[CQ-Contest] Computer Interfaces

[Tony Field]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Doug Smith W9WI" <w9wi at w9wi.com>
> I agree with those who think Ethernet is a better successor to
serial than
> USB.  Ethernet is cheap (well under $20), compatible with existing
CLI OSs,
> already present in many PCs, and faster than USB.

It seems to me to be humorous that folks using "command line os's"
(i.e. msdos low-tech and possibly others, circa 1980) are concerned
with using USB (slow hi-tech) & Ethernet (fast hi-tech).  There should
be a migration on the contesting software side to a more contemporary
software platform.  Maybe then we can actually take significant
advantage of the magic presented by USB (for radio control)  and/or
Ethernet (for radio and station system control).

> > * The RS-232 interface is an asynchronous, character oriented
interface.
> > There is no error-checking on characters sent or received. Because
of
>
> Not exactly true - the standard allows for parity which is certainly
a form
> of error checking.  For greater reliability, the application and the
rig's
> protocol could certainly allow for a checksum/CRC/whatever.

And obviously, RS-232 interconnection standards also allow sync as
well as async, HDLC, etc, etc.

The desire for USB, however, is well taken.  This is a reasonable
standard for new hardware and new programs since the over-all power is
higher than for traditional serial connections.  This allows greater
freedom for the designers of radio and related hardware.  All we have
to do is to ensure that old radio (and other devices such as rotator)
interfaces are still supported properly while migrating to the USB
standards.


tony field (ve6yp)
field at nucleus.com
ve6yp at rac.ca
http://www.qsl.net/ve6yp
http://www.nucleus.com/~field


--
CQ-Contest on WWW:        http://lists.contesting.com/_cq-contest/
Administrative requests:  cq-contest-REQUEST at contesting.com