<div dir="ltr"><div class="gmail_extra"><div class="gmail_quote">On Fri, May 9, 2014 at 8:26 AM, <a href="mailto:wageners@gmail.com">wageners@gmail.com</a> [apache-labs] <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:apache-labs@yahoogroups.com" target="_blank">apache-labs@yahoogroups.com</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<u></u>
<div style="background-color:#fff">
<span> </span>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<p>Look at the pricing!</p><div><br></div><div>This is a clear move to take on Apache full force. </div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Maybe. As I see it, these radios are as different as night and day. The key is that Flex has adopted the approach of forever limiting their radios by placing the processing inside the radio rather than leaving it in the external computer. There is no way to ever enhance the radio as you could with Hermes, Angelia, Orion, or whatever follows along in the OpenHPSDR family.</div>
<div><br></div><div>There are several logical places to put the interface between the "front end", the IF processing, and the consumer of the data. The HPSDR approach places the interface (Ethernet) after the first filter/decimator so you can have many multirate subbands ("slices") limited only by the processing available in the FPGA and the capacity available on the physical interface, 1Gbps right now. Right now there is a soft limit built into the firmware of 6 or 7 fixed-rate subbands. (I wish I would just remember the number.) My hope is that we get a new transport protocol that will allow any number multi-rate subbands limited only by available front-end processing and transport, not by a soft limit in the firmware. The future applications will want many variable-rate subbands (variable width "slices") directed to many different back-end processors. Heck, if I were designing a new board I would be looking to put multiple gig-E ports on it, not more ADCs. Right now a single ADC generates a 1.9Gbps stream and I have no option of trying to process the entire firehose worth of HF data. </div>
<div><br></div><div>So with the HPSDR communications system model, we have the potential for lots of expansion into the future. </div><div><br></div><div>In the case of Flex's architecture there is no expansion. They offer you a fixed number of fixed-rate subbands and then further process them to baseband for you. There is no option of further processing the subband data externally to the radio hardware. As I see it Flex has stepped back to the YASHRT model of transceiver design. (YASHRT = Yet Another Stupid Ham Radio Transceiver, i.e. a glorified KWM2).</div>
<div><br></div><div>And then there is the history of Flex's outstanding software quality and rapid-fire delivery of bug-free new features. Remember, with HPSDR you have people working on PowerSDR, cuSDR, KISSconsoe, Vishnu/Thoth, ghpsdr, gnuradio, Hetrodyne, AND new FPGA firmware. If you don't like one platform switch to another. And once the FPGA firmware allows for multiple consumers of data, you could potentially run multiple back-end processing platforms concurrently, either on a single machine or spread across multiple machines. </div>
<div><br></div><div>So to my way of seeing things, comparing Flex's offerings to HPSDR is like comparing a horseless carriage to V-22 Osprey. I don't care what the price is, Flex has moved firmly to anchor themselves to the past. </div>
<div><br></div><div>In Flex's defense, I understand why they did it. They can sell more radios by making their radios just a little more advanced than current radios. People who had been riding horse-drawn carriages could understand the horseless carriage where they couldn't understand a flying machine, let alone a VTOL that cruises at 250kts. And they have moved the processing into the box where they control it and no longer have to provide technical support for windows problems because they have bypassed the Windows latency problems. The bulk of their customers can understand the product better and their tech support load is reduced. They have found a sweet spot that lets them sell more radios. But they are no longer anywhere near the forefront of HF communications systems, at least not as far as ham radio is concerned.</div>
<div><br></div><div>So, the future of radio *IS* with the multirate subband receiver with high-capacity transfer to multiple back-end processors, not YASHRT. Flex has their market and HPSDR appeals to people who want to do newer and more interesting things. OTOH, it is worth noting that the HPSDR model works in BOTH markets. Hmmm...</div>
<div><br></div></div>-- <br>Brian Lloyd, WB6RQN/J79BPL<br>706 Flightline Drive<div>Spring Branch, TX 78070<br><a href="mailto:brian@lloyd.com" target="_blank">brian@lloyd.com</a><br><span><span id="gc-number-3" class="gc-cs-link" title="Call with Google Voice">+1.916.877.5067</span> (USA)</span></div>
</div></div>