How software-defined radio could revolutionize wireless
- Thread starter JournalBot
- Start date
I haven't read all of this article yet, but it's already reminded me of a prior one, at the other end of the scale:
http://meincmagazine.com/information-technology/2012/06/how-to-blow-6-billion-on-a-tech-project/
http://meincmagazine.com/information-technology/2012/06/how-to-blow-6-billion-on-a-tech-project/
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
So stupid question:
How do these software radios actually work electrically? Are they reprogrammable tuners/mixers or are they literally just parking an oscillator at some frequency and running a really fast A/D to capture everything moving through the air over a very wide band?
Can they simultaneously read in 1 GHz and 2 GHz transmission for instance?
How do these software radios actually work electrically? Are they reprogrammable tuners/mixers or are they literally just parking an oscillator at some frequency and running a really fast A/D to capture everything moving through the air over a very wide band?
Can they simultaneously read in 1 GHz and 2 GHz transmission for instance?
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Thank you for an interesting article on a very, very cool topic that isn't yet on many people's radar, even amongst the technology oriented. As you say, the number of potential applications is staggering, and at the same time the entire field could be extremely disruptive to a lot of established, and very powerful, interests. It'll be very interesting to see exactly how it plays out, but the potential is incredibly important. Bandwidth and infrastructure are key limitations in the modern world and seem to be becoming ever more entrenched and constricting choke points. All First World societies seem to have accumulated a lot of very sticky historical cruft when it comes to usage of the EM spectrum, which in turn results in significant inefficiency. There are certainly risks, but given the practice of what we've been stuck with and how poorly it has been progressing for the last decade I think the potential benefits well outweigh the potential harm.
It'll also be personally exciting purely in terms of history. I was alive but too young to fully appreciate what was going on with the original personal computer revolution in the 80s, so I'm particularly looking forward to being in the thick of it all this time.
It'll also be personally exciting purely in terms of history. I was alive but too young to fully appreciate what was going on with the original personal computer revolution in the 80s, so I'm particularly looking forward to being in the thick of it all this time.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Nitpick: It isn't, not by any physical metric you could associate with "size".
I've been waiting for well over a decade for software radios to take off, but had always heard the FCC was blocking any useful applications. Glad to hear some people are trying to sneak them in under the radar regardless.
Hopefully I don't have to wait another decade before the many complex, disparate radios in mobile devices finally get replaced by a single, unified, far more capable software radio.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
https://www.ettus.com/content/files/Ett ... 7.12_2.pdf
So basically, you have a tunable oscillator/mixer with 2 moderately broadband A/D and D/A. So I guess you pick 1 (or 2?) channels and then log everything in that approximate band and use software to home in on specific carriers or whatever.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Not so stupid a question actually. I also wondered about that.redleader":15bppifj said:
Due to the nature of electromagnetic, signals need to be modulated or EM waves will not be emitted.
Plus, the antennas must be at least as long as 1/4 lambda and (IIRC) not multiples of 1/2 lambda. This practically limits the usable wavelengths used, introducing "blind spots" here and there.
I'm not saying that those limitations are insurmountable, but designing/engineering around them would surely introduce additional complexities, and hence, increased cost.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
SDRs are everywhere actually. Most radios are SDR based though limited by firmware to coexist with existing rules.
For traditional SDRs, what happens is you have an analog front end consisting of an antenna, ampllifier, and a pair of mixers driven by an oscillator that feeds a local oscillator signal out of phase, giving you an IF signal with an in-phase (I) and quadrature (Q) component. Stick those in a ADC and you're done/ Common SDRs use audio ADCs (24bit/192kHz) to give you a 192kHz bandwidth at 24 bit resolution, and software takes the rest.
The new generation of SDRs use a high-speed ADC, limiting the analog parts to the antenna and an amp, and digitizing everything from that. Then you can feed it into a massively powerful computer and see the whole spectrum at once. Or, to make it more managable you feed it into a digital downconverter (a discrete time mixer) which lets you focus in on the bands you want at varying bandwidth. The limit here is your hardware DSP - you can listen in on as many bands as you have processing hardware to run separate downconverters for.
The latter is a direct-sampling SDR and is of the new breed of SDRs coming on the market. Given you can get 250MS/s ADCs, Nyquist gets you 0-125MHz sampling right off the bat.
