America's Hams Embrace Linux

Anonymous Coward writes "The current survey question over on the eham site shows that around 40% of Amateur Radio operators that responded to the survey are using Linux/Unix as an operating system in some form or other. Part of the ham radio charter is to 'experiment and innovate'...seems the tradition is alive and well in ham radio. Some of the comments are interesting as well ...What's Amateur/Ham Radio? See www.eham.net/newham/"

Comments

America's Hams

[DJCouchyCouch]

It's funny without even trying :)

Re:America's Hams

[Anonymous Coward]

Spammers v. Hams. The dark and light side of the force.

The rest of us just aren't force sensitive enough.

Re:America's Hams

[suss]

It's funny without even trying :)

Canada's Hams would've been funnier...

Dontcha' think, eh?

Re:America's Hams

[Anonymous Coward]

I give up, explain that one to me slowly.

Bayesian radio

[Baloo Ursidae]

So if Hams are linux users, does that means spams are Windows users?

Re:Bayesian radio

[rekkanoryo]

Most likely :)

I'd be more willing to bet that the CBers are Windows users, though. (Yes, I know you were joking. I chose to ignore the humorous side.)

Re:Bayesian radio

[Anonymous Coward]

*groan*

Re:Bayesian radio

[Anonymous Coward]

I'm not hear to bash CB'ers, yet i am a former CB'er and didn't make use of any electrical theory to use the tranceiver. HAM's mostly have *some* electrical theory, but that will change when the FCC is put back in line that it lawfully has NO IMPLIED JURISDICTION on the use of radio waves.

There, I said it. FCC didn't create physics, and it can't regulate the application of these natural laws. Although, Microsoft created Microsoft Windows 2003, and Microsoft regulates the use of such. Don't ask me how Microsoft does it, but FCC backs up its jurisdiction with the U.S. Military (another corporation) by use of second ammendment and unlawful application of Admiralty Law. Of'course, most of us think "We, the People" are the self-governing being and create puppet-entities (corporations/states) with certain aura of influence, yet today's world is where a out-of-hand pseudo Representative Republic will assume control of neighboring countries and is allowed to have "Federal Possesions, enclaves, garrisons, forts, and arsenals" without the consent of "We, the People" which hath created such business fiction entity. Can you say Anti-Trust?

Re:Bayesian radio

[Pharmboy]

I'm not hear to bash CB'ers, yet i am a former CB'er and didn't make use of any electrical theory to use the tranceiver. HAM's mostly have *some* electrical theory, but that will change when the FCC is put back in line that it lawfully has NO IMPLIED JURISDICTION on the use of radio waves.

There, I said it. FCC didn't create physics, and it can't regulate the application of these natural laws. Although, Microsoft created Microsoft Windows 2003, and Microsoft regulates the use of such. Don't ask me how Microsoft does it, but FCC backs up its jurisdiction with the U.S. Military (another corporation) by use of second ammendment and unlawful application of Admiralty Law. Of'course, most of us think "We, the People" are the self-governing being and create puppet-entities (corporations/states) with certain aura of influence, yet today's world is where a out-of-hand pseudo Representative Republic will assume control of neighboring countries and is allowed to have "Federal Possesions, enclaves, garrisons, forts, and arsenals" without the consent of "We, the People" which hath created such business fiction entity. Can you say Anti-Trust?

An interesting point, although I have issues with your analogy. Then what exactly do you propose, other than airwave anarchy? "We, the People" is supposed to include the government, since we either elect them, or they are appointed by people we elect, so they are "of the people".

I may agree with your implication that the FCC is more interested in commercial interest than individual rights, but this is not always A Bad Thing(tm). If 10 people want to broadcast at 1400AM (for instance) and it turns into a wattage war (winner take all) then the average joe who is only interested in listening, loses. They key is to find a balance. I would even agree that the FCC leans too heavily toward commercial interests, but again: We know your complain, but what is your SOLUTION?

My guess is you are a bit more rational than your post comes across.

Re:Bayesian radio

[collinl]

By this logic, electricity should not be regulated either.
Electrons are just framgments of physics, right?

I agree that over regulation is bad, but the way to discuss and promote alternatives should at least be sensible and justifiable, IMHO.

Lyal

This is kinda cool...

[rekkanoryo]

...and it ties into a personal experience. A friend of my family's is a ham radio operator. He is experimenting with Linux and FreeBSD. So far it seems that he prefers Mandrake over FreeBSD. So maybe this type of thing could broaden the acceptance of UNIX/Linux substantially, which is always a good thing.

Re:This is kinda cool...

[Anonymous Coward]

You make it sound like HAMs are just now learning about *nix... whats to say they haven't been using *nix all along?
-KD5UZZ

Re:This is kinda cool...

[gantzm]

I'm pretty sure Marconi wasn't using *nix.

Re:This is kinda cool...

[rekkanoryo]

I know you are trolling, but I feel compelled to answer this. Mandrake is easier to use for him, both for the installation and everyday use. With Mandrake (and RH, SuSE, and other similar distros), X configuration is done with the GUI during install. Just about everything he needed was included with Mandrake in the default installation. Less shell work is necessary with Mandrake--in fact, he's not yet found the need to use an xterm. And even if FreeBSD is more "stable," stability isn't everything. Do you think Windows got where it is by being rock-solid?

Besides, does FreeBSD provide support for ham radio like Linux does? I'm sure the guy wants to eventually integrate everything into one simple solution.

For him, Mandrake just worked. FreeBSD needed a fair amount more configuration for his preferences in a workspace, but Mandrake could meet them with the installation options. He's more or less a normal user--e-mail, light browsing, Solitaire and Mahjong, etc. Nothing overly deep. Linux distros still have a little way to go to be viable for the masses (like him), but FreeBSD is leaps and bounds behind in being ready for the masses. Just my $0.02.

Re:This is kinda cool...

[rootofevil]

right, because all the cool kids are firing up their rigs and blasting the morse code while they hop their lowriders down the street.

gimmie a break dude, what non-geeky person do you know that would consider hooking up a bunch of electronics so they can talk to people around the world at 5wpm? not to mention all the configuration necessary, tweaking the radio, the feedlines, the antenna...

it really takes a special breed of person to be a HAM.

Re:This is kinda cool...

[Anonymous Coward]

I bet you never even bothered to ask him.

Re:This is kinda cool...

[Anonymous Coward]

This is kinda cool..and it ties into a personal experience.

Man, the jokes are just writing themselves tonight.

Re:This is kinda cool...

[Anonymous Coward]

From a 'make search key=radio:' /usr/ports/comms/acfax /usr/ports/comms/hamlib /usr/ports/comms/kpsk /usr/ports/comms/xlog ...'Unfortunately,' that does seem to be it, but on the other hand, most amateur gear that can be computer-interfaced uses RS-232 and could be run by a dumb-terminal if you wanted. The biggest benefits of *NIX to the amateur are going to be 'little niceties' - like acceptance of the UTC time standard - and the reliability and extensibility 'Free'/'Open' software provides.

Now, as a real FreeBSD user, and not a troll, I'm glad the guy is having a positive experience with Mandrake - *someone* needs to be shooting for the 'desktop usability' niche. Personally, I think all the desktop *NIXen, OS X included, could go a lot further, but if he likes it, more power to'm. FreeBSD *is* a bit of a mess if you just want KDE in front of you in 20 minutes; it doesn't start looking good until you get *past* the installer/defaults and discover the consistency of the layout and documentation as an administrator.

Now, when the DragonFly project settles, I think *that* should provide a basis for BSD distros that should give Mandrake, Microsoft, and yes, even Apple a run for their money. I hate to be a fanboy, but I *am* mindblown that someone's finally launching an assault on the design elements that keep *NIX in general difficult to maintain. Until we see someone shrinkwrapping a DragonFly distro with KDE/Gnome/The_Next_Big_GUI, and developers having the sense to target it, I'll gladly defer to Mandrake, RHAT, Lindows/Lycoris and OS X.

Re:This is kinda cool...

[Anonymous Coward]

I agree that FreeBSD and Mandrake aren't anywhere near in the same league. And when I read "he chose Mandrake over FreeBSD" I rolled my eyes and thought "oh please". However, I don't like seeing that "any shitty GNU/Linux distro" bit either. Mandrake is garbage. Red hat is Garbage. SuSe, despite what people say about it, garbage. But Debian is much closer to being in BSD's league.

There are so many things I like about BSD over Linux. But you know what is sticking in my mind right now for some reason? GNU headers. #ifdef and macro central. BSD headers... Pure... Pristine. They cut right to the chase. While GNU tries to be everything to everyone, BSD just tries to work. It does an excellent job.

The great thing about BSD over Linux is that the system is maintained as a single unit, and not as ten thousand separate packages maintained by ten thousand different people, each with different plans in mind.

Re:This is kinda cool...

[rvega]

"Ham" isn't an acronym, so why are you spelling it in all-caps? You have a callsign, you should know better.

Re:This is kinda cool...

[tzanger]

You don't need to know Morse Code to do HAM radio these days, but if you can pass a simple 5WPM test the range of what you can do with amateur radio is significantly more than what you're allowed to do without.

Personally I think the moonbounces, satellite hacking, video and packet radio would be where more people would flock to...

Re:This is kinda cool...

[Anonymous Coward]

For him, Mandrake just worked. FreeBSD needed a fair amount more configuration for his preferences in a workspace, but Mandrake could meet them with the installation options. He's more or less a normal user--e-mail, light browsing, Solitaire and Mahjong, etc. Nothing overly deep. Linux distros still have a little way to go to be viable for the masses (like him), but FreeBSD is leaps and bounds behind in being ready for the masses. Just my $0.02.

Ahhhh... but you see real hams pride themselves on not being appliance operators. So if you need Mandrake for your particular disability, don't wish it upon the rest of us. Besides FreeBSD configuration is easier to deal with than some of the inane stuff in Linux. That survey also neglects those hams that use Mac OS X too. 8-P

Re:This is kinda cool...

[rootofevil]

it was mostly hyperbole dude, and if you think thats what people would *flock* to, you missed the point entirely.

