Milestone at the end of the road

My Motorola Milestone 2 smartphone, which I bought nearly two years ago, has gone kaput. When I slide out the keyboard, the display goes blank. The device is usable, but only as an ordinary phone. I can imagine what has happened. There is probably a flexible ribbon cable like in the KX3 connecting the two halves, and a trace has broken. (A good job I've got the charger for the KX3 so I don't have to keep opening it up to change the batteries.)

Of course, it is out of warranty. The question is, is it repairable at a reasonable cost? Motorola's support site won't give an estimated cost of repair. "Send it to us and we'll give you a quote" they say. I'd really like a ballpark figure for what it is going to cost before doing that.

I guess I'll just have to spring for a new phone. But there weren't many alternatives with a real hardware keyboard and I expect there are even fewer now. I wish I could type using the software keyboard (which I'll have to for now) but I have a 50% error rate. I don't think my fingers are much fatter than normal. How do you guys manage? Perhaps you don't text much and don't do email on the phone.

Print me an enclosure

Picture from nextdayreprap.co.uk

Jason, NT7S has just posted an article entitled "3D Printed Enclosures" on his blog. As a ham with a drawer full of unboxed projects who has often spent hours searching for suitable enclosures for a project and only finding ones that are either a wee bit too small or miles too big, the idea of being able to make my own custom enclosures is very appealing.

I had heard about 3D printing before, but thought it was either an April Fool spoof gone wild or one of those blue sky ideas that never become reality. My (admittedly cursory) searching has so far failed to turn up any articles that explain how it works, who makes 3D printers or what they cost. (However the site from which the picture was taken, nextdayreprap.co.uk, looks like a good place to start.)

Not so smart phone

My Motorola Milestone 2 (which I think is known in some places as a Motorola Droid) has started acting up. I've had it more than a year now so it is out of warranty.

A couple of days ago I picked it up one evening and it was stone cold dead. Pulling the battery made no difference so I dropped it into the multimedia base and when it came to life it showed the battery was at 0%. The phone sleeps in the multimedia base so it is always fully charged and there is normally 60% left by the evening unless I've been running some GPS applications, which for just this reason I don't. How odd.

The next day after a full charge the phone appeared to be OK. A couple of hours later I scrolled to the page where the Gmail app lives and its icon had changed to a box with a gear wheel in front of it. When I tried to run it I got a message "Application not installed." Even odder.

I tried the tech support guy's standard fix which is to switch it off and then switch it on again. To my relief this did the trick. The Gmail icon was back again and the app seemed to be working normally. Until this morning.

When I got up I was surprised that the phone wasn't winking its green light at me to show there was email waiting. Had no-one at all commented to my blog? After breakfast I turned on the shack PC and lo and behold there were 4 messages in my inbox. The phone still showed nothing. Eventually I checked the account settings and every one of my Google accounts had the "Synchronize Gmail" setting turned off. How very peculiar.

I turned sync on again and the phone is checking my mail as normal. But I just wonder what it's going to do next?

Kindley advise me

I've been thinking about buying an Amazon Kindle. But I'm not sure if it will really be useful for what I want or whether it will just end up sitting on a shelf like my Eee PC and other gadgets of the month.

I know that the real purpose of the Kindle is for reading electronic books purchased from Amazon.com. However I don't see myself using it for that very much. What I am interested in is reading ham radio and electronics publications that are increasingly being made available in electronic format. Are these magazines viewable on a Kindle or do they use some proprietary format only supported by a special application that needs a PC or Mac?

One of the publications I'd probably use it for is CQ, as I'm not sure it is really worth the international postage. Then there is World Radio, which is only available in electronic form, which I have never read due to the inconvenience of having to use a PC to do it. Now ARRL is bringing out an electronic version of QST. I still look forward to the printed magazine landing on the doormat but I do pay quite a premium for that.

I'd be interested to learn from Kindle users what formats the device supports. A couple of months ago the back issues of the now defunct 73 magazine and Ham Radio were put online. I downloaded the Kindle application for Windows and was disappointed with the results. The magazines were available in Kindle format but it looked as if they had been badly scanned using an OCR system and half of the content was in Greek! The PDFs were huge files and looked more like a poor quality FAX. The best format appeared to be one called Deja Vue. I downloaded a reader for it. Does the Kindle support that?

My eyes might find it easier reading on a device that lets you zoom in and enlarge the font. Does the Kindle let you do that?

How well does the Kindle support PDF files? I expect I would use it for those a lot. With a Kindle could I read PDFs I've downloaded and stored on a drive on our network or a memory stick? I've often considered, for nostalgic reasons, ordering some electronic back issues of Radio Communication (now RadCom) from the years when I first got interested in ham radio, though so far I have always changed my mind when I see the cost!

