http://news.com.com/Feds+snub+open+source+for+smar... This story had more details and investigation than the others I'd seen. FYI. John
on 2007-07-24 02:23
on 2007-07-24 02:58
John G. schrieb: > http://news.com.com/Feds+snub+open+source+for+smar... > > This story had more details and investigation than the others I'd seen. This article was sent out on the list a few weeks ago. I personally see such a ruling as sinster. As it stands with 802.11 and 'FreeBSD' + Sam Leffler's HAL, while allowing for much more application variablility than the 'access point', and 'station' model of using 802.11... the closed 'HAL' has presented many obsticles to applications which would operate in the regulation limit, such as lower than X power or within X bandwidth, but because of the FCC's paranoia (and other regulatory agencies around the world...), such applications as 5 MHz bandwith 802.11 operation, are very difficult to acheve without paying '3-rd' party developers to make crappy software 'attempts', then charge more for 'fixing', or even eventually saying that 'you needs are such small potatoes that we don't want your business'. For companies that have the funding, I'm sure such regulations are minor obstacles, just part of the development costs. However for many smaller operations, or even 'low funded' operations in bigger companies these sorts of regulations are basically brick walls to innovative products... John C.
on 2007-07-27 04:18
On Mon, Jul 23, 2007 at 04:05:07PM -0700, John C. wrote: > , but because of the FCC's paranoia (and other regulatory agencies > around the world...), John, Does any written statement from the FCC give credence to the "regulatory excuse" for keeping the Atheros HAL closed? Atheros cites the FCC's SDR NPRM, which doesn't really apply. Dave -- David Young OJC Technologies email@example.com Urbana, IL * (217) 278-3933 ext 24
on 2007-07-27 04:47
David Young schrieb: > SDR NPRM, which doesn't really apply. Larry Flint has 'gone to the edge' with pushing the concept of 'free speech' often enough, and won enough, so that, while you may not purchase his Hustler magazine, you may be able to purchase without fear, 'mild' erotica..., because the book seller knows their material is far away from the Flint edge... I realize that the analogy may be a bit strained, but I only see companies pushing the regulatory edge, when there is a significant profit to be made. Otherwise, often their policies are to work unquestionably within the regulation. So, if there is a hint that the FCC regs suggest a need for a closed system, they will close it and avoid any ill that could have come their way. Face it, Atheros, and other wireless chip manufacturers can report profits for a very long time, without making one change in their 'closed' policies. The amount of 'change' for their income by publishing more details of their devices, will not 'double' their profits... or even close...
on 2007-07-27 05:05
Some more takes on the FCC position. My favorite is the second. The line "The Software Defined Radio (SDR) Forum politely responded that the FCC did not know what it was doing and asked it to get a clue." amuses me. http://internetcommunications.tmcnet.com/topics/en... http://reclaimthemedia.org/legislation_and_regulat... http://www.zdnetasia.com/news/communications/0%2c3... Philip