Smartsdr next version ?

  • 1
  • Question
  • Updated 4 years ago
  • Answered
Photo of Robert Allbright

Robert Allbright

  • 14 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like

Posted 4 years ago

  • 1
Photo of Jim Gilliam

Jim Gilliam

  • 462 Posts
  • 71 Reply Likes
I am, personally, getting worried. I a very very very  disappointed they have not provide more core functions such as WAN capability. Way, way, too long since this radio has hit the market. It has occurred to me that, perhaps, there is not enough computer power to do all the things that was originally promised. The next version, is nothing more than "bells and whistles". I am worried that the promised land might never come with this stock of 6000 radios. I hope I am wrong.
Photo of DK1EY

DK1EY

  • 177 Posts
  • 48 Reply Likes
Jim,

even if I am a newbie to FlexRadio, I did some research before purchasing my Flex 6300.  I had a look onto the SSDR roadmap and "promised land" is promised for 2015.

To be honest: In my opinion, the only "core function" that really is missing until today is  the diversity thing for 6700 owners.

After purchsing my 6300, I sold all my analogue rigs and I can say,  I am not missing anything exept some small improvements (DSP/NB/NR/ANF/APF). Have a look here and share your needs and expectations: "Just one more thing..." What do we have to expect as additional features in V1.3?.

I am very happy with the FlexRadio Systems communication of the ongoing development, even if I just can't wait for WAN, remote CW via paddle and so on. 
I don't know another (ham radio) company that is so open with it's communication.

What Flex do you use?

VY 73
Tom
DK1EY
(Edited)
Photo of pa0bie

pa0bie

  • 152 Posts
  • 20 Reply Likes
Not every one is desperately waiting for thinks like WAN and LAN.  There are people who likes other things like good working NB/NR as with PSDR and the 5000 , memories , profiles , CWX , FM , diversity and transverter options.  Flex is doing a great job !
Photo of Al / NN4ZZ

Al / NN4ZZ

  • 1732 Posts
  • 590 Reply Likes
Agree,  Originally I thought I'd like to take advantage of the WAN capability.  Now I'm not so sure.  We get frequent thunderstorms in the Atlanta area so being remote can be a big problem.   Even when home I keep the antennas grounded and the radio equipment off when not in use.  If there is an active storm in the area, PCs also get shut down.  If you are somewhere across the country you probably won't know about that thunderstorm until its too late.  A direct hit or even a close strike can do a lot of damage to your station and worse.  

If you are lucky enough to live in a part of the country where you don't get thunderstorms, then WAN remote sounds great.

So while WAN remote has a lot of interest, there are a lot of other features, improvements, etc that many of us are wanting just as much.    FRS has a tough job balancing all of the wants and delivering what make the most sense but they are making progress.   

Regards, Al / NN4ZZ  
al (at) nn4zz (dot) com
Photo of Steve K9ZW

Steve K9ZW, Elmer

  • 1288 Posts
  • 657 Reply Likes

Worry about the feature pool is not productive.  Period.  The roadmap has been shared for a long time.

Yes it is unique that FRS has made widely available a roadmap that lets a prospective buyer decide at what point in the feature aggregation they would like to buy-in. 

Makes it a simple decision if a person did not like the present feature set, they can hold off buying until the product package is where they want it to be. 

The idea of a post-purchase evolutionarily enhancing radio is uncommon and the point-in-time underrun/overrun of the feature set when compared any one ham's particular personal desired feature set is quite a change from the black-boxes-with-knobs we're accustomed to.  The BBWK radios are basically set in stone, excepting add-ins and the occasional flash updates.

I am really puzzled by the speculation that computing power limits are holding things back or that the rest of the roadmap somehow wasn't going to be delivered.  Not seen the slightest indication of either issue, so wondering what is the worry?

Personally I am enjoying the evolutionary development process and I do look forward to the WAN integration, which will open up a lot of additional operating hours for me.  Did I hope & wish it was part of the package from the start - oh yeah I did!  But I am content to wait until FRS has it "ready for prime time" and can live with the roadmap dates.

Actually each update is like a new dose "Fun" being injected into my radios and ham hours.

73

Steve

K9ZW




Photo of Ken - NM9P

Ken - NM9P, Elmer

  • 4025 Posts
  • 1248 Reply Likes
CWX and savable profiles are certainly not "bells and whistles" to the contesting/DXing crowd or to those who operate multiple modes and change back and forth between them rapidly. These are going to add a LOT do utility to my rig. I wish that I could have afforded the 6700 so that could enjoy the new diversity function. For many, it will make the difference between "all noise" and a solid contact.

Yes, I will love to try the new remote access controls when they are delivered. And I am confident that they will be delivered on time according to the timeline.

I have had my 6500 for a year and it just keeps getting better! Thanks FRS.
Photo of Ned K1NJ

Ned K1NJ

  • 303 Posts
  • 76 Reply Likes
  Right you are, Ken. CWX is a significant functional improvement.  Profiles are very much needed.
Someday, these will simply be taken for granted, as "trace averaging" is now.  This will be a much
appreciated step forward.

Ned,  K1NJ

This conversation is no longer open for comments or replies.