more info here:
--
*** If you are not part of the solution, then you are the problem. ( ) ***
|
Hi Bruce,
We are not talking about one. I claim that the program was made by an Indonesian radio amateur as a hobby, which can also be found on a google drive. I read somewhere that it¡¯s not that hard to hack these materials put on the drive, so I can imagine it¡¯s also a hacked version that¡¯s there. That's why I recommended what I had.
If you find a similar problem in this, please let me know, because then I will remove it. For me, Nod32 protects and doesn't signal anything like that.
Herb,
i know the program you recommend was not published by its author, this is when you tend to disable githubos access when someone alleges its existence.
Do you know that differently?
73, Gyula
--
*** If you are not part of the solution, then you are the problem. ( ) ***
|
On Sat, Oct 3, 2020 at 05:16 AM, TONY G4WIF wrote:
Regrettably, even Google won't let me download it from Google Drive.
============================================
Tony,
As an alternative to nanoVNA Partner, which has not been actively supported by the author in a while, you might want to try the NanoVNA-App at . OneOfEleven has done a very nice job with this Windows application and it supports the latest DiSlord firmware modifications. Additional features such as a built-in console mode, nice info panel, LC matching, S21 offset correction, and a function to update the NanoVNA firmware from within the application are very appealing.
OneOfEleven has only recently released the application on GitHub after extensive beta testing. The software application was initially intended as a test bed for her open source NanoVNA-H firmware but has developed into a very fine NanoVNA application in its own right. OneOfEleven continues to make frequent improvements to the program.
The program is free for use but is not open source. OneOfEleven retains all rights. It has become my go to application for the NanoVNA-H and NanoVNA-H4. Like nanoVNA Partner, it uses the NanoVNA's internal calibration.
- Herb
|
Locked
Re: A public message to Hugen
Please do not continue to contribute to this thread. This is a provaye matter between OwO and Hugen. Further public discussion of this matter will be shut down quickly.
DaveD (moderator)
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Oct 4, 2020, at 08:52, Dragan Milivojevic <d.milivojevic@...> wrote:
I/m going to keep repeating this ad nauseam:
This has nothing to do with Open Source.
For those that this fact is non obvious:
Hugens Nano has been cloned for ages now and he
did not publish board files and yet cloners produce
carbon copies of his version.
On Sun, 4 Oct 2020 at 13:02, Peter Ide-Kostic <on7yi.pik973@...>
wrote:
This is very much understandable and unavoidable given the way the nanovna
v2 story developed.
Going for open hardware makes sense as long as the product gets improved
by people/organisations who copy it so user gets a better experience and
the size of the market also eventually grows.
The V2 is not a copy of the V1, except at the conceptual level, it is a
fresh pcb design resulting in outstanding technical specifications compared
to the V1. The hardware could have been closed but it was kept open with
the hope that the product would be further improved by the community.
Open hardware should be more about colaboration than competition, everybody
should enjoy the ride including of course the original designer of the
product.
Unfortunately it did not happen with the Nanovna v2. I own a genuine model
and two clones so I know what I am talking about. The clones are copy paste
of
the original design: there was no attempt to further improve the dynamic
range or isolation, the sweeping speed, the return loss improvement on
port 2 , the frequency range, etc... .
It was also suggested at some early stage of the V2 saga on some forums
that cloners of the V2 offer the functionality to swap port and 1 and 2 to
ease measurements of the 4 s parameters but it did not happen.
The only benefit for users was a somewhat lower price compared to the
genuine model. On the other hand, the return loss above 1.5 Ghz of port 2
of the two clones that I own is not as good as the one of the genuine
model. Quality control of clones seems to be an issue. One of my two
clones was shipped initially defective by the way... .
The designer of the V2 didn't draw any fruits of his open hardware
strategy, he only faced harsher competition, what happens was just
unavoidable, expecting the hardware to remain open would be unreasonable
very unfortunately. It could have happened differently though.
On Sun, 4 Oct 2020, 07:51 , <aleks07111971@...> wrote:
Your words are legally null and void!
|
Gyula,
Using the link from Tony, attached are some screenshots I've taken on the .rar archive and the exe file inside. I'd be very hesitant to run this on windows. The screenshots were taken on a linux box so I think I'm safe to at least run them through the analyzer.
BruceN / K4TQL
--
*"To invent, you need a good imagination and a pile of junk"* -- Thomas Alva Edison (1847-1931)
|
Locked
Re: A public message to Hugen
I/m going to keep repeating this ad nauseam: This has nothing to do with Open Source. For those that this fact is non obvious: Hugens Nano has been cloned for ages now and he did not publish board files and yet cloners produce carbon copies of his version. On Sun, 4 Oct 2020 at 13:02, Peter Ide-Kostic <on7yi.pik973@...> wrote: This is very much understandable and unavoidable given the way the nanovna
v2 story developed.