HAM operators use tecnology for its own sake. the general public uses tech because it does something they want. why would they do something overcomplicated and expensive when a cellphone, or webcam does exactly the same thing? in a way that they better understand, and not have to code entirely from scratch on their own?

the answer is, they wont.

Re:This is kinda cool...

[hoty97]

The same reason you use Linux rather than Mac or Windows. Because it challenges the brain and makes me think. Trust me, I know bigger compter geeks than ham radio geeks.

Re:This is kinda cool...

[rootofevil]

right exactly, and linux is just LEAPING onto grandmas desktop right now.

Re:This is kinda cool...

[hoty97]

But no one ever said that Linux had to be the number one operting system and no one is saying that ham radio has be be a hobby for everyone. Both provide a challenge to the user and train their users in skills that are valuable. Not everyone needs to be a computer nerd and not everyone needs to be a ham radio operater. But if we can't respect each other, then how can others respect us? You guys are all about making sarcastic come backs which make you feel all warm and fuzzy that you are superior. So, if it makes you feel better, you can think that hams are a bunch of old codgers. But remember that hams were involved in every bit of wireless technology you ever thought about using.

Re:This is kinda cool...

[rootofevil]

did you read the comments? or are you just shooting from the hip?

the comments were to the effect of "this will bring amateur radio to the unwashed masses! hooray!"

in fact the opposite is true. this will merely provide another divide beween geek-culture and "regular" people. if movies (contact, frequency come to mind) cant bridge the gap, do you think an already "nerdy" operating system would do any better?

you try to lecure me on warm-fuzzy crap while preaching cant we all just get along? dismount from your high-horse i say!

i know for a fact that hams are not all old codgers - i AM one (have been since i was 16), and i work for a very popular antenna company - but by far, believe me, they are old folks. some nice, some codgerly, but 99% older folks. the apathy and lack of attention span that later generations have is to blame.

Re:This is kinda cool...

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't like seeing that "any shitty GNU/Linux distro" bit either.

Well, of course FreeBSD is superior to the shitty distros. The good distros are a different story.

40% ?

[tealover]

Quick, what's 40% of 100 ?

Re:40% ?

[Anonymous Coward]

40.

Re:40% ?

[Anguo]

RTFA

Quick, what's 40% of 1725 votes (at last count)?

Re:40% ?

[SpaceLifeForm]

Only for small values of 42.

Re:40% ?

[fireboy1919]

It's 42 for sufficiently large values of 100, and possibly also in a bistro, where none of the normal rules of mathematics or physics quite work the same. Coincidentally, this is also the answer to Life, the Universe, and Everything. Unfortunately, the question, smeared slightly by time, appears to be "What do you get when you multiply six by nine?"

Geeks using Linux?!

[Anonymous Coward]

Amazing! Who would have thought?!

Re:Geeks using Linux?!

[gilesjuk]

Given such things as i2c and other methods for low level access is it any wonder?

Hardware access in Windows becomes more abstracted and obfuscated with each release, much to the detriment of things like accurate timing which is essential for things like MIDI and controlling some hardware.

Linux gives the hacker plenty of ways to poke around with hardware ports etc..

Obligatory "-1, flamebait"

[Anonymous Coward]

The other 59.999999% use windows (and one person chose BSD, which is dying)

Re:Obligatory "-1, flamebait"

[Gherald]

> The other 59.999999% use windows

No, its 59.949999%. You have to allow for the .05% MacOS.

Re:Obligatory "-1, flamebait"

[soliaus]

59.999999%

Thats too much ham for my taste. 10,000,000 ham operators seems pretty high to me.

Re:Obligatory "-1, flamebait"

[soliaus]

Sorry, correction = 100,000,000. Forgot a zero, even higher.

Re:Obligatory "-1, flamebait"

[Anonymous Coward]

Fact: the fucktard who keeps posting the above is dying

You know you're just jealous that your shitty GNU/Linux crap can't compare to *BSD's great speed, security, and stability. Go walk into a meat grinder.

Re:Obligatory "-1, flamebait"

[Anonymous Coward]

Fact: *BSD is dying

It is common knowledge that *BSD is dying, that ever hapless *BSD is mired in an irrecoverable and mortifying tangle of fatal trouble. It is perhaps anybody's guess as to which *BSD is the worst off of an admittedly suffering *BSD community. The numbers continue to decline for *BSD but FreeBSD may be hurting the most. Look at the numbers. The loss of user base for FreeBSD continues in a head spinning downward spiral.

OpenBSD leader Theo states that there are 7000 users of OpenBSD. How many users of BSD are there? Let's see. The number of OpenBSD versus NetBSD posts on Usenet is roughly in ratio of 5 to 1. Therefore there are about 7000/5 = 1400 NetBSD users. BSD/OS posts on Usenet are about half of the volume of NetBSD posts. Therefore there are about 700 users of BSD/OS. A recent article put FreeBSD at about 80 percent of the *BSD market. Therefore there are (7000+1400+700)*4 = 36400 FreeBSD users. This is consistent with the number of FreeBSD Usenet posts.

Due to the troubles of Walnut Creek, abysmal sales and so on, FreeBSD went out of business and was taken over by BSDI who sell another troubled OS. Now BSDI is also dead, its corpse turned over to yet another charnel house.

All major marketing surveys show that *BSD has steadily declined in market share. *BSD is extremely sick and its long term survival prospects are very dim. If *BSD is to survive at all it will only be among hobbyist dilettante dabblers. In truth, for all practical purposes *BSD is already dead. It is a dead man walking.

Fact: *BSD is dying

Re:Obligatory "-1, flamebait"

[Anonymous Coward]

Get a life. Please.

Stats might have been even higher

[sakusha]

Remember "linux/unix" also includes MacOS X, and there were quite a few comments about Macs on that page. They might have gotten even higher percentages, maybe even beyond 50%, if they'd put MacOS X in the survey. Ya know, not everyone runs Intel/AMD.

Re:Stats might have been even higher

[Anonymous Coward]

"linux/unix" does not include MacOS X...

Its core was based on BSD but the rest is proprietary nonsense.

Re:Stats might have been even higher

[DavidinAla]

That is just plain stupid. Some versions of Unix -- including the original -- are still proprietary, and that doesn't make them non-Unix. You clearly don't have a clue what you're talking about. Either that or your religious attachment to open source is getting in the way of your ability to think rationally. Trying running Mac OS X and pop open a terminal window. You'll find that it's Unix, whether you like it or not.

Re:Stats might have been even higher

[alienw]

Trying running Mac OS X and pop open a terminal window. You'll find that it's Unix, whether you like it or not.

By that logic, Win95 is UNIX, too. Ever install cygwin? It's basically a UNIX-like environment that runs on Windows. In fact, cygwin is more compatible with UNIX/Linux than MacOSX is.

No, Mr. Proud Mac User. MacOSX is NOT unix. It's MacOSX with a unix-like shell. It uses a non-standard kernel, non-standard file system layout, a non-standard API, and a non-standard windowing system. There's a reason why the Open Group said Apple can't use the term 'UNIX' to describe OS X.

Re:Stats might have been even higher

[Luke-Jr]

IIRC, Mac OS X uses ext3

Re:Stats might have been even higher

[Anonymous Coward]

No, it does not, you dumbshit. It uses HFS primarily, but can use the BSD UFS, which won't support a resource fork, and is not suitable for a lot of OS X programs.

Re:Stats might have been even higher

[KPU]

True. Some of us run ARM.

Re:Stats might have been even higher

[Anonymous Coward]

Actually, it doesn't use ext3 at all.

Neither does it use Reiserfs, JFS, XFS, ext2, or anything else other than HFS+ and UFS.

Even if it did use one of those filesytems, that would not make OS X any more Unix than it already is (or isn't).

Re:Stats might have been even higher

[iCEBaLM]

You recall incorrectly, it uses HFS+ (Apples FS also used in OS9) and/or UFS. (which a lot of apps dont support and will break if you use it)

Re:Stats might have been even higher

[ExEleven]

You know, not everyone runs a single platform OS like OS-X. Linux/Unix could mean just about anything, not just Intel/AMD.

Re:Stats might have been even higher

[corkhead0]

Ya know, not everyone runs Intel/AMD

Ya, some run cyrix and alphas :)

Re:Stats might have been even higher

[DavidinAla]

It has nothing to do with pride. It's just a simple fact. Mac OS X is as much Unix as Linux or BSD or Xenix or AIX or any other Unix variant. If Mac OS X isn't Unix, then neither are the others. They're all slightly different from the "real" Unix, so they can't be Unix, either, if you think there's only one "standard" Unix. Your comparison of Cygwin running on Win95 is really weak, because it's not the OS, but rather an emulator/environment on top of Windows.

Re:Stats might have been even higher

[Geek of Tech]

By that logic, Win95 is UNIX, too. Ever install cygwin? It's basically a UNIX-like environment that runs on Windows. In fact, cygwin is more compatible with UNIX/Linux than MacOSX is.

And if I use XPde as my window manager and some version of WINE on Linux, I must be using windows, because I can run windows programs, and I see the ugly start menu? Yeah?

No, Mr. Proud Mac User. MacOSX is NOT unix. It's MacOSX with a unix-like shell. It uses a non-standard kernel, non-standard file system layout, a non-standard API, and a non-standard windowing system. There's a reason why the Open Group said Apple can't use the term 'UNIX' to describe OS X.

Oh and about OS X isn't UNIX...

From this article
The Open Group wants Apple to have Mac OS X undergo testing to certify that it complies with its standards for software bearing the Unix name; it also wants Apple to pay a fee. The Open Group says the costs to license the name are reasonable, based on the size of the company and the rough number of copies of the software Apple sells. In any case, no company is required to pay more than $110,000, said Graham Bird, vice president of marketing for The Open Group.

The only reason the Open Group won't give them their seal of approval is they want apple to pay.

Re:Stats might have been even higher

[alienw]

Cygwin is not an emulator. Why don't you actually get a clue? It's basically a set of UNIX programs compiled for windows. It runs natively on Windows, it can natively run windows programs, et cetera.

