tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-953397841255562532.post6249537457461069021..comments2009-06-21T19:58:14.623+01:00Comments on G4ILO's Blog: Bad protocolJulianhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11984840704237681015noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-953397841255562532.post-85065448982394360632009-06-21T19:58:14.623+01:002009-06-21T19:58:14.623+01:00I agree - The use of the patented AMBE protocol is...I agree - The use of the patented AMBE protocol is obviously done from a commercial point-of-view. The amount of D-Star repeaters in the UK (now 53) that have been licenced in such as short space of time is un-believeable - Whilst many are connected to international reflectors (read: internet servers), some are still simple relay systems like conventional GB3xx units. Internet-linked repeaters are nothing new, we have EchoLink+IRLP ones so why the need to promote them as "worldwide" systems when we already have the infastructure ?!<br /><br />Whilst I am happy that this transmission method offers a narrower bandwidth and superior S/N ratio over a "standard" 12.5KHz channel, there are some major concerns surrounding the implimentation of D-Star: At present, D-Star seems nothing more than a cash-cow for Icom and DVS Inc. The surge of D-Star licences and the speed of their frequency clearance is nothing short of fascinating. I would be interested in to know what sort of "kick-back" (if any) the RSGB gets out of this. Whilst I can appreciate that there is a valid security consideration with PC-based systems (DV Dongle) - the verification of bona-fide hams does not go hand-in-hand with a closed-source codec.M0PZThttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08761389989891374881noreply@blogger.com