# TinyGS vs. SatNOGS: A Comparative Analysis of Open-Source Satellite Ground Station Networks
## 5 Discussion
### Comparison of the Block Diagrams
With TinyGS, the process is relatively faster, simpler, and less susceptible to problems. The first step is to download the TinyGS Uploader according to the utilized operating system, connect its board to the computer, and then upload the TinyGS firmware to the LoRa board. After the board boot, one needs to configure its station by first connecting to a Wi-Fi network called \"My TinyGS\" and second setting some parameters like its latitude, longitude, MQTT credentials, Wi-Fi SSID and password to have access to the network, etc. These MQTT credentials are provided by the TinyGS Personal Bot on Telegram. After that, its GS will be ready and added to the system [9]. One can see if its GS is connected to the network on its station dashboard. To do that, one needs to place the IP address that appears on the LoRa board in the browser and check if the MQTT server status is equal to \"CONNECTED\". Regarding software updates, TinyGS has the advantage of automatically updating itself by enabling automatic firmware updates [9]. However, in SatNOGS, updating SatNOGS Client has to be conducted manually by running \"sudo satnogs-setup\" and selecting \"Update\" and \"Apply\". Finally, considering the significance of the difficulty/time relationship and assuming the inclusion of the previously mentioned tasks (building, configuring, updating, and uploading), it was decided to create Table 1, wherein different scenarios and their corresponding difficulty/time relationships can be observed. Within the scope of various scenarios, it was decided to specify the inclusion or exclusion of the antenna's construction for both TinyGS and SatNOGS and the inclusion or exclusion of the rotator and controller's construction solely for SatNOGS. This decision stems from the fact that these components represent some of the most costly elements, as will be elaborated upon in the cost section. Naturally, readers may also opt to construct their own LNA and filter for cost reduction purposes, albeit at the foreseeable expense of increased difficulty and time investment. However, for this comparison, the construction of these components was not factored in. To make Table 1, it was assumed that the reader had acquired all of the necessary materials. Regarding antenna construction, it is presumed that the omnidirectional antenna used is a double turnstile antenna and the directional antenna is a Yagi antenna. Additionally, for SatNOGS, in instances where the construction of the rotator and controller is mentioned, this pertains to the construction of a SatNOGS rotator v3 and a SatNOGS controller. \begin{table}
\begin{tabular}{c c c} \hline
**Scenario** & **Difficulty** & **Time** \\ \hline TinyGS GS (Without building & & \\ the omnidirectional antenna) & 1 & 1 \\ \hline TinyGS GS (Building the & & \\ omnidirectional antenna) & 3 & 2 \\ \hline \end{tabular}
\end{table} 
Table 1: In this figure, the difficulty/time relationship for various scenarios of both projects is depicted. Difficulty is categorized into five levels in increasing order: Low = 1, Medium-Low = 2, Medium = 3, Medium-High = 4, and High = 5. As for time, there are four levels, also in increasing order: Low (\(\leq\)1 day) = 1, Medium (>1 day and \(\leq\)5 days) = 2, High (>5 days and \(\leq\)10 days) = 3, and Very High (>10 days) = 4. In summary, TinyGS without antenna construction represents the project with the lowest difficulty/time ratio, which can be achieved in a single day with relative ease. Conversely, the most complex and time-consuming project corresponds to SatNOGS, involving the construction of the antenna, rotator, and controller components.