The point is, Cygwin supports most UNIX APIs and looks very much like UNIX. However, it isn't. Likewise, MacOS X might look like UNIX. However, it's more like a UNIX compatibility layer on Apple's own system core. There is a ton of proprietary, closed-source, closed-specs stuff like Quartz that is integrated very deeply into the system. MacOS X is, if anything, an updated version of NextStep. I don't think that was ever called UNIX, even though it did have the same kind of UNIX command-line support.

Re:Stats might have been even higher

[drinkypoo]

Cygwin is not just a set of Unix programs compiled for windows. Cygwin is first and foremost a compatibility layer which maps POSIX functions to windows functions through the use of a collection of DLLs. THEN it is also a set of Unix programs compiled for it. The core of cygwin includes these DLLs, and a base "filesystem" layout. The Cygwin DLLs link into your programs just like any other loadable, shareable libraries, and they take care of those various functions which are not normally present on Windows, which is why (As you say) it is not an emulator. Programs are Win32 native executables.

Cygwin has progressed to the point where most software which does not unthinkingly use syntax only valid on one system or another, and which uses gnu autoconf, will simply build on cygwin without trouble, as it should be. Other things have been ported to it.

Anyway Cygwin isn't Unix, it's a compatibility layer, and Windows is Windows, so it can't be Unix either. Obviously, Windows with Cygwin is a Unixlike operating system. (Mind you, it is quite possible to set it up in such a fashion that the average user could ssh into the system and run X apps, displaying them back to another system's X server, and never really realize that they're interacting with a Windows system. So while it's still not Unix of course, it has a tendency to look like it.)

The thing is that Mac OS X has a Unix-y kernel. When you boot a modern mac there's some key combination you can use to see kernel messages (sorry, I forgot what it was already, I only used it once) and after mach loads, the Darwin kernel pops up and generally does all the things a kernel normally does. It really does behave like a Unix is expected to.

Now back to your complaint about Quartz being "integrated very deeply into the system". It is irrelevant. A programmer never need consider Quartz, Aqua, or any of the other brand spanking new APIs which Apple has sensibly tied into the system at a tolerably low level for performance. If you are a Unix type, you can ignore the mac side of things as much as you like, down to simply installing Darwin and ignoring Mac OS X and Mac Apps, and treat your system like a Unix workstation. I understand that XFree runs on Darwin these days. Of course Apple does provide an X server for OSX, though you have to download it separately. So you really get Unix behaving like Unix if you want it.

I know many hardcore Unixheads like to pretend Mac OS X isn't Unix because of the pretty GUI, but BSD UNIX is in there and you cannot take it out because it provides much of the major functionality of the system. You can choose not to install the BSD Environment but that doesn't remove the Darwin kernel, which borrows heavily from FreeBSD and is (obviously) required for booting the system. I challenge you to demonstrate how having your kernel sit on top of the mach microkernel makes it "not Unix". Does it really matter if all the kernel functionality is in one monolithic kernel, or split up between two (or more) processes? Many people develop user-space drivers for Unix, choosing to provide support for some hardware via a daemon and named pipes or simply some form of IPC. If a Unix distribution shipped that way, would it not be Unix?

Re:Stats might have been even higher

[mindstrm]

Okay Mr. Elite Unix User....

as a fellow elite unix user, who has used, professionally, everything from Xenix in the olden days to Irix, SunOS 4.x, Solaris, HPUX, AIX, *BSD, and Linux..... and now uses OS X. Heavily....

If you ask me what Unix means, I can tell you that on one hand, it means whatever the Open Group says it means. I can also tell you on the other hand that nobody really gives 2 shits in the real world what the Open Group says. To us, unix means Linux, unix means *BSD, unix means Irix, unix means Solaris, and unix does NOT mean Windows NT with Cygwin. they are making money off a trademark. Whether something is certified Unix by the Open Group makes no difference to my purchase decision, or anything else... SCO UnixWARE was out and out unix, and it is perhaps the worst unix on earth to use.. and I don't mean because of Sco's latest charades... it's crap.

It's not MacOS with a unix like shell.. and it's not like cygwin with bloated, slow libraries emulating unix system calls. Yes, there are some things that are missing... the file system layout IS standard, the API is VERY standard, minus a few calls, and the windowing system is irrelevant. Mine has a full X implementation, built by apple for OSX.. what exactly is the problem? The shell isn't unix-like, it's BASH. Or CSH. OR any other shell you like. The filesystem layout is standard, with addons for some apple stuff. I have no problem finding every traditional unix tool I want, where I expect it to be. A non standard kernel? Who determines what's standard? Seems to work fine on the hardware for me.

If you want to go by the open group's distinctions, sure, OS X is not Unix. Neither is Linux. Neither are several other systems out there. Does anybody professionaly really care, other than being able to look smart and tell you who holds the unix trademark? Nope.

Re:Stats might have been even higher

[mindstrm]

I think you haven't used OS X.

IT's not a unix compatability layer.. it's more the other way around.. The MacOS desktop and the underlying system are built on the BSD core, with extensions for some stuff like quartz (the low level graphics engine), etc....

Some pople seem to feel that tha'ts what Apple means by Unix in OSX.. that it's like cygwin, tacked on so they can say it's UNIX. It's nothing of the sort.. it's out and out unix, plus other stuff.

Process control happens like unix. PS will list all the processes, and I don't mean by some hack that makes it look kind of the same like cygwin uses. You can boot OSX without the graphic desktop... and you are left with.. unix. Looks like unix, smells like unix.. I don't see in what way it's not unix, other than the Open Group wanting some money.

Re:Stats might have been even higher

[Kymermosst]

Does this mean that when I launch bash under Cygwin, I have Unix as well? :)

(It's a joke. Laugh.)

Re:Stats might have been even higher

[DavidinAla]

First, I called Cygwin an emulator/environment (or something like that), because it's not the actual OS running on the computer. It's a layer allowing Unix commands to run on top of Windows. In another response, someone else did an excellent job of explaining why Cygwin is radically different from Mac OS X. But since you seen uninterested in facts which don't support your position, you're probably not interested.

Second, you're clearly very uninformed about Mac OS X. You really should know much more about it before you go making such dogmatic and uninformed assertions. Others here have laid out the facts about why it's Unix, but you'll certainly ignore those facts, too. The fact that it has "a ton of proprietary, closed-source, closed-spec stuff like Quartz" is totally irrelevant to whether it's Unix or not. Your religious bias is showing badly. You can debate about whether closed source is good or back, but that has nothing to do with this debate. Unix and open source are not synonymous, contrary to what you seem to think.

Third, you're utterly and completely wrong about NEXTSTEP not being Unix (or being called Unix). Anybody with even passing familiarity with the history of NeXT would be embarrassed to make such a laughably wrong statement.

You can meander around irrelevant points all you want, but it doesn't change the fact that you're mistaken when you claim that Mac OS X isn't Unix. It's as much Unix as any other Unix derivative.

Re:Stats might have been even higher

[NateTech]

And some of us run sun4u/linux. :-) Old Ultra 1's make pretty good commodity Linux boxen.

yeah, ok...

[verbatim_verbose]

I love how you guys phrase these things.

Yes, they embrace Linux. But that's 38% of them. 51% are still embracing Windows.

Re:yeah, ok...

[dema]

And the remaining 11% love Apple! :D

Now if only Apple's market share could get even that high :\

Re:yeah, ok...

[Oper Sorcerer]

Actually MSDOS - to run their Morse code software.

Re:yeah, ok...

[Uncle Gropey]

Morse is officially done for now. Get with the program!

Re:yeah, ok...

[razjml]

And how much of the general population uses Linux? What? Less? There you go.

Re:yeah, ok...

[Oper Sorcerer]

Never heard of QRP? Low power radio, no voice. Uses Morse code. Software sends/receives and translates to text.

Nice wording

[soliaus]

"America's Hams Embrace Linux"

Oh come on now! Thats like saying "Americas Idiots Embrace Windows". Wait a sec...

New Linux Distro?

[CaptainTux]

Might we see a new distro of Linux targeted at hams? Maybe XV7VYK2 Linux? hehe Tux

Re:New Linux Distro?

[kb3edk]

No need for a new Linux distro - most of the ham interfaces work fine with all distros and are available as RPMs, DEBs, etc. You will find slightly higher percentages of hams using SuSE (because of a tradition of working on ham apps) and Slackware (just for its "tinkerability") distros than in the regular Linux user population, IMHO.

Re:New Linux Distro?

[dooling]

Debian GNU/Linux has a hamradio section already.

Re:New Linux Distro?

[commodoresloat]

Maybe XV7VYK2 Linux?

Nah; It'll be called Swinux.

What's Linux - Windows

[krymsin01]

Are not these two vote options redundant?

Re:What's Linux - Windows

[rekkanoryo]

Not entirely. "What's Linux?" implies that that operator has led a more sheltered computer-related life than the typical Slashdotter (i.e. matches the majority of the Windows user base) and therefore has never heard of Linux. The other choice implies that the operator has at least heard of Linux but has decided not to tinker with it for one reason or another.

So, no, they're really not redundant at all when some logical thought is applied.

Heh

[Henry V .009]

I have a General class license. I use Windows XP.

Re:Heh

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah? I have an Extra, and I use Red Hat. So there. :P

Re:Heh

[cide1]

I have my Technicians ( KB9RGV ) , I use Red Hat.

Re:Heh

[Anonymous Coward]

Yeah, I'm a real 20 wpm Extra. I use Tops-20 and a KSR33.

Re:Heh

[geekoid]

When they say innovate, they don't mean the MS definition of inovation.

Re:Heh

[Cpt_Kirks]

I use Windows XP.

Blasphemer!

Somebody hold him and I will get the "M$" branding iron heated up.

Re:Heh

[Geek of Tech]

I have a Technician Class (KG4HVP) and I use Linux Mandrake 9.1

Re:Heh

[calidoscope]

Well I have an Extra class (since 1981). I run Solaris 9. ;-)

Re:Heh

[Supercilious]

The only thing stopping most general class amateurs is the code requirement - hey wait.. isn't that what keeps people using windows?

Re:Heh

[Supercilious]

Yeah, but could you run Red Hat 7.0? A lot of guys and gals ramping up now that there is no code requirement (on either).

