[pskmail] Re: fldigi
- From: Pär Crusefalk <per@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: pskmail@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2012 16:37:18 +0200
Hi Jack,
The idea has been discussed but discarded mostly due to cost. An idea could be
to combine the raspberry pi with a usb sound card and a rig interface in a box.
That raspberry pi is $25 so it would not have to be so expensive any more. But,
we need a stable modem to put in that box to begin with. Once we have that then
perhaps its just as easy to just use a good rig interface and let the pc do the
work..
73 de Per, sm0rwo
Jack Chomley <radio@xxxxxxxxxxxx> skrev:
>
>On 06/04/2012, at 6:15 PM, Pär Crusefalk <per@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I am using 3.21.41 and I have more trouble than I ever had before.
>> Seriously, we need to get rid of fldigi now. I used to have uptime for
>> days but now it's just hours.
>>
>> Rein, have you committed the javamodem to subversion? If so then I'd
>> like to help out as fldigi has passed the point of no return for me.
>>
>> 73 de Per, sm0rwo
>>
>>
>
>Hi Everyone,
>
>At the risk of upsetting some people, I will offer my comments...........
>For a long time I have watched the trials and tribulations of PSKmail and
>FLdigi, so many revisions along with so many problems in making it one of the
>ultimate packages.
>I have seen over time, an immense effort being made to achieve the ultimate
>goal of
>success.
>I personally think there is only one real way to solve many of the problems
>faced........
>Dare I say it.........you need a hardware box between PC and radio with a
>micro to do the job.
>I think back 20 years to the concept that LL Grace had, with their DSP-12
>modem, it came with the basic modem nuts and bolts and developers could build
>their own firmware to run in it based on the V40 architecture.
>This box cost nearly $600 in its day, very expensive but, the concept was a
>good one.
>Fast forward to today and.........we have a multitude of low cost processors
>that could be used for the same sort of purposes.
>Yes, there is a hardware cost but, it allows much of the hard processing work
>to be taken away from the PC. The DSP56303, or similar may yield a solution?
>Maybe someone knows a processor that is more suitable.
>I seriously think, this is a route that should seriously be looked at.
>
>73,
>
>Jack, waiting to be shot down :-)
>
>VK4JRC
Other related posts:
