Please create an account to participate in the Slashdot moderation system

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
Television Media Wireless Networking Hardware

World's Most Advanced Portable TV 170

Posted by timothy from the likely-excuse dept.
Eric Schlaepfer writes "Here's another great toy for your wish list! ICOM manufactures the highly advanced IC-R3 portable scanner/television set. Besides picking up radio stations in the frequency range of 0.495-2450MHz, the IC-R3 also receives regular television signals, amateur television, and wireless security camera signals."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

World's Most Advanced Portable TV More

World's Most Advanced Portable TV

Comments Filter:

  • Mirror (Score:3, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward on Sunday August 03, 2003 @12:52AM (#6598357)
    In case the site (or routes to the site) get slashdotted. Here is a mirror to link one [martin-studio.com], and link two [martin-studio.com].

    • Re:Mirror (Score:2, Interesting)

      by Goldberg's Pants ( 139800 )
      GOD that thing is gorgeous! I first saw this hyped a couple of years ago I think and thought how cool it would be. I just bought a nice new shortwave radio which has rejuvenated my waning interest in radio.

      That radio is a thing of beauty! I don't care if it's cellular blocked, I WANT IT!

      Fact: Cell frequencies do NOT have to be blocked here in Canada, but sadly, since 99% of our scanners come from the US, they're blocked. Not that it really matters. The imaging (when a frequency appears on a different freq
      • Having owned many cellular capable scanners I can say with authority, cellular listening sucks 99.9999999999% of the time.

        Most of it is soccer mom yakking, suits doing work and contractors ordering lumber.

        Every once in a while, you will hear something good. I once heard what I think was a murder being planned, I have heard a few drug deals going down and some screwing around on spouses.

        It's all moot. Almost all cellular is digital now. Scanners are only good for the very few analog calls. All analog
        • All analog will be going away very soon.

          What with all the tripple band phones out there, it seems like analog will be more of a backup/roaming solution.

          I wonder if this scanner can be modified to unblock those bands.
          • Triple band doesn't mean the phone includes analog (though it doesn't preclude it). A band is a frequency range. If a phone will work with both digital and analog, it's touted as Dual Mode or Tri-Mode. Analog vs. Digital or Analog vs. CDMA vs. GSM are modes, not bands.
            • I just looked on my phone (LG TP5250, CDMA/Analog), and it says "Dual-Band." Whatever the technical realities are, the phones are being marketed as "Dual-Band" and "Tri-Band."

              Furthermore, don't the different "modes" require different "bands" for communication? I.e. isn't CDMA at 1900 MHz and analog at 850 MHz?

              • Yeah I guess market-ese is different than reality many times. Yes, the different modes operate on different bands (though it's only required by convention/law, not by technology).

                There are several bands in the US, Europe, and Asia for cellular service; few overlap. CDMA isn't always at 1900.

                I wonder if marketers and copy-writers just don't know the difference between band and mode or if they have devoted some "market research" to such things... Hmm.
              • CDMA can operate at 850 MHz and 1900 MHz. I believe Verizon has a lot of CDMA in the 850 MHz band. Sprint PCS runs CDMA in the 1900 MHz band. I read something that said Verizon would like to shutdown AMPS and totally switch over to CDMA.
  • but U.S. cellular telephone frequencies are blocked =(

    • Re:wow a TV with a tuner! (Score:5, Funny)

      by Kenja ( 541830 ) on Sunday August 03, 2003 @03:44AM (#6598779)
      Bastards, respecting peoples privacy. Whats the world comming to?

      • Re:wow a TV with a tuner! (Score:5, Informative)

        by Detritus ( 11846 ) on Sunday August 03, 2003 @04:33AM (#6598911) Homepage
        I have an old VHF/UHF receiver that was built before they outlawed sales of cellular capable scanners.

        The problem is that it used to be legal to build and sell a general coverage receiver that covered DC to Daylight. There were laws that restricted what you could do with some of signals you received, such as prohibiting disclosure to third parties, but the general principle was that any American was free to listen to anything transmitted on the public airwaves.

        Enter cellular telephony (AMPS), which replaced the old mobile telephone service. Eventually, some bright bulb rediscovered that cellular telephone conversations were transmitted via UHF FM radio signals, without any encryption or signal security. Anyone with a UHF FM receiver, or an older VHF/UHF television set, could listen in on cellular phone calls. When the word got around to the general public that cellular calls were not private, the CTIA (cellular trade association) went nuts. This was a public relations problem that could hurt their sales and profits. Rather than fix the problem of broadcasting cellular calls in the clear, their "solution" was to lobby congress for a law that would prohibit sales of receivers that could listen to cellular telephone frequencies, and would criminalize the act of listening to a cellular telephone call. This was the first time that congress had made it illegal to listen to a radio signal. Of course, none of this made a damn bit of difference as to the security of a cellular telephone call. It just provided the illusion of security, which was all the CTIA was willing to pay for. It also gave a big stick to politicians who were embarrassed by the public disclosure of the contents of their cellular telephone calls. They could demand that the government prosecute the "criminals" who had the gall to embarrass them by publicizing their dirty laundry.

        • and that's not all (Score:5, Interesting)

          by The Tyro ( 247333 ) on Sunday August 03, 2003 @08:32AM (#6599274)
          It's also illegal to listen in on cordless phones.

          I'm a long-time HAM, and I also have one of the old scanners that gets cellular (old Radio Shack model), and many can be modified to receive cellular signals (though this is illegal... do a google for scanner mods and you'll see how easy it is).

          The Cordless phone prohibition came later... I can't recall the year, but a hue-and-cry came about from people scanning the old 49.x mHz cordless phones. Naturally, the newer 900 mhz and 2.4ghz models with spread-spectrum require a bit more technical expertise than the old turn-on-the-scanner-and-listen routine. Even the Donald-Duck-sounding "scrambled" ones used a simple frequency inversion routine that you could easily decode (probably a DMCA violation these days).

          The trunking radio systems put a brief dent in the scanning scene, but you can even get scanners to track those now.

          Years ago, a buddy of mine lived in an apartment, and had an enormous dipole tacked up in the attic of his building, tuned specifically to the 49.x band... got every cordless phone for blocks. It was a rough neighborhood, so he sometimes got to hear the drug dealers doing business, and the ex-cons talking to their parole officers. I suppose that's the lazy man's way to get to know who your neighbors are BEFORE you invite them over for a neighborhood BBQ. However, before you run out and set up a similar rig, I can tell you that most people's conversations are relentlessly boring. Nosy, boring, and illegal... hardly worth it.
    • And it doesn't do two-way paging. I'll never be able to sell this to management unless they know they can get e-mail on it.
    • > but U.S. cellular telephone frequencies are blocked =(

      But not north of the border. Find a Canadian Dealer (example here [elkel.ca]) that sells the unblocked Canadian version. Take a vacation, make the most of it. ;)

  • "All-new"? (Score:2, Informative)

    by BJH ( 11355 )
    This is hardly new - the IC-R3 has been out in Japan since before I bought my ICOM scanner (I'm at work atm so I can't check, but it's an R5, I think) a couple of years ago.

  • A review from someone who owns one (Score:5, Informative)

    by InterruptDescriptorT ( 531083 ) on Sunday August 03, 2003 @12:55AM (#6598373) Homepage
    While the Icom R-3 truly is a cool little gadget, I wish to caution those who are buying one for video monitoring purposes. It has a lot of features, to be sure, but as I found out the hard way, for the hardcore video monitoring enthusiast or TV DXer, it has some serious limitations.

    Its sensitivity is lacking, so unless it encounters a very strong video signal (especially on 2.4GHz, where a lot of wireless cameras broadcast their signals), do not expect a very watchable or even decodeable picture.

    Secondly, the video screen eats the hell out of the battery life. You'll find yourself reaching for the AC adapter quite frequently. This device tends to use the LCD screen to display a lot of configuration/tuning information, even in non-video mode, so beware if you buy this to use as a general-purpose scanner.

    After 10 months of R3 ownership, my feelings are still mixed. It's pretty cool to walk around and stumble on 2.4GHz video, especially from wireless security cameras, but as a general-purpose scanning receiver or for attempting to receive TV DX in these skip-prone months, it falls sadly short.
    • My question is, can I get the Icom in cornflower blue?
    • ...I wish to caution those who are buying one for video monitoring purposes

      Do you recommend a better portable alternative product, or is this the best we can hope for, for now?

    • picking up 2.4G wireless video from afar (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      Attach a pringle's can antenna or a Cantenna [cantenna.com] to your wireless TV reciever. I havnen't tried it myself, but it should work. You may get ghosting of the video, though..

