Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Check out the new SourceForge HTML5 internet speed test! No Flash necessary and runs on all devices. ×

Universal Software Radio Peripheral From GnuRadio 320

The Universal Software Radio Peripheral for GNURadio has now gone into production and is available for purchase for $450. It used to be insanely expensive to acquire this technical equipment. Now the price has dropped by two orders of magnitude, to something about as expensive as a high-end graphics card. How long will it be till it's labeled a terrorist tool and banned?
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Universal Software Radio Peripheral From GnuRadio

Comments Filter:
  • How long? (Score:2, Funny)

    by cnelzie ( 451984 )
    I don't know, allow me to contact the Office of Homeland Security and inform them about this device and find out...

    (Just kidding)
  • Terrorist Tool (Score:3, Insightful)

    by FunWithHeadlines ( 644929 ) on Monday December 27, 2004 @01:04PM (#11192644) Homepage
    "How long will it be till it's labeled a terrorist tool and banned? "

    It just happened. At least for those who know enough to use Google, but don't have enough common sense to handle context issues. Which sounds remarkably like those congressfolk who go around labeling things terrorist tools. Except for the knowing how to use Google bit.

    • Except for the knowing how to use Google bit

      I have RTFM and can find any documentation on the "Google Bit".

      Should it be cleared or set? and why?

    • Re:Terrorist Tool (Score:3, Insightful)

      by dbIII ( 701233 )
      Which sounds remarkably like those congressfolk who go around labeling things terrorist tools.
      A spade is no longer a spade - it is a terrorist tool.

      All this overemphasis on terrorism is just as stupid as an extreme born again Christian going into a supermarket and thinking "what sort of ice cream would Jesus choose?"

  • Claws (Score:2, Funny)

    by Manan Shah ( 808049 )
    Not long. Government likes banning things. Next thing on the list: a hammer. Since it can be used for terroristic activites.
    • No lets just go to the source of the problem. All these terrorist need is food. Without food they are unable to operate their terrorist orginizations. Lets put a law in congress out outlaw all editible products.
    • ...terroristic activites.

      Is that you Dubya?

      :)

  • What's it do? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Darth Muffin ( 781947 ) on Monday December 27, 2004 @01:05PM (#11192648) Homepage
    For those of us who aren't up on our RF TLAs, can someone describe, in english, WTF this thing does?

    Neither of the links provided are much help.

    • Re:What's it do? (Score:3, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Software radio or SDR - an intresting subject where mathematical formulas become radio.

      See http://comsec.com/software-radio.html for a high level overview.

      Good reading is Understanding digital Signal processing by Richard G. Lyons. Prentice Hall, 1st ed: ISBN 0201634678 (amazon.com, search). 2nd ed: ISBN 0-13-108989-7 (amazon.com, search)

      VanuBose 's company Vanu Technology demonstrated a software radio based on an iPAQ with a digital radio "backpack", in May 2003. Here are some links:

      http://slashdot.org
    • Re:What's it do? (Score:5, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 27, 2004 @01:26PM (#11192840)
      A quick search on google revealed what this thing is.. Basically it allows you to build radio receiving equipement using software instead of traditional hardware (resistors, capacitors, transistors etc..). To quote something I just read 'getting code closer to the antenna'. Interesting idea cause it means you could theoretically write a receiver to decode digital signals (like TV) without paying for it? (Ok, perhaps a little un-realistic at the moment but this is the basic idea).
      • Re:What's it do? (Score:3, Informative)

        by |<amikaze ( 155975 ) *
        Interesting idea cause it means you could theoretically write a receiver to decode digital signals (like TV) without paying for it?

        It is already capable of tuning HDTV. Screenshots [gnu.org]
      • Re:What's it do? (Score:5, Informative)

        by plcurechax ( 247883 ) on Monday December 27, 2004 @02:05PM (#11193145) Homepage
        Basically it allows you to build radio receiving equipement using software instead of traditional hardware (resistors, capacitors, transistors etc..).

        Partial true, it does not eliminate, but reduces the the electronics used by do as much of the decoding (demodulation, etc.) of the RF signa l in programming hardware (FPGA) and in software (GNU Radio code itself). You still need a RF front-end typically for VHF ~100 MHz and higher (microwave signals a la Wi-Fi, GPS, DSS TV, etc.) and hardware like the USRP.

        ould theoretically write a receiver to decode digital signals (like TV) without paying for it?