Re:Heh

[cide1]

I started on Red Hat 4.2, in 1997. Since then, I've tried Gentoo, Linux From Scratch, Debian, and a bunch of others. I keep coming back to Red Hat, it seems much more polished to me. I've learned how to deal with RPM dependancy hell, and Im not a huge fan of any of the other packaging systems. LFS was cool, and I learned a ton doing that. I started that on 2.2, which was in early 2000. It just took so much effort to build everything from source. I was able to get Mozilla built, without too much pain, but things like OpenOffice had quite wierd build systems (at the time) I have seen that the OpenOffice build has improved. Anyway, I'm rambling, and arguing on the intenet is like the special olympics, even if you win you are still retarted.

Re:Heh

[jxs2151]

I have an Extra class license and I use both.

Crystal ball

[Nucleon500]

I predict than in the next 6 hours, Linux usage among ham radio operators will jump to 75%.

Great idea!

[Jennifer E. Elaan]

What a wonderful idea! Let's poll a bunch of people who are, in large part, ELECTRONICS HOBBYESTS, and ask them what OS they prefer!

HAM radio types are often some of the most technically knowledgable in the world. I'll bet that even the ones that still use Windows know enough Linux to survive. They may even have legit reasons for using Windows (like certain Windows-based EDA software still beats anything on Linux...)

I have another great idea. Let's poll KERNEL HACKERS and ask what OS they run :P

Re:Great idea!

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it true that there are huge restrictions on what you`re allowed to talk about on HAM radios? I seem to remember its pretty much limited to stuff like your location, equipment etc. Not discussion of politics, anything which could be considered obscene etc.

Re:Great idea!

[Anonymous Coward]

Except for the rapidly increasing stylishness of attacking perceived linux zealotry, how is this insightful? This post belittles everyone mentioned in the article and directly challenges its relevance. It's flamebait, morons.

Re:Great idea!

[Felinoid]

I think I know where this came from.
A few Slashdot storys ago. I made this post showing how similar the Linux and Ham communitys are.

Pay attention to the rely. The growing populaity of Linux in the ham community is no secret BUT there are people who insist on denying it.

The Ham community is much older than the Linux, open source and free software communitys and knows what to do to crush misinformation before it spreads.

Side comment: Excuse me if I seam abrupt. I've just had a chat with a person who believes an infer red vision camra can't see during the day time and practicly worthless at night. He's dead sereous. Someone else reminds me this guy has some pritty strange ideas as to how the world works.

Re:Great idea!

[Anonymous Coward]

Is it true that there are huge restrictions on what you`re allowed to talk about on HAM radios? I seem to remember its pretty much limited to stuff like your location, equipment etc. Not discussion of politics, anything which could be considered obscene etc.

No, there are NOT huge restrictions about what you can discuss over amateur radio. The only things off limits are profanity (many still seem to get away with this, however,) playing music over the amateur radio (with the exception of incidental music when transmiting to an orbiting station -- seriously!,) and broadcasting information to the general public. -- KD5LSX

Re:Great idea!

[njchick]

Sorry, but sarcasm and ignorance don't mix. There are much more operating systems than just Windows and Linux. It would be reasonable to expect electronics hobbists to try something else as well. The comments indicate that NetBSD was mentioned several times.

Have you ever heard of KA9Q? It's an OS older than Linux and it was written by a Ham radio enthusiast Phil Karn. It's a shame it wasn't mentioned in the survey. I can imagine some people are still using it, but they probably don't have browsers to vote :-)

Moderators, there is nothing insightful in treating this article like a piece of propaganda and attacking for that.

Re:Great idea!

[tres]

This may be true to some degree, but I think you've overstated it quite a bit.

But then, maybe you were being facetious and I'm too dense to see it (but since this has been modded "+5 Insightful," not "+5 Funny" I don't think I'm alone).

Anyway, there's lots of different kinds of geeks around, let me tell you about one:

He's had his Amateur Extra Ham license for well over 20 years now.

He's been hobby programming for a good fifteen years.

He's been working with Novell Networks for about ten years; he's Novell certified to do so.

And I just built him his _first_ Linux box. This is someone who hasn't touched a *nix system for well over ten years. Although he's a very smart guy, he's still trying hard to understand the Linux zeitgeist. Consequently I'm providing support via SSH and VNC on a pretty regular basis.

So, although I don't disagree--the correlation between Ham hobbyists and computer geeks is definitely not spurious--I do think that you can't just take for granted that someone who knows Ham knows Linux, or would be interested in Linux just to geek-out on.

Linux is already a cornerstone in this community because of the kind of people you're talking about. I think Linux is growing in this community faster than it is for your average "Joe 56k" Home PC user, but I think in great part it's because of the applications that are available. The excellent development tools and open platform are definitely pluses, but the big draw seems to be the number of Ham applications that are already available.

Re:Great idea!

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's poll KERNEL HACKERS and ask what OS they run :P

My own, of course :)

Re:Great idea!

[Jennifer E. Elaan]

I'm actually surprised that none of the moderators caught the fact that I was trying to make a joke. Oh well. Yes, I'm definately overstating it.

Although I would still expect hardware hackers tend to have a bit of an interest in the kind of software that lets them tinker. I know I do.

Nothing can stop Linux now

[evilempireinc]

Thank God! With this powerful special interest group behind Linux, nothing can possibly oppose it!

Re:Nothing can stop Linux now

[Anonymous Coward]

I, for one, welcome our ham radio overlords....

That's all we need...

[fuzzix]

Ham radio enthusiasts using Linux could give the impression that it's some sort of marginal, nerd OS and that couldn't be further from the truth.

hmm

[ShadowRage]

only reason I'd use ham radio is for a last resort or communication, too bad they're so expensive. too bad bsd is dying, it has some guts to it and it did have a lot of influence over linux. tis a shame, really. I have a question, is there any way you can connect your computer through ham radio to connect to a ham radio server on another part of the world and keep some speed?

What's Easier

[MBCook]

If you want to expirament with radio connectivity between computers, protocalls for use over radio, and other such things, which is easier? Windows or Linux?

• With Linux, you have full access to source code for the OS, and can EASILY add new protocalls, network interface like things, and other such things you may need for expiramenting. It's all very well documented too.
• With Windows, you... um... good question. You COULD write drivers, but I don't know how you would get started. I'm sure there are a few books on the subject, and maybe some web pages, but the ease of information could hardly match Linux. I'd guess most things are implemented as programs rather than drivers.

Add to the fact that many (most?) hams are technically minded, and the fact that Linux and such are free and come with compilers and other such things, and that Linux CAME FROM expiramentation, can we really be that suprised?

MBCook -KC0QBP

Re:What's Easier

[2short]

"With Windows, you... um... good question. You COULD write drivers, but I don't know how you would get started. I'm sure there are a few books on the subject, and maybe some web pages"

There are quite a few boks on the subject, and certainly some web pages. In particular MSDN comes to mind: all the docs and apis you need in one place. You don't know how you would get started, because you've never tried.

If the abiltity tinker and experiment with your OS is a driving factor, go with Linux, absolutely. (I'd also go with linux based on various other things being your driving motivation) But if you're interested in extending MS lock-in, I mean, uh, writing Windows specific software, you'll find that MS is as helpful and friendly as you could ever hope for. They understand that as mammoth as they are, it's the many third-party developers writing Windows specific code that really make the monopoly thing work. If you want to (or have to) write such code, they really do make life pretty nice for you.

In any case, I've got to agree "Ham radio operators use Linux more than the general population" is definitely a no-brainer. Why is this newsworthy? I mean it's obviously Ham-radio booster month here on Slashdot, but why exactly? Did one of the editors just get into ham radio? I don't dipute that ham radio is cool enough, or rather nerdy enough. Based on the Hams I've known it's got a bigger nerd factor than basically anything, but pace yourselves! This at-least-one-Ham-story-every-day just can't stay interesting. As evidenced by this article. Or even this post; I'm just rambling at this point, clearly. Insomnia will do that. Sigh. Why am I still awake?

Re:What's Easier

[jargonCCNA]

Linux CAME FROM [experimentation]

Actually, Linux came out of Linus wishing he could have his own copy of Minix without having to pay for it. So, rather than resorting to outright piracy/theft (as in theft of the install disks from the university), he reverse-engineered it.

Other 60

[Anonymous Coward]

Unfortunatly the other 60% have been broadcasting sobig and Lovsav into the airwaves

Hams?

[volpe]

So... William Shatner uses Linux?

Re:Hams?

[Anonymous Coward]

"So... William Shatner uses Linux?"

...only 40% of him.

maybe that's the "final front ear" he was always going on about?

Re:Hams?

[Anonymous Coward]

Shatner's a damned Canuck.

Re:Hams?

[Anonymous Coward]

So... William Shatner uses Linux?

Wouldn't that be CANADIAN ham at that point? >;)

This just in...

[CaptainTux]

THIS JUST IN TO CNN:

According to recent reports from our sources it seems that a mass revolution is taking place in the ham radio world tonight. After a short article appeared on the popular Slashdot website the ham radio frequencies were flooded with new users bringing towers, repeaters, and other equipment arount the world to a virtual standstill.

While we're still trying to determine if this could perhaps be the first radiowave based denial of service attack we were assured by knowledgable users that it most likely isn't. According to someone identifying themselves as BSDZealot, most of the on air chatter seems to consists of people calling each other gay niggers, fucktards, idiots, and making random pro/con statements about the usability of Windows versus Linux. More at 11.

Re:This just in...

[Geek of Tech]

Uh, sorry, but I don't think you can say gay niggers, or fucktards on HAM Radio. Not allowed to cuss. Sorry.

Hams and Linux

[Lxy]

This is weird because I was asking a guy just today on why so many hams DON'T use linux. Most of them have at least heard of it, if not tried it.

Hams are technically literate folks who don't pay for anything if they don't have to. If you can build it, why pay someone for it? I'm shocked that most of them can make a radio out of some wire and a resistor because it's cheap, yet choose to pay $200 for a Windows license.

And as for the poll, I assume the same rules apply on eham.com as /., I quote::

• This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane.
  