For transmit, it's a bit easier - either a DAC to an amp (you can get 400MU/s DACs good to 200MHz), or more traditionally, a DAC followed by a upconverter (analog), power amp, antenna.
Of course, receivers don't need licensing, but transmitters do to prevent interference. You can bet that the need to license transmitters will never go away because of interference. Pirate radios yes, but there will be no "free spectrum" for transmission because that leads to chaos.
And you can get an OK SDR hardware for $20 shipped. It's the traditional SDR, but the price is definitely awesome (and you get 1MHz bandwidth). http://sdr.osmocom.org/trac/wiki/rtl-sdr
For traditional SDRs, what happens is you have an analog front end consisting of an antenna, ampllifier, and a pair of mixers driven by an oscillator that feeds a local oscillator signal out of phase, giving you an IF signal with an in-phase (I) and quadrature (Q) component. Stick those in a ADC and you're done/ Common SDRs use audio ADCs (24bit/192kHz) to give you a 192kHz bandwidth at 24 bit resolution, and software takes the rest.
The new generation of SDRs use a high-speed ADC, limiting the analog parts to the antenna and an amp, and digitizing everything from that. Then you can feed it into a massively powerful computer and see the whole spectrum at once. Or, to make it more managable you feed it into a digital downconverter (a discrete time mixer) which lets you focus in on the bands you want at varying bandwidth. The limit here is your hardware DSP - you can listen in on as many bands as you have processing hardware to run separate downconverters for.
The latter is a direct-sampling SDR and is of the new breed of SDRs coming on the market. Given you can get 250MS/s ADCs, Nyquist gets you 0-125MHz sampling right off the bat.
For transmit, it's a bit easier - either a DAC to an amp (you can get 400MU/s DACs good to 200MHz), or more traditionally, a DAC followed by a upconverter (analog), power amp, antenna.
Of course, receivers don't need licensing, but transmitters do to prevent interference. You can bet that the need to license transmitters will never go away because of interference. Pirate radios yes, but there will be no "free spectrum" for transmission because that leads to chaos.
And you can get an OK SDR hardware for $20 shipped. It's the traditional SDR, but the price is definitely awesome (and you get 1MHz bandwidth). http://sdr.osmocom.org/trac/wiki/rtl-sdr
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
redleader":bqzrhyze said:
1 channel tx (dac) and 1 rx (adc) simultaneously
fpga (altera cyclone IV) with high speed dac and adc.
fpga clock blocks(clock management) can do multiply, divide and phase shifting
fpga has multiple clock control blocks with pll's and other clock modules
http://www.altera.com/literature/hb/cyc ... -51005.pdf
http://www.altera.com/support/devices/p ... rview.html
TI and AD have add on cards for xilinx's zedboard (www.zedboard.org) for sdr with lower frequency range
and use ethernet not pcie but double the price, can be programmed in matlab or c,c++ and vhdl or verilog
http://www.em.avnet.com/en-us/design/dr ... o-Kit.aspx
http://www.em.avnet.com/en-us/design/dr ... o-Kit.aspx
zedboard uses a zynq - dual arm cortex A9 + fpga with dsp blocks
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
JustAdComics
Ars Praetorian
Very interesting article. I wonder if some form of widely-dispersed radio astronomy could be done with this, akin to the SETI@home project? Given enough of these units spread across a huge geographic area, the right kind of software could create a virtual antenna with a ginormous radius.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
SDR is going to lead to positive changes in several industries. It's also going to bring hell.
Projects like OpenBTS, for example, are amazing. Their project is focused on doing good. They know what they're doing, and follow the law. Which is great. Because if they were focused on doing bad, and breaking the law, they could do so just as easily.
As SDR becomes more affordable more people will work with it. Both for positive reasons, and negative. SDR will allow anyone so inclined to mimic existing networks. What happens when someone decides they want broadcast over the entire FM range? Or mimic a cell tower to snoop your communications? Or overpower GPS signals? Indeed, all of those things have already been accomplished. The only thing stopping it from being more common is the cost of hardware.
Conversations on the possible positive impact, while worthwhile, ignore half of the topic. What happens when people decide to intentionally be malicious?