      • Re:picking up 2.4G wireless video from afar (Score:4, Informative)

        by josecanuc ( 91 ) on Sunday August 03, 2003 @11:15AM (#6599866) Homepage Journal
        While it may help a little bit to put on an antenna tuned more closely to 2.4 GHz, the effect would be marginal. The problem isn't necessarily that the antenna isn't getting the signal good enough, it's that the receiver circuitry is less sensitive in the 2.4 GHz range.

        It's very difficult to create a tuning circuit (which all receivers have) that is very sensitive across a wide range of frequencies. I would guess that this receiver is most sensitive in the VHF/UHF or even 800 MHz bands. From the specs, it looks like the upper end of the range for the R-3 is 2540 MHz (2.54 GHz), which isn't necessarily the clear-cut end of receiving capability for the product, it's just where the engineers (or marketers) decided to print the cutoff because the sensitivity drops off quickly somewhere around there.

        The solution might be a 'transverter' device which essentially acts as another IF stage in the receiver, mixing all input signals with a fixed frequency. The result is several sidebands, at least one of which is offset from the input signal by the value of the fixed frequency.

        Example: You want to see a video transmission on 2.450 GHz, but the receiver is not sensitive there. You build a little circuit that uses a diode to mix the incoming frequency with a 1000 MHz signal generated by a crystal (good luck finding a 1GHz crystal ;-) ). Then you can tune your receiver to either 1.450 GHz (2.45 GHz - 1.00 GHz) and find a slightly weaker copy of the 2.45 GHz signal there. If the increased sensitivity of your receiver in the 1.45 GHz area is larger than the decrease in the signal strength by mixing (which is probably some calculable amount, but I don't want to take the time to figure it out...), then you will end up with a clearer picture of the 2.45 GHz video signal.

        This technique is sometimes used by folks who really want to break US law and listen to cell-phone conversations. Nevermind that nowadays analog calls are nearly extinct. By law all receivers sold in the US must block tuning in of the cell-phone frequencies, which are around 850-900 MHz. (That's different these days with digital, but we're talking about analog.). Since nearly all receivers of FM audo use an IF (Intermediate Frequency, like the 1000 MHz signal we used above) of 10.7 MHz, users found they could tune to some multiple of 10.7 MHz below or above the cell phone frequencies and hear the 'images' of the calls. Nowadays scanner manufacturers extend those blocked frequencies to the image frequencies as well, so most folks are out-of-luck unless they build their own receiver for 850 MHz.
    • It's new technology for crying out loud!!

      I know it's a battery hog but as for the signal strength issue on broadcast TV reception you might want to give your R3 a better antenna. If you are particularly aiming for UHF stuff, get one of those 800 Mhz antennas.

      Universal Radio and Grove Enterprises are good places to go for stuff like that.

    • Re:A review from someone who owns one (Score:4, Informative)

      by hatmouse ( 555964 ) on Sunday August 03, 2003 @09:03AM (#6599324)
      I would add that the Icom R-3 is difficult to program. I would have like to seen more single propose instead of a few multi-funtion buttons.

    • Re:A review from someone who owns one (Score:4, Interesting)

      by foldedspace ( 463615 ) on Sunday August 03, 2003 @12:25PM (#6600281) Homepage
      I had one also. I sold it on the internet a long time ago. It does eat batteries and it does have weak reception. I could unplug the antenna from my TV and still get a better picture than the R-3 with the antenna plugged in, on the same channel. I expected MUCH better reception for the huge chunk of cash I paid. I think I paid over $600 for all of the gadgets and goodies.

      I also used to have a no gap (cell) wide band scanning receiver. Same deal. If it doesn't work, what's the point?

      How much do you have to pay to get a decent radio? The Icom R-8500 is about $1500 without any toys. I'd probably buy one if I knew there was something cool to listen to here. I don't really think there is though. :(

  • Too bad ... (Score:5, Informative)

    by ProfMoriarty ( 518631 ) on Sunday August 03, 2003 @01:00AM (#6598389) Journal
    Just a couple of days late for a $100(US) "rebate" ... R-3 link [universal-radio.com]

    Still ... $450 for a ultra-wide band WITH a 2" TFT ...

    Only better (at 10x the price) would be the AR-one here [universal-radio.com], almost forgot ... have to be a non-US location to ship to ...

    • Re:Too bad ... (Score:4, Insightful)

      by Skuld-Chan ( 302449 ) on Sunday August 03, 2003 @02:05AM (#6598589)
      Only better (at 10x the price) would be the AR-one here, almost forgot ... have to be a non-US location to ship to ...

      Its nice to have relatives in Canada :).