So whether or not we should put any stock into a poll on another website and make an article out of it makes me wonder.

Re:Hams and Linux

[SuperQ]

yep.. I see this too. Many hams I know are not linux/unix users. I also have a hard time finding open source/etc solutions for ham problems. software like radio mobile, echolink, and other usefull ham apps are only available in windows.

When it comes to packet radio, there is a lot more linux stuff going on.. mostly because packet started before windows existed, and the only OS that networked was UNIX.

Re:Hams and Linux

[KC7GR]

Lxy Writes...

"Hams are technically literate folks who don't pay for anything if they don't have to. If you can build it, why pay someone for it? I'm shocked that most of them can make a radio out of some wire and a resistor because it's cheap, yet choose to pay $200 for a Windows license."

Speaking as a long-term hamateur (I've been licensed nearly 26 years), I have some comments on your statements above.

First, name me ANYone on this planet that doesn't pay for something if they don't "have" to. I can assure you with absolute confidence that this is not a trait that is limited to ham radio folk. ;-)

Amateur radio, like other hobbies, gives back exactly what you put into it. If you just want to spend a minimal amount on a low-end radio for use on the local repeaters, and chat with others, fine. You'll get that, no problem.

If, on the other wing, you want your signal to go halfway around the planet, bounce off the moon and land back on Earth at some distant point, or put up your own repeater or APRS station, you're going to need to invest significant $$ in the appropriate hardware (and software, if needed) to do it.

Considering the high cost of some of that hardware, particularly specialized commercially-made antennas, is it any wonder that many hams (myself included) are tinkerers and kit-builders? Is it any wonder that we're opportunistic as all get-out when it comes to scrounging, and re-utilizing surplus parts to build our own stuff?

As far as your comments on $200 or so for Windows goes, let me add this. Learning how to tinker properly with electronics, especially radio hardware, takes lots of time. It also takes, in most cases, a significant investment in test and measurement equipment, and many specialized hand and power tools. Oscilloscopes, signal generators, and spectrum analyzers are not cheap, even on the used market, any more than a good drill press or contact crimper is.

Given that, and given the high degree of difficulty, and the equally high degree of skill, required to write a decent operating system or application software, I would certainly (heck, I did) choose to simply buy available products if they will meet my needs.

Put it another way; I really don't have the time or skill to write my own OS and software, nor is it something that I would choose to learn. It's enough of a challenge keeping up with what I'm doing on the hardware side (which does, admittedly, include the occasional bit of assembly code for embedded microcontrollers). It's much more expedient, in many cases, to simply buy what is already made that can be adapted to serve my requirements.

73 de KC7GR

The Ultimate

[spoonist]

For the ultimate in merging Linux with radios:

GNU Radio

From the FAQ:

It does signal processing in free software. This means you can learn from it, and modify it to do new things. The big idea is to give ordinary software people easy access to 'hack' the electromagnetic spectrum, that is, to understand the radio spectrum and think of clever ways to use it.

Re:The Ultimate

[Anonymous Coward]

GNU Radio is beautiful, and of utmost interest to many hams.

However, what's interesting is the misconception that it makes it easier for the 'common man' to 'hack the spectrum.' I don't really know where to begin with this, but I'm disappointed when my seemingly-intelligent friends feel it supports an argument for deregulating spectrum... when, at the same time, they complain about microwaves and cordless phones interfering with their 802.11b.

'Software radio' in general, and GNU Radio in specific, make it easy for radio nerds to do some really awesome things... Things like inventing and deploying the CDMA modulations all cellphone standards are now moving to. (Please, no revisiting the Qualcomm vs. GSM arguments; *both* network standards are now shifting to the CDMA *radio technique* 'under the hood.') Things like 'ultra wideband' modulations that haven't come to market yet.

In other words, for the most part, things that are 'useless' and 'experimental' until they're turned into products (like 802.11b cards) that you people *buy.* It's a new and versatile technique for the demodulation and sampling of signals, nothing more, nothing less.

Now, when desktop CPUs hit 10-100GHz, then, perhaps, it will be cost-effective for the average user to use their CPU for this purpose, versus a TV or 'radio' card, but by then, DSPs will probably still be far ahead, and there's little reason to max out your 'desktop' CPU when a dedicated embedded radio ('conventional' or 'software' running with a dedicated DSP chip) could be doing the work for you.

If you want to snoop on the police, decode weather satellite imagery, or listen to the guys at the Taco Bell drive through take your order, you can do it all with a conventional radio (and a sound card, should your computer need to be involved). If you want to watch TV - analog or digital - this too can be done with cheap, 'conventional' hardware. It's only when you want to do something like watch *every TV channel at once* that GNU Radio begins to shine... and unfortunately, the capabilities of the ADC solutions presently in use with it are far below what would be necessary to allow such.

Let's be honest

[$eRvmanIO]

As a ham and a linux/windows/blah blah blah user, there are many reasons why hams gravitate to linux:

1. Elitism - Yes, Linux users and Hams DO have something in common.
2. Technical aspects - speaks for itself
3. Cheapness - Combine used computer parts from Hamfests and free OS and you got the spirit of Ham Radio operators.

America's Hams?

[FsG]

Wouldn't this be a better icon for the story?

If you thought computer guys are nerds ...

[greenmars]

... then you haven't spent time with a bunch of hams. Holy Moly. I got enough geek/nerd time in one hour to last me the whole weekend. Talk about a convention with no girlfriends in sight ...

Re:If you thought computer guys are nerds ...

[Anonymous Coward]

Ham conventions are the only place where there is a line to use the man's room. 90% of the attendees are male, and of those 90% are over 50 years old.

40% of the hams _online_

[kwj8fty1]

Most of the 'hams' out there are not even on the internet. Wait until they die off (soon, I'm guessing), and the newerr generation takes over. Then we'll see some cool stuff again from hams.

Currently, the ax25 stuff under linux works, but it's licences are lame (non-gpl). I had at one point a working version of tcpdump that worked with ax25 frames for ham/digital stuff, but it wasn't 'legal'.

One of the big problems with ham 'warez' are that most of it is really lame windows shareware - - most of the current tools are not free, and most don't have equiv. linux versions.

Re:40% of the hams _online_

[pe1rxq]

I think you have had one blow to the head to many....

The linux ax25 stuff is all gpl as its in the kernel... Secondly you don't need tcpdump at all to watch ax25 frames you simply use 'listen' which is part of the gpl'ed ax25 tools

There are some packet programs that are not free but mostly they are monolithic shit ported from dos to work on a more modern os (linux)

Jeroen

Re:A Perfect Match

[LinuxGeek]

Since you said method (meaning radio emission), that also leaves out cell phones, wifi, bluetooth, microwave relay towers, pretty much every communication method except wire or optical fiber.

I am just taking your flamebait post as a chance to remind you that if it dosen't use wires, hams have probably been involved in development at some stage.

Linux Kernel Options

[Student_Tech]

This shouldn't be too much of a surprise I think. The main menu for the Linux kernel has "Amateur Radio" options in it. So they have taken the time to add support for AX.25 (a variation of X.25 used for packet radio) and added it to the kernel as well as drivers for a bunch of interfaces.
Last time I played with it (about kernel 2.2.12) it worked fine and connected to the rest of the packet users without any problems. Made it really easy to pass packets destined for the AMPR out from my network at home.

linux use

[mut3]

go check out irlp at www.irlp.net . guess what THAT uses!

I am Ham

[KB3JJY]

I am a ham a run linux on all my radio computers and am general class, also(17) a young ham. I still have linux on my parents box though

Most people have

[Anonymous Coward]

Time for about 5 pursuits:
Job
Wife
Kids
Chores
Ham Radio -or- Linux

Only 1685 were in the survey

[Anonymous Coward]

Which makes it only 674 used linux.

IN A COUNTRY OF 320,000,000.

Way to ass hats. Taken a leaf from the iraqi information minister have we? You fuckers are even worse then SCO.

Re:Only 1685 were in the survey

[_KiTA_]

And you're a dumbfuck troll. Nothing to see here, Next idiot, please.

Re:Only 1685 were in the survey

[Anonymous Coward]

You are an asshat. Go read a book on statistics.

New Slimming agent..

[Anonymous Coward]

Linux has been taking America's hams by storm. "The Bloat is no more" stated one slim and confident former windows user. "I mean, I have been using windows for so long, just like 95% of others out there."

"Its good know that there are alternatives" said another new Linux user. "Now I can tell what I am using just by looking at the source, its great!"

Well there you have it folks Linux the alternative for the Hams of America. So if you don't trust what your using today, try Linux! Best of all its free!!

Marginally Relevant

[Xenoproctologist]

Saying "40% use Linux" isn't very meaninful without some form of usage context. I'd be more interested if there were a follow-up poll in which asked what they were using it for...

* Primary general-use computer
* Non-primary general-use computer
* Exclusively for Ham work
* Saw picture of penguin on back page of my Linksys router or Tivo manual

ok

[Anonymous Coward]

So one group of losers is correlated with another group of losers. Who knew??

Well, not quite the same thing

[The Tyro]

Just because HAMs like myself tend to be hardware geeks does not necessarily mean we're software geeks too... though we probably pick it up a lot faster than the average joe. Just the tendency to tinker probably leads some HAMS to linux.

I'm an amateur operator, and I run windows AND linux. I'll admit, Windows is primarily for gaming, but there are some HAM-type applications that just are not as robust under linux. Here's a good example:

Winradio is a wonderful piece of scanning equipment, whose software runs best under windows. Yes, I'm aware of Linradio but the software is not as full-featured.

I'm sure other amateurs can come up with other examples. Personally, I'd like to know how many amateur operators run completely SANS windows. I'd lay even money that Bruce Perens doesn't own a windows box, so there's one...

Re:Well, not quite the same thing

[Geek of Tech]

I'm a technician class ham and I've got two computers.

Desktop is running Windows 98 (as default boot) and Lycoris 1.19 (Hardly ever use the desktop, unless I want to print something)
Laptop is running Mandrake 9.1 (as default boot) with Windows XP. I only use Windows for.... hmmm..... yeah.... that's about it....

