Re: Modifying the Design

Joshua Mesilane <josh@...>

Hi John,

Thanks for taking what I said on board, I was worried I may have been a little aggressive and offended you/your team. People don't really like it when you pick on their products saying "what if this" or "what if that" so it's good to see that my feedback hasn't been taken the wrong way.

Once the unit is ready to release to public I'm sure we'll discuss more. I'll be one of those people that falls into the "unsupported mods" category so perhaps there is an opportunity for future development there. I do hope in the future though that the hardware can be opened up for development and experimentation by the community with the support of the parent company.

Completely understand minimum viable product, and I think you should be commended on even getting this far. So often really good products get stumped before they make it to market.

Do you have a delivery expectation for Australia as yet?


On Wed, May 23, 2012 at 12:43 PM, John D. Hays <john@...> wrote:


Keeping this short :)

1. The radio side has a very small part count and very high integration.  For the most part, moving to another band has to do with some discrete components and the PA module.  I'm sure some enterprising person will figure out "unsupported" mods.  This radio expects logic level digital in and out, we aren't taking things to audio level at all, the analog in it is at the antenna :)  The computer side and radio side are separable if one wanted to really dig into building something to replace the radio.

2. It may be possible to "hack" in a serial interface if a user really feels the need.  But remember there is no need for any external TNC, etc. except in special circumstances -- one can add them, but the radio does most functions internally.  One of the goals is to keep it an attractive price, so we try to minimize the extra add-ons that turn it into a duckbill platypus.

Thanks for your input, enthusiasm, and support. I welcome suggestions and they will be taken into consideration, however we do have an aggressive goal and at this point in time, I'm inclined to work toward delivery of the product we have presented.

One of our principles is to listen to the user community and to be as responsive and open as possible, with the caveat that some of our team members still have "day jobs" and other obligations :) 

I would rather be open about what we are or can do, than to promise everything and deliver little of it.

John D. Hays
PO Box 1223, Edmonds, WA 98020-1223 

On Tue, May 22, 2012 at 7:05 PM, Joshua Mesilane <josh@...> wrote:

Hi John,

Thanks for the quick reply.

To avoid this getting too big I'll snip out the bits I'd like to add further comment/clarification to.

Interesting to hear your thoughts. As I said, I do think that this in a fantastic product, and keep in mind this is only my opinion - nothing more.


Join to automatically receive all group messages.