Also, if you're interested in playing with SDR's on the cheap, there are some USB TV tuner cards that will let you get your feet wet on the cheap. HaD has some coverage. http://hackaday.com/tag/software-defined-radio/
Projects like OpenBTS, for example, are amazing. Their project is focused on doing good. They know what they're doing, and follow the law. Which is great. Because if they were focused on doing bad, and breaking the law, they could do so just as easily.
As SDR becomes more affordable more people will work with it. Both for positive reasons, and negative. SDR will allow anyone so inclined to mimic existing networks. What happens when someone decides they want broadcast over the entire FM range? Or mimic a cell tower to snoop your communications? Or overpower GPS signals? Indeed, all of those things have already been accomplished. The only thing stopping it from being more common is the cost of hardware.
Conversations on the possible positive impact, while worthwhile, ignore half of the topic. What happens when people decide to intentionally be malicious?
Also, if you're interested in playing with SDR's on the cheap, there are some USB TV tuner cards that will let you get your feet wet on the cheap. HaD has some coverage. http://hackaday.com/tag/software-defined-radio/
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
pepoluan":jdm0qe3b said:
Well my thinking was that if you have a fast enough A/D and D/A you don't actually need a modulator/demodulator. But apparently we're not quite there yet.
pepoluan":jdm0qe3b said:
Those rules of thumb are for simple dipole antenna. They're probably using something a bit smarter then that. But yes, you have to swap the antenna if you want to go from 100MHz to 4GHz.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
JustAdComics":29ernhjt said:
someone is already having a go with the funcube dongle its another lower cost sdr in a usb dongle.
http://www.britastro.org/radio/projects ... escope.pdf
http://www.pe0sat.vgnet.nl/radios/funcube-dongle/
Its a 64Mhz - 1700Mhz sdr with 80KHz bandwidth for US$155 http://www.funcubedongle.com/
Can even control it from an ipad or android tablet via a wifi board (extra board)
see http://www.funcubedongle.com/?p=889
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
I would be happy with an AM,FM radio PCIe for the pc. As far as transmitting goes,the practicallity of computing might include a PCIe two-way radio on one of the familiar FCC channels. This would be useful for boating ,camping,stuff like this.
The simplest implementation of this is would be something of a 'radio scanner',again a PCIe for the pc. My look at it,is that the frequency ranges would be something held in a software 'tuner' . You supply the antennae.
The implementation of the several used ranges Wi-fi, a/b/g etc.,are implemented directly because of the relationship of the 'regulated'nature of the components. I dont know of the different chips involved,but they are probably each different,and separate. When a 'software'tuner,would simply glaze on each at its spec.,and adjust wattage on the transmittion end automatically. Dont know how well software receivers are 'tuned',being that they are confined by their own specs. But incremental tuning in the Hrz.range would bring about some interesting relationships.
A single chip with variable software tuning,and programming would be interesting. Dont know reason AM,FM Pci e is not been available,or seen available.
The simplest implementation of this is would be something of a 'radio scanner',again a PCIe for the pc. My look at it,is that the frequency ranges would be something held in a software 'tuner' . You supply the antennae.
The implementation of the several used ranges Wi-fi, a/b/g etc.,are implemented directly because of the relationship of the 'regulated'nature of the components. I dont know of the different chips involved,but they are probably each different,and separate. When a 'software'tuner,would simply glaze on each at its spec.,and adjust wattage on the transmittion end automatically. Dont know how well software receivers are 'tuned',being that they are confined by their own specs. But incremental tuning in the Hrz.range would bring about some interesting relationships.
