[App_rpt-users] Modified FOB vs URL

[Scott Zimmerman]

 > I expect many just use the RX/TX audio, a COS/RUS/CTCSS input, PTT and ground.
Ok.... So the next question then is: How much would you pay for such a device?

Would you want it in an enclosure or "bare bones"? Blinky flashy lights? Any preference for an 
interface connector? DE-9?

Scott

Scott Zimmerman
Amateur Radio Call N3XCC
474 Barnett Road
Boswell, PA 15531

On 10/13/2015 3:50 PM, W5JR Mike wrote:
> I expect many just use the RX/TX audio, a COS/RUS/CTCSS input, PTT and ground. Seldom both COS and CTCSS so that the cop command can switch from tone to carrier. And never use the extra GPIO pins for other things, like mic hang up for Tone/Carrier if separate COS/CTCSS aren't available, hi/low power on a remote or repeater, antenna 1 / 2 selection, discreet channel steering, porch light on/off, etc, etc. And if usbradio is used, then COS/CTCSS/RUS isn't even required. I have such a configuration - just 4 wires from the repeater radios (gnd, disc, mic, ptt). And I have several fobs to modify and free up that URI for a higher calling....someday.
>
> tnx
> Mike / W5JR
> Alpharetta GA
>
> On Oct 13, 2015, at 1:21 PM, Scott Zimmerman <n3xcc at repeater-builder.com> wrote:
>
>>> The URI offers many extra features that most of us never touch.
>> Such as? I've been thinking of producing a lower cost alternative, but realize that the cost of a GENUINE CM119 alone is more than you pay for a whole FOB from your favorite Chinese supplier. You then add the cost of an enclosure and board to the parts count, things add up pretty quickly.
>>
>>>> Lay the schematics side by side. The URI type device offers quite a few features not provided by
>> a modified FOB.
>> My USB-RIM device went several steps further down the "additional features" path. It seems there are few people that want to pay for additional features or better engineering. <shrug>
>>
>> Scott
>>
>> Scott Zimmerman
>> Amateur Radio Call N3XCC
>> 474 Barnett Road
>> Boswell, PA 15531
>>
>>> On 10/13/2015 12:50 PM, W5JR Mike wrote:
>>> The URI offers many extra features that most of us never touch. Great if really needed. I do like the "professional" look of the URI versus a (my) modified fob at a shared repeater building.
>>>
>>> tnx
>>> Mike / W5JR
>>> Alpharetta GA
>>>
>>>> On Oct 13, 2015, at 10:13 AM, Steve Zingman <szingman at msgstor.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> To some extent you are comparing oranges and tangerines. :)
>>>> Lay the schematics side by side. The URI type device offers quite a few features not provided by a modified FOB.
>>>>
>>>> 73, Steve N4IRS
>> _______________________________________________
>> App_rpt-users mailing list
>> App_rpt-users at ohnosec.org
>> http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users
>>
>> To unsubscribe from this list please visit http://ohnosec.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/app_rpt-users and scroll down to the bottom of the page. Enter your email address and press the "Unsubscribe or edit options button"
>> You do not need a password to unsubscribe, you can do it via email confirmation. If you have trouble unsubscribing, please send a message to the list detailing the problem.
>