FM chip in iPhone: What's wrong with THIS picture?

[justula]

When I first saw "FM chip" in this thread for an electronic device, I thought it was the idea of adding FM synthesis chips. These were very popular in soundcards on PC's, and were also found in music synthesizers by Yamaha.

Okay, so now reading further, here's the value proposition to consider.
Why would customers prefer an FM receiver inside as opposed to streaming with iHeartRadio and related apps if Apple Apps are the big thing
for iPhones?

 

[Roger That]

When I first saw "FM chip" in this thread for an electronic device, I thought it was the idea of adding FM synthesis chips. These were very popular in soundcards on PC's, and were also found in music synthesizers by Yamaha.

Okay, so now reading further, here's the value proposition to consider.
Why would customers prefer an FM receiver inside as opposed to streaming with iHeartRadio and related apps if Apple Apps are the big thing
for iPhones?

Bandwidth, mainly. Have you ever used an iPhone? AT&T service sucks out loud when simply trying to use it as a phone. The data service is worse. Streaming is a great option on wifi, but to truly listen on the go, FM would be a much nicer play for radio fans.

 

[Nate Wesley]

FM radio on a cell phone is stupid. Given iphone connects to last fm and the web, or that cell phone double as an MP3 player, listening to fm radio for music would be a last choice, like when nothing else is available.

It's doubtful cell phone sales will spike because of a radio chip on board...or people will suddenly spend more time listening to radio via a cell phone.

Except for the fact that you're paying for the privilege being able to 'dial up' those internet services, and wireless data charges aren't necessarily cheap. With a good FM tuner, everyone from the Joes and Janes using a Tracfone (or another prepaid service) to the constant Crackberry user can stay tuned in, and without extra charges.

'Free' is still a pretty good selling point for broadcast radio and TV, especially in these troubled economic times.

 

[adma]

'Free' is still a pretty good selling point for broadcast radio and TV, especially in these troubled economic times.

Except we're dealing with a moment when, given what you're getting, getting your broadcast media for free is a little like doing your grocery shopping at the 99 cent store, or getting your medical treatment from Dr. Nick Riviera. IOW it isn't just a matter of it being free; it's a matter of how desperate you are to stoop so low...

 

[SirRoxalot]

Cell phones are mostly sold by cell phone companies. Cell phone companies make their money by selling access time and service packages. FM radio competes by offering content with superior audio quality for free. Anybody else see a reason that cell phone manufacturers will avoid including FM radio chips in cell phones?

 

[Holland Cooke]

Tossing-in a freebie is NEVER unattractive.

Anybody else see a reason that cell phone manufacturers will avoid including FM radio chips in cell phones?

Most buyers buy devices, and accept service-tied-to-the-device, i.e., iPhone = AT&T.
Especially since number portability, now that changing-service-doesn't-mean-giving-up-your-phone-number.
So the-more-tricks-a-device-does the more attractive it'll be, to consumers, and to allied carriers.

 

[TheBigA]

Re: Tossing-in a freebie is NEVER unattractive.

So the-more-tricks-a-device-does the more attractive it'll be, to consumers, and to allied carriers.

A lot of radio critics thought it was a statement that the iPhone didn't have an FM receiver in it. They took that as some slam on FM radio. But the fact is that the iPhone doesn't have ANY form of radio in it, including a WEATHER radio. Say what you want about FM radio, and all the negativity people attribute to its content. But no one can question the safety value of weather radios.

The fact is that everyone is most concerned with their own selfish self interest. It's not just the people in radio. Steve Jobs is not in the business of giving away space on his devices that will make money for other people. Unless HE can make some money with it too. Apple doesn't own transmitters or towers. They have no reason to help radio companies reach audiences. What changed the game was when XM started offering car companies a share of the money to put their radios in the dashboard. Once manufacturers saw that, they felt if FM radio wants to be on our devices, they can PAY for it. Unless the government REQUIRES these devices companies to install FM, there will be no traditional radio in cell phones or any other kind of electronic device. And there's nothing the radio companies can do, no new programming or services they can do that will change that.

 

[SirRoxalot]

There are three reasons that my MP3 playing ISN'T an iPod.

1. I wanted one with an FM receiver.

2. I wanted one that records - both from a built-in mic, and from the FM receiver.

3. I didn't want to be a slave to iTunes.

Vote with your feet. If FM is important to you, buy devices that include it - even if you have to look a little harder. Streamed MP3 audio sucks compared to FM, and FM is free.

 

[Nate Wesley]

Except we're dealing with a moment when, given what you're getting, getting your broadcast media for free is a little like doing your grocery shopping at the 99 cent store, or getting your medical treatment from Dr. Nick Riviera. IOW it isn't just a matter of it being free; it's a matter of how desperate you are to stoop so low...

That might be your own take on it, but I'm not sure it applies on a macro level at all.

Equating free with 'cheap' and/or 'desperate' is pretty short sighted in my mind, as nobody has to pay to enjoy American Idol, Neal Boortz, the Super Bowl, This American Life, Lost, Tom Joyner, etc. Are you necessarily 'stooping low' by enjoying these personalities and programs? I don't think so. You can certainly choose to pay for an enhanced experience, but that's a bonus--you'll notice that not a lot of people have followed Howard Stern's lead.

(And shopping at the '99 cent' store, by definition, isn't free; poor example.)