A single chip with variable software tuning,and programming would be interesting. Dont know reason AM,FM Pci e is not been available,or seen available.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
It's hard to say for sure, but I think there's a very good chance that will not actually end up being a huge deal, at least once society adjusts. The key factor is that, of the entire range of technology crimes, or even crimes in general, it's hard to think of many where a person or item announces the problem more clearly. "Maliciousness" and "incompetence" appear to be similar here: someone sets up a device that, either by intention or just simple misconfiguration, ends up being a bad EM citizen and pumps out too much power too randomly, thus acting like a jammer and mucking things up for others. However, by definition anything operating with that kind of power is dead easy to find by anyone at all. The exact same physics that cause it to mess with other network equipment also means it's a big fat "Here I Am" sign.mikecyber":33ik9lrh said:
So it'll be easy to see who or what is being bad, and thus I think tools and social norms can be developed to handle it. It seems very similar to noise pollution really, if someone is partying too loudly and bothers the neighbors then the first step is just calling them up or walking over and asking them to turn it down, which often is enough right there. Everyone here could go out and buy a big set of speakers, turn them up to 11 and be a jerk, but that isn't a widespread problem because most people aren't jerks and even for those that are most will bow to social pressure. For what remains, just call the cops. "It's freaking one in the morning and so-and-so's kid is having a rock concert in their back yard" becomes "so-and-so's kid is operating a jammer and messing with everyone's Internet".
No doubt there will be plenty of growing pains though, and people being idiots. Wasn't too long ago where we had a story covering people pointing lasers at aircraft for example.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
sigmasirrus":204dji81 said:
They did but the cost was to high and a lot higher complexity.
The price for this is better US$9750/850 but still not cheap
(okay its very cheap compared to a lot of existing sdr boards)
Funcube dongle is $155 but more limited and rx only.
This board still uses hdl for the fpga and driver in c or c++.
If you want to "hack" it you still need to know hdl (verilog or vhdl) and have to use the manufacturers tools.
Its impossible to do full open source on fpgas with the current generation (need the manufactuers tools to do synthesis , mapping and bitstream generation)
I think it has great potential but its still expensive if they can get it down until $200 or less
it would go like hotcakes.
Would be nice to see Altera sponsor something like this to promote their fpgas as their development boards are usually much more expensive than xilinx.
Problem is if you had a clue and wanted to its possible to jam essential frequencies.
Keeping a bit of complexity helps reduce this.
This could help reduce the cost of phone jammers for movie theaters etc
If I had one I'd be keeping a dummy load on the tx most of the time.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
sigmasirrus":sv9w3wmo said:
This is something that has existed for many years, just that it hasn't really gotten to the hobbyist market yet. I'm a little surprised at a couple of their statements. The "spaces" in between are guard bands, and they're there to minimize interference (barring harmonics). Also, I'm unsure why they would think that they would avoid the FCC when the FCC is concerned about ERP from antennas (and would probably be concerned as well at the possible maximum power at a specific frequency).
The real reason that software definable radio is as limited as it is is due to the limitations with PAs and antennas, and with the narrower and narrower tolerances for more advanced data rates (QPSK, OFDM, etc).
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
redleader":1gxalide said:
As the name would imply the components of the transmitter or receiver would be implemented in software. Not a very useful statement, I know. In general, SDR makes the whole system more flexible. Instead of "hardcoding" the functionality into an IC it's done in C/C++ or VHDL. Some or all of the following blocks can be implemented: filtering, modulation, demodulation, detection, channel equalization, and amplification. The A/D is usually configurable too.
In terms of a dipole, that's mostly correct but a more complex wide-band antenna could be used.redleader":1gxalide said:
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
I like this, obviously the FCC will impose some sensible restrictions. Things like limiting the maximum power output of the module, then making it illegal to circumvent the restrictions.
Otherwise, I like the idea of having a more central system, much like I can get one computer to be a media center, file server and gaming machine, having a single device be a wi-fi AP, garage door opener and cell repeater.
If it does go the way early computers did, then having handheld version opens up significant opportunities for innovation, since what you can do isn't limited by the chips the manufacturer put in.
Otherwise, I like the idea of having a more central system, much like I can get one computer to be a media center, file server and gaming machine, having a single device be a wi-fi AP, garage door opener and cell repeater.
If it does go the way early computers did, then having handheld version opens up significant opportunities for innovation, since what you can do isn't limited by the chips the manufacturer put in.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Voix des Airs
Ars Praefectus
xoa":247s5snl said:
The problem is that a malicious actor need not operate for very long to cause damage and can do so from a mobile platform. And aside from actual criminal types, there are also just a lot of immature idiots too (think of all the laser pointer pointed at landing plane incidents). Just Imagine all the 4chan-type geeks capable of causing real damage just for the lulz.
