Has HD radio already failed?

[vsa]

ElCheapo wrote: "To be brutally honest, I used phrases like "Really?" and "God bless you and your miraculous cell phone" as euphemisms for what I was really thinking - you're a liar."

I understand you may not like what's happening out there in that it doesn't fit your view of what the future should hold. I am not a liar. Like I said earlier - you are in denial.

 

[ElCheapo]

How, did you know, God sent me here ? Yes, I am on a one-man mercy mission from God, to rid the planet of the HD Radio Cartel/iBiquity gangstas ! Analog AM shall live forever (well, maybe in Canada) !

The "mission from God" thing was a joke of course, but anyone can see you're very, very passionate about this - good for you.

Personally, I'm not as passionate. I guess I'm really like most people in radio. I hope HD works out for the betterment of the industry and I do enjoy my work with HD, but I'm not going to cry if it doesn't work out long-term.

 

[ElCheapo]

ElCheapo wrote: "To be brutally honest, I used phrases like "Really?" and "God bless you and your miraculous cell phone" as euphemisms for what I was really thinking - you're a liar."

I understand you may not like what's happening out there in that it doesn't fit your view of what the future should hold. I am not a liar. Like I said earlier - you are in denial.

Hey - whatever you want to believe dude.

I can't have a reliable cell phone conversation on I-35 between Dallas and Austin. Believe me - I've tried on many occasions - on both Cingular and Sprint. This is an incredibly busy stretch of interstate that is mostly flat.

The Cingular service stinks at my office and the Sprint service stinks at my home. Both have been known to drop calls when the phone displayed excellent signal strength.

Why on Earth would I believe these people can provide reliable wireless internet access - especially with the robustness necessary for streaming audio with decent bitrates? They can't even handle voice telephone calls with any real degree of reliability!

Like I said before - when your marketing campaign is "Can you hear me now?" you're acknowledging that your industry has a rather serious problem with reliability. That makes your story really, really hard to believe.

 

[vsa]

I've made similar trips through California with similar results. Same with my road trip to last April's NAB convention in Las Vegas. Actually, it still blows my mind that I can listen to Internet radio reliably in my car. I do it all the time all over the Los Angeles area. I admit I'm on the bleeding edge with this, but others are beginning to do it too.

I can't speak for reception in your part of the country. I believe you when you say your voice service sucks. Wireless data service can be improved when the provider adds more CPEs. 4G Wimax not only improves speed, it also improves coverage.

These technologies will only continue to get better. The demand for Internet services of all kinds is driving this. Radio over the Internet is riding on the coat-tails. To even have a prayer of success, HD radio has to offer better, not worse, signal coverage.

 

[vsa]

ElCheapo wrote: "Hey - whatever you want to believe dude."

Well, believe this from today's Detroit Free Press:

"In what might be the start of an exciting technological future for cars and trucks, Ford Motor Co. and software giant Microsoft Corp. are expected to jointly announce soon that new Windows Automotive software soon will be available in Ford vehicles...the Microsoft technology works through a computer located on the vehicle that runs Windows Auto software. The computer uses Bluetooth to connect wirelessly with a mobile phone in the car, which in turn connects to the Internet. Motorists communicate with the system through a microphone embedded in the roof of the car."

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061230/BUSINESS01/612300331

 

[ElCheapo]

ElCheapo wrote: "Hey - whatever you want to believe dude."

Well, believe this from today's Detroit Free Press:

"In what might be the start of an exciting technological future for cars and trucks, Ford Motor Co. and software giant Microsoft Corp. are expected to jointly announce soon that new Windows Automotive software soon will be available in Ford vehicles...the Microsoft technology works through a computer located on the vehicle that runs Windows Auto software. The computer uses Bluetooth to connect wirelessly with a mobile phone in the car, which in turn connects to the Internet. Motorists communicate with the system through a microphone embedded in the roof of the car."

http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20061230/BUSINESS01/612300331

Again, there is a big difference between being able to check e-mail or sports scores and reliably receiving streaming high quality audio. Notice, they didn't point that out as an application for the device.

Did you also notice the reader comments at the bottom of the article? Not too positive - in fact, not a single positive comment.

One comment in particular was right on and echos something I said here months ago.

"If any of these people, driving one of these cars runs into my awesome 1989 NISSAN 240SX, which still runs like it just came out of the factory, and runs 0-60MPH in 7.8 @ 140HP, then I will start a class action personally."

I don't think he'll have to. These things will end up being regulated out of existence before they ever get off the ground.

The last thing I want to think about is the driver next to me reading his e-mail or surfing the web on the road. The insurance industry has an extremely powerful Washington lobby. I suspect they'll have something to say about this distraction. They may simply refuse to insure vehicles equipped with systems like this.