So over to my readers. Your thoughts on this, if you would be so kind!

Out of touch

Olga and I returned yesterday from a long weekend in Birmingham. That sounds like one of those joke competition prizes doesn't it? "First prize, a week's holiday in Birmingham, second prize two weeks!" But that would be unfair to Britain's second largest city. It was the first time either of us had visited it and I wasn't sure what to expect, but we liked it a lot. It is clean, modern and prosperous and there are entertainments and amusements to suit all tastes.

We went to a ballet at the Hippodrome Theatre, a concert at the Symphony Hall, visited the National Sea Life Centre, the Botanical Gardens, Winterbourne House and Gardens and the art gallery and museum. But on Saturday night the place was heaving with squealing teenage girls wearing clothes so skimpy, despite the near freezing temperatures, that I was concerned for their health. They were there for a concert by someone called Justin Bieber, whom we had never heard of, but who is apparently the current teenage heart-throb.

I didn't take a ham radio. I looked at the APRS map for Birmingham and it appeared to be a bit of an RF desert. The only repeater near enough the centre to be accessible using a handheld was D-Star. So I decided to save a bit of weight and space in my suitcase and give the hobby a break.

I switched off my mobile when we went into the theatre on Friday evening (to avoid the embarrassment of it ringing during the performance) and didn't switch it on again until Monday when we were preparing to leave. That wasn't a deliberate intention to be incommunicado so much as absent mindedness. I didn't miss it, so it never crossed my mind to switch it back on. Having grown up in a house that didn't have a home phone, and having only been persuaded a few years ago that a mobile would be useful "just for emergencies", it has never concerned me that when I am away from home I am out of touch.

But it seems to me that many people can't bear to be disconnected for half an hour, never mind a weekend. On the bus, on the train, walking along the street, even in the theatre during the interval people were staring at the tiny screens held in front of their face. There is a TV advert - I think it's for the iPad - in which, apparently without irony, people are shown clustered round a screen while a fabulous view or famous building goes unnoticed in the background. In the Birmingham Botanical Gardens one woman appeared engrossed in interacting with her Blackberry whenever we saw her, ignoring the plants. Do these people ever switch off? If you are constantly connected, receiving a continual stream of information which you must absorb or respond to, when do you get time to think, to dream, to appreciate the real world around you?

Technology was supposed to be our slave, helping us to do things more easily. But it seems to have become a drug. The technology itself is amazing, but for me the most important feature is the ability to switch it off.

Platform for progress

One of the things at the back of my mind when I was writing that the magic of ham radio wasn't in high technology was the feeling that anyone who got into the hobby out of a mania for high-tech toys was soon likely to be disappointed. I've seen it happen when people who are new to the hobby and don't yet know much about it get an enthusiasm for APRS or Echolink. They get disappointed that the network coverage is patchy or nonexistent compared to cellphone coverage because they don't realize that it depends on hams to provide the infrastructure and where there are few hams - or none interested in these particular aspects of the hobby - there are no repeaters and no gateways.

I've seen the same people criticize the latest VX-8, TH-D72 and Icom D-Star radios as being overpriced and unimpressive. They don't like the geeky "walkie talkie" look or the plain 1990s LCD display. They can't believe that APRS radios don't support predictive text entry like the cheapest mobile has for more than a decade. And why can't they have a colour screen and a scrolling map display?

It's easy to dismiss these criticisms as coming from people who don't understand that ham radio is a specialized niche market and that amateur HTs don't benefit from the economies of scale which allow vastly more R&D to be spent on a smartphone costing a similar amount of money. But then I realized that perhaps the critics had a valid case. Manufacturers of smartphones don't completely reinvent the wheel whenever they release a new model. They just design the hardware. But the hardware is a platform. On it runs a standard OS and various apps, a few of which may be customized to the manufacturer or phone but most of which are generic. Given that software development is one of the most time consuming and expensive parts of any new technology product development, wouldn't that be a huge saving?

Why can't top of the range hand-held radios use a similar hardware architecture to cellphones? Instead of a custom design the radio would be a computer running embedded Linux. The RF side could be SDR or it could use conventional technology - it wouldn't matter, that would simply depend on what is most cost effective and delivers the best battery endurance. But all the control functions, together with transmit and receive audio, would be accessible through an API to software. The user interface would be an app.

Since the radio is a computer the interface would be endlessly customizable and all kinds of things not possible with existing radios could be feasible. Instead of entering local repeater frequencies into memories you could install an app that gets your position from the built-in GPS and shows you the nearest repeaters. One click and you're listening on it.

