Hi TOM!

11 Jan 2016 07:10, from TOM WALKER -> RICHARD MENEDETTER:

 RM>> That is the good thing with HAM radio.
 RM>> You can have different definitions.

 RM>> Mine looks different to yours 

 TW> There is NO different look for Ham Radio.

But obviously there are.
You have one, and I have one, they are not the same, hence they are different.
QED.

 TW> IT is, and has been since it's inception, communications over Radio
 TW> waves for the entire contact.
 TW> A Microphone connected to a Computer or an Internet Adapter hardly
 TW> seems to qualify

I am not talking about a microphone connected to a computer or an Internet
Adapter!

I am for example talking about D-Star/DMR/Fusion.

There you have 3 possibilitites:
1) talk on simplex HT <-> HT over radio waves (talk around on DMR)
2) HT <-> repeater <-> HT over radio waves
3) HT <-> repeater 1 <-> IP <-> repeater 2 <-> HT all over radio except the IP
link between the 2 repeaters. Those two repeaters can be seperated by thousands
 of kilometers or whatever non-SI units you like.

From MY point of view having the possibility of using option 3 does NOT
disqualify those technologies as being HAM!

Again feel free to have a different oppinion, but stop telling me that there is
 no different viewpoint, because there is!!

CU, Ricsi

--- GoldED+/LNX
 * Origin: fido.ricsi.priv.at (2:310/31)