Re:Well, not quite the same thing

[DF5JT]

" I'm sure other amateurs can come up with other examples. Personally, I'd like to know how many amateur operators run completely SANS windows. I'd lay even money that Bruce Perens doesn't own a windows box, so there's one..."

Here's another one.

Main main interest in ham radio is shortwave DXing, long CW (morse code) plain text chats, contesting and pile-ups.

I am using a regular telnet connection to a DX-cluster, use xplanet as my desktop background to see day/night distribution together with propagation paths and an updated country list (http://www.qsl.net/df5jt/snapshot2.jpg is a screenshot of my desktop). Logging is done with CX, an open source clone of the most widely used contest logger by K1EA.

No need to go back to Windows for me.

Of course we are!

[coene]

Yes, I believe that they call us "nerds".

Starting Out...

[MrEnigma]

I know there has been tons of Ham Radio stuff posted to /. recently...

My question, is there a beginners FAQ or anything written up? I'd love to get into it, get my callsign/license and then some equipment, problem is I don't know exactly what all there is to get, or what I need....

Kind of like *NIX needs a better way to promote itself, sounds like Hams could use this also...

Re:Starting Out...

[Atilla]

Besides looking on eham.net and arrl.org web sites, you might try to find out where your local ham club is... the best resource for amateur radio information are the amateur radio operators!

you might be able to find a good starter radio on ebay for under 100 bucks.

the technician class license is really easy to get, and you don't even have to know morse code to get licensed (general and extra classes require 5 words per minute proficiency). It helps if you have some electronics background, though.

Re:Starting Out...

[Anonymous Coward]

If you in the USA, you could check out the American Radio Relay League. Other countries should have a similar oragnization.

Re:Starting Out...

[Geek of Tech]

If you head to your local Radio Shack, they should have the stuff. They'll have a little booklet you can buy to help prep you for the test. And make it a point to go to a few hamfests.

This is the book. The Beginner's Handbook of Amateur Radio, 4th Edition. I believe this is the right book.....

Re:Starting Out...

[Sir Toby]

I've had this book recommended to me by a Ham friend of mine:

Now You're Talking

I read a bit of the 4th edition in preparation to get my license, and I enjoyed what I read. However, I got distracted by a new job and a move and the tests have been updated again. I've just ordered the 5th edition, and will give it another try.

Re:Starting Out...

[Anonymous Coward]

First of all, the FCC does not control use of the radio waves; they simply offer training and licensing to operate under their regulation. Lawfully, they can't force you to contract with them, unless of'course they perpetuate war/duress upon you. How it works, after reading the No-Code Technician study-guide, is that FCC-regulated station operators are not allowed to communicate with foreign station operator(s) when no treaty agreement exists between the foreign station operator(s) and the FCC.

Second of all, nobody needs to buy a ham radio from eBay. The majority of ARRL study guides are complete with electricity theory studies; if pursued, then the slowest learner (like me) will be able to construct a homebrew 10 meter transmitter and receiver within one month of study and with bare necessities available in any household kitchen. Believe me, I built my tranceiver from a 1) parts found in a hair blow-dryer, 2) a small length of ferrite rod and wire, 3) homebrew capacitors made from plastic party cups with mineral water and each separated by aluminum foil, 4) some high-watt rating resistors from an old toaster oven, 5) house-wall light switch (for toggling halfduplex tx/rx, 6) 35 watt lightbulb, 7) 12v 500 cranking-amp (automotive) battery, 8) full-wave length coat-hanger antenna, 9) some ol' Silicon controlled rectifiers, and 10) one coconut. With my setup, I can reach giligan from the mainland (huntington beach-California to Catalina Island-California repeater; about 22 miles).

Re:Starting Out...

[Atilla]

umm... if FCC catches you transmitting without their "contract", they will pull the plug on you, whether you think it's legal or not.

oh, and i can't think of any ham operator (incl. myself) that will be willing to talk to you on the air if you don't have a callsign, unless you're "third-party" traffic and _not_ the operator.

and sure, it's easy to put together a mcgyver radio, but i sure wouldn't want to walk around town with a fucking grammaphone... i would rather get a cheap HT.

but you have fun talking to gilligan.

Why, then...

[pongo000]

...was the most recent Linux ham radio HOW-TO last updated over 7 years ago?

Re:Why, then...

[the system fucked me]

Because of all the stunning break throughs in the HAM industry?

Re:Why, then...

[Poeir]

They're all running Debian stable. It's still perfectly up-to-date.

I am Grammar

[toomuchPerl]

I am a grammar a need grammar checker for my sentences, also like post slashdot. I still have to finish high school though -toomuchPerl

Re: Linux and Hams...

[Anonymous Coward]

"...ballot stuffers... If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane."

What? You got somthing against Florida politics?

Obligatory Simpsons Quote

[Anonymous Coward]

I am called Ham because I enjoy Ham radio. /Superfriends

innovate?

[MrFreak]

"Part of the ham radio charter is to 'experiment and innovate'"... by clinging on to an anachronistic method of communication?

The frikkin' Amish are beating these guys!

Re:innovate?

[geekoid]

yes, radio. nobody uses that kind of technology.
And by nobody, I mean everybody.

You don't use any form of wireless communication? if it aint laser, then its radio.

Re:innovate?

[gnu-sucks]

according to dictionary.com, anachronistic means:

1.The representation of someone as existing or something as happening in other than chronological, proper, or historical order. 2.One that is out of its proper or chronological order, especially a person or practice that belongs to an earlier time

I see you are absolutely correct. Ham radio is way ahead of its time, in several ways.

for one, we had wireless networking back in the 70s in the form of RTTY

Not to mention wireless communication, such as the autopatch my dad had in his car in 1965 which he made phone calls off on a regular basis

Lets not forget communication sats which some of you are likely posting via (without knowing) are offten used as amature radio repeators

Obviously the above poster doesn't know or realize the ways amature radio has impacted his life - I hope you can all sence my sarcasm above. But seriously, folks, don't bash it if you don't know it, that just puts you down with the "bsd is dying" crowd.

Re:innovate?

[Tony-A]

by clinging on to an anachronistic method of communication?

When all of the modern stuff doesn't work (due to natural disasters, etc.), the hams manage to get communications through.

Re:innovate?

[Anonymous Coward]

One heck of a good smackdown.

U are teh man!

Hams & Linux: Not quite yet.

[Teeja]

As a ham, I have experimented with Mandrake & Red Hat, but I don't believe the average Amateur Radio Operator will be making the switch to any form of Linux soon. Why? Because hams love radio and are primarily interested in computing as a tool to extend their abilities within radio experimentation.

Yes, more hams are getting into Linux, mainly because experimentation is in their blood... but the question is "what are hams passionate about?"-- answer: ham radio, not necessarily computing, although integration of the two is occuring at a faster pace now.

As a ham, I want my tools to work and work well. I want to spend my time on my hobby (radio) and not that much time figuring out how to use or configure my tools (OS's).

IMHO, linux will begin to rule when it:

1. Has a more intuitive GUI/Menu with descriptive application names that tell me what the app does.
2. Has an application installation procedure that my wife can figure out.
3. When lunatic-fringe linux geeks stop bashing "windoze" simply because it's easy to use.

What am I running right now? XP
Why?
It gives me what I need with the least amount of effort on my part. Call me an "appliance operator" or whatever, but I'm spending more time on what I enjoy: ham radio.

Re:A Perfect Match

[fussman]

Useless is a Microsoft Corp.(R) innovation.

Wait

[luekj]

So the hams are invading our linux?

Does this mean we get free hams?
Are these hams precooked?
Or does linux=pork shephard?
I'll just keep on trying till' it's funny.

Re:Wait

[shepd]

>Are these hams precooked?

No, they're steamed.

Geekdom^3

[windowpain]

Amateur radio and Linux go together like taped up glasses and high water pants.

MOD PARENT UP

[Anonymous Coward]

Mod parent up! Informative +5

The survey is to scewed to be useful

[Anonymous Coward]

Let's see our choices are different distributions of Linux or windows. This then leaves out Macs, *BSD, Solaris, or anything else. It may seem stupid on my part but I read the last option 3 times before I realized it wasn't "No windows whatsover". The person taking the survey limited the choices in such a way as to get the results they wanted, not to provide any accurate information.

Re:The survey is to scewed to be useful

[KillerHamster]

The only ham radio operator I know, one of my physics professors, uses Irix and Macintosh. Polls are dumb.

Re:The survey is to scewed to be useful

[Anonymous Coward]

Damn straight!

What about my C64 and Osbourne 1?

Re:Hams & Linux: Not quite yet.

[mattite]

... And how many 'fringe' 'windoze' users bash Macs because they're 'too easy' to use?

I'd rather see Canadian Bacons embrace Linux

[melted]

I don't like ham, but I have nothing against Canadian Bacon.

KG4HVP

[Geek of Tech]

I'm a ham, well, licenced, but don't have access to a radio =(
I use Mandrake on my box, and I too am a young ham (18).

I'm an Extra and so I'm smarter...

[kmahler]

I just converted to a windowless house. The only computers I touch that runs windows anymore is my work laptop and my Cisco Callmanager. Soon enough the callmanager will be on another platform. The work laptop will just have to stay for now. The other 6 computers in my house all run Linux... or should I say SCO free Linux.

Re:I'm an Extra and so I'm smarter...

[EvanED]

"I just converted to a windowless house."

I've always wanted to have one underground... Does it same you on heating/cooling bills?

(Sorry, but that was too easy to pass up)

nice joke

[Anonymous Coward]

queer

I am gay

[Anonymous Coward]

I am a gay and run lunix on all my computers and am dirty dirty hippie. I still lunix on box parents.

Re:I am gay

[KB3JJY]

fucking cowardly loser insult me with dignity

MacOSX is Genetic Unix, Here's Why

[drinkypoo]

Also known as: There and back again, an operating system's tale

As Apple clearly states in their Darwin FAQ, "Darwin is a version of the BSD UNIX operating system that offers advanced networking, services such as the Apache web server, and support for both Macintosh and UNIX file systems." I think we all agree that BSD is in fact UNIX with a capital UNIX. In fact it is one of two bloodlines for Genetic UNIX, the other being AT&T's progeny. Everything which calls itself UNIX once had to be genetically descended from one of these two codebases.

