Input wanted on new 6600M

Doug - W5WTX

I have the exact same questions as K3SF.  I understand the software is still being written but isn't there a software specification the programmers are working to that would define the features and desired behavior of the 6600M?

Tim - W4TME

There is what we want to do and there is what we end up doing once we start coding and testing.  We do not talk about either of these until said feature passes testing.

Andy - KU7T

Tim, 
I understand (I am in software too).  One thing FRS could consider is a thing called a feature roadmap.  I know you mention some things in the community board, but an official roadmap for v2 and v2.1 would be nice. Would also reduce the traffic here since the same questions come up again and again...

Andy

Tim - W4TME

We did a roadmap a few years ago and missed a date by a few weeks and had to rearrange in what release some features would be included.  The resulting negativity that was experienced caused us to reevaluate the benefits of a product roadmap.  We decided to curtail using them.

K5CG

OK, but there ought to be a way to publish what is planned for a release and then update that living document as items are confirmed or slipped to the next release. At least the features would be listed and the "when" questions might go away. This is a project/product managers job, at least it is where I work.

Mike VE3CKO

A road map would be nice but unfortunately as Tim indicated a few people would hold FRS to their word and make a big deal about it in this community if time tables and/or features are missed.  Most understand and would appreciate a road map as that would be sensible but it's too bad a few rotten apples . . . you know the saying. I'm always amazed on how fast the level  negativity gets with some people when something is quite what is expected.

KY6LA_Howard

As Tim said, the last roadmap brought out all the whiners ...it got toxic in the community so much so that most of us never want to see it again A more significant issue is that for competitiveness the last thing you want to do is to telegraph to your competition what you are doing next Plus if you miss a published feature then you are giving your completion more ammunition

K5CG

I understand the issue about the whiners, but the company sets expectations and then has to deliver for that to stop.

And publishing a roadmap that your competition might use against you is not an issue if you are leading the pack.

I know my comments make no difference anyway.

EA4GLI

When you ask for money up front for 2.x then a list of future features to make it into 2.x before EOL is almost a must or you are selling vaporware. Otherwise we will be paying the $200 for whatever comes with 2.0 with no clue what to expect later on or if the features at the end of life of 2.x will be worth the money. When frs wasn't asking money for the software they could get away with not providing a roadmap. Now that they will be asking for the money not having a feature list of the software you are trying to sell is a very odd decision.

Ken - NM9P

When they began with V.1.0 four years ago, the deal was $199 per year as a software maintenance fee. When it became apparent that the software/firmware was going to be more complex than thought, they changed to $199 for each Major version. So I don't particularly mind paying $199 for V.2.0 plus whatever is going to be added in V.2.X point releases. Actually I feel like I am $600 ahead for three out of four years without an annual fee. My only "too bad" is that I am paying $199 for V.2.0 on my 6500 this month, only to turn around and trade up to a 6600 in few months......but, hey...that's life on the cutting edge! Ken - NM9P

WV9L

Totally agree Salvador. When i bought my 6500 in December i was told 2.0 was due by end of march. That came an went. Now its june and im not holding my breath. I got a trade quote to trade my 6500 for a 6600M. Was fair offer concidering id pay $200 to upgrade my 6500. I asked about muti user logins and was told that was not going to be available at first but will down the road. Id have to ship my 6500(my only rig) to them now and wait for the new one to ship. They are claiming an August release, but ive learned not to trust dates. So ill stick with my 6500 i guess. Dont wanna be off air and waiting to get my new rig, only to possibly see August come and go. All this pay ahead and wait for the unknown kinda reminds me of Nancy Pelosi and that ACA, that they had to pass to see what was in it. Lol

Dave Dave

They will delete your post.

Jay Nation

I actually prefer, not being lied to. Time travel might be required before predictions of the future can be regarded as factual.

A roadmap for products and features, "TBD" is never going to work, might as well ask the nearest psychic.

They might expect payment though.

Roadmap == VaporMap

Successful Installation of new features when available for download after thorough alpha testing, is IMHO a better approach.

I don't mind waiting for reality to happen.

     SDRgadgets

#FlexRadio IRC chat

   73, Jay - NO5J

Bill -VA3WTB

For the ones who still wish for a road map, I can only assume you were not part of the community at the time of the road maps in the past, or I am sure you would understand better why it stopped. For most of us that lived through it, we never want the same kind of things go on that did, again. Ever.

Please remember there are people waiting in the weeds for any reason to attack Flex, over anything, and sometimes I notice they pop up still.

