ARRL EComms Messaging System...WinLink?

[Jeff King]

Curt:

I didn't mean to imply you where casting stones at Winlink.... that was just a general statement on my part based on all the scuttle-butt I have heard over the months. 

In my eyes, the ARRL should have insisted on a open source server platform, as well as open protocols that be publicly documented. That way, no one is holding a gun to your head with regards to the network backbone itself. If someone packs up their marbles and goes home, you can quickly pick up the ball. And the client market, where the real money is, still can be closed source, if one so desires. The idea is not to hand a monopoly to any one company (what their defacto endorsement is). 

That much being said, having talked at conference with some of the players here, the battle here is lost. Their minds are closed to out of the box thinking.

But the war isn't lost.

If we all step up to the plate, and oppose the further dumbing down of amateur radio (the ARRL's restrictive bandwidth by regulation) real ham experimenters still might save the hobby. HF is the crown jewel of the amateur radio, and if we can properly utilize it, with modern digital modulation techniques, it can be quite useful and quite fun. 

Yes, that ugly three letter word, FUN. I didn't put together a tcp/ip network at 19.2kbaud over two states, and one Canadian province, in the early 90's,  because I wanted to chase ambulances (and yes, I did surf the web with this quite well in the WWW's early days....). I did it because it was cool and FUN. As a fellow I know says, "Pure Nerd Joy".  That is what amateur radio is about and how we can bring the most value to the table. Why? Because the only way a network is valuable in time of emergency is IF IT WORKS AND IS USEFUL. And the only way you know it is going to work, in time of need, is to stress and beat on it every day. And since we aren't paying these hams to do this, it has to do something useful for them.  F U N

-Jeff



On Wed, 12 Jan 2005 15:49:34 -0800 (PST), Curt, WE7U wrote:
>On Wed, 12 Jan 2005, Jeff King wrote:
>
>>You missed one big one Curt, one we all just all witnessed in APRS,
>>and is even more critical in ECOM's.
>>
>>What happens if the programmer and/or company of a closed source
>>product ceases to exist? In the case of APRS UI-View it was willed
>>the source code be destroyed for the primary application,
>>essentially freezing further progress (save the mapping server).
>
>Agreed.  I was very sorry to hear about Roger's passing, and sorry
>yet again when I heard what was to happen to the code.
>
>
>>Escrowing the source code is claimed as a solution for Winlink, but
>>in my eyes, it really isn't one. The beauty of open source is not
>>linux, windows or any operating system. It is peer review. A open
>>source solution forces (most) programmers to care about things like
>>style and maintainability. Who is to know what is actually escrowed
>>behind closed doors? It could be a obtuse piece of spaghetti code
>>that only the one that wrote it could understand. Having the code
>>in the public eye at least puts all the cards on the table.
>
>Yep.
>
>
>>That much being said, I am a firm believer in property rights. The
>>Winlink folks didn't do anything wrong, and from what I can tell,
>>they have a fine product. Lets not cast stones at them, as it is
>>not they that chose a proprietary solution with all its attendant
>>risks. It was the ARRL. Proof again that ham radio is its own worst
>>enemy.
>
>I don't think I cast any stones at property rights or the Winlink
>folk's decisions as to their code.  I have some things I don't
>release in the wild also, sometimes because they could do harm if
>out there, sometimes because I plan to make money with them in the
>future.  Does that mean I lean any way the wind blows?  No, it means
>that I weigh each decision based on a variety of factors.  Money
>buys me more radio/computer toys with which I can make more
>hardware/software toys for others (and me!).
>
>I'd rather the ARRL picked an open-source set of software, and
>either an open modem protocol or at least a standards-based modem
>manufactured by a variety of companies.  Right now I think our only
>option is Pactor-I which is the slowest option and not recommended
>for WinLink due to the speed.  Not that great of an option.  Yea,
>I've heard of another possible soundcard option coming.  Maybe that
>will be the savior of the system in that regard.
>
>It would be pretty funny though (in a sad sort of way) if the ARRL
>chose a proprietary modem made by a German? company to use for
>homeland security purposes.  Of course darn-near everything fits
>under that "homeland security" umbrella these days, but the hams are
>intended to be a backup for when other forms of communications fail.
>If relations between our countries fail in the future or the company
>fails or raises it's prices even more, then we'll be out a bunch of
>needed modems for our purposes and nearly back to square one.
>
>-- Curt, WE7U.   APRS Client Comparisons:
>http://www.eskimo.com/~archer "Lotto:    A tax on people who are bad
>at math." -- unknown "Windows:  Microsoft's tax on computer
>illiterates." -- WE7U "The world DOES revolve around me:  I picked
>the coordinate system!"