Welcome to the new FlexRadio Community! Please review the new Community Rules and other important new Community information on the Message Board.
Need the latest SmartSDR, Power Genius, Tuner Genius and Antenna Genius Software?
SmartSDR v3.8.23 and the SmartSDR v3.8.23 Release Notes
SmartSDR v2.12.1 and the SmartSDR v2.12.1 Release Notes
Power Genius XL Utility v3.8.9 and the Power Genius XL Release Notes v3.8.9
Tuner Genius XL Utility v1.2.11 and the Tuner Genius XL Release Notes v1.2.11
Antenna Genius Utility v4.1.8
SmartSDR v3.8.23 and the SmartSDR v3.8.23 Release Notes
SmartSDR v2.12.1 and the SmartSDR v2.12.1 Release Notes
Power Genius XL Utility v3.8.9 and the Power Genius XL Release Notes v3.8.9
Tuner Genius XL Utility v1.2.11 and the Tuner Genius XL Release Notes v1.2.11
Antenna Genius Utility v4.1.8
If you are having a problem, please refer to the product documentation or check the Help Center for known solutions.
Need technical support from FlexRadio? It's as simple as Creating a HelpDesk ticket.
Need technical support from FlexRadio? It's as simple as Creating a HelpDesk ticket.
DXLab Does Not Support SmartSDR v 3
Comments
-
I have exactly one objective in this matter: help Flex improve its relationship with 3rd party developers.
Recall how this thread started: my post on the DXLab Discussion Group making it clear to users that the current version of DXLab doesn't support SmartSDR v3 -- because v3 is not upward compatible with v2 - was reposted here by a DXLab/Flex user. Your responses:
"After reading that posting, sounds like someone is having a gripe because of the lack of support on the dongle, and issues he is having with using spots"
"I haven't seen any other 3rd party developers complaining publicly regarding functionality with v3 but at least one has indicated they have been given access to v3 for development purposes. That's called co-operation, so I have no doubt these developers already have or will function with v3."
DXLab users posting in this thread are not "cheering me on". They are expressing dissatisfaction with Flex's decision to make the SmartSDR v3 API be non-upward-compatible with the SmartSDR v2 API. Had Flex not made that decision, the current version of DXLab -- and the current version of every other 3rd party application -- would support SmartSDR v3 out of the gate.
0 -
Mike,
I am certainly not cheerleading for any one. I rely on DXLab. There is no incentive for me to upgrade other than curiosity / support for Flex. Now there is a reason not to upgrade since I wont be able to use DXLab with 3.0. If the situation changes I will probably upgrade.
1 -
On a professional level, These type of 'corporate' conflicts could be better handled in offline 'face to face' between the corporate entities. as i currently see it, there is one entity trying to be a profitable corporation creating jobs in America and the other offering freeware.
Dont get me wrong, i appreciate freeware as much as the next ham and in the world at large too. I also applaud the effort of those who develop and share their labors.
I do use freeware such as FLDIGI and WSJTX that run on my Mac.
BUT
My Position as a Mac user, i find i have no need to run DXlab here as there is one mac app, MacDXlogger, that has most of the same capability. True, I did pay for it but Don Agro provides awesome support at almost 24/7 and in my opinion Don creates professional grade software which also includes MacDoppler and dogparkSDR.
https://www.dogparksoftware.com/home.html.
So i am ready to run SSDR V3 on my 6600M whenever it is released.
just my two cents eroded by inflation
Paul K3SF
0 -
It is very good to see that while DXLab may not support SmartSDR V3 out of the gate, that Dave AA6YQ hasn't ruled out later SmartSDR v3 support.
It also a good reminder how long te DXLab and FRS relationship has gone on, apparently a reasonable two-way dialogue for the most.
Hopefully there will be a meeting of the minds as SMartSDR v3 rolls out shortly.
As Dave AA6YQ points out the v3 transition is quite a fork in the road- I know that for my (arguably and factually much more trivial than the DXLab suite) needs I am approaching v3 "as if a whole new radio" as the added capabilities appear to have required a lot of API rework to capture with v3.
As long as the "smart folk" are talking things tend to get worked out.
All best and 73
Steve
K9ZW2 -
Thanks Paul, but since the Flex SmartSDR V3 API (MultiFlex) is not upward compatible with the V2 API - Third party applications like MacLoggerDX and dogparkSDR will not operate with SmartSDR V3 (MultiFlex) until they are re-written to support both the V2 and the V3 APIs at runtime or split into multiple versions for each API Version.