I think what many proponents envision as the future/solution is that most communications will be some form of spread modulation that involves something like key exchange to define the modeling functions/scheme. In this circumstance impersonation is difficult-to-impossible (due to the keys or whatever) and jamming will also be very hard as it is generally quite difficult to jam most spread schemes. I think the hope is that everything will just sort-of dynamically negotiate for somewhere spectrum-wise to operate and everything will just be able to step all over everything else (many spread systems work like that - see for example CDMA) and the system will still work fine. Whether an RF world like this will ever come to pass or is just a futurists' pipe dream I don' know.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Fractal antennas should minimize the blind spots.pepoluan":1xo88c9i said:
Wiki page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fractal_antenna
DIY HDTV aerial #1: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q= ... CHQEcezBPw
DIYHDTV aerial #2: http://blog.makezine.com/2012/01/30/diy ... igital-tv/
There is a lot of material on these wideband antennas, Try "fractal antenna" "wideband antenna" & "recursive antenna" Google searches as a starting point.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
iwill":1o90fdzt said:
ugh thanks i guess, but I already looked up and posted the actual answer above, so no need for you to guess how they work.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Quick gripe:
The intro seemed to me to imply that Apple came to their vast fortunes solely due to their computers. The majority of their profits come from iTunes and related (mobile devices) sales and not from their computer business.
That may not have been what you were going for though so it might just be me.
On another note...This was an interesting read and I am going to have to look into this some more. Thanks.
The intro seemed to me to imply that Apple came to their vast fortunes solely due to their computers. The majority of their profits come from iTunes and related (mobile devices) sales and not from their computer business.
That may not have been what you were going for though so it might just be me.
On another note...This was an interesting read and I am going to have to look into this some more. Thanks.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
A bug.
The thing about citizen maliciousness is interesting because what empowers the citizen also empowers the establishment, and earlier since they have the financial resources to do so. Maybe you'll see active research into adaptive systems that keep the rest of us in line.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
I think the legal issues surrounding this at least in europe will heavily restrict what an indivudal device could be capable of. Under the EC R&TTE regulations of 2000.
1. licenses are required to broadcast on most frequencies irespective of power.
2. most those licenses are unatainable as they have been exclusivly auctioned to third party monolpolies
3. devices that do broadcast on licensed frequecies (mobile phones) are sub licesned through the network provider's licsense - so the device would need to be facilitated through a licsense holder- which will restrict it to frequencies that the provider holds a license for, by definition, the providers don,t have licsenes for each others frequencies.
4. a device cannot operate accross more than one individually licensed frequency band - ie across gsm900 and gsm1800.
Great future thinking but i think there will be a hell of a lot of red tape.
(i was prosecuted a couple of yeara ago by OFCOM for brodcasting on unlicsensed frequencies and for using a device that worked accross multiple frequencies)
1. licenses are required to broadcast on most frequencies irespective of power.
2. most those licenses are unatainable as they have been exclusivly auctioned to third party monolpolies
3. devices that do broadcast on licensed frequecies (mobile phones) are sub licesned through the network provider's licsense - so the device would need to be facilitated through a licsense holder- which will restrict it to frequencies that the provider holds a license for, by definition, the providers don,t have licsenes for each others frequencies.
4. a device cannot operate accross more than one individually licensed frequency band - ie across gsm900 and gsm1800.
Great future thinking but i think there will be a hell of a lot of red tape.
(i was prosecuted a couple of yeara ago by OFCOM for brodcasting on unlicsensed frequencies and for using a device that worked accross multiple frequencies)
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
The worldwide changeover from analog to digital radio in the "consumer" frequencies is already underway.
The days of FM and AM on your radio dial are already numbered.
The terms "VHF", "Medium Wave", "Long Wave" and "Short Wave" are about to be confined to history.
The project is called "Digital Radio Mondiale".
Website : www.drm.org
Overview:
http://www.drm.org/uploads/files/DRM_Th ... inal_1.pdf
Technical specs:
http://www.drm.org/uploads/files/broadcast_manual.pdf
The days of FM and AM on your radio dial are already numbered.
The terms "VHF", "Medium Wave", "Long Wave" and "Short Wave" are about to be confined to history.
The project is called "Digital Radio Mondiale".
