HFLnEOX_SFzaC5uTeg@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite">
<p>Duffy,</p>
<p>It is all about perception though...yes, Dstar is an 'open'
protocol. Yes, anyone can license and manufacture equipment
for it. So who (of the major ones) has done it? Icom. So
yes, regardless of the reality...Dstar *appears* to be an
Icom protocol. All that has to happen for that to change is
for another manufacturer to get in the game. It would
*appear* though...that this is going to remain Icom's thing
for now.</p>
<p>Eric K9LGE</p>
<div class="gmail_quote">On Dec 29, 2011 7:59 PM, <<a
moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:duffy@wb8nut.com">duffy@wb8nut.com</a>>
wrote:<br type="attribution">
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex"> Icom
gave away repeaters to help continue D-Star's growth. So
what is the<br>
big deal with seeding equipment? Companies do it all the
time.<br>
<br>
The Codec is proprietary yes. The Codec is available to
anyone on a chip<br>
for around $25 in quantity one. Buy more and I assume
there is a discount.<br>
Our radios use proprietary chips all the time with
proprietary DSP<br>
firmware. P25 manufacturers use proprietary technology in
their radios.<br>
>From what I have seen so far, D-Star radios are much
less expensive than<br>
P25 radios.<br>
<br>
What do we need cross-compatibility for with Public
Service? You think<br>
Police/Fire/Government are going to allow their systems to
link to amateur<br>
systems? Hardly. And just like the differing P25 systems,
the<br>
manufacturers have allowed for interoperability, but I
hardly think<br>
government systems will tie into amateur systems.<br>
<br>
Icom trademarked it to protect it. Just like WB4APR
trademarked APRS. No<br>
one is charging anyone else to use those names.<br>
<br>
D-Star is not an Icom protocol. It was developed by the
JARL and it is an<br>
open technology available to anyone. Only the Codec is
proprietary as<br>
discussed before.<br>
<br>
Duffy<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="http://www.wb8nut.com"
target="_blank">www.wb8nut.com</a><br>
<br>
<br>
> If D-Star is such a raging success in the amateur
market, why was Icom<br>
> giving away repeaters? The codec is proprietary. It
is not used by any<br>
> other radio service so there is no availability of
equipment with cross<br>
> compatibility (for those amateurs who are authorized
to use public<br>
> safety frequencies, or have access to used PS
equipment). Icom<br>
> trademarked the D-Star name, so how much are they
going to charge other<br>
> manufacturers to use it? I suspect D-Star will
remain an Icom only<br>
> protocol.<br>
><br>
> Brian Clark, AG4BC<br>
><br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> aprssig mailing list<br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:aprssig@tapr.org">aprssig@tapr.org</a><br>
> <a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig"
target="_blank">https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig</a><br>
><br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
_______________________________________________<br>
aprssig mailing list<br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" href="mailto:aprssig@tapr.org">aprssig@tapr.org</a><br>
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig"
target="_blank">https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig</a><br>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
aprssig mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:aprssig@tapr.org">aprssig@tapr.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig">https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
aprssig mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:aprssig@tapr.org">aprssig@tapr.org</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig">https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
<pre wrap="">_______________________________________________
aprssig mailing list
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:aprssig@tapr.org">aprssig@tapr.org</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig">https://www.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/aprssig</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>