RTTY
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: [RTTY] PSK31 -vs- PACTOR II/III

To: RTTY@contesting.com
Subject: Re: [RTTY] PSK31 -vs- PACTOR II/III
From: dj2pj@t-online.de (Hadi Teichmann DJ2PJ)
Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2005 11:40:32 +0100
List-post: <mailto:rtty@contesting.com>
Phil, I simply can't follow... What are you talking about? Amateur radio? Sure?

Hadi DJ2PJ

psussman@pactor.com wrote:

Perhaps you misunderstood my intent; for I was not pleading any intent for using
(or not using) PACTOR or any other mode. My observation was that COST was the
driving factor, not quality.


Likewise, one can disgard amateur radio all together and merely type messages
back and forth one letter at a time on your mobile PDA and and accomplish the
same thing. Why don't we do that? COST... for (I contend) if data message
exchanges were free and unemcumbered by things like ISPs and IPs and spam
networks, even running PSK31 would be decried as too expensive.

I'm not a contester and if I need to send a .JPG I usually use the internet. I
have transferred .JPG and .EXE files via PACTOR and it goes pretty well. But
size/bandwidth is always the issue. Again, it becomes a cost/quality balancing act.


Of course, every mode has a purpose - and everyone has their individual
preference. That's fine. My point, I suppose, is that in amateur radio, cost is
a prime consideration when deciding those preferences.

Regarding your comment about 'fun' that's in the eye of the beholder. Hey it's
no fun for me to run RTTY with someone overdriving AFSK/PSK 5 khz away.

Enjoy...

Phil Sussman - N8PS

---------------









_______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty




_______________________________________________ RTTY mailing list RTTY@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>