Updates are Coming

[wm8s]

I think the problem is that nobody could make money on it.

I don't want to hear your capitalist realism ! Sadly, you are undoubtedly correct. I suspect that there is a market for such a radio at, say... the $1K price point; whether that would be profitable is another question. There are plenty of rich geeks out there. If not, I can only hope that the enthusiasts who know way more about DSP than I do will step in and fill the void some day. In the mean time, I'll keep all my ideas for software ready to go...

...R

 

[donc13]

Guess this is as good place as any to ask the question: I see one big difference between the RS and the 396D is the ability to cover 700 Mhz. Does/Will the 396D have this capability with upgrades/ Etc.... Deciding between the RS unit and the 396D. Anybody have a recommendation?

Thanks
Robert in Phoenix,AZ

I think you're talking about the 796D, not the 396T The 396T DOES cover 700MHz. And that's why I sold my 796D to get a 396T

 

[DonS]

Public Domain software is NOT the same as Open Source software. In fact, stuff licensed under the GNU license terms is specifically NOT public domain. The author (or their employeer if done for hire) is the owner of the copyright on the software and even if they may allow you to freely use it, that does not me you are free to modify it.

If by "stuff licensed under the GNU license terms" you're referring to software released under the GNU General Public License ("GPL"), then someone who receives such software most certainly is free to modify it. The GPL specifically enumerates that right. For example, GPLv2 says "2. You may modify your copy or copies of the Program or any portion of it".

Of course, this does not mean that software released under the the terms of the GPL is "public domain". Copyright still resides with the author(s), but they have, by using the GPL, explicitly allowed others to copy, modify, and/or distribute the copyrighted work.

 

[yaesumofo]

I do.
If Uniden starts charging for "updates which are actually not additions of new feature but "fixes" of old problems. If Uniden for example charges for a promised feature like rebanding, I will have a hard time paying. If they do infact add new features I will welcome them with open arms and wallet providing that they are useful and not bug ridden. I would be very upset to pay for new features only to find out that I had been selected to be a paying beta tester.

BTW A few posts above there is mention of this clause:
"Changes or modifications to this product not expressly
approved by Uniden, or operation of this product in
any way other than as detailed by this Operating
Guide, could void your authority to operate this
product."

All I can say is that this particular clause is completely ridiculous. There is no agreement by me with Uniden which can enforce this. All I have to do to "break" this agreement is operate the radio in some way which is NOT outlined in th4e manual. Say for example if I chose to operate the radio underwater in a submarine. Well operation in a submarine is not expressly mentioned in the manual so it could be determined by UNIDEM to be outside the scope of this clause and UNIDEN coule determine that I am operating the radio in a way which is not consistent with what THEY consider to be correct.
IMHO this Clause is a bunch of Lawyer speak and in reality holds NO water or sand.
That said I do own the hardware and will operate it in anyway I see fit.
I have a major problem with unilateral behavior clauses. You will notice that nowhere is there any clause which defines UNIDEN's responsibility or anything describing the MINIMUM performance level of the radio. There is even a statement saying that the spec can change at any time at UNIDEN's discretion.
It is all very one sided. I believe that there is some sort of license agreement for the apco 25 decoder. who is that between us and uniden or uniden and the holder of the decoding algorithm?

All I want to do is have fun with my radio. I will continue to do so. No matter what.
Yaesumofo

I see nothing wrong with Uniden charging for updates. If we don't like the price, we don't have to buy the updates. If we think it's worth it....then why shouldn't Uniden get paid for their efforts? IF Uniden can better utilize their resources upgrading software (and it costs me $50) and I don't have to buy a new radio for $500 to get those new features...that seems like a win-win situation to me.

 

[N4DXX]

I do.
If Uniden starts charging for "updates which are actually not additions of new feature but "fixes" of old problems. If Uniden for example charges for a promised feature like rebanding, I will have a hard time paying. If they do infact add new features I will welcome them with open arms and wallet providing that they are useful and not bug ridden. I would be very upset to pay for new features only to find out that I had been selected to be a paying beta tester.

BTW A few posts above there is mention of this clause:
"Changes or modifications to this product not expressly
approved by Uniden, or operation of this product in
any way other than as detailed by this Operating
Guide, could void your authority to operate this
product."

All I can say is that this particular clause is completely ridiculous. There is no agreement by me with Uniden which can enforce this. All I have to do to "break" this agreement is operate the radio in some way which is NOT outlined in th4e manual. Say for example if I chose to operate the radio underwater in a submarine. Well operation in a submarine is not expressly mentioned in the manual so it could be determined by UNIDEM to be outside the scope of this clause and UNIDEN coule determine that I am operating the radio in a way which is not consistent with what THEY consider to be correct.
IMHO this Clause is a bunch of Lawyer speak and in reality holds NO water or sand.
That said I do own the hardware and will operate it in anyway I see fit.
I have a major problem with unilateral behavior clauses. You will notice that nowhere is there any clause which defines UNIDEN's responsibility or anything describing the MINIMUM performance level of the radio. There is even a statement saying that the spec can change at any time at UNIDEN's discretion.
It is all very one sided. I believe that there is some sort of license agreement for the apco 25 decoder. who is that between us and uniden or uniden and the holder of the decoding algorithm?

