Some comments about Nate's observations:
1). I have had to learn in my professional career how to implement device
drivers for a lot of operating systems, including Linux and WinIntel. None
are easy and all require a great deal of thought and work (especially if
you have never written one before). But there are a lot more Linux examples
to refer to, and swipe code from.....and lots of FREE support
available....when compare to all the other O/S I have written device drivers
for.
2) There are low cost software packages available for Linux that sell in
the $70-$100 range. CT priced in this area would do well. I know that true
Linux fans want source code, but we are talking about getting hams
(contesters) to adopt Linux versus purchasing a higher performance WinIntel
machine. I have Linux screaming along on a 386DX40 with 8 Megs of RAM...a
machine that could not run Win95, Win98 or Win NT. It was cheap, and will
run along time before it is necessary to be scraped because it can no longer
perform. It browses the net faster than my Pentium 200MMX! Remember Linux
is a true O/S. There a lots of hams using Linux for TCP/IP over packet
radio, for sat tracking and other activities.
I fully believe that with DOS no longer supported by Microsoft, Linux for
the experimenting ham is the only choice. Hams traditionally recycle used
or old gear. 386 and 486 computers are now in this category. They can get
gotten very cheap and together with Linux can meet the needs of most hams.
But it will take the market, us, to ask that product developers, like Ken,
that we would want a Linux implementation....
3) But all said and done if CT is ported to Win95, I will have to upgrade
one of the shack computers...because I like the product not that I like the
O/S.
Nuff said,
73
Lawrence, VA3LGD
-----Original Message-----
From: Nate Bargmann <ka0rny@midusa.net>
To: ct-user@contesting.com <ct-user@contesting.com>
To: <ct-user@contesting.com>
Date: March 22, 1998 23:32
Subject: Re: [ct-user] WinIntel vrs Linux for CT
>Hi All.
>
>I've found this an interesting thread. First let me say that I
>experimented with Linux since September 1996 on and off. Since about
>mid-January of this year I have made a point to use Linux almost
>exclusively. I reboot to Win95 on an occasional basis, although would
>probably do this more often if I were still editing a club newsletter
>since I have Word 6 and haven't decided to lay out the cash for
>Wordperfect 7 for Linux.
>
>I'd like to make a couple of observations about CT to Linux.
>
>First let me say I am only now getting my feet wet understanding the
>deeper issues of how Linux works and its control of the hardware. It is
>my guess that CT, by necessity, handles the serial and parallel ports
>itself (at least through the COMTSRs). This is quite legal and even a
>necessity under MS-DOS as it provides very little in terms of OS support
>for these devices. Linux, on the other hand, being a UNIX clone retains
>full control of these devices and while you can write a new serial
>device driver and substitute it, you still can only access the device in
>question through the OS (such is my understanding). So, I would guess a
>port from MS-DOS to Linux would be very involved and time consuming, not
>to mention the time it would take anyone involved in the project to
>learn how to use Linux and the GNU utilities (I'm assuming no previous
>experience on Linux/UNIX here).
>
>Second, I see a bit of a culture clash here. Traditionally, software
>for DOS/Windows has been commercial (buy before you try it) or shareware
>(try it before you buy it) and both are generally propriety to their
>authors (no source code distribution). In the Linux world, Free
>Software is the rule of the day (free being synonomous with free speech,
>not free beer, although it often meets both definitions) with most
>packages distributed in source code only and compiled on your system to
>match your system. Shareware has not reached the popularity in the
>Linux camp that it has in the DOS/Win world (practically non-existent)
>and commercial software is typically business applications that were
>probably developed and marketed for some other flavor of UNIX and then
>ported to Linux.
>
>So I come to the conclusion that CT wouldn't be cost effective in its
>present form as a port to Linux. Especially considering the time and
>effort involved in the port and the prospect of low monetary returns due
>to the culture that exists among the Linux community. That is not to
>say that the second half of this equation might not change dramatically
>in the next few year. I just don't see the demand justifying the effort
>today.
>
>So, what then is the solution? Well, I wish I could report a Free
>Software contest logging program is in the works on my PC. Sadly, I
>cannot. However, that's not to say that some pieces don't already exist
>that if assembled could have the makings of a very good contest logging
>program. I believe someone has worked on a rig control (TS-450?) app
>for Linux and I've looked at some very basic loggers. There is
>currently a program called "pileup" that purports to be a CW contest
>trainer using the soundboard (I've had the source for a while, but
>haven't spent the time getting it running), so perhaps this is a means
>for CW output.
>
>I would like to see such a Free Software logging program developed (not
>because I want to put Ken out of business ;-) ) so that many hams could
>contribute to the project and learn and understand what is all involved
>in software such as this. There are a number of ways a project like
>this could go (I'm thinking of way too many now and this post is quite
>long!) and I think it is an intriguing idea. Perhaps someone already
>has a project similar to this underway.
>
>As I see it, Ken has CT going in the right direction. Perhaps one of
>these days I'll finally have to upgrade from my old version 8.53.
>
>73, de Nate >>
>
>--
>
> Packet | KA0RNY @ WF0A.#SCKS.KS.USA.NOAM | "Thesaurus: A great
> Internet | ka0rny@midusa.net | ancient beast that
> Location | Valley Center, Kansas USA EM17hs | roamed the earth
> Visit my Linux + Ham Radio pages | with a fantastic
> http://homepage.netspaceonline.com/~ka0rny/ | vocabulary!"
>
>--
>Submissions: ct-user@contesting.com
>Administrative requests: ct-user-REQUEST@contesting.com
>WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ct/
>Questions: owner-ct-user@contesting.com
>
--
Submissions: ct-user@contesting.com
Administrative requests: ct-user-REQUEST@contesting.com
WWW: http://www.contesting.com/ct/
Questions: owner-ct-user@contesting.com
|