psussman@pactor.com wrote:
> HAL sure noticed that when they released CLOVER and remember G-TOR,
> that 'enhanced knockoff' of PACTOR-1. So when SCS released PACTOR-2
> they did NOT make the protocol freely available. After all their
> PACTOR-1 reputation had been tarnished by 'cheap knockoffs' of their
> freely released protocol. Can you blame them?
>
> Comments??
Intellectually, no, I can't blame them and intellectually do support
them. However, from an *economic* point of view, I recall the PACTOR-2
modems running around $1000 (!), give or take. As an *amateur*
communicator, I didn't foresee $1000 of improvement over PACTOR/G-Tor
and therefore chose to pass.
Hams being (frugal) hams, there seems to be plenty of great low or no
cost software available to the ham community; e.g., PSK, MFSK,
Hellschreiber, MMTY, the W1 (?) meteor scatter software, etc, etc.
I don't know the answer, but it would seem that the inventor of a better
mousetrap would be better off trying to market their invention to
commercial interests rather than the frugal ham community... ;-)
73,
Carter K8VT
_______________________________________________
RTTY mailing list
RTTY@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rtty
|