<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">My understanding is that the NWS gets a
feed from both. Licensed amateurs are welcome to use the main
APRS-IS at reasonable rates while non-licensed folks must go
through CWOP. But I will defer to (and be educated by) anyone
that knows a different history.<br>
<br>
Lynn (D) - KJ4ERJ - Author of APRSISCE for Windows Mobile and
Win32<br>
<br>
On 2/28/2013 4:43 PM, Max Harper wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:1362087792.18690.YahooMailNeo@web124906.mail.ne1.yahoo.com"
type="cite">
<div style="color:#000; background-color:#fff; font-family:Courier
New, courier, monaco, monospace, sans-serif;font-size:10pt">
<div>I've noticed that some hams send their weather data via
APRS-IS while others sent it to the CWOP. Is there an
advantage to one over the other?</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Max KG4PID</div>
</div>
<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="http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig">http://www.tapr.org/mailman/listinfo/aprssig</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>