      Its sad though. I think we are one of the few industrialized nations on earth who have rescrictions on what frequencies can be listened to and when.

      Many states for instance have anti-scanner laws that prohibit you from having a R3 or another scanner in your car.

      And you know the cops don't want you listening in when they switch to encrypted digital repeaters.

      • Re:Too bad ... (Score:3, Interesting)

        by Teun ( 17872 )
        Its sad though. I think we are one of the few industrialized nations on earth who have rescrictions on what frequencies can be listened to and when.

        Don't forget the strict limitations in Germany and France. In the case of Germany I'll allow you one guess to who came up with these legal restrictions of the (in my opinion) universal right to information...

        Another, not so surprising, example is that many years ago my Sony ICF 2000 was confiscated when entering Saudi Arabia.

        • ... many years ago my Sony ICF 2000 was confiscated when entering Saudi Arabia.

          Oh man! That really sucks. The ICF-2000 is a really great radio, even though (maybe because) its design is getting a bit long in the tooth. If anyone want to get into shortwave, this is an absolutely fabulous radio to get you started. Even though it's a bit pricier than some of its other portable cousins, it's worth every penny.

      • In the UK it's illegal to listen to anything other than brodcast, ham radio and CB (unless it's a frequency you're licenced to transmit on). So in theory you can't listen to air and marine frequencies with a scanner but as the RA (http://www.radio.gov.uk) admits, they aren't really wanting to take action. The police are only interested in whether a scanner user is listening to them and anybody who uses any sort of 'interesting' radio outdoors can expect to be asked questions about it at least once (all they
        • The UK police don't want you to listen to them? The last time I was there (in 1986) I rented a car and found it curious that the police radio frequencies were right smack-dab in the center of the FM radio band. You could tune them on your car radio as you drove around. If it wasn't for that annoying beep they sent every few seconds it would have made fascinating listening. I assume they have moved these transmissions to a better location now?
          • Yep. They moved in the late 80's or early 90's. My Dad got a scanner around 1993 and it was a laugh trying to figure out who we were picking up.

            Was kinda funny being able to tune along the FM dial in those days. "Music, sports, music, robbery in progress, music..."
        • I suppose one difference is in the US its illegal to modify your radio to recieve blocked frequencies wheras in most countries you can get a scanner that recieves everything, but your just now allowed to.

          Its also technically illegal to go to canada and import radios capable of recieving cellular repeaters.
    • These folks [chq-inc.com] have it for $339.95. Not that I have $339.95 to blow on something like this, but if I did...

  • TV (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward
    This TV is neither advanced, nor portable.
  • ...I don't think I saw anything mentioned in the article, but the picture I saw of this device made it look like it had a built-in pen.

    Is this a standard feature? I remember many a time I've been watching pronography and have said to myself:

    "Damn. I need a pen! I should be taking notes on this!"

    If this TV has a built in pen, it's perfect for me!

  • Probably cheaper to buy separately (Score:5, Funny)

    by bobo333 ( 693563 ) on Sunday August 03, 2003 @01:03AM (#6598402)
    Well . It's good to see Americans are making Tv's again.
  • The IC-R3 has 400 memory channels to store your most frequency used channels.>/i?

    What the hell is a frequency used channel? Is it the frequency one uses frequently?

  • Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)

    by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Sunday August 03, 2003 @01:04AM (#6598409)
    Comment removed based on user account deletion
    • yes they are ;)

    • Re:Use of scanner (Score:3, Informative)

      by suwain_2 ( 260792 )
      Just a note for those not aware... buying a scanner capable of receiving the cell band is illegal in the US, as is listening in. (ie, unlike many things, just owning a scanner capable of listening to the cell bands is illegal, although I think people who had them prior to the law were 'grandfathered')

      Not that I personally have any objections to this, just figured I'd point out that if you're a US resident not wishing to go to jail, you may wish to buy cell-blocked versions.

  • Cost for the non-american version. (Score:4, Informative)

    by BrookHarty ( 9119 ) on Sunday August 03, 2003 @01:08AM (#6598421) Journal
    Frequency Range:
    USA version: 0.495-815.995 MHz, 902-2450.095 MHz
    Non-USA version: 0.495-2450.095 MHz

    Ok, so where can I buy a Non-USA version? And price.
  • Anyone know the price of this thing? (Why even bother to post about it without that basic information? Clearly this and more are available if price is no object.)

    And only the US version is hobbled with the cell frequency clock. Anyone know if there is a non-US NTSC version available anywhere?