        You can legally receive signals in the US, you cannot legally bypass copyright security measures like encryption to decode a satellite TV signal to enable to watch it. There is a moderate large hobby of people who listen or watch un-encrypted signals, we use to call them scanner listeners, but scanners evolved into Software Defined Radio devices as well. NB: There are explicit laws about listening into telephone conversations (both cordless and cellular) in ths US, AFAIK.
    • Re:What's it do? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 27, 2004 @02:35PM (#11193361)
      The idea behind soft-radio is that you grab a signal from the air and use software to 'decode' it instead of hardware. So all decoding becomes an issue of software and not hardware.

      You can grab an FM signal from an antenna, use some software 'stuff', and get your favorite local station to come out the computer speaker. The only hardware you need is an antenna and a frontend to pump the signal into your computer. This device is that frontend interface between the RF capture device (antenna, dish, etc) and the computer, via a USB2 plug. The reason it was developed was that this kind of hardware was either very specific (grab only FM signals or TV signals) or very expensive (the cost of a new computer or two).

      The reason this will be labeled a terrorist device is because you can grab any signal from the spectrum (if you can make an antenna) so all the decoding becomes a software problem. You develop a program to decode HBO's satellite feed, and bang, this thing gets banned as a pirate device, err terrorist device as that's the buzzword dejour. Special interests will push this through Gov like everything else and claim it's destroying American capitalism, meanwhile never mentioning their monopolies destroy fair competition and hurt the consumer when prices rise.

      Geeks will lament as not only is this device a reciever but it's a transmiter as well. Want to make an ad-hoc WiFi-like network on some other frequency? What about a smart 'cell' phone that makes it's own network so you don't need a common provider (think p2p phones)? As it's so new, the possibilities have not been well thought out, but technologies like this are a solution looking for a problem, kinda like the PC in the 1980s.
  • by bhima ( 46039 ) <Bhima...Pandava@@@gmail...com> on Monday December 27, 2004 @01:05PM (#11192651) Journal
    Yep, I can see all the slashdot readers going out and getting this... with all of the other VME stuff we have.
    • Hey, I have a VXI chassis I was wondering what to do with. I so far have a Mains supply for the backplane, and a dc power supply. I have 8 open slots left (which means I could fit 8 of these by the looks of them). Hmmm... Wish I was more into this stuff I might dedicate a couple hundred to acquiring one of these boards.
      -nB
  • It's [kgnu.org] been around for years...
  • by daveschroeder ( 516195 ) * on Monday December 27, 2004 @01:06PM (#11192658)
    How long will it be till it's labeled a terrorist tool and banned?

    When HAM radio is?

    Seriously, what kind of commentary is this, especially with the FCC giving unprecedented amounts of frequency bandwidth back to the public?

    Couldn't the article have done just as well without the last sentence?
    • by John Miles ( 108215 ) on Monday December 27, 2004 @01:35PM (#11192903) Homepage Journal
      I remember an editorial in QEX [arrl.org] not too long ago that suggested there were already political efforts under way to regulate the sale of high-performance ADCs.

      SDR is eventually going to make the Stalinist wannabees on Capitol Hill very nervous indeed. There is already precedent for banning the manufacture and sale of certain types of receiving equipment (Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 1987), so I would not take the availability of this technology for granted if I were you. It wouldn't be the least bit surprising to see a Federal ban on private ownership of high-speed analog-to-digital converters at the IC level.
      • It wouldn't be the least bit surprising to see a Federal ban on private ownership of high-speed analog-to-digital converters at the IC level.

        On the contrary, it would be VERY surprising.

        First of all, because the high-tech industry is where the money is. Second, because this (and variations of it) has many, many practical uses. Third because stealing a high-speed digital capture card from a university or company would be trivial. And finally, because people could make these out of their garages if need-

    • especially with the FCC giving unprecedented amounts of frequency bandwidth back to the public?
      Giving? Don't you mean selling? I'm a ham, and I don't recall any large new unlicensed bands showing up, or any large new ham bands. I suspect you're talking about the spectrum auctions, but that's hardly `giving' back to the public.

