Instant Gratification (Almost)

[Al42]

I can't believe that these state-of-the-art digital trunking scanners are still using slow

The interfaces are faster than the scanners.

error-prone, rs-232 interfaces.

Oh? Since when is 12 volts more error-prone than 5 volts? And why? (The noise margin is higher with RS-232, not lower.) What's the error correction method used in USB? What is it in RS-232?

I'm shocked that this 'high tech' scanner market is so retarded... It is truly giving me serious doubts about going on from here. Regards.

I guess your only solution is to stay away from scanning. The rest of us won't miss you, as we use RS-232 interfaces to program and control our scanners.

 

[Al42]

There shouldn't be the need for seeking drivers and the like, whatever software you buy should have USB drivers that will work with whatever radios it supports and the various windows o/s's that the software puports to support, just like other perhiperal devices you purchase and plug in via USB; perfect example, my Digital Camcorder. I furnished Windows XP and a USB cable, they furnished the rest including software with drivers.

And it works flawlessly with a Mac? An Acorn? A linux machine?

RS-232 devices do - USB devices usually don't. RS-232 is universal - USB requires a driver for the specific version of the specific operating system in order to work.

You have 'universal' backwards.

 

[loumaag]

Well, as has been stated in this thread, this has been discussed quite a lot.

The bottom line is that the scanner (not just the 386T) that interfaces to the computer uses RS-232 because that is what it uses. It does not need a driver (drivers contribute to "bloat-ware"), it just works. I object to whoever said that RS-232 is error prone, not true, it is much less error prone than USB because it doesn't use a specific driver for a specific device. Plug and play is fine for common use items (printers, monitors, keyboards, and yes camcorders) but plug and play scanner? Why? The problem is not that the scanner producers are not keeping up with the times, but rather the computer makers are "cheaping" out by not maintaining legacy ports on the computers they sell.

 

[MacombMonitor]

About the time you convince the scanner industry to convert to USB, all the computer hardware will drop it, and only have Fire-Wire!

Seriously, it seems that the communications industry lags behind when it comes to computers. So much of the ham radio gear, and software used to be set up for Commodore computers, when everyone was moving on to PC's, and DOS. I made mention in another thread that WiNRADiO is still marketing internal PC/radio cards, on the old ISA bus! Go figure?

 

[JoeScan]

The interfaces are faster than the scanners.

I agree, 'the device' interface has rarely been a performance issue for 'the device'. It's a user thing (plug-n-play, auto-detection, auto-configuration...). There is no reason for GER and Uniden to limit use to those that know how to configure a serial port on a PC or MAC. I can do it but I have been working computer communications for over 30 years.

Oh? Since when is 12 volts more error-prone than 5 volts? And why? (The noise margin is higher with RS-232, not lower.) What's the error correction method used in USB? What is it in RS-232?

Unfortunately, RS-232 does not really have an error recovery/detection scheme unless you want to consider a _possible_ single-bit, hardware related error detection (i.e. parity). RS-232 only specifies link-level byte transfers. And for you, what does '12 volts' have to do with RS-232 (better do a little research before you answer)?

USB is SOOOO far ahead of RS-232 in robustness, you probably do not want to go here. But we can if you want…

I guess your only solution is to stay away from scanning. The rest of us won't miss you, as we use RS-232 interfaces to program and control our scanners.

I don't care if you miss me or not (you're just a little arrogant eh?). I certainly will not miss your feeble and poor attempts at discouraging new users or those that want a better environment.

 

[JoeScan]

And it works flawlessly with a Mac? An Acorn? A linux machine?

RS-232 devices do - USB devices usually don't.

FALSEHOOD ALERT - USB has _much_ more support than RS-232 in all current operating systems. Raise your hands, how many of you are using ARM-based (Acorn) computers to interface with your scanners? Both Microsoft and Apple (even Sun) have prettty much abandoned future RS-232 serial device interfaces.

 

[JoeScan]

The bottom line is that the scanner (not just the 386T) that interfaces to the computer uses RS-232 because that is what it uses.

Now that's the most sensible response I've seen in this thread. It is a truism, it sucks but it is true. It is what it is...

 

[Al42]

I agree, 'the device' interface has rarely been a performance issue for 'the device'. It's a user thing (plug-n-play, auto-detection, auto-configuration...).

Which would be a nightmare for scanners, unlike a serial port which is just "pick the port and play".

There is no reason for GER and Uniden to limit use to those that know how to configure a serial port on a PC or MAC.

That's backwards - "configuring" a serial port means plugging in the cable. Configuring a USB connection to a scanner requires a little intelligence on the part of the user. A scanner isn't the kind of generic device USB was designed to interface. Why do you think so many people have had so many problems getting a scanner to work on a USB adapter that works with all their other RS-232 devices?

Unfortunately, RS-232 does not really have an error recovery/detection scheme unless you want to consider a _possible_ single-bit, hardware related error detection (i.e. parity).

Sorry to differ with you, but I've designed many very high-speed RS-232 links with vigorous error correction (1 in 10^13 hard error rate). And you still haven't told us what the hardware error recovery mecvhanism of USB is. (We're talking hardware to hardware here.)

RS-232 only specifies link-level byte transfers.

Since it's a document that specifies a hardware interface, what else would you expect? The hardware spec for USB doesn't specify error correction either.

USB is SOOOO far ahead of RS-232 in robustness, you probably do not want to go here. But we can if you want…

I'll see your USB and raise you an interface that's been running in a commercial environment, 7 days a week, since 1978 - without a single byte of data error as of yet.

You still haven't addressed what hardware has to do with error correction.

I don't care if you miss me or not (you're just a little arrogant eh?).

I think that, having worked in data communication for over 30 years (and having designed a few "it can't be done" systems), I can afford to be just a little when discussing the subject.

I certainly will not miss your feeble and poor attempts at discouraging new users or those that want a better environment.

Your (totally incorrect) opinion that USB is "a better environment". I noticed that your posts have been a little (excuse the massive understatement) short on facts - like ... I'm still waiting for the first one.

 

[JoeScan]

That's backwards - "configuring" a serial port means plugging in the cable.

"Backwards" ???

When you plug your serial cable in, you have to tell your OS that it has (in some cases) a device/port, baud-rate, parity, and stop-bits (no standards here).

You have to _hope_ you have a compatible cable. This probably the most painful part, get out your soldering iron to reverse pins and jumper others, you may even need to change the gender of your plug (no standards here). db-25/db-9, enough said...

You even have to tell your host application which 'port' the device is on (no standards here).

Configuring a USB connection to a scanner requires a little intelligence on the part of the user.

Yes, that's right, it requires little intellegence.

We're talking hardware to hardware here.

I'm not talking hardware. I'm talking about connecting my scanner device to an application.

The hardware spec for USB doesn't specify error correction either.

Your ignorance is showing... Try http://www.usb.org and look at the megabytes of specifications (complete crc, packet id, all in a single chip w/auto retransmit).

an interface that's been running in a commercial environment, 7 days a week, since 1978 - without a single byte of data error as of yet.

At 480Mbs vs 115kbs, I'm sure that USB has already eclipsed the total number of bits that have ever been transmitted over RS-232.

It's time to quit being a stump and join the 21st century.

"it can't be done" systems

boring... We've all been there and done that (I truly have many t-shirts).

 

[loumaag]

Well this thread is closed before it sinks lower than it has already.

Just as a note people, everyone has an opinon; some are based on experience and all experience is personal. Think about that when you think your opinon is better than the other person's opinon.