All I want to do is have fun with my radio. I will continue to do so. No matter what.
Yaesumofo

Well just do nothing when the updates come out and don't give it another thought and you and your worried mind will be just fine.

 

[DaveNF2G]

BTW A few posts above there is mention of this clause:
"Changes or modifications to this product not expressly
approved by Uniden, or operation of this product in
any way other than as detailed by this Operating
Guide, could void your authority to operate this
product."

All I can say is that this particular clause is completely ridiculous. There is no agreement by me with Uniden which can enforce this.

You are misreading the intent of the clause. Uniden does not grant "your authority to operate" a radio receiver. The FCC does. If you modify a radio in such a way that it no longer meets the required specifications (mainly about creating interference or receiving banned frequencies, etc.), then the FCC Certification of the receiver is void. It is possible, although extremely unlikely, that your radio could be confiscated by federal agents for being out of spec.

Uniden includes such language in their documents so that you can't sue them for failing to warn you if such a thing happens to you.

 

[UPMan]

BTW A few posts above there is mention of this clause:
"Changes or modifications to this product not expressly
approved by Uniden, or operation of this product in
any way other than as detailed by this Operating
Guide, could void your authority to operate this
product."

Is wording we are required to include in the manual by the FCC.

 

[Bill_White]

Hummm...
So is rebanding going to be an up-date (free) or a up-grade ($$)???

 

[Gilligan]

So is Uniden planning on updating the BC246T?

 

[jeffrogerson]

Updates to be released Monday.
You didn't hear it from me.

 

[falcon4o]

Does anyone know if the BC296d will be included in any of the updates that are comming out in the near future?

 

[kb9hgi]

Steve:

Hold off for now. We'll have the updates referenced in the 1st post out in about 2 weeks (we found some stuff that needed to be tweaked which pushed back the release date).

UPMan, I was looking around in my scanner and brought up the info and my scanner says it already has version 1.03.11 and it reads the serial number on the screen. Don't know if it came from the factory that way or if Scanmaster updated the firmware.

 

[N9JIG]

UPMan, I was looking around in my scanner and brought up the info and my scanner says it already has version 1.03.11 and it reads the serial number on the screen. Don't know if it came from the factory that way or if Scanmaster updated the firmware.

BCD996T and BC15's already have the SN, it is the BC396 and possibly the BC330 (Mine is out in the car now so I can't tell...) that would have the ESN added by this update.

1.03.11 is the latest firmware for the BCD996T, I think the updates spoken o fin this thread are going to be 2.x.x.

 

[k9swx]

Updates to be released Monday.
You didn't hear it from me.

I don't see anything on the site yet.

 

[UPMan]

Ah, well, you didn't hear it from me, either.

Due to some additional changes needed during testing as well as input from the user community, the target release date for the updates has been pushed out until around the beginning of April (no fooling).

 

[k9xyz]

Seems to be getting longer

Seems to me the "updates" keep getting "pushed back" daily. Wonder when or if they ever will be available. Glad I got my GRE's.

But it would be nice to see an update for the 396T instead of just talking about it.

 

[k9xyz]

forgot to say

It also seems a little late to be using "input from the user community" as an excuse for the updates to be "pushed back", as we the users have been making issues/requests known since these models were released and most have gone ignored.

Oh well........

 

[pyeman99]

Ah, well, you didn't hear it from me, either.

Due to some additional changes needed during testing as well as input from the user community, the target release date for the updates has been pushed out until around the beginning of April (no fooling).

The best is always worth the wait.Keith

 

[offsite]

My Uniden history doesn't go back as far as some here, I'm sure.

But I find it really remarkable that, in this age of manufacturers totally isolating customers from the internal development process, Uniden (thru UPMan's presence in this forum) is actually letting us inside a bit to share in the excitement (and frustration) that always accompanies a new product release.

As a long time Bill Gates beta tester who has paid up front for that privilege in release after release of WinXX, I find it amazing that Uniden cares enough about our niche user community to adopt this approach (an approach that must certainly create additional internal hassles for them) while taking time to wring out known issues in the software before releasing it.

No system release will ever be perfect.

But it seems Uniden is going beyond the norm to try to bring theirs a little closer.

 

[k9swx]

Ah, well, you didn't hear it from me, either.

Due to some additional changes needed during testing as well as input from the user community, the target release date for the updates has been pushed out until around the beginning of April (no fooling).

No problem, thanks for the update! I am involved with some programmers and release dates at work, so I totally know how that system operates. Keep us posted!