Going for open hardware makes sense as long as the product gets improved
by people/organisations who copy it so user gets a better experience and
the size of the market also eventually grows.
The V2 is not a copy of the V1, except at the conceptual level, it is a
fresh pcb design resulting in outstanding technical specifications compared
to the V1. The hardware could have been closed but it was kept open with
the hope that the product would be further improved by the community.
Open hardware should be more about colaboration than competition, everybody
should enjoy the ride including of course the original designer of the
product.
Unfortunately it did not happen with the Nanovna v2. I own a genuine model
and two clones so I know what I am talking about. The clones are copy paste
of
the original design: there was no attempt to further improve the dynamic
range or isolation, the sweeping speed, the return loss improvement on
port 2 , the frequency range, etc... .
It was also suggested at some early stage of the V2 saga on some forums
that cloners of the V2 offer the functionality to swap port and 1 and 2 to
ease measurements of the 4 s parameters but it did not happen.
The only benefit for users was a somewhat lower price compared to the
genuine model. On the other hand, the return loss above 1.5 Ghz of port 2
of the two clones that I own is not as good as the one of the genuine
model. Quality control of clones seems to be an issue. One of my two
clones was shipped initially defective by the way... .
The designer of the V2 didn't draw any fruits of his open hardware
strategy, he only faced harsher competition, what happens was just
unavoidable, expecting the hardware to remain open would be unreasonable
very unfortunately. It could have happened differently though.
On Sun, 4 Oct 2020, 07:51 , <aleks07111971@...> wrote:
Your words are legally null and void!
|
Locked
Re: A public message to Hugen
This is very much understandable and unavoidable given the way the nanovna
v2 story developed.
Going for open hardware makes sense as long as the product gets improved
by people/organisations who copy it so user gets a better experience and
the size of the market also eventually grows.
The V2 is not a copy of the V1, except at the conceptual level, it is a
fresh pcb design resulting in outstanding technical specifications compared
to the V1. The hardware could have been closed but it was kept open with
the hope that the product would be further improved by the community.
Open hardware should be more about colaboration than competition, everybody
should enjoy the ride including of course the original designer of the
product.
Unfortunately it did not happen with the Nanovna v2. I own a genuine model
and two clones so I know what I am talking about. The clones are copy paste
of
the original design: there was no attempt to further improve the dynamic
range or isolation, the sweeping speed, the return loss improvement on
port 2 , the frequency range, etc... .
It was also suggested at some early stage of the V2 saga on some forums
that cloners of the V2 offer the functionality to swap port and 1 and 2 to
ease measurements of the 4 s parameters but it did not happen.
The only benefit for users was a somewhat lower price compared to the
genuine model. On the other hand, the return loss above 1.5 Ghz of port 2
of the two clones that I own is not as good as the one of the genuine
model. Quality control of clones seems to be an issue. One of my two
clones was shipped initially defective by the way... .
The designer of the V2 didn't draw any fruits of his open hardware
strategy, he only faced harsher competition, what happens was just
unavoidable, expecting the hardware to remain open would be unreasonable
very unfortunately. It could have happened differently though.
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
On Sun, 4 Oct 2020, 07:51 , <aleks07111971@...> wrote: Your words are legally null and void!
|
To the best of my knowledge, neb (who made the program) tried programming as a hobby.
I have no more knowledge of the author, I tested this program a lot in terms of usability in the early stages. I hope you will show up neb and clear up any misunderstandings.
Thanks to everyone who took part in the testing or gave some feedback on its usability.
According to feedback, windows XP can be used from windows 10.
Gyula
--
*** If you are not part of the solution, then you are the problem. ( ) ***
|
Locked
Re: A public message to Hugen
Dear Gabriel,
I am sorry to hear your announcement.
The whole nanovna movement has transformed my participation in radio and electronics, which has spanned 60 years. I would never have experimented with any of the more traditional ¡° home¡± vnas.
I have been so taken by the device concept that I currently own four altogether (one original nano and the three main V2 devices. I opened one up yesterday to investigate installing emi absorber, and was amazed again at the PHYSICAL creation of the core board.
The 6ghz device is probably no-go for me as it is a bit big (physically) for the pocket and needs a computer. Also I have little need for 6ghz.
I wish your team well, and hope your future devices are sucessful and not tooooo expensive.
Steve L. G7PSZ
|
Thanks for that link Christian. It is appreciated because you can test it before even downloading with
.. and with more than one anti-virus engine.
It's something useful to try - especially when even Google reports it unsafe to download from its own Google Drive.