      Couldn't the article have done just as well without the last sentence?
      Better, even.
    • I could have done without that editorial line myself, but your comment about the FCC giving bandwidth back to the public is either naive or intentionally misleading. When it comes to making political hay and rewarding the appropriate cronies the policies of the FCC are very closely aligned with Bush. Bush is doing a reasonable job in protecting the nation against terrorism, but many people believe that Bush is a little too quick to apply the terrorist label to things for no reason other than to benefit hims
    • by ars ( 79600 ) <assd2.dsgml@com> on Monday December 27, 2004 @02:02PM (#11193127) Homepage
      This thing can recieve HDtv [comsec.com] - so you can ignore the broadcast flag. That obviously makes it a terrorist tool.
    • Seriously, what kind of commentary is this, especially with the FCC giving unprecedented amounts of frequency bandwidth back to the public?

      If it can tune in cellular frequencies, sorry, it's already illegal in the US and pretty much any other developed nation. Various dictatorship-countries would probably instantly declare anyone they found owning this kind of thing to be a 'spy'.

      I imagine this scares the crap out of the FCC. , because prior to this the only thing that stood between your phone call and

      • Umm... don't all digital cell phones (which almost everyone uses in the United States) use some kind of basic encryption? GSM phones do [newscientist.com] though it might not be perfect, I don't know about the other standards.
    • 1) This nothing to do with HAM radio.

      2) There are many reasons this tool could be banned, as it could theoretically be used to interfere with or listen in on radio transmissions that are now protected via FCC regulation of devices.

      3) The FCC allowing the public to use a few bands relatively freely does not prevent them from regulating other bands very strictly.

      4) The last sentence incites a very pertinent discussion, although the "terrorist" statement was unnecessary.

      5) You are a jackass.
  • terrorist tool? (Score:4, Informative)

    by Twid ( 67847 ) on Monday December 27, 2004 @01:06PM (#11192659) Homepage
    Well, since neither link in the submission actually explains what it does, I think whatever-it-is is safe from being labeled a terrorist tool. :)

  • Editor incoherence (Score:2, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Two orders of magnitude? Did it really cost $45,000? And what's with the terrorist comment?
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 27, 2004 @01:07PM (#11192668)
    Is this just a radio tuner card for PCs?
  • Sweet ! (Score:4, Interesting)

    by BigJim.fr ( 40893 ) <jim@liotier.org> on Monday December 27, 2004 @01:08PM (#11192674) Homepage
    This is great news : software defined radios are über-cool and the Gnuradio project is quite promising. I hope that someone will soon package it with enclosure and daughtercards and market it to people who are not willing to do the seemingly required hardware assembly.
    • Re:Sweet ! (Score:4, Informative)

      by John Miles ( 108215 ) on Monday December 27, 2004 @01:38PM (#11192930) Homepage Journal
      What you're talking about already exists, actually. See www.flex-radio.com [flex-radio.com].
    • could someone tell me what this device is, what it does, and why it should be interesting to us?

      The web site certainly wasn't much help, and the jargon-laden responses I've seen so far aren't much help either.

      Many thanks.

      D
      • The device is mainly a fast analog-to-digtal and digital-to-analog converter, with USB interface.
        It allows you to quickly readout a couple of analog signals using a PC, and to generate some analog signals under program control.

        With some additional radio hardware (supplied on daughterboards) you can convert a certain frequency band into analog signals that are then fed to the converters. With proper software you can use this as a radio that does not have a tuning knob but can be tuned in software and/or to
      • by stienman ( 51024 ) <adavisNO@SPAMubasics.com> on Monday December 27, 2004 @03:30PM (#11193892) Homepage Journal
        Of the set of problems in the world that can be solved using software only, hardware only, or a mix of the two, problems are generally moving toward the software solving side.

        In other words, radio can be completely received, down converted, and demodulated in hardware and by and large this is how it is done.

        However, if you instead receive and downconvert the radio signal, then you can let software take over for the demodulation, and in the case of HDTV further digital decoding.

        Further, this device can work on about 32MHz of the signal spectrum at a time. This doesn't mean much until you realize that the entire FM radio band (88.1MHz - 107.9MHz) fits within that slice of bandwidth. You can use this radio to decode the entire audio of all the radio statiosn in the area simultaneously. Live in detroit? Listen to and record every single radio station with one device. Not so terribly useful for the consumer, but nice for the re-streamer, radio fanatic, FCC, NSA, etc.