  • Take a look here [strongsignals.net] for some specs. Unfortunately, this receiver has been out for a few years now, and has never had reviews that are all that stunning. Complaints are generally regarding poor sensitivity, which as a owner of a IC-Q7A (Icom's ham version of the IC-R2), doesn't surprise me one bit.

    What always surprised me was the crummy UI on this thing. You've got a full color dot matrix display on the thing -- why isn't there a sophisticated OS, slick icons, and on-screen help guide? Why isn't there a flashable ROM for OS upgrades? How about a smartmedia slot to store screenshots? It's almost as if they're afraid to sell too many of the things, so they cripple it my making it cryptic to use, with a lousy UI, and no features.

  • unblocked for cellular == waste of time (Score:5, Funny)

    by puzzled ( 12525 ) on Sunday August 03, 2003 @01:19AM (#6598463) Journal
    I used to own an early model Icom PCR1000 - nice receiver, could hear cell bands, but WHO THE HELL CARES? You get to hear the cell site side of a two way conversation and its usually some yokel who can't afford a digital phone trying to rig a meeting with his girlfriend while his wife is at the grocery store.

    Don't violate the FCC's rules to listen to crap like that - just use the thing to tune in to Jerry Springer and you'll see the results of what happens when people make calls on analog cellular.

  • One word. (Score:3, Funny)

    by cybermace5 ( 446439 ) <g.ryan@macetech.com> on Sunday August 03, 2003 @01:23AM (#6598476) Homepage Journal
    Christmas.

  • Also by ICOM (Score:2, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward

    I forgot to mention this in the submission, but ICOM also makes scanners [icomamerica.com] that you can hook up to a regular PC. Unfortunately it doesn't look like there is any Linux software...

    A number of you have noted that the American version blocks the cell phone frequencies, but rumor has it that snipping out a resistor removes the block.

    --Eric

  • The Road To Happiness (Score:5, Funny)

    by jkeegan ( 35099 ) on Sunday August 03, 2003 @01:44AM (#6598533) Homepage Journal
    ICON IC-R3 $449.95
    Extra Battery & car adaptor $119.95
    Series1 Standalone TiVo(eBay) $182.50
    Car->110volt-adapter $ 35.99
    Hacking TiVo [amazon.com] Book $ 20.99
    AirNET adapter $ 69.25

    Watching extracted TiVo video synced from your
    house to your car: Pricele..... **CRASH**

    New Fender $210.00
    Insurance Deductable $300.00
    Emergency Room Co-pay $ 50.00
    • Uh, sock away $500 or $1000 in your checking account, and raise your deductable to $500 or $1000 NOW. You'll save greatly in premiums (ask your agent for a quote).

      If you're really daring, use the money you save to buy an umbrella policy.

  • at least thats what is says on the page, how hard would a firmware hack be to fix that, and listen to all sorts of people on cellphones? maybe w/ an addon decoded for the digital signal.
  • Ok checkin out the spec., one 1/8" stereo plug for data to clone units etc.. The other 1/8" stereo plug is for audio /video. Questions, what is spec. on audio/video plug, I wonder if you can get pager and trunking data off the video or audio.also what is the resiloution of the video output anyway? Or do I find the detector out from inside anyway? Has anybody plugin to the wrong 1/8" jack ? damage?
    • Questions, what is spec. on audio/video plug
      Duh! Line-level audio, NTSC BBV. Data jack is probably TTL, but it doesn't matter, as the only function enabled is cloning. No CAT system.
  • So when will the HDTV version hit the market?
  • As many know the US one has certain frequencies blocked while the non-US one doesn't. Is it legal to mail it to a P.O. box, or equivalent, in Canada and carry it over the border to the U.S.? I would assume so since older ones without the blocking are legal.

    • Re:Canada importing (Score:1, Informative)

      by Anonymous Coward
      "Is it legal to mail it to a P.O. box, or equivalent, in Canada"

      Yes.

      "and carry it over the border to the U.S.?"

      Not legal.

      btw, IANAL

      But from a summary of telecommunications stuff I read, they get you on 2 fronts:

      First, section 302(d) of the Communications Act, 47 U.S.C. Section 302(d) says the FCC may not authorize such scanning equipment that allows the receiving of (domestic) cell transmissions. FCC. 47CFR 2.803 says that the sale or lease of such scanning equipment not authorized by the FCC is pro

  • Amateur Television (Score:1, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward
    Gimme a P!
    P!!!
    Gimme an R!
    R!!!
    Gimme a zero!
    Zero!!!
    Gimme an N!
    N!!!

