-
To anyone looking to acquire commercial radio programming software:
Please do not make requests for copies of radio programming software which is sold (or was sold) by the manufacturer for any monetary value. All requests will be deleted and a forum infraction issued. Making a request such as this is attempting to engage in software piracy and this forum cannot be involved or associated with this activity. The same goes for any private transaction via Private Message. Even if you attempt to engage in this activity in PM's we will still enforce the forum rules. Your PM's are not private and the administration has the right to read them if there's a hint to criminal activity.
If you are having trouble legally obtaining software please state so. We do not want any hurt feelings when your vague post is mistaken for a free request. It is YOUR responsibility to properly word your request.
To obtain Motorola software see the Sticky in the Motorola forum.
The various other vendors often permit their dealers to sell the software online (i.e., Kenwood). Please use Google or some other search engine to find a dealer that sells the software. Typically each series or individual radio requires its own software package. Often the Kenwood software is less than $100 so don't be a cheapskate; just purchase it.
For M/A Com/Harris/GE, etc: there are two software packages that program all current and past radios. One package is for conventional programming and the other for trunked programming. The trunked package is in upwards of $2,500. The conventional package is more reasonable though is still several hundred dollars. The benefit is you do not need multiple versions for each radio (unlike Motorola).
This is a large and very visible forum. We cannot jeopardize the ability to provide the RadioReference services by allowing this activity to occur. Please respect this.
Apco 25 Repeater?
- Thread starter n8jsn
- Start date
- Status
N
N_Jay
Guest
HabboX
Member
There is at least one amateur radio repeater in a town about 100 miles from me that is APCO Project 25 capable.
It is even listed in the ARRL repeater directory with a comment that it is Project 25.
How is this legal?
It is even listed in the ARRL repeater directory with a comment that it is Project 25.
How is this legal?
N
N_Jay
Guest
HabboX said:
Why would you think it is not legal?
HabboX
Member
Project-25 is NOT an open standard outside of Govt, Law Enforcement, Fire and other Public Safety.
If a radio manufacturer wants make a Project-25 compliant radio to sell on the amateur radio or commercial radio market, then they must license the technology.
If a radio manufacturer wants make a Project-25 compliant radio to sell on the amateur radio or commercial radio market, then they must license the technology.
N
N_Jay
Guest
HabboX said:
They must license it either way. It does not matter what the application is.
It is an open standard. The standards body is the TIA.
jim202
Member
P25 Standard
Can I ask where you are getting this information from. The last time I checked, the P25 Standard is an open standard that some of the radio companies have used the term of like "shareware".
Please tell the rest of us the source of your info that this is not an open standard.
Jim
HabboX said:
Can I ask where you are getting this information from. The last time I checked, the P25 Standard is an open standard that some of the radio companies have used the term of like "shareware".
Please tell the rest of us the source of your info that this is not an open standard.
Jim
He probably means the vocoder software. DVSI developed and market the vocoder software and they get royalties from manufacturers whenever it's loaded into a DSP chip.
Atleast that's my take on how it works.
mancow
Atleast that's my take on how it works.
mancow
HabboX said:
Think about that, if that was the case, that would make our digital scanners also illegal unless we were active members of any of the agencies you mentioned above. :roll:
HabboX
Member
No. The scanners are legal because they have licensed the technology from DVSI. And the scanner manufacturers paid for the license.
HabboX
Member
If I have a radio company, HabboX-Com, and I want to build a digital, Project-25 compatible radio, and sell it to a construction company, then I must pay the company that developed the digital technology. If I developed the radio and agreed to sell the radio ONLY to public safety agencies, then I don't have to PAY for the technology, although I must still abide by the terms of the license, which I'm sure contains some financial incentive to DVSI.
HabboX said:
Then again, your statements are contradictory or you're not being clear about what you mean, you said:
That leads me to believe that you think that no one outside those agencies can use the technology, whether they pay or not.
And by the way, those agencies ARE also paying DVSI indirectly by buying their P25 systems, just like we are paying indirectly by buying the digital scanners.
N
N_Jay
Guest
HabboX said:
Wrong.
In either case they pay the same license fee.
It is defined as "Reasonable and Non Discriminatory"
HabboX said:
Which is no different than if you wanted to use ProVoice or OpenSky. You have to pay somebody for the hardware and technology regardless for what type of use is for, i.e. business, PS, Military, etc.). APCO 25's main reason for being is for manufacturers of the equipment to have an open standard platform to work with and develop equipment that will work with each other regardless of brand, price, etc. Unlike proprietary technology like ProVoice or OpenSky which have a "head-lock" on the market for their equipment.
Maybe that's were your misunderstanding lies, as far as I know, APCO 25 wasn't strictly develop just for Public Safety and only them. They might've been the main reason and drive for it but I don't think is was meant exclusively for their use.
N
N_Jay
Guest
kikito said:
I think this is the basic misunderstanding.
Everyone pays the same royalties. It is not based on the purpose or market the end product is sold for.
N
N_Jay
Guest
kikito said:
There is a VERY significant difference.
P25 being an open standard MUST allow for any proprietary technology to be licensed in a Fair and Non-Discriminatory manner.
Non-standard technologies can be licensed under any terms the technology owner wants (or not at all).
To thow another curve here....
Am I misunderstanding this? To be P25 compliant means the product conforms to the standards set for the type of modulation etc.....
The vocoder algorithm (eg: IMBE) developed by DVSI is just a way to encode and compress the voice using the open "P-25" modulation standards (C4FM etc...). Another DSP compression and encoding scheme could be used and if that were the case then the licensing issue involving DVSI obviously wouldn't apply. The royalties or licencing would apply to whoever developed that format.
:?
mancow
Am I misunderstanding this? To be P25 compliant means the product conforms to the standards set for the type of modulation etc.....
The vocoder algorithm (eg: IMBE) developed by DVSI is just a way to encode and compress the voice using the open "P-25" modulation standards (C4FM etc...). Another DSP compression and encoding scheme could be used and if that were the case then the licensing issue involving DVSI obviously wouldn't apply. The royalties or licencing would apply to whoever developed that format.
:?
mancow
HabboX
Member
Point is that APCO Project-25 is not an "OPEN" standard and therefore not a permitted mode in the amateur radio service.
- Status
Similar threads