        Bandwidth of an NTSC TV signal is about 6MHz. Watch/record 4-5 consecutive channels simultaneously.

        HDTV is about 8MHz. Watch and record 3-4 consecutive channels simultaneously.

        In short, it's a move from less hardware to more softare. The biggest advantage is not less hardware, but more flexibility. This one tuner can be used to tune your HDTV, TV, radio, 802.11, bluetooth, etc.

        -Adam
  • naive question (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward
    This looks like an excellent step towards a turn-key software defined radio but I have a dumb question:
    Why go with usb2.0 as the interface instead of pci or multiple usb2.0 connectors (is the usb 2.0 bandwidth limit a total value or a per/channel value?) I know you want to isolate the radio receiver from all the RF noise inside the PC but there are giga-sample a/d cards that go inside boxes already... Just wondering
    • Re:naive question (Score:5, Informative)

      by plcurechax ( 247883 ) on Monday December 27, 2004 @02:30PM (#11193326) Homepage
      Why go with usb2.0 as the interface instead of pci or multiple usb2.0 connectors

      Because USB2.0 was the fastest commonly available connection found on home PCs and laptops.

      PCI rules out laptops, but the developers (Eric and Matt) use and demo their work on laptops.

      Firewire wasn't as well developed and as well supported on all Free/Open OSes (OpenBSD in particular) when the decision was made.

      The on-board ADC / DAC and FPGA will reduce the needs for most applications to something that works, such as a single HDTV ATSC signal (which is roughly 6MHz bandwidth).

  • The commercial board provides considerably more than the "free" board, for approximately a correct ratio for the price. (Eight times as amany quadrature channels for eight times the price, since a quadrature channel on the GnuRadio requires the purchase of four daughterboards at $50 each.) More than that, the commercial board includes documentation, and is easier to reduce to a standard FPGA implementation for inclusion in hardware.

    Where's the bargain, here?
    • Most people will want this to record one or two channels simultaneously, and to play only one. My problem with it is that it uses USB which is well-known to imply a significant expenditure of processing power as compard to, say, 800Mbps IEEE1394, which is probably three times the real-world speed of USB2. There is no way I can take this thing seriously enough to spend $450 if I have to screw around with USB. I would have preferred a PCI card to USB, as well, even with the potentially high PITA factor.
  • by CheapEngineer ( 604473 ) on Monday December 27, 2004 @01:10PM (#11192702)
    It's apparently a general purpose software decoder of digital signals; decode DTV at a software level, apply software filters to analog audio, basically thru programming replicate all those arcane things done in both analog and digital radio/tv/shortwave signals.
  • My favorite quote ever: #137692 +(191)- [X]

    Procyon> I don't know the world around me!
    Procyon> I'm scared, and confused!
    DS> have you felt a strong desire to vote for george w. bush recently?

    Same with terrorism, it sucks. But the politicians should stop banning random stuff out of fear - i want people to start using their brains, for once. In the US they already slashed constitutional rights, and want me to give my fingerprints and digital foto when i travel into US. Forget it!

    Too bad the US
  • ...was the previous price really 10x10x450=$45K?

    Wow...that's some cost reduction.
  • by Anonymous Coward
    The text claims the limiting factor is the USB2 bus but when you get into the details of the circuitry, the Raceway Link, the Aquisition bus, and the Arbitar all connect through one single 32bit local data bus. I assume this is a change from the previous design and build. Now I know why the price is a few orders of magnatude lower.

    On a side note, I really have no idea what I am talking about. Just pulled that out of the air based on 10 seconds looking at the two included links, Based on the current comm
  • It might have been good for this to come out 1-2 years later. Why? Because then HDTV and digital radio broadcasters would have had more time to get sloppy on the encryption and DRM under the (false) assumption that the need to have their hardware radios in order to receive the signal is protection enough.

    With software radios widely and inexpensively available during the initial deployment of the next generation of radio and television broadcasts, broadcasters may recognize too soon the need for bullet-pr
  • by mahesh_gharat ( 633793 ) on Monday December 27, 2004 @01:31PM (#11192869)

    A software-defined radio (SDR) system is a radio communication system which uses software for the modulation and demodulation of radio signals.

    An SDR performs significant amounts of signal processing in a general purpose computer, or a reconfigurable piece of digital electronics. The goal of this design is to produce a radio that can receive and transmit a new form of radio protocol just by running new software.