As you may or may not know, many if not most commercial UNIX vendors based some releases on BSD, and some on System whatever. SunOS4 is based on BSD 4.something, for example, and SunOS5 (commonly called "Solaris") is System V. So everything today called UNIX is derived from one or another of those sources. It's my understanding that prior to the Open Group getting their grubby hands on the UNIX trademark you pretty much had to be a source licensee to use the name Unix, which was a privilege accorded to Digital, HP, SCO, Sun, and IBM. BSDi was always pretty careful to be called BSDi and not BSD UNIX, as I recall, even though it's based on BSD UNIX.

I think the strongest argument for Unix being mostly a set of behaviors and not a genetic descendance, however, is that there are clearly two things called Unix; BSD UNIX, and Unix System V. (And the various ancestors, of course.) Then, there's the name UNIX, which one pays for. In order to get it, however, one also has to mimic a certain set of behaviors.

In any case, you have to make some sort of decision about what Unix really is. If NeXTStep is Unix, then so is Mac OS X. Christ, they're practically the same thing, except the big joke is, NeXTStep ran on PCs. Ha ha, ain't that hilarious. The question of Linux being Unix or not is a lot muddier, certainly it is not Genetic Unix... or at least we hope it isn't or SCO could be partially right :) But where I'm going here is that Linux acts like Unix, it looks like Unix, people who use it are like any other Unix types (now that everyone uses Unix.) I'm not talking about Mac users who never touch the Unix side here, mind you. I know plenty of hardcore Unix types use it as well, and since Darwin is open source, you can do whatever you like to the Unix side of it. Or hell, just run it by itself.

Your argument about the non-standard kernel, well, that's the best one I could come up with myself. The non-standard filesystem layout doesn't mean anything, Unix filesystem layout has changed a lot over time. The non-standard API is rubbish, it has the standard ones, it just has additional ones. There's no law that says Unix can't be extended, it's been extended plenty over time. A non-standard windowing system? X doesn't make Unix. Unix is one thing, and the X Window System is another thing, which Unix just tends to come with all the time.

Returning to the question of whether or not a microkernel-based operating system can really be Unix, that is a toughie. As you may know, Mach handles processes, memory allocation, multitasking, et cetera. This is what really raises the question, isn't it? If it were just a HAL-style mini-microkernel like NT's, it would be less of a question I think.

But let's face it, most of FreeBSD is in there. Big chunks of the kernel presumably made it in as well. After all, there's lots of things that the kernel does besides process management and memory allocation. I think it's fair to say that it's Unix, it's just on top of a microkernel. Big deal. It also has a whole bunch of makeup dumped on top of it as well, but that doesn't make it any less the same old mom. Here's to Apple Pie, the USA, and Unix forever. Call it Unix, call it UNIX, call it a POSIX-Compliant Unix-workalike, I could give a shit. But let's face it, Mac OS X is Genetic Unix. You can't take that away from it, no matter how hard you try.

Elecraft open sources DSP code

[niko9]

I was interested in building a kit radio and had heard of a company called Elecraft. After checking their page today, seems they have open sourced their DSP source code used in some of their HF rigs. Users are free to modify the code and post to web site to share with other users.

They and TenTec are the last of American made and assmebled hame radio equipment makers left.

Wonder how this will spur interest in custom DSP desgined radios. There's also a link from the elecraft page to a samll and inexpensive DSP development platform.

73's

N2PDB

Debian's Ham section.

[niko9]

I've been using Debian for more than a couple fo years, and I cant't remember when they didn't have a
Ham Radio section

I just think that's cool.

Linux for gymnasts....

[Anonymous Coward]

The hamm twins like linux? Gee...

Stop embracing my hams...

[Ignis Flatus]

I've got a headache.

Re:Hams & Linux: Not quite yet.

[Teeja]

Not sure what your point is, but my point was that some Linux promoters (on the fringe) have an elitist attitude-- almost taking pride in the fact that their OS is hard-to-use. By setting themselves up as intellectually superior geeks, they effectively become "Linux Nazis", snobbishly looking down upon the unwashed windoze users.

Until that attitude decreases, it will be hard for Linux to step into the world of the average man.

The Ham Ethos & Computing

[vergil]

This article (which I nearly passed over) caused me to think a bit about the parallels between computer users and their operating systems & radio operators and their use of equipment.

I've always viewed my friends who are especially into Linux and ham radio (Rob Carlson -- radio callsign KC2AEI -- is one friend of mine who's fluent in both fields) as advanced hobbyists, the type of folks who might have scoured mall Radio Shacks for 6.5536 mhz crystals and dabbled in Heathkit
catelogues several decades ago. Tinkerers, in other words, passionate about tweaking the miniscule component constituents of their electronics to achieve a personal, customized result.

On the other hand, the similarities between radio "consumers" and Windows users are too tempting not to make. Unlike the Linux/ham radio enthusiasts, these folks operate their store-bought PCs/radio receivers as black boxes, strictly according to the design intended by the devices' manufacturer and rarely cracking open cases out of curiousity. Of course, I'm painting w/ a broad metaphorical brush here, lumping swaths of individuals into overly generalized categories.

mod this down....

[Anonymous Coward]

XP is not a real operating system and I get a headache every time I'm trapped in that point and click quagmire. How could you sleep at night and use an overpriced white elephant produced by a company whose sole purpose is to make people's lives more miserable while making metric tons of cash?

Alas, no Echolink ...

[dougmc]

Alas, there's still no Linux version of Echolink, which is a pretty clever combination of ham radio and the Internet.

Re:Alas, no Echolink ...

[ipb]

Checkout echolinux and thebridge at http://cqinet.sourceforge.net/

Re:Alas, no Echolink ...

[dougmc]

Sweet! Thanks!

LOLERZ

[the system fucked me]

Were you hoping for +5 Insightful? YOU FAIL IT!

Other polls...

[thelandp]

Recent operating system polls on the sites www.matrix.com and www.dunkindonuts.com also showed strong percentages for linux.

Sadly, the commonest response in the OS poll taken on www.wideworldofsports.com was: "What's Linux?"
The second-best response was: "What's an operating system?"

Even higher percent....

[Anonymous Coward]

I hear the American Buggy Whip Enthusiasts prefer Linux too. :)

finally!

[happystink]

Now that ham radio enthusiasts are into linux, there is finally going to be an influx of hot women into the open source scene, awesome!

Hams Embrace[s] Linux or Linux Embrace[s] Hams

[biggj]

I am just wondering if it's Ham users that are embracing Linux, or if it's Linux users that are embracing Ham's ....

mmmmmm .... Ham ....

ooooooo .... embracing hams ...

I embraced Linux....

[Davoid]

and got Gnu all over me.

-DU-...etc...

SuSE Prof Ed -features- lotsa Ham applications

[ivi]

Search for "Ham" on this page:

www.suse.de/en/private/products/suse_linux/i386/pa ckages_professional/index_group.html ...skip 2 false hits for an Intel HaM modem ;-)

How does that list compare to other Linux
(or BSD's, et al. for that matter)?

Ham Radio and FreeBSD Unix

[zimmermantech.com]

Click the "MORE" hyperlink from the URL below, need I say more?
http://zmaster.dyndns.org/fm_radio/

Have you hugged your food today?

[Anonymous Coward]

Well it could have read, "Americans embrace hams, the pork industry is estatic."

Re:Hams & Linux: Not quite yet.

[faaaz]

It gives me what I need with the least amount of effort on my part.

*cough*
You did at some point have to learn to use MS Windows right? I highly doubt you just knew how to operate it.

Log Book of the World Open Source Project

[ac7xc]

http://www.arrl.org/lotw/ Logbook of the World is a open source ham radio software project. A log book keeps track of what stations that a ham contacts on the ham radio bands.

Boxed linux sets

[SgtChaireBourne]

Many computer shops could do more to offer boxed sets. Not only to home users save the time, trouble and expense of downloading and burning the CDs, some of the distros come with some really excellent books.

For the merely curious, nothing beats an excellent book. SuSe, for example, had very isntructive ones.

Re:Boxed linux sets

[rekkanoryo]

As does Mandrake. I haven't bought RH myself so I can't comment on it. But you're right, shops should make an effort to offer boxed products of Linux. Currently the only stores I know of that sell Linux are BestBuy. Circuit City used to sell Mandrake, Slackware, and I think Corel, but they stopped right around Mandrake 7.2 Powerpack, and they never carried the $30 version of Mandrake. There currently aren't any actual computer-only shops within reasonable driving distance of my location, but when there were, I know there weren't any boxed Linux sets for sale. Seriously, if I owned a computer shop I'd be offering sets of RH, Mandrake, SuSE, Slackware, etc. And above the shelf with them I'd have a sign reading something along the lines of "Linux--More reliable than Windows for a fraction of the cost!" to see if I could lure in any users. So overall I agree with you.

Breaker 19 for a Radio Check

[Anonymous Coward]

YeeHaw :P

Only 40%?

[Anonymous Coward]

Only 40%? So 60% or so are using Windows/DOS?
What's the news?

annoying

[Anonymous Coward]

*what's* an *annoying* posting *style*. Typical.

NEWS FLASH!

[Anonymous Coward]

Geeks like geek stuff. Woah! Front page that news item stat! I would've never made the connection!

Dyslexia

[stud9920]

Anyone else read the headline as"American Hams Embarass Linux" ?

someone

[Anonymous Coward]

someone spammed eham's survey to show more windoze users since it was posted here @Slashdot.org

you M$FT sycophants suck...

So part of that 40% Unix must be Mac Users or is

[adzoox]

.... it the other part of the 60% - because at the last Hamfest I went to ...... A LOT of the dealers/users there used Macs. There is a lot of Ham Radio software and hard ware out there for the Apple platform:

Elmer - teaches for the ham radio exam

Antenna Master - helps design ham setups and antenna design

MacTNC - terminal control for Ham radio

Moonsked - ham radio moon bounce software

All of these are available for all flavors of the Mac OS - even X

I'm an amateur radio operator

[eap]

and I have found that hams often do not embrace free software to its fullest extent. They often choose proprietary software packages over free ones (logging programs and APRS, for example), and most people I hear talking about computers on local repeaters all use windows.

