<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:x="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:excel" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40">
<head>
<meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=us-ascii">
<meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 11 (filtered medium)">
<style>
<!--
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{color:#606420;
text-decoration:underline;}
span.EmailStyle17
{mso-style-type:personal-compose;
font-family:Arial;
color:windowtext;}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
-->
</style>
</head>
<body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink="#606420">
<div class=Section1>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>>While the layouts may be wrong for a PC they are right
for a standard rack mount (not pc) .<br>
>If the connectors are moved adjacent to the Din connectors you will now
ONLY have a PC mount.<br>
>Not a board which may be mounted in either case (chassis).. VME and cPCI
all have their boards mounted with connectors opposite >the Din...They seem
to still work..The company I work for, DRS-SS makes a VERY good living using
those type of boards.<br>
>Contrary to what Alex mentioned ATLAS may still be mounted in a PC in the
normal manner allowing the boards to be inserted and >removed without
removing ATLAS with the addition of a simple harness to the back connector.<br>
>If it is absolutely necessary to make these boards "PC" only then
at least KEEP the current designs as an alternate for the rest of >the
world...and the Antarctic.<br>
<br>
>No I don't have a SDR-1000. I have no vested interest in either method. And
no I wasn't here at the beginning. I do have a strong >interest in SDR and I
just don't think a mistake should be compounded to exclude other uses.<br>
<br>
>Peter Hughes N7BMG/3<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>I tend to agree with Peter’s comments. Depending on
whether the i/o connectors are located opposite the DIN or on the adjacent side
from the DIN the boards will be optimized for different uses. Personally, my
goal is to put together a compact stand alone portable rig that doesn’t
depend on an external PC. To than end, I think a more compact housing can be
found/built that is not a PC specific chassis.<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>The use of a PC chassis certainly will simplify some
mechanical issues and very well may be preferred for some applications. <o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>I back the proposal to fab at least some of the Janus and
Ozy boards with the connector opposite the DIN configuration (as they are
presently laid out). A second layout could always be done to move the
connectors by those so inclined (open designs encourage derivative works).<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>Whatever the ultimate decision turns out to be I can go with
it, but for my particular application I like the ‘WRONG’ layout .<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'>73 Ray WB6TPU<o:p></o:p></span></font></p>
<p class=MsoNormal><font size=2 face=Arial><span style='font-size:10.0pt;
font-family:Arial'><o:p> </o:p></span></font></p>
</div>
</body>
</html>