73 de VE3VRW Don Agro2 -
It is to the advantage of a corporation seeking to be profitable to provide an API that that enables 3rd parties to develop complementary products. Such complementary products expand the total available market for the corporation's products, increase the perceived value provided by the corporation's products, and enhance the corporation's brand -- all at modest cost to the corporation (develop/test/document/maintain the API, communicate with the 3rd parties).
The above is true independently of whether the complementary products are free or paid-for.7 -
Why did this all come out so close to the release of V3? Did I miss previous conversations about this? It's all new to me - and it seems to many others as well.
Can you imagine how upset folks would have been if they found this out only after shelling out $$ for the upgrade?
5 -
Pat, that's exactly why I posted the "DXLab does not support SmartSDR V3" message on the DXLab Discussion Group.
I'd guess fewer than 10% of DXLab users are members of that group; hopefully those Flex users who aren't members of that group will see this thread.
1 -
Software deprecation is a strategy that is often used in situations like this. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deprecation It provides a path and time (often years) to upgrade to the new function calls. Maybe there were reasons not to take that approach either. Al / NN4ZZ1
-
Me too. I was going to buy V3 when it comes out. Now I am going to wait until this all shakes out. I am not going to use my 6400 without DXLabs.1
-
Well said Steve.
0 -
Don and Dave
I wish you all the best on working with Flex to make it all happen.
I do understand the difficulty encountered when API's do not remain compatible over revisions. But with problems come opportunities to excel. (That is what my mom would always tell me)
I think this may make a perfect 'opportunity' to provide an abstraction layer to minimize similar impact in the future. OR i am totally off the wall.
in either case...
good luck in making it all happen for us your faithful users.
Paul K3SF
0 -
Developing an abstraction layer to bridge the V2 and V3 APIs would cause all 3rd party developers to stop working until the abstraction layer was developed, tested, and documented. At this point, the same effort could likely re-work the V3 API to be upward compatible with V2.
Of course any 3rd party developer who's already done the work to move to the V3 API would be unhappy to have to rip up track, and Flex may be unable to tolerate additional delays in V3 at this point.
3 -
I'm 100% on board with Dave. I've been a DXLab user longer than I've been a Flex user. I also have found little reason to upgrade to V3 other than to support Flex. This gives me a reason not to upgrade. I guess to be fair I should use some of the upgrade funds to donate to DXLab.
Jon
0 -
hi Dave...
you have just taught me that " i am totally off the wall" in my thought process.
i am a most willing learner.
I am more than happy to learn something new everyday
and
i do appreciate your effort to teach.
good luck going forward
and
i would like to add in the voice of Captain Picard "Make it so" ;-)
Paul K3SF
0 -
Thanks Jon, but I don't accept donations.
1 -
But why was this not disclosed in this forum sooner? FRS must have been working on V3 for a long time. How did this come as such a surprise to everyone? Why now on the eve of the new release?
I would think that such a change that renders widely used software packages useless in the new release would have been communicated to the user community long ago.
1 -
Wow, I am glad I read this thread. If V3 does not work with Dogpark, I will definitely not be purchasing V3 until it works with DogparkSDR.1
-
I wonder what else would be on the list of incompatibilities. Nothing that wasn't written specifically for V3 would be compatible with the new Flex software? I guess this would mean fldigi and the gateway, cw skimmer and the gateway, wsjt-x and jtdx, n1mm+? These are the main tools I use in addition to DXLab suite.
I don't use slicemaster or frlogger yet but the developers are active in this community. What's the impact to you?
If new features were added as API additions then developers could just add the new features as required. But if the whole API is changed, developers now have to maintain an interface to both? I find it pretty amazing that these tools I use can support so many different radios. Is there a case where another manufacturer wiped the slate clean?
And most of all... I would love to hear from Flex on their intentions or plans. Were they going to delay release until the API is published and developers could catch up? Or maybe the delay is to re-think the API backward compatibility. Or is it simply, they found a better, more supportable and expandable way of doing things and really need this forklift upgrade. There could be all sorts of OK reasons besides just developing in a vacuum but I would really like to hear their perspective.
If you buy V3 day one... what will work with it? The ARRL Amateur Radio Logbook I guess.
73,
Kev K4VD1 -
To be sure I wasn't revealing anything Flex considered confidential, I waited till I received a email message extolling the virtues of SmartSDR v3 from Flex Sales before posting the "DXLab doesn't support SmartSDR v3" message on the DXLab Discussion Group.
Eric KE5DTO sent me the SmartSDR v3 migration guide several months ago.
No one from Flex ever contacted me to say:
1. let me review with your the primary benefits of V3 and help you understand why you should ensure that DXLab users will have access to V3
2. let me hear from you about the obstacles in extending DXLab to support v3, and see if there's anything Flex can do to mitigate them
This is "Managing a 3rd Party Developer Ecosystem 101".