    Software radios have significant utility for the military and cell phone services, both of which must serve a wide variety of changing radio protocols in real time.

    The hardware of a software-defined radio typically consists of a superheterodyne RF front end which converts RF signals from and to analog IF signals, and analog to digital converter and digital to analog converters which are used to convert a digitised IF signal to and from analog form.

    Software-defined radio can currently be used to implement simple radio modem technologies. In the long run, software-defined radio is expected by its proponents to become the dominant technology in radio communications. GNURadio is a project to implement software-defined radio as free software.

    URL:: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Software-defined_radi o
  • Instrumentation uses (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Animats ( 122034 ) on Monday December 27, 2004 @01:36PM (#11192912) Homepage
    This could be valuable for high-bandwidth instrumentation applications. Wideband data-acquisition cards tend to be both overpriced and out of date, because the product volumes are small.

    Some years ago, I was doing some work on a laser rangefinder, and got to the point where I needed about $20K in test gear to find out why it wasn't working right. Something like this would have been a big help.

    Radio hams will find uses for this. It should be great for working on new data transmission schemes for high-noise links, like HF.

    LabView [ni.com] support would be nice.

  • Essentially this is a device to 'tune' to any of the millions of frequencies that are in the upper part of the non-visible Electromagnetic spectrum. TV and Radio are broadcast in the long wavelength low frequency part of the specturm. Pretty pictures at Nasa [nasa.gov]

    Anyway, Here's a Salon Article about the polictical & technical aspects of it:
    http://www.salon.com/tech/feature/2003/03/12/spect rum/index.html [salon.com] (Warning: you may have to click through a stupid ad.)
  • by VE3ECM ( 818278 ) on Monday December 27, 2004 @01:39PM (#11192935)
    SDR has long been considered the 'Holy Grail' in radio communications.

    There were quite a few pages dedicated to the advances in digital radio and SDR in Monitoring Times [monitoringtimes.com] a few months back.

    One of the biggest advantages to a true SDR radio is that the manufacturer can build one or two models of radios, and have different software loads depending on bandsplit, features, costs, etc.

    Motorola tried that with their Jedi-series and XTS series of handy talkies over the past decade... biggest problem was that it is pretty simple (technologically) to take a radio with no special features (smartnet, digital modes, tone signalling, etc.) and enable the features by cloning the software load of another model.

    They did smarten up to that with the MTS2000 line of radios; any attempt to force a 'codeplug' into it that didn't belong would turn the unit into a brick, and you'd have to send it back to Motorola for a costly repair (as well as a stern talking to for 'hacking' at the radio).

    True software defined radios would be a lot easier to secure... on paper it would drive prices way down... in reality, as long as the radio manufacturers control the public service contracts, prices will still remain sky high.

    As an aside, WiNRADiO [winradio.com] markets a device that could *almost* be considered an SDR device... super pricey for a receiver, but neat concept.

    I am looking forward to the day we see true SDR transceivers.

  • Never (Score:2, Insightful)

    by gtrubetskoy ( 734033 ) *

    How long will it be till it's labeled a terrorist tool and banned?

    It's not a transmitter as far as I understand.

    • Re:Never (Score:3, Interesting)

      by plcurechax ( 247883 )
      It's not a transmitter as far as I understand.

      Correct, the USRP (Universal Software Radio Peripheral) base module itself is not an transmitter. There is an additional $50 USD basicTX modules available.

      "Terrorist tool" is simply nonsense on the part of the submitter or editor. Ignore the poor fool.

      Unlicensed operation and interference are not a new issue, (radio stations use to "compete" by trying to transmit by "out-gunning" by using more power (Watts) on a given frequency (e.g. 105.7 MHz)) are why depa
  • by kremvax ( 307366 ) on Monday December 27, 2004 @01:45PM (#11192987) Homepage
    But, he's right in pointing out that the powers that be do not have a vested interest in allowing citizens to own a general purpose reciever/transmitter. It marginalizes their sense of control.

    Like PGP/GPG, buy one, use it, build an economy around it BEFORE they start thinking about making it illega.

    Kremax
  • I hope the equipment they sell holds up better than their server! ;-)
  • by east coast ( 590680 ) on Monday December 27, 2004 @01:54PM (#11193055)
    How long will it be till it's labeled a terrorist tool and banned?

