Paul - Fair points all - I just didn't understand why you would want to attempt SS on HF, but what you said makes sense.
I chuckled that you were trying to make the point to me about "it doesn't have to make sense" as a prominent touchstone in my Amateur Radio development was that KA9Q created his NET and NOS applications just because he …
Paul - Fair points all - I just didn't understand why you would want to attempt SS on HF, but what you said makes sense.
I chuckled that you were trying to make the point to me about "it doesn't have to make sense" as a prominent touchstone in my Amateur Radio development was that KA9Q created his NET and NOS applications just because he wanted to (and enable others to) play around with TCP/IP on Amateur Radio. Doing so on Amateur Radio, and later the early mobile phones, didn't make sense to KA9Q's employer at the time, which says a lot about how myopic companies can be and the value of "playing around because you want to".
KA9Q's employer? Qualcomm.
You'll get no "static" from me about "interference" which, is in the end, an engineering issue of a receiver not being designed well enough to decode only the desired signal.
Paul - Fair points all - I just didn't understand why you would want to attempt SS on HF, but what you said makes sense.
I chuckled that you were trying to make the point to me about "it doesn't have to make sense" as a prominent touchstone in my Amateur Radio development was that KA9Q created his NET and NOS applications just because he wanted to (and enable others to) play around with TCP/IP on Amateur Radio. Doing so on Amateur Radio, and later the early mobile phones, didn't make sense to KA9Q's employer at the time, which says a lot about how myopic companies can be and the value of "playing around because you want to".
KA9Q's employer? Qualcomm.
You'll get no "static" from me about "interference" which, is in the end, an engineering issue of a receiver not being designed well enough to decode only the desired signal.