Website : www.drm.org
Overview:
http://www.drm.org/uploads/files/DRM_Th ... inal_1.pdf
Technical specs:
http://www.drm.org/uploads/files/broadcast_manual.pdf
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
This has to be one of the most interesting pieces I've read in Ars recently. Very promising tech. That said, I hope they can work out the interference/spectrum allocation issues. And implement this as a low-power SoC - imagine phones that can be upgraded to the next cell spec (5G?) through software! Although I can hardly imagine phone manufacturers thinking very highly of this - after all, that would undermine the incentive to move from a 4G to a 5G phone 
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
What i would love to see if for this to be put into hand held devices so that i no longer have to shop around for something that include both wifi and bluetooth. One software radio, and i am all set.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Apple is not the worlds largest company. It's not even the worlds largest tech company, 43rd to Samsung's 24th by 2011 revenue. Try and contain you ridiculously obvious Apple bias just a tinsy bit in future. Oh and research and fact checking are also staples of good journalism... so I hear.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... by_revenue
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_co ... by_revenue
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Great articles (as almost always) BUT please change "Today, of course, Apple is the world's largest company." They are not the largest by any means except perhaps within IT... If someone don't believe me please go check in "Samsung" they are kinda big....It doesn't look good even though I understand the reason, but please rephrase to something like "one of" or "largest within PC/IT/whateever"..
Very interesting technology but there's always one question would this be possible to use as a "super-wide-band frequency jammer"? ie. could you destroy stuff with this technology
Also a sort of question how would this change the "spectrum control" that most countries use to make sure no one crams the "international frequencies" would there still be some freq that would be "no-touchie" or would those restrictions be removed if this got in to "everything"...
And how/when can I get this in to my phone so I can get super reception and bandwidth wherever I am
Very interesting technology but there's always one question would this be possible to use as a "super-wide-band frequency jammer"? ie. could you destroy stuff with this technology
Also a sort of question how would this change the "spectrum control" that most countries use to make sure no one crams the "international frequencies" would there still be some freq that would be "no-touchie" or would those restrictions be removed if this got in to "everything"...
And how/when can I get this in to my phone so I can get super reception and bandwidth wherever I am
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Timothy B. Lee is using Market Capitalization as a measurement. The Wikipedia list you linked to can be sorted by Market Capitalization.Puzzlebox42":wd9ax1d0 said:
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
So here's what I got from this article:
"Apple... apple. Apple apple: Apple! Apple? A-p-p-l-e. (Phi)."
Sorry, it's a fascinating subject ruined by hugely out of place fanboyism.
"Apple... apple. Apple apple: Apple! Apple? A-p-p-l-e. (Phi)."
Sorry, it's a fascinating subject ruined by hugely out of place fanboyism.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Cool article, reminds me of the earlier projects I used to watch my father create (advanced class Ham, EET, software engineer etc..). When I was younger I watched him create our own little ham radio kits, 2000w linear amp (we had to give all our neighbors ferride coils so it never bleed through the tv's...) capture and decode weather packet data and later move on to experimenting with RFID. Eventually he created a RFID and satelite tracking system (mid 1990's) for the steel plant he works for in chicago which is still highly used today over the company's entire plant. Nice to see that people have started to notice the potential and versatility for software radio applications.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Walshicus":28fqanzi said:
You must not have read the same article as me. While I don't particularly like Apple, and while I think mentioning it as the largest company in the world is highly debatable and depends on you choice of metric, I can't understand how this thread became about that instead of the exciting tech reported on. The comparison with Apple is an insignificant part of the article. Someone's got a really sensitive Apple nerve... in fact, several people do, apparently.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
In my job I work with a bunch of Harris LOS Software radios; the software defined part was actually the main reason the military ended up with these. Being able to install a firmware update to enable an entirely new waveform is totally awesome but has a downside.
Now we pay MILLIONS for what amounts to a firmware update. Maybe I'm a bit more old school but installing a few MB of software on existing hardware at tens of thousands of dollars a pop just doesn't seem like its worth the money.
Now we pay MILLIONS for what amounts to a firmware update. Maybe I'm a bit more old school but installing a few MB of software on existing hardware at tens of thousands of dollars a pop just doesn't seem like its worth the money.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
Since people are complaining about the claim about Apple being the world's largest company, I've added "by market capitalization" to make it clear.
Upvote
0
(0
/
0)
- Status