[hpsdr] What can we do with 2 cards

[Eric Ellison]

Bob

I agree 100% with your 2 cents! HPSDR should be HPSDR. The project I'm most
interested in (aside from a separate Ozy>Atlas>Gibralter) is the Mercury.
HPSDR will, and should kill many birds with many stones. The open design and
the exciting creative thought can do almost anything!

Still this is good discussion fodder, and can still result in good ideas all
around!

Eric


-----Original Message-----
From: hpsdr-bounces at hpsdr.org [mailto:hpsdr-bounces at hpsdr.org] On Behalf Of
Robert McGwier
Sent: Saturday, May 13, 2006 8:56 AM
To: Philip Covington; hpsdr at hpsdr.org
Subject: Re: [hpsdr] What can we do with 2 cards

***** High Performance Software Defined Radio Discussion List *****

Philip Covington wrote:
> ***** High Performance Software Defined Radio Discussion List *****
>
> On 5/13/06, Alex <harvilchuck at yahoo.com> wrote:
>   
>> I'm going to bring up my question from earlier.
>>
>>
>> Why not move the parallel port DSR-1000 control onto JANUS?
>>
>>
>> Then we have a 2 board solution (plus the backplane). SDR-1000 users can
take advantage of other cards like:
>> GIBRALTAR -  to provide the 10MHz reference signal to the SDR-1000
>> SASQUATCH and the it-who-is-not-named gp I/O board  - or computerless
SDR-1000 operation
>> (the gp I/O board can also replace the UCB).
>>
>> My vote is not to regress the OZY design, but to put the SDR-1000
interface system requirements onto JANUS.
>> I know one argument put forward was:
>> Why send the SDR-1000 control commands down the ATLAS bus, deal with them
at the OZY.
>>
>> Well, since we're going to have to handle other i/o commands coming from
the host computer and sending them to the gp I/O card, why not let JANUS
deal with the i/o for the SDR-1000.
>>
>> I am advocating to not assume SDR-1000 will always be "state of the art",
but nor to ignore that installed user base.
>> The current card interfacing structure of the SDR-1000 leaves lots to be
desired, the HPSDR can provide a good platofrm for expansion.
>>
>> No, I don't own any SDR-1000s
>>
>> We need to keep thinking everything through so the HPSDR will meet the
requirements from the two interest areas:
>>
>> (a) SDR-1000 upgrading
>> (b) HPSDR as a full-up SDR itself (and as a real neat and useful generic
benchtop device)
>>
>> Those are my 2 cents
>>
>> Alex, N3NP
>>     
>
> Yep, we really need to decide whether our primary goal is to support
> the SDR-1000 or whether we are buiding or own SDR.  The answer should
> be obvious...
>   

This wants to be independent of any external considerations, including 
the SDR-1000.  HPSDR is not trying to make a thing that is necessarily 
easily manufactured by a commercial company such as Flex.  This is an 
experimentalists group and did not start out as a company as Flex Radio 
did after finding out there was large interest.  We are trying to push 
the envelope and get as much as we can get in the way of performance,  
etc. and to make the individual experimenter happy with her/his work.   
Gerald does not need us to do external support in HPSDR for his work.  
In the end,  in self defense,  Gerald would roll his own so it would be 
most easily by his own contract manufacturer and easily supported by his 
company end-to-end.   With the open design model of this group,  Gerald 
can mine any of this he needs or wants so long as he follows the open 
model anyway.

My $0.02 worth.

Bob

> With that being said, I am trying to accomodate everyone's wishes as
> best as I can in the OZY design...
>
> 73 de Phil N8VB
>   

_______________________________________________
HPSDR Discussion List
To post msg: hpsdr at hpsdr.org
Subscription help: http://lists.hpsdr.org/listinfo.cgi/hpsdr-hpsdr.org
HPSDR web page: http://hpsdr.org
Archives: http://lists.hpsdr.org/pipermail/hpsdr-hpsdr.org/


 1147526326.0