About the the $200  people do not need to buy any feature updates without first carefully reading the notes on it when it is published. Then buy it if you want it. So you see, you don't buy and wait and see whats in it. No mystery.

EA4GLI

Bill and Howard, I was there when the decision was made to remove the Road Map. I remember the threads and they weren't any different that any of the current threads like the lock-up one, the ones after the 6400/6600 announcement, the ones after the delay with the Maestro, the 7300 threads, the Sherwood one, or any other when major things happen.

I believe removing the Road Map was a business decision on the part of FRS and I would be very surprised if any "toxic" (as you put it Howard) voices had the power to define how FRS does business. Heck, I would be disappointed if that was the case.

As you can tell by my post, back then, and still today, I am disappointed that we do not have the road map. I miss that compass. I am no Elmer or alpha and I have no other insight into these radios than what gets published here on the forum, from my vantage point I am a bit blind.

FRS has taken constructive criticism and built upon it with new hardware features. Like adding a mic with the new radios or including a balanced input in the 6600. This is great.

So, forget the Road Map!! It is clear from past performance that it is impossible to define a specific date for a specific feature. That boat sailed long time ago. Understood. What about a Feature List?

Let me present my case for a feature list in as constructive a manner as possible.

It would be great to have a clearer picture upfront of the purchase of 2.0. 
We are probably looking at aprox. 10 releases (2.0 to 2.9) with as few revisions for bugs (hopefully) as possible.

There could be a Programmed Features for 2.x List (A list of features that will be in 2.x for sure)

• SmartLink
• Pre Distortion
• Multi-client
• ****

Wow Factor / Surprise / Theme releases List (some of the ideas but not certain)

• Dockable Windows
• GUI Enhacements (personalizations, templates) 
• DX Chaser release (cluster integration, logging)
• Noise Mitigation release (use of phased diversion, new NR and NB algorithms)
• Wave Form release (FreeDV, DStar enhancements)
• Digital modes (RTTY, BPSK decoding on screen)

Add a disclaimer on anything that is not in the programmed Feature List. State clearly that it is not a certainty that some of these things (outside the programmed list of features) will make it into 2.x; the same way that new things that are not published will make it (Surprises). State clearly that there are no specific dates but 2.x will be the software for the radios for the next 2 to 3 calendar years.

If you ask me if I prefer a Final Ver. 2 with all the features in 2 years time or 2.x today with incremental features throughout the next 2 years, I definitely prefer the latter. So I am just asking to get a list with caveats to understand what to expect of 2.0.

KY6LA_Howard

@Sal In a way that is Avery good suggestion BUT. FLEX would need to ADD IN BOLD LETTERS THE LIST IS ONLY A PROPOSAL AND THEREUS ABSOLUTELY NO GUARANTEE THAT ANY OF THESE PROPOSED ENHANCEMENTS WILL ACTUALLY EVER BE INCLUDED IN SSDR OR WHEN THEY MIGHT BE IMPLIMENTED The issue is that intelligent people such as yourself will understand the tentative nature of the list but unfortunately many less sophisticated users may still interpret the List as a Promissed Feature. OTOH It does not mitigate the competitive disclosures issue of informing competitors of future plans. For Example...The ICOM 7610 was supposed to be the big news at Dayton. But Flex overshadowed Icom big time by announcing the M6400, M6600 series. If Flex had announced their intentions earlier Icom could have modified the 7610 to be competitive. Instead Icom is now looking at massive price cuts to be competitive with the M6400

Tim - W4TME

At this time I am inclined to close this post because the question asked, has been answered.

In regards to a few issues that came up in this thread that was off topic, we have heard your desire for a feature roadmap.  As it currently stands, one is not forthcoming.  Yes, it was a business decision.  I encourage everyone that is contemplating upgrading to SmartSDR v2.0 to evaluate the delivered feature sets and decide how they will enhance your operating style and desires as the primary reason for making a purchasing decision.

For those who have expressed their disappointment and at times accused us of breaking "promises" at SmartSDR v2.0, not shipping when a targeted delivery date was not met or a proposed feature was pulled in favor for something else, this is why there isn't a roadmap or a feature list published. In business, there are factors and dynamics that happen daily that influence the business decisions we have to make.  Sometimes opportunities arise that were unforeseen and to take advantage of them, other deliverables have to slip.  It is just a fact that happens.  We have decided not to use these tools so that customer expectations can be better managed.

Thank you to everyone who has posted in response to WV9L's questions.  Best regards.