[Ham-Mac] What I don't like?

[Chris Smolinski]

>What I don't like, Chris, is investing in hardware, specifically USB 
>I/O interfaces, only to find out that the software is very 
>inadequate!  Only a poor example of 'paid for' work in progress, 
>literally, Beta Release software.  Software I now feel I was duped 
>into buying from a very nice presentation web site, with excellent 
>examples of the Beta Release software performing under very 
>obviously ideal conditions.  And now, my $89.00 yearly subscription 
>to support the 'poorly paid programmer' has run out.  Nah!  No more 
>pay!  You're fired Chris!

To be honest, I am not quite sure how you could havebeen "duped". 
MultiMode is distributed as shareware. You're free to download a copy 
and try it out before buying it. I actually encourage people to try 
it before sending me any money. If you don't like it, you don't pay 
for it, it's that simple!. Some people probably like it and use it, 
but don't pay for it, although I have no control over that. It's the 
most fair system I can think of for evaluating software. I then give 
a year's worth of updates for free. I chose this over the arbitrary 
'free updates until next release' method since it would be up to me 
as to when a "major release" occurs. Then another year's worth of 
updates is $25, a little more than a quarter of the initial 
registration fee. There is no $89 a year "subscription" to MultiMode.

>And, just for the record Chris, I have written you before regarding 
>questions about ACARS performance, etc.. You never responded, or you 
>responded with a very generic, go away 'end user', 'you bother me', 
>type response.  After all, that ACARS stuff is a non-Ham related 
>issue anyway, right?

I don't recall ever receiving any messages from you prior to this 
recent thread. I try to answer each and every email I get regarding 
one of my programs, especially bug reports. I also try my best to 
help users use the programs. I have certainly never told a user to 
"go away".

Email is unfortunately not 100% reliable, especially with all the 
junk and virus messages floating around. I receive about 2,500 
messages per *day*, of which 99% are of course junk. Filtering 
removes many of these, but there's always the risk of a genuine 
message getting blocked as well. I'm sorry if your messages were 
blocked. That's one additional feature of this mailing list, it's 
often an alternate way to get in touch with someone.

>All right then, since one of my special interests is ACARS, then let 
>it be know that MultiMode's continued poor performance in ACARS is 
>just pathetic.  Even when one is setting very nearby an Up Link site.

ACARS is actually one of my special interests as well, which is why I 
implemented the ACARS decoder in MultiMode. It was actually one of 
the first modes implemented, shortly after CW, RTTY, and FAX, as I 
recall. I routinely get greater than a 90% decode rate on ACARS using 
MultiMode. I've run it in parallel with a PC based decoding program 
(RadioRaft in this case) which got similar results.

In the case of ACARS, the input volume level is the one setting you 
need to worry about (in addition to making sure squelch is off of 
course). Too low or high will cause poor decoding results. I've had 
good results with radios ranging from an Icom R-7000 down to an old 
Bearcat 220 scanner. Curiously I have had very poor results using a 
JRC NRD 545 (with the optional VHF/UHF converter). Some preliminary 
tests show that the DSP filtering in the 545 causes some severe 
distortion to ACARS signals.

>Nope!  Even as bad as the PeeCee with Windows OS platform is today, 
>with software like SkySweeper Standard around, I myself use the 
>Professional edition, SkySweeper out performs MultiMode hands down 
>in every aspect that I could possibly desire.  And with no 
>additional hardware investment required!!  Fact is, the over all 
>total investment in hardware and software is much less in comparison.

For those not familiar with PC software, SkySweeperPro is a roughly 
$700 package. I am certainly not knocking it, from other radio 
enthusiasts I know who use it, it is an excellent piece of software.

>Yes, SkySweeper is, as Chris implied, complex software.  [Actually, 
>on much closer inspection, it's really not!]  And MultiMode is 
>certainly not of that caliber.  Okay!  My whole point in starting 
>this thread in the first place was to inspire people like Chris, 
>paid well or not, to make MultiMode for the Macintosh platform 
>comparable if not better than the PC counter parts / competition.

And my reply was to ask for some specific suggestions as to what 
additions/changes you would like to see. Repeating "make it like 
SkySweeper" is a little more vague than what I was looking for. Maybe 
one day we can get to the full feature set of a program like 
SkySweeper, but we will have to get there in steps. Rome was not 
built in a single day.

I've always been open to suggestions from users, and indeed I can say 
that many of the features in MultiMode, as well as some modes 
themselves, where included at the suggestion of users. Likewise, if 
someone points out a bug, I try my best to replicate it here, and fix 
it.

>
>And now, to add insult to injury, we have the ridiculously simple 
>MP3 file, oops no it's really actually an application, Trojan Horse 
>in the community.

Yes, it's an application that shows the icon of an mp3 file. I'm 
really not sure what all the fuss is about. Frankly I'm surprised 
that no one thought of that sooner.

I again solicit any and all suggestions,  criticisms, complaints, and 
even the rare kudos for MultiMode, or any of my other programs for 
Hams who use Macintosh computers.

73
Chris
N3JLY

--