Even better would have been a web conference for 3rd party developers held a year ago, at which Flex would have shared its objectives for SmartSDR v3. Such discussion would certainly have surfaced the "hey, why is V3 not upward compatible with V2?" issue now being discussed.
3 -
I just think that someone , probably FRS, should have been more proactive in communicating this to the user community so customers could make a more informed decision regarding V3.
The first I heard of this was from your post. There would have been quite an uproar had this not been known until after upgrades were purchased.
Thank you for the heads up and thank you for a fine software package.
1 -
DXLab, CWSkimmer and fldigi will be show stoppers for me. I use these all the time.0
-
Houston (Austin) , we have a problem1
-
Is it possible that the reason we haven’t heard anything from FlexRadio is because their Software Engineers in Austin are “heads down, bottoms up” trying to circumvent this issue, so that they can demonstrate Version 3 running with, say, DXLABS at Dayton? It certainly would be a master **** if they could pull it off. Sometimes it pays to dream. Fingers crossed Winston VK7WH0
-
Having a strategy for attracting, retaining, and nurturing 3rd party developers is not something you do when you have time. Companies that depend on the 3rd party community are focused on the relationship all the time. So, it is irrelevant how busy the FRS developers are.0
-
First, I'd like to say it's always possible to do more work and provide more support than we've provided to our third party developers. Dave's comments, while harsh listening from the inside of FlexRadio and also unique in their voracity, are not the only comments that we've received saying that we could do more to support developers over the years.
As a young ham in college I purchased a Kenwood TM-721A, a dual-band VHF/UHF FM transceiver. I really loved that radio, especially the inverted color LCD display technology used. From my standpoint, that radio was ahead of it's time and it was a great seller for Kenwood. Even today, I still find that radio "beautiful." Writing code was my passion as a young man and I wanted badly to **** open the case and add my own capabilities to that radio. I wondered why, in a hobby like ham radio where we're all learning and experimenting, the radio could not provide ready access to the guts to let me play with it. I didn't expect Kenwood to make the radio available for me to play with in this manner, but I didn't forget what that felt like either. After we'd developed the API for internal use at FlexRadio, I pushed hard to open it to the world and provide it so others, like myself, could expand its capabilities, experiment and learn about radios. And I knew the investment would bring capabilities and pleasure to our customers. From my perspective and from a company perspective, I'm very glad we did this, it was the right thing to do and I'd do it again.
But like any business decision, opening the API comes with a cost and we've not always invested as heavily in the API as we could have. When we first opened it, I and the other engineers spent many late nights and weekends updating the Wiki that houses the TCP/IP API and Eric wrote documentation to support the Windows side of the API. Our team has worked to keep both of these sets of documentation current. When we first released the API the Wiki had only a portion of the commands in it at launch. This is no one's fault but mine. It's probably fair to say I drug FlexRadio into the API world and FlexRadio took me at my word that it was the right thing to do without knowing the cost of maintaining the API for all time and as a result we've occasionally struggled to keep up.
As an engineer, I know what's hard and what's not so hard in the software world. Generally, getting started in something new is what's really hard. Once you have your first program running, adding capabilities and experiencing how they work, you can incrementally add and test and the mental work load goes down and the fun goes up. As a result, I wanted to make sure the basics were well documented and that there were tools to find out everything else. More than once, I told someone interested in developing for the platform that they could "get the basics from the Wiki on how to connect and communicate to the radio and then literally anything else you want to do can be discovered simply by running WireShark and watching the traffic between the client and the radio." For the uninitiated, WireShark can display all the commands between the radio and any client. To discover how to do something, you can watch the communications and press the button in SmartSDR then watch what command we send. This is not ideal, but to an engineer like myself the message is clear: you can do anything we [FlexRadio] can do because we are layered on the API ourselves. It's not something "separate" that we have to keep up to date.
Knowing for some that this would not be enough, we also created a community topic for the API that encourages sharing information and an email help line just for developers. This email, devhelp@flexradio.com, goes straight to the desk of the engineers. We are committed to answering 100% of the emails that come in this way, in part because we know that everything is not always documented as well as we would like, but also because we love engineers just like we love customers and we yearn to help them experience the fun of writing software in and along with radios and we know that what they do is for the benefit of our mutual customers.