    What does that spell???
  • Somewhat OT, but I use one of their PCR 1000 [icomamerica.com] wide-band computer controlled receivers in my Jeep not only to monitor ham and NOAA channels, but also in place of the am/fm stereo. Good stuff.

  • old & short battery life (Score:5, Informative)

    by Nullsmack ( 189619 ) on Sunday August 03, 2003 @02:51AM (#6598688)
    I'm going to agree with others, this isn't new.. I've been drooling over this radio for something like 2 years now.

    One downside that I've found in my reading is that when you're using the bigger lcd (for tv and better scanner control) it drains your batteries much faster. You can control the scanner with the smaller lcd, but I think more complex options need the color lcd to set. If you're running it at home on an AC adapter, then you're okay, but mobile is kinda limited with the effect video reception/display has on battery life.

    Then again, if you're the kind of person that drives around with their laptop searching for wifi networks, you might be used to that kind of battery life already.
    • Then again, if you're the kind of person that drives around with their laptop searching for wifi networks, you might be used to that kind of battery life already.

      Why use your laptop when you can use this [kensignton.com]?
  • Why use this device? I have one built into my head. Oh wait, weren't you all assimilated too? In that case... In reality, I think this is an *interesting* concept, however unless you're watching the teletubbies you're not going to fit much on the screen. I bet with current technology though if they made the screen bigger the picture would have crappy quality.
  • What I really need is a 1080i capable 2 inch HDTV.

  • Keep in mind (Score:2, Informative)

    by stangbat ( 690193 )
    Keep in mind that if you live in a large metropolitan area most public service broadcasts (fire, police) use trunked systems. A scanner like this won't help you much when trying to follow any activity on a trunked system. Many even use digital trunking, which you can't monitor at all unless you get a scanner such as the Bearcat BC250D and the optional BCi 25D digital card.

    Blocked analog cellular is nothing new here in the US. It really isn't a big deal as fewer people use analog cellular anymore. Mos
  • Icom [icomamerica.com] is a top-tier manufacturer of ham radio gear. Their newest creation, the D-STAR [icomamerica.com] system supports 128 kb/s data and phone (voice) over 1.2 GHz links and 10 GHz backbone links. The user radios have a mike, speaker, control head, as well as USB and 10 base T ethernet. Very interesting stuff.
  • From the Article:

    Hours of Fun The IC-R3 also has an extremely wide receive range of .5-2450 MHz, except for the cellular ranges. Speaking of hours of fun! The IC-R3 comes with a Li-Ion battery offering up to 27 hours of continual operation!

    How strange... People still use analogue cellular phones???

    • Those old Motorola phones (with the trapezoidal batteries on back) are still fairly popular in Alaska due to the fact that they have decent talk time in the cold. Most phones with smaller batteries cool off too fast, and thus can give you as little as 10 minutes of air time in cold weather.

      I had this AWESOME little CDMA phone when I was in Japan...a list of features that would be found only in the $300+ range in the US today (and it was the CHEAPEST PHONE AVAILABLE AT THE TIME....THREE YEARS AGO), a batte
  • I think I got some spam about a website featuring some "amateur television"....
  • Being a ham radio operator (although slightly dormant at the moment) I fall for gadgets like these. I've owned a bunch of Icom's in my career. One reason to buy this product would be to bring it with me when I travel. However, it can only do either PAL or NTSC, you have to choose when you order the radio. That's just silly. There's silicone available today that could have made this a TV DX'ers dream (while jetting from one continent to the next). However, with this limitation it just doesn't make any sense

  • No FM video demod (Score:3, Insightful)

    by pestie ( 141370 ) on Sunday August 03, 2003 @02:08PM (#6600769)
    Another complaint I've heard about the IC-R3 is that it doesn't demodulate FM video across its entire receive range (or maybe not at all). A lot of "interesting" video is FM modulated, not AM (like broadcast TV, amateur TV, etc.) That alone would keep me from buying it, but throw in the poor sensitivity and I just don't see the point. Besides, I'm lucky enough to have an AOR AR-5000+3, so I can just add one of these [usascan.com] and a cheap video monitor or video capture card to it and get the same functionality, albeit with less portability.
  • I bought mine in 1987, w/the video adapter. Interesting for a few months... //de KQ6J
  • All this thing needs is wireless internet and it will be the ultimate machine.

Slashdot Top Deals

Quantity is no substitute for quality, but its the only one we've got.

Close