[nos-bbs] JNOS closer to Winlink than many realize + hf.ampr.org anyone ?

[KV9U]

 From my perspective, the main advantage of Winlink 2000 is that it 
makes it simpler for the end user. The view from our ARES/RACES state 
leader is that ARRL is ONLY supporting Winlink 2000 and nothing else. 
While this may not be true, this is the direction he has taken our 
Section and no other system or input is allowed. The conventional 
VHF/UHF packet structure is failing day by day as we lose (moving/health 
problems/loss of interest/SK, etc.) the hams who had provided such 
networks. There are no new hams with any interest in this, or at least 
not enough interest to make much of a difference. The state EOC has even 
discontinued monitoring amateur pactor and has switched over to the 
SHARES system for this mode.

The underlying assumption is that most of the new hams are not going to 
be using HF, and will be not be technically astute, so everything has to 
be as simple as possible. While Winlink 2000 is not all that simple 
either, it is much simpler than other similar systems.

My past interest has been the use of HF for digital networks. I do not 
see any other way to get the coverage in Sections like ours. Even during 
the heyday of packet more than a decade ago, we never had a very robust 
system either. Many areas will never have telpacs or other connection 
points for VHF/UHF. But the reality is that almost no hams have the 
slightest interest in doing any HF digital of this type. I was never 
able to get even one other ham in the state (Section) to test the 
Winlink 2000 SCAMP mode.

Ideally, if SCAMP is ever developed into a practical and GPL'd mode, 
then it would be useful for JNOS2 and other uses but this could be years 
away since there is almost no development along those lines due to the 
closed nature of Winlink 2000.

The main advantage that I see with JNOS2, PSKmail and those types of 
systems, is that they are not dependent upon multiple layers of a 
system. My main concern with Winlink 2000 is that it requires a very 
complicated behind the scenes system, that may not be operational when 
needed, and yet the internet may be operational.

The strong suit that amateur radio has for emergency communications, is 
our ad hoc ability to network. Moving away from that, to the exclusion 
toward only one way, is not logical to me, but apparently the majority 
are supporting this because they just don't have anything else to 
interface amateur radio to the internet. The ARRL seems to be 
misrepresenting the Winlink 2000 system as some kind of new breakthrough 
development in technology without explaining that it is basically the 
internet with amateur radio for a part of the connection.

In my view, the best solution is for end users to operate either through 
the Winlink 2000 system for simplicity, but also be able to operate 
transparently via the internet, even if Winlink 2000 is not on line.

It would make no sense to reinvent the Winlink 2000 with its frailties. 
Since it is already in place and getting as robust as it can with the 
current server system, it has a place for casual use and some emergency 
use, as long as you don't put all your eggs in one basket (as we 
sometimes say).

73,

Rick, KV9U



Glenn Thomas wrote:

> Given the political clout behind winLink2K, JNOS will at least have to 
> be fully interoperable with winLink2K to survive. Especially in the 
> emcomm arena.
>
> The main disadvantage of JNOS is that it does not include a sound card 
> based interface. It also doesn't seem to have the marketing muscle 
> that winlink2k does.
>
> The main advantages of JNOS include:
>
> JNOS source code is readily available for education and bug fixes. It 
> is also readily extended as developments require. In contrast, Wl2k is 
> tightly held proprietary code.
> JNOS runs on many different platforms, including XP, win2000, 
> win98/95, DOS, os/2 and of course Linux. Wl2k is limited to XP & win2000.
>
> 73 de Glenn WB6W
>
>
> WAR IS PEACE!
> FREEDOM IS SLAVERY!
> IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH!
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nos-bbs mailing list
> nos-bbs at lists.tapr.org
> https://lists.tapr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/nos-bbs
>
>
>