With SmartLink, we needed to use cryptographic techniques for a number of reasons related to security and the protection of our customers and their equipment. This, necessarily, made understanding what we did with SmartLink harder without documentation. We were asked to write a comprehensive guide on how SmartLink works for developers. We're a small shop with a few engineers and we did what we felt like we had time to do -- we wrote a guide that would get developers jump-started and had what we felt like were the necessary details. We've provided this now to a number of fellow developers who have coded to SmartLink. With multiFLEX, it was a whole other world. We changed the guts of the radio to support multiple clients at the same time and this work was non-trivial. We actually wanted to do this when the radio first shipped but it was hard enough we had to shelve it and only now had the time to implement. We discussed how to make the API backward compatible since we'd done this every time in the past. Making it backward compatible would allow a companion program to use either command set (v2 or v3) and it would work -- of course without using the v3 commands, no multiFLEX capabilities would be possible. As we discussed it, we realized that the API would be less understandable and would look awful over time. I could go into detail on this, but suffice it to say that we wanted to avoid confusion and make it easy to understand moving forward. Right off the bat we developed a migration guide that explained the API differences and showed examples of old and new code to assist developers with the migration.
Since that time, we've had several developers take what we've written and adapt their code. We're asking a lot -- for the engineer that wants to support both v2 and v3, they have to have their code spit out different versions of the commands and parse different responses based on whether v2 or v3 is running. It's not ideal, but it's not always an ideal world. We looked at what other engineers have done and felt like it was a greater error to "bastardize" our API rather than force developers to support two API calls depending on version. Our customers reading this should give developers that have chosen to go along with us on this a pat on the back. These guys are troopers. In a way, what we've done is unfair -- we've asked them to update their API when it was convenient for us or their software will no longer work with ours. Was this something we wanted to do? Of course not. Could we have done it differently? Yes. Do we feel like we made the best choice we could? Yes.
I'm proud that FlexRadio, in the spirit of ham radio, opened our API to the community. I wish we had time to do everything asked of us in this regard, but we do what we feel we have time to do. We answer every question posed by developers and like Dave has said, when developers call or ask for help we drop what we're doing to help them. Dave is a nice guy -- I've met him at several hamfests. While I disagree with his approach of calling us out publicly, he writes good code and his application is well loved by the amateur community. Dave is, in a sense, right to criticize us. I would like to do all the things Dave and other developers have asked of us. At the same time, we have a large customer base that is also asking us to add features, repair defects, stay the leader in SDR technology and work capabilities in their particular niche of the amateur world. We want to do all of these things, we really do. We regularly look at the list of all the things we could do and make those choices. We are often not happy making those choices -- we want to do everything. Let me say that again: every engineer we employ wants to do everything our customers and developers ask of us. We can't, but we do listen to the feedback and we do what we are able to do.
We are passionate about what we do. We know that some will look at what we've done and celebrate the decisions we've made and what we've created. We also know that others will malign us for our choices. Neither group are every entirely wrong. In Star Trek II, The Wrath of Kahn, (sorry I'm a bit of a trekkie), Captain Kirk asks Spock how a new crew on the Enterprise will respond in a crisis. Spock's response, "As with all living things, each according to his gifts," tips a hat to what we all know: each of us has gifts and capabilities that we can bring to bear on a problem, but there are limits to the capabilities of all living things. The same goes for abstract entities composed of those living things: companies. We do the best we are able, but we also provide several easy ways for developers to reach us if you feel we've not done enough. We'll always want to do more and if you ask nicely and we're able, we'll drop what we're doing and help because that's what hams do.
26 -
I, for one, appreciate everything Flex has accomplished.
73, Jim N9VC
2 -
Thanks Steve. Great explanation.2
-
That's a nice explanation but the question remains (unless it was answered in all that) will DX Labs , Slice Master and CW Skimmer work with V3 when it is released or not?
0 -
I have the same question. The answer is the crux of the issue.0
Leave a Comment
Categories
- All Categories
- 311 Community Topics
- 2.1K New Ideas
- 566 The Flea Market
- 7.7K Software
- 6.1K SmartSDR for Windows
- 154 SmartSDR for Maestro and M models
- 385 SmartSDR for Mac
- 253 SmartSDR for iOS
- 241 SmartSDR CAT
- 176 DAX
- 364 SmartSDR API
- 8.9K Radios and Accessories
- 7.1K FLEX-6000 Signature Series
- 109 FLEX-8000 Signature Series
- 887 Maestro
- 49 FlexControl
- 852 FLEX Series (Legacy) Radios
- 841 Genius Products
- 433 Power Genius XL Amplifier
- 296 Tuner Genius XL
- 112 Antenna Genius
- 267 Shack Infrastructure
- 188 Networking
- 428 Remote Operation (SmartLink)
- 132 Contesting
- 686 Peripherals & Station Integration
- 131 Amateur Radio Interests
- 914 Third-Party Software