Sunday, June 6, 2010

When is interoperability a sham?

Dr David Boyd testified in front of Congress that equipment developed under the P25 moniker doesn't mean it is interoperable.


What?

http://www.fiercegovernmentit.com/story/boyd-p25-doesnt-necessarily-mean-interoperable/2010-06-01

DHS (or their pre-cursors) has been working on this problem since people died on 9/11, and it seems we're n0 closer to a radio being able to interact seamlessly with others. Is radio truely more complicated than telephones or the IP networks that support the Internet? I don't think so.

Vendor self interest, good old boy networks, and a host of other reasons have continued to plague this whole area. When will it get fixed? Likely when a disaster happens, people die or property destroyed, and the public is shown by the news media that everything is pretty much incompatible and that we've spent billions as a country. There will be a hue and cry, a search for a scapegoat, immediate regulations proposed, lobbyists rushing to pour water on the flames, and little real change if history is our guide.

P25 has been around for 21 years an effort to standardize radios.

No comments:

Post a Comment