[pskmail] FW: FW: Re: Fldigi
- From: "Gunnar Bulukin" <gunnar@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <pskmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2012 18:05:59 +0200
Hi
Is this something that can be used?
73 de Gunnar
http://www.nue-psk.com/
Den den 7 april 2012 klockan 15:20 skrev Gunnar Bulukin <gunnar@xxxxxxxxxx>:
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: pskmail-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:pskmail-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On
> Behalf Of Jack Chomley
> Sent: Saturday, April 07, 2012 7:05 AM
> To: pskmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: [pskmail] Re: Fldigi
>
>
> On 07/04/2012, at 1:41 AM, Eric Davenport <kz5ed@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > I think these other hardware sources might have some value in the
> > future
> >
> > http://beagleboard.org/
> >
> > http://trimslice.com/web/
> >
> > Looks like the day of the throwaway computer literally is here.
> >
> > Just some thoughts for what they are worth.
> >
> > 73
> >
> > Eric
> >
> > --
> > KZ5ED
> > Eric
> > ewdavenport@xxxxxxxxxx
> >
> >
>
> I still believe that ultimately, there will be no choice but to have some
> kind of external processing power, to do the job. The feasibility of a
> hardware concept solution, simply comes back to cost.
> Just how much would people pay?
> The further growth of PSKmail to add modes and extra features is being
> hampered by PC processing power, in trying to handle ARQ requirements.
> Just look at what the original intent of Winmor performance was envisaged
> and then look what it took to make it happen and that the end result was
not
> the speed performance they had hoped to get.
> Now, look at Pactor......forget the mode, just look at the external
> processing power it needed, to achieve its speed performance and
robustness.
> It could never have happened using software on a PC alone, it had to use
an
> external processing solution.
> Since PSKmail relies on PC software at this time.........future changes to
> PC hardware, operating systems all will affect PSKmail, whereas IF it was
in
> a hardware box, there would not be future compatibility problems.
> The architecture of the hardware box, would allow more flexible
development,
> along the lines of the LL Grace DSP-12 of 20 years ago.
> It could end up a digital modes developers paradise :-)
>
> 73,
>
> Jack. VK4JRC
>
Other related posts:
