Re: bcd436hp

Bernard Skoch

We were all smaller back then, so they looked bigger.

On Apr 18, 2020, at 14:22, Jim Shipp <jimshipp@...> wrote:

Don't think there was ever a floppy disk larger than 8-inch. I never used 8-inch on a computer per se, but only on a dedicated "word processor."

At Saturday 03:00 PM 4/18/2020, you wrote:
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I don't recall Motorola or GE ever supplying SW on 8" floppies. Somewhere around I have some 12" (I think) floppies - maybe larger.
I recall Motorola having 5/25", then 3", then CDs.

Ahhh yes. The BC101. That was the 5th generation.
Many people don't realize that 101 was binary for V (5).

Bearcat, Bearcat II, BC-III, BC-IV, BC-101. (The Electra days)

I believe I still have at least one of each of the above.

Then they jumped from 5 to 210 then started appending letters. :-\

My favorite of the era? BC300. The BC100 (no letters) was a close second - a portable scanner that needed no crystals! And 16 channels? WOW! (or was it 10 channels?)

Joe M.

On 4/18/2020 2:27 PM, clive frazier via wrote:

Software use to come on 8 inch floppies. The computer booted up using
paper tape read through the teletype machine.

Having a 10 MEG hard drive was a luxury. People questioned the need for
such a large hard drive. It fit in a 19 inch rack. You would NEVER need
that much storage space.

And DOS was the operating system.

And the first Bearcat scanners that had push-buttons to program in the
frequency were a great step ahead of crystal controlled scanners.

Clive, K9FWF

On Friday, April 17, 2020, 01:16:12 PM CDT, Joe M. <mch@...> wrote:

One thing Jim didn't mention is the learning curve. A brief anecdote:

Back in the 80s, I learned radio programming on GE software (anyone
remember them?). Then when GE's delivery times got ridiculous (more than
a whole year from order to delivery - REALLY!) I had to learn Motorola
software. You would think programming one brand vs another would be
simple. NOT SO! It was almost like learning from scratch again.
Software came on 5.25" floppy disks back then. (anyone remember those?)

A few key concepts for Motorola:
A "mode" is what most call a "channel".
A "codeplug" is what most call a "file" or "programming".
CG (Channel Guard) became PL (Private Line). (both are just CTCSS)

I won't even get into "templates". I'm sure Jim knows those too well.

So I can appreciate the fact that even Jim knows Motorola (assuming)
software, Sentinel is a completely different animal.

This is also true with scanner software from different authors. That is
why I have such little input on scanner SW recommendations and "which is
best". The "best" is what you know for the most part. That's not to say
it is the best overall, but it is the best *for you*.

Joe M.

On 4/17/2020 1:58 PM, Jim Walls wrote:
On 04/17/2020 10:38, Bernie Burawski wrote:
You are right that the scanners are getting more difficult to program,
but you then have to study the directions carefully; I just don't like
to have to read a long narrative and study the procedures until I feel
comfortable programming. Scanning is getting more and more complicated
and that won't change,.
That is a true statement. Scanners are more complicated because the
radio systems are more complicated. If you think that programming your
scanner is hard, try real radios. I run a regional trunked system for a
living, and writing codeplugs for various radios is a major part of my
job. The only advantage that we have is that we have KNOWN CORRECT
information - as opposed to what scanner users often have, which is only
partially right (or in many cases, flat out wrong) information on
frequencies, talkgroups, etc. When I bought my SDS100, I programmed the
system I run into it first from what RadioReference had, but then spent
hours fixing it. For me that was largely academic since I have multiple
radios on the system, but it helped me learn the Sentinal software and
the scanner.



Join to automatically receive all group messages.