Maybe this is because there is not much quality free software for ham applications out there. On top of this, I'm not so sure an informal poll on eham really means much anyway. The most heavily trafficked ham sites are probably QRZ.com and arrl.org. QRZ censors its users comments, and anything critical of ham radio is in danger of being removed. The ARRL doesn't even allow user comments on its site and seems to devote the majority of its time to the BPL issue lately.

If you want to get an idea of who uses linux, get on your local 2m repeater or listen in on some of the popular HF bands.

This is biased

[Anonymous Coward]

Seriously, how many slashdotters visited the site to vote for their 'favorite distro'?

I know I did!

So what you're saying is..

[njan]

..that one community composed entirely of geeks has strong similarities with another community composed also entirely of geeks.

Sorry, am I missing something? :-D

I use

[khold]

I am a Technician Class (KC8STN) and I use Windows XP, Slackware Linux, and FreeBSD.

America's Hams Embrace Linux?

[Gudlyf]

America's Hams Embrace Linux

I didn't realize Chevy Chase was such a techie.

Re:Hams & Linux: Not quite yet.

[Anonymous Coward]

More importantly, how much is needed to un- and/or re- learn when the next ('ooooh, shiny') version is released.

HFS? UFS?

[soloport]

Huh... Neat. Those Apple guys are at it again! They made a new TV thingie that has more channels than just UHS and VHS ? Clever guys...

A little addition.

[mindstrm]

I think a lot of armchair critics who think real unix users would never use OS X would be surprised to know just how many seasoned Unix admins now use OS X on their main workstation by choice, as well as how many seasoned linux people at conferences are starting to show up with apple laptops running OS X. There is a reason they like it, and it's not because it's pretty.

Re:A little addition.

[drinkypoo]

You mean, it's only half because it's pretty. Besides that, it just happens to be a nice fast version of BSD UNIX, and the GUI is not just pretty, it's useful. (I know you understand all this stuff, but I like to clarify for posterity.) The behavior of the Dock is really quite sweet, especially if your mouse has more than one button (all the unixheads have a three button mouse anyway, partly due to the magic of USB HID-class devices) and the GUI itself is just fairly sensible.

Also, Unix geeks are used to owning expensive workstations :)

But the other 60%...

[Rorschach1]

Are still using their Commodore 64's.

good sign

[penguin7of9]

For the longest time, many ham radio operators were sticking with old versions of Windows or even DOS. As a result, a lot of the software for interfacing to radios was DOS/Windows only and many companies were unwilling to publish protocols. Hopefully, that is going to change as more hams are moving to Linux.

Linux and Hams

[Subnirvana337]

I'm not the least bit surprised by these numbers, the guy who got me into amatuer radio used linux first, then was a ham, i followed the same path...

Also, IRLP (a project similar to echolink but requires less computer use on the user side) is based on Linux, which makes it alot better than echolink in some repects because its alot harder for a non-ham user to set one up.

The majority of the HAM users i know, mostly use windows, simply because they've been using the same logging or PSK, or RTTY program since windows 3.1...they're satisfied with what they have and don't see a need to switch...

73s from KD5UTQ

Re:Hams & Linux: Not quite yet.

[Shawn Baumgartner]

As a ham, I have experimented with Mandrake & Red Hat

Those would be the wrong distros to use anyhow. :) Hams should use Debian since dselect (or aptitude or whatever you choose to use for your package browsing) has a ham radio category which means that you can browse through the software listing, choose what you want to try out, and it gets installed to your computer automatically, along with any dependencies that it might have. Great selection of free software that requires even less effort to install than apps in Windows. Might want to check it out if you are still considering giving Linux a chance.

Does this mean

[howhardcanitbetocrea]

Spams embrace windows?

Re:Does this mean

[howhardcanitbetocrea]

well...I wasn't so clever was I, should have read the thread and would have seen the idea had been previously floated :P

Embrace!? Hams prefer Windows!!

[fygment]

Only 40% use Linux and that doesn't mean they prefer it. And even the site notes the skew in results once the /. crowd got a whiff of a good MS bashing opportunity.

And fer cryin' out loud why put the political spin on this subject line? Have we sunk to the depths of the big bad corporations that we have to taint our news to suit our needs? Or is it that Open Source advocates simply resents MS because they envy its clout and money?

Hey now...

[Jennifer E. Elaan]

Careful who you call ignorant there. I realize that there are plenty of other OS's out there. I use QNX once in a while for realtime development, and on my page you can find a bootable image of an OS that I'm writing myself. I had an old DOS machine for microcontroller stuff that I only recently migrated to Linux.

Besides, I only once mentioned Linux specifically, and in passing. I mostly meant tinker-friendly systems in general.

All that I'm saying is that the same spirit that founded Open/Free software has roots in the old-fashioned HAM community. Sharing of designs, ideas, and often even parts were common, and the will to tinker was high.

I was just pointing out that it's not exactly surprising that a community formed on the same foundations as the various open-*nix communities would favor open platforms.

It's the other way around

[trolman]

Linux is fueled by groups like Amateur Radio Operators. Just take a look at archives for clear proof. Now this is how it should be; groups of inovators creating useful stuff to improve everyone' lives.

W4ZKK

BTW the big WiFi 802.11b thing is in a Amatuer Radio allocation.

Re:Hams & Linux: Not quite yet.

[mattite]

My point was that people will use anything to create elitist groups, which does not necessarily translate into a barrier to market for Linux, so long as the elitist attitude doesn't permeate throughout the majority of the user base and general promotion (and it doesn't). Basically, I disagree with your post. Elitism doesn't pose a threat to Linux because the whole philosophy behind Open Source is openness.

Though I have yet to find a 'Linux Nazi', I think you had a bad experience. It's a fact that some people shouldn't teach. But unless you have some names, claiming that there are Linux Nazis isn't going to help the cause. The good teachers are on distro IRC channels and the local LUG. And if you don't like people there's plenty of documentation.

mmm ham

[sadtler]

How did this turn into a OS discussion anyway? I thought we were talking about breakfast, it's 6:30am, and all anyone can talk about are OSs and HAM.

We could easily say Windows rules in every aspect, as it dose; properly secured and used. But, GNU/Linux rules in every aspect, as it dose; properly secured and used.

This is true on every system. If someone wanted, a Palm Pilot could be made into a perfect HAMtasticle tool.

I personally think all HAMs need to run Windows 98se. Never change it, only develope on/for it. If an exploit is found, hack the problem and fix it. Then all ham development could be focused on one point. Be it a bad point, but an easy point.

The same goes for BSDs, stop forking, unfork, and make an easy OS. How many people are writing something for NetBSD, that the OpenBSD people are allready finished. It's a waste of time.

Don't make 3 HAMical tools that do the same thing, make 1 that dose it 3 times better!

Change is bad, now where is breakfast? Look ma', my first post, and it sucks.

Yup.

[mindstrm]

Yeah, I'd say you nailed it.

We are used to expensive workstations... however...

My mac is by far the cheapest computer I've ever owned.

(I found that aside from games, I really have no need for a dual 2Ghz G5.. I use an 800Mhz ibook. Long battery life, (Like I really can get 4 hours out of it) small size, just the right features for a notebook.))

Hmm. I double bracketed that. That's nerdy.

As for the dock.. it sure is sweet.. but I think it's got more to do with how applications are packaged and how the gui works overall than the dock itself... I mean we have similar docks in unix, and none of them feel as useful, even though they do the same thing more or less.

Re:Yup.

[drinkypoo]

The thing I've noticed is that a refurb G4 in the 1GHz range costs about a grand. Meanwhile you can go pick up a refurb Athlon XP 2200 system with cdrw and dvd-rom for $400 off geeks.com. Even a used 400MHz G4 runs around six to eight hundred bucks depending on the equipment. That's a bunch of horseshit. I know that Apple doesn't have the clout or resources to get good driver support on x86, so if we see osx on x86 it'll be an Apple-branded machine and it'll cost just as much. Sigh. But the point is, macs still cost too much, so I'm using windows xp with cygwin and not osx. I got a G3/350 from someone as part of a trade and osx actually ran fast enough for my taste on it, but the system plain wasn't fast enough to play MPEG4 video, so I stopped using it.

Well...

[mindstrm]

yeah. If you want to look at it as pure Ghz... intel is always going to be cheaper.

Now, I'm not going to tell you "Ghz is a myth" and that macs are faster.. because it's not technically true.. but...

I'd tell you how I prefer my 800Mhz G3 mac over the 2 Ghz P4 sitting next to me, how I get more work done and am more productive with the mac.... but you'll probably still feel like you are buying "less" of a computer because it's not 2Ghz.

Perhaps it's just how one works with the mac.. If I did cpu intensive work all day, then certainly a faster computer would make me more productive. As it is, I do mostly administration... so I don't really need a super fast bleeding edge computer... and the user experience is the same whether it's fast or not on a mac.

So in a way, yeah, it is a slower computer for the money.. a slower computer on which I get more work done, and am much happier using... and if I get more work done, and am less frustrated... isnt' that worth more money?

Re:Hams & Linux: Not quite yet.

[xnixman]

>Though I have yet to find a 'Linux Nazi',

Try reading SlashDot sometime, Try going to a LUG, etc

You gotta get out of the house more man, if you aren't seeing it, it is because you aren't looking.

The whole "World Domination" and "WinBlow$" crap does alienate people.

Kinda reminds me of the late 80's with Amiga people ant their holier then thou attitudes.

Dan

Re:Hams & Linux: Not quite yet.

[mattite]

I've been reading /. for years, and have yet to find what you claim (there is a lot of bashing of windows, and pretty much every platform in general, but that doesn't equate to fascism). I go to my local LUG. If you are going to make claims about Linux 'Nazis,' then you should point to a specific post or LUG or name names. I'll believe you if you can provide specific evidence.

As for looking for these Nazis, well, perhaps I'm not seeing anything because there's nothing to see.