    I'm seriously asking what else has been banned under the concerns of terrorism?
    • I know a terrorist (Score:4, Interesting)

      by A nonymous Coward ( 7548 ) * on Monday December 27, 2004 @02:24PM (#11193299)
      He was told by a store to come in and pick up a refund check. WHen he got there, they told him it wouldn't be ready til the next day. He got pissed, ranted and raved, cops showed up, and told him it was a terrorist threat to challenge the manager to meet him outside.

      Anything the Powers That Be want to label as terrorist; that's what is terroristic these days. When Disney sees SDR as a threat to Mickey Mouse, it will be labeled a terrorist tool.
      • He got pissed, ranted and raved, cops showed up, and told him it was a terrorist threat to challenge the manager to meet him outside.

        This has been on the books for a much longer time than terrorism (on the levels we know of it now) has been a threat. The fact is that you can not threaten someone with bodily harm. Perhaps there is a level of provocation that makes it legal but I doubt it.

        Anything the Powers That Be want to label as terrorist; that's what is terroristic these days.

        As I said, this threat
    • All manner of harmless items have been banned on airliners, such as nail clippers and children's scissors.

      The current administration is already seriously discussing jamming cell phones and GPS in the event of a terrorist attack. While it's not a ban, it's in the same ball park as far as the kind of thinking goes.
  • by YetAnotherName ( 168064 ) on Monday December 27, 2004 @01:57PM (#11193079) Homepage
    The nice thing about GnuRadio is that you can build things like an ATSC digital television receiver, all in software. The problem is that, thanks to the heavy weight of the MPAA and other media lobbies, the FCC gave us the broadcast flag, meaning that a programmer can set a bit that says "do not record" such-and-such.

    But to make the broadcast flag effective, you also have to mandate that equipment pay attention to it, and be robust against user modification. You've got to make it otherwise illegal to make an ATSC receiver that doesn't obey it. And sure enough, that's what the FCC has done; July 2005, any equipment that doesn't obey the flag is illegal to sell, trade, create, etc.

    And with GnuRadio, you write an ATSC receiver that does or doesn't pay attention to it ... at your own peril. It makes specific uses of GnuRadio illegal, and even if you wrote your GnuRadio software to pay attention to the flag, a simple programming error would make your product illegal.

    Heck, it might even be said that GnuRadio itself will be illegal this year, since it fails the robustness rules.

    Now, is this copyright infringement? Refusing to record a pristine ATSC transport stream or recording it for personal use isn't necessarily a distinction the MPAA et al. are likely to make. But it does facilitate the distribution of perfect copies of Desperate Housewives and other quality programming (ahem), and the MPAA have used the copyright infringement/terrorism analogy before.
  • It can also create signals! This is a really nifty device! Except for one thing, it's only avaliable as a USB device! I'd have thought that PCI would be a bit more sensible for something this data hungry?
  • If you examine the madwifi driver FAQ [clara.co.uk] it makes reference to regulations explicitly permitting "open" code controlling hardware that can receive/transmit many frequencies.

    5.3. Why is the HAL closed source?

    The Atheros chipset can tune to frequencies that are out of the ISM band(s). These frequencies are licensed by various regulatory agencies, and radar systems thus an open HAL is disallowed by just about every regulatory institution in existence (i.e. FCC etc). On a practical/usability note: Were it not f

    • I expect just receivers will bear less of a burden, but I would not be surprised if Gnu Radio was already illegal with massive criminal penalties associated.

      Which is an atrocity, frankly. Please correct me. Please.


      The FCC, et all (IC, RA, PTO, ...) have regulated RF transmissions for nearly 100 years now. They goal is so that the spectrum can be peacefully shared amongst users nationally, and internationally with as little interference as possible. Spark-gap transmitters are also illegal to use.

      I'll ig
  • If it is truly universal, why do they have various packs for different frequency ranges? I would have assumed that it would let you tune into any frequency (upto a certain maximum, of course); that is the premise of a software radio, isn't it?

    Prolly I'm a bit confused here.

  • by willy_me ( 212994 ) on Monday December 27, 2004 @02:46PM (#11193439)
    With 4 x 64MHz AtoD converters, this board could be easily turned into a descent digital oscilloscope. Right now such equipment is so very costly, but the right IO module might just make this a possibility for low frequency work.

Take an astronaut to launch.

Working...