 

[Roger That]

Equating free with 'cheap' and/or 'desperate' is pretty short sighted in my mind, as nobody has to pay to enjoy American Idol, Neal Boortz, the Super Bowl, This American Life, Lost, Tom Joyner, etc. Are you necessarily 'stooping low' by enjoying these personalities and programs? I don't think so. You can certainly choose to pay for an enhanced experience, but that's a bonus--you'll notice that not a lot of people have followed Howard Stern's lead.

I believe his point was that if "free" was your biggest selling point, that's not saying much. Yes, those programs you mentioned are free, but they don't need to promote "free" because they're great, quality content. In the vast majority of cases, radio does not have that to boast.

 

[adma]

I believe his point was that if "free" was your biggest selling point, that's not saying much. Yes, those programs you mentioned are free, but they don't need to promote "free" because they're great, quality content. In the vast majority of cases, radio does not have that to boast.

Exactly--and there's also the fact that what might have passed for "quality" two or three decades ago won't fit the bill today.

Like, I don't think you'll find many of Generation iPod bouncing back to hackneyed least-denominator commercial music radio formulae anytime soon, "free" or not...

 

[TheBigA]

Like, I don't think you'll find many of Generation iPod bouncing back to hackneyed least-denominator commercial music radio formulae anytime soon, "free" or not...

So you're telling me the people buying Jonas Brothers records are all boomer parents getting them for their kids?

I'm sorry, but every generation thinks it's too smart for hit music, only to find out they love it.

 

[adma]

Like, I don't think you'll find many of Generation iPod bouncing back to hackneyed least-denominator commercial music radio formulae anytime soon, "free" or not...

So you're telling me the people buying Jonas Brothers records are all boomer parents getting them for their kids?

I'm sorry, but every generation thinks it's too smart for hit music, only to find out they love it.

And, once again...this isn't about "hit music" (which, as we all know, still tops the download charts), it's about the means of consuming it.

And re the "every generation thinks it's too smart for hit music, only to find out they love it" argument: believe it or not, it was already validated by the Lester Bangs school of rock criticism four decades ago, Kasenetz-Katz rools, Moody Blues drools, etc. Though you're probably too much the tasteless philistine to notice...

 

[TheBigA]

And, once again...this isn't about "hit music" (which, as we all know, still tops the download charts), it's about the means of consuming it.

But the purpose of mass media is to appeal to the masses. That means least common denominator. As long as advertisers buy numbers and not quality, that's the approach to tale.

Though you're probably too much the tasteless philistine to notice...

It's not a hobby. It's my job.

 

[adma]

And, once again...this isn't about "hit music" (which, as we all know, still tops the download charts), it's about the means of consuming it.

But the purpose of mass media is to appeal to the masses. That means least common denominator. As long as advertisers buy numbers and not quality, that's the approach to tale.

And such is why the pool of "masses" you're dealing with is--even by your admission--on the wane; with the advances in "means of consuming it", you're dealing with a dwindling and increasingly backwoods pool.

It isn't about whether the Jonas Brothers themselves are "quality" or not--though perhaps it's about a kind of "two-tier" fanbase which might not have existed a generation ago...

 

[TheBigA]

And such is why the pool of "masses" you're dealing with is--even by your admission--on the wane; with the advances in "means of consuming it", you're dealing with a dwindling and increasingly backwoods pool.

The pool isn't on the wane. You just share it with more devices and activities. As for "increasingly backwards," that's a bit elitist, don't you think? We live in a democracy. People are people. As long as they buy stuff, they're just fine.

 

[adma]

The pool isn't on the wane. You just share it with more devices and activities.

But once again, even as you've indicated, the traditional media industry is going through painful moments...mainly because the sharing comes with a little picking and choosing, and audiences ultimately not "behaving" in manners once accustomed, etc. In a way, it allows the "elitism" you brush off to be democratized; maybe more passively than actively, but, still.

Which, curiously enough (and a backhanded pitch in your court) might mean less raw disgruntlement over the state of commercial radio (at least, that which isn't conservative talk; but that's more of a political than "sucky programming" matter) than there might have been a generation ago. With the "sharing with more devices and activities", radio's far less the primary obsession and idee fixe than it used to be; hence, easier to be benign, out of sight, out of mind, and only used when required and as customized t/w one's own needs. Indeed, a lot of the "radio sucks" threads in boards like this one--especially those dealing with music programming--strike me as pre-Y2K anachronisms.

So it's nothing to do with the Jonas Brothers "sucking", or with "forcing" pointy-headed Plant/Krauss-isms upon the Jonas-loving kiddies. But it may say something about how, in hindsight and by today's standards, all sentimental memories aside, the Top 40ish mass platforms of the 60s/70s/80s "sucked" more than the musical content they offered. These days, they'd do an inane injustice to either Jonas or Plant/Krauss, making both more obnoxious than they need to be, and all the more so by colliding them with each other--at least on anything other than a syndicated Casey Kasem-type countdown platform.

As for "increasingly backwards," that's a bit elitist, don't you think? We live in a democracy. People are people. As long as they buy stuff, they're just fine.

Sure, in the abstract. And one can make that claim even when the "stuff" one is offering is colon-blow quackery and get-rich-quick schemery.

I love it when radio folks cover up for their own dubious selling machines by referring to "people" generically. (But hey, it's probably been the case since the days of goat glands, at least...)