- Tony
|
Locked
Re: A public message to Hugen
Your words are legally null and void!
|
Locked
A public message to Hugen
Hello, on behalf of the NanoVNA V2 hardware design team we have to announce that from today on we can no longer permit you to use our hardware design. To avoid giving you unnecessary trouble we will allow you to continue to sell off your existing inventory, but we ask that you cease production of any hardware that uses our PCB layout design from today on. I understand that this notice is not legally binding because PCB layouts are not covered by copyright. However, we believe that vendors who use our design work and profit from it should respect the wishes of the original developers. We generally permit all vendors to use our design without any royalties, and only very rarely under extenuating circumstances would we rescind permission. However, the events in the past few months forces us to make this difficult decision. You are always free to develop your own layout design from scratch, or to partner with other engineers to develop alternative designs. Thank you and best of luck with your 6GHz VNA efforts. (for anyone else reading this, the backstory is here: /g/NanoVNAV2/message/30)
|
Gyula,
I think you're referring to this download from your web page?
The main issue with NanoVNAPartner is its use of code obfuscation. While this not something inherently evil, it's something commonly used by malware authors. This is why it is misidentified as suspect by many virus scanners.
Regards
Christian
|
Hi Tony,
you can find it on my web page without a virus.
73, Gyula HA3HZ
--
*** If you are not part of the solution, then you are the problem. ( ) ***
|
Regrettably, even Google won't let me download it from Google Drive. I get...
"Sorry, this file is infected with a virus
Only the owner is allowed to download infected files."
- Tony G4WIF
|
Re: New open source VNA released - excellent performance claimed
The SAA-2N has a VNA board inside with SMA connectors, short cables out to N-type connectors mounted on the case. As suggested in post /g/nanovna-users/message/17846I'm fine with that approach. And suspect that is what will happen with this 6ghz VNA for those that want to use N-type connectors. And for those that prefer to use SMA's as well. I can believe that the N-Type connectors stand up better to hard use than the rather small SMA. But I would not want N-Type connectors directly mounted to a PCB with easily fractured surface mount caps. N-type don't do any better than SMA's with regard to use at high frequencies. If anybody can point me to a thread with a "consensus" to the contrary, I'm all ears. I didn't find it. Me, I'm fine with SMA's, I don't use this thing often enough to wear anything out. I use my nanovna-H4 with SMA extender cables, so only the far end would wear out if it did. To each their own. Jerry, KE7ER
On Fri, Oct 2, 2020 at 02:24 PM, Sora wrote: N-type connector itself is physically sturdy and has stable RF
characteristics.
It was discussed in another topic whether it was fully demonstrated in SAA-2N,
for example,
but I have to say that the impression of that implementation is a little
unreliable.
SAA-2N did well for an additional cost of around $ 30. Well, it looks a bit
reckless, but I still like the challenge.
|
Re: New open source VNA released - excellent performance claimed
Hello Jerry,
Some time ago, my friend got a wide-band receiver / spectrum analyzer KC908.
This is a project that was around $ 1500 during crowdfunding.
The developers say that there are plans to expand to 40GHz in the future and HW already supports it.
Certainly a 2.92mm K-type connector is used.
(It seems that the current product has been changed to a male connector)
Yes, the first impression I had when I saw Jan's previous 6G-VNA was a fascinating and beautiful design.
And I even tried to find an affordable CNC milling machine on AliExpress.
N-type connector itself is physically sturdy and has stable RF characteristics.
It was discussed in another topic whether it was fully demonstrated in SAA-2N, for example,
but I have to say that the impression of that implementation is a little unreliable.
SAA-2N did well for an additional cost of around $ 30. Well, it looks a bit reckless, but I still like the challenge.
Sora
|
Re: Can Nano be used to test for power level (amps) at antenna?
On Sunday 27 September 2020 07:08:59 pm Jerry Gaffke via groups.io wrote: In post 17730 I wrote:
"Jeff has a bunch of really good blog posts about directional couplers."
Here's the blog post I was thinking of but could not find:
That's an excellent analysis of the Tandem Match.
This business of adding a voltage reading to a current reading (with proper scaling)
is the basis of most SWR meters that an amateur radio operator might use.
It is also an excellent example of how circuit analysis
of a rather difficult problem can be carried out.
And gives further insight to the nature of reflections. There's some good stuff there, as well as in some of the links that he provides, like: as well... -- Member of the toughest, meanest, deadliest, most unrelenting -- and ablest -- form of life in this section of space, ?a critter that can be killed but can't be tamed. ?--Robert A. Heinlein, "The Puppet Masters" - Information is more dangerous than cannon to a society ruled by lies. --James M Dakin
|
"merely a modification" ???
No disrespect intended - but if I could 'merely' write modifications like that I'd be Very pleased with myself !!
Kind Regards
Ross
|
Hi Neb,
Very nice work - Many Thanks - Still learning how to use the VNA & this version of the interface software is very complete and should help a Lot :-)
Thanks again . .
Regds
Ross
|
Gyula Molnar
OwO
Sora