Instead of a plain LCD display showing distance and bearing your APRS capable radio could show a full map display just like APRSISCE currently provides on Windows smartphones. You wouldn't need packet modem hardware in the radio because packet generation and decoding could be done in software. In fact there would be no such thing as an APRS capable radio. The platform would be the same - if you wanted APRS you would just install the APRS application. If you wanted Echolink you could add the Echolink application. If you wanted D-Star you could buy the D-Star app from Icom. If you wanted to work satellites then I'm sure someone would write an app that would keep track of where the satellites are and even control the radio frequencies taking account of doppler.

You could power this hypothetical next generation radio using cellphone battery packs, which are a lot cheaper than the custom battery packs for traditional ham radios. You could even use standard cellphone accessories.

So why won't this happen? I guess the reason for that is that Yaesu, Icom, Kenwood and the rest don't make cellphones. Their business is making radios that are intended to be as dumb as most of their users. Ham radio is just an offshoot. The market just isn't big enough to justify developing what for them would be a completely different and unique hardware platform. So I guess for the foreseeable future we'll be stuck with our geeky walkie talkies and the cool stuff will all be on cellphones.

USB technology du jour

Getting a radio to communicate reliably with a computer proves to be a difficult task for some people. The trouble seems to be caused by USB to serial adapters that corrupt the data when used with certain software or at certain speeds. Whenever these problems are discussed in amateur forums inevitably the question of why radio manufacturers don't build USB interfaces into their radios (as Icom and Kenwood have started to do) is raised. I think this is a very short sighted view that really does nothing to solve the problem.

To begin, let's deal with the argument that goes "why force users to buy a serial to USB adapter when serial ports have been obsolete for years." Users have to use something to connect the radio to the computer and the only physical difference between a serial to USB adapter and a serial cable is that one end of the former is a bit fatter to accommodate the USB electronics. There is little difference in cost between the two cables. Furthermore, just because PCs don't come with serial ports doesn't mean that they are obsolete. My shack PC has four - soon hopefully to be increased to six if I can get it to accept the two port board I removed when I upgraded to four as an addition - and installing them is easily within the capabilities of any radio amateur. If you use a laptop you don't have that choice, true enough, but why force a change on everybody because some people choose shack PCs that have limited expandability?

But the main reason why I think building USB into the radio isn't the solution is that it doesn't address the problem. It's USB - either the hardware or its drivers - that is causing the connectivity problems in the first place. If an external adapter cable is used, users can try a different type if the one they have is not working correctly. If the USB hardware is built into the radio then they are stuck with it and reliant on finding a software solution. That might be a matter of getting the manufacturer to fix its drivers, which is not so easy.

Another reason why building USB into the radio is a bad idea is that it limits choices for users. If you want to connect your radio anything other than a PC, something like a MicroHam controller or a remote control over internet device for example, then you're stuffed if you've got a USB port. Some owners of Kenwood's new TH-D72 APRS handheld have already found that Kenwood's decision to provide a USB rather than a serial interface to the radio's internal TNC means they can't use Bluetooth to link it to APRS software on another mobile device.

Whenever I argue that switching to USB is a bad thing someone always counters the argument by saying USB can provide a wide bandwidth connection that can handle other things such as audio. As somebody who has sometimes had three USB sound devices attached to my PC I can certainly see how a one cable interface between rig and computer might seem attractive, especially to those who believe that sound card modes need something like a RigBlaster. And I would agree that a fast interface would be a nice thing to have if it was one that was a true universal standard like, say, Ethernet.

But if we are talking about USB, most of my arguments still apply. Built-in USB limits choices. An analogue audio input and output lets you interface audio with other things such as digital voice recorders, TNCs and VOIP devices for remote control over the internet. We're hams, we're supposed to be able to handle technical stuff, do we really need plug and play interfaces for our radios?

USB is a technology du jour. It keeps changing, whereas RS-232 and analogue audio are permanent standards. USB 1.0 devices seem still to work with USB 2.0 but now USB 3.0 is starting to appear and it remains to be seen how backwards compatible that will be with older USB devices. Who knows what the computers of 10 or 15 years time will be equipped with? It may not be USB anything but something completely different.

Finally there is the fact that USB depends on software to work: drivers that are operating system dependent. Most serial to USB hardware is at least supported by operating systems other than Windows "out of the box." I don't have the experience to know whether that is true for USB interfaces that carry audio or other information. Is anyone using their IC-7600 or TS-590 under Mac OS or Linux?

Even if the manufacturer-supplied drivers work for Windows today, will they work on the latest version of Windows in 10 or 15 years time? If not, will the manufacturer of the radio provide new drivers once the radio is an obsolete model? I'll bet a perfect but unusable as no longer supported scanner that they won't. I'm equally sure that I'll still be able to interface my K3's RS-232 serial port and analogue line input/output to whatever computing hardware and operating system I'm using then.