 

[700WLW]

Do you really think that the new partnership, between Ford and Microsoft would have been formed, if they thought, as you say, "These things will end up being regulated out of existence before they ever get off the ground." LOL ! In-dash HD Radio is now officially dead !

"At Ford, Windows is Job One"

"What is YOUR group doing to be in front of this trend? What is YOUR group doing to be in every car in every way in 2007 and beyond? What content do you have that every Ford will want to stream? And where does this leave satellite radio and especially HD radio ?"

http://www.hear2.com/2006/12/at_ford_windows.html#comments

 

[ElCheapo]

Do you really think that the new partnership, between Ford and Microsoft would have been formed, if they thought, as you say, "These things will end up being regulated out of existence before they ever get off the ground." LOL ! In-dash HD Radio is now officially dead !

"At Ford, Windows is Job One"

"What is YOUR group doing to be in front of this trend? What is YOUR group doing to be in every car in every way in 2007 and beyond? What content do you have that every Ford will want to stream? And where does this leave satellite radio and especially HD radio ?"

http://www.hear2.com/2006/12/at_ford_windows.html#comments

I think it will all depend on who can afford the best lobbyists. Since they are actively lobbying to curb cell phone use on the road and making some progress in that area, a distraction like mobile internet - which is a much more substantial distraction than cell phones - is bound to get their attention.

http://www.iii.org/media/hottopics/insurance/cellphones/

This clearly isn't on their radar yet, but I assure you - it will be.

 

[700WLW]

Do you really think that the new partnership, between Ford and Microsoft would have been formed, if they thought, as you say, "These things will end up being regulated out of existence before they ever get off the ground." LOL ! In-dash HD Radio is now officially dead !

"At Ford, Windows is Job One"

"What is YOUR group doing to be in front of this trend? What is YOUR group doing to be in every car in every way in 2007 and beyond? What content do you have that every Ford will want to stream? And where does this leave satellite radio and especially HD radio ?"

http://www.hear2.com/2006/12/at_ford_windows.html#comments

I think it will all depend on who can afford the best lobbyists. Since they are actively lobbying to curb cell phone use on the road and making some progress in that area, a distraction like mobile internet - which is a much more substantial distraction than cell phones - is bound to get their attention.

http://www.iii.org/media/hottopics/insurance/cellphones/

This clearly isn't on their radar yet, but I assure you - it will be.

All they have done with cell phones, is required for them to be hands-free, at least in Maryland. Worst case for this device, they will require people to pull over, but that will never happen, and there are such things called, passengers. Gosh, how many times have I seen someone talking directly on a cell phone, while driving past a cop, and the police do nothing about it - the same thing will happen with mobile Internet. As usual, IBOC supporters feel threatened (and, this time definately for good reason), and make up some ridiculous excuses - I can assure you, no one is going to stop mobile Internet, especially IBOC supporters. I can assure you, that Microsoft's and Ford's powerful lawyers have already looked extensively into this potential problem. Oh yes, good luck trying to legislate away people listening to Internet Radio, through this device ! In-dash HD Radio is now officially dead - LOL !

 

[Chuck]

Its STL has been an FM subcarrier for many years now, and apparently I'm the only person that thinks some improvement is in order. I will probably end up doing a link with the Barix boxes and maintain the subcarrier. I'll probably put a silence sensor on the output of the Barix and wire it to fall back to the subcarrier if needed.

That should work pretty well. Broadcast Tools and several others make decent silence sensors. I'm using one from DM Engineering (www.DMEngineering.com) that works OK. It only has a single relay output, which I had to cascade to another relay to switch audio. That's not wonderful, but it was cheap, and it does work. It was about $100 as I recall, which is in line with the idea of a budget system.

Actually, if you FMExtra on the SCA channel, you'd get a great STL connection.

 

[ElCheapo]

Its STL has been an FM subcarrier for many years now, and apparently I'm the only person that thinks some improvement is in order. I will probably end up doing a link with the Barix boxes and maintain the subcarrier. I'll probably put a silence sensor on the output of the Barix and wire it to fall back to the subcarrier if needed.

That should work pretty well. Broadcast Tools and several others make decent silence sensors. I'm using one from DM Engineering (www.DMEngineering.com) that works OK. It only has a single relay output, which I had to cascade to another relay to switch audio. That's not wonderful, but it was cheap, and it does work. It was about $100 as I recall, which is in line with the idea of a budget system.

Actually, if you FMExtra on the SCA channel, you'd get a great STL connection.

True, but you get into that pesky money thing again. Believe me when I say this station bills nothing. Getting the company to spend money on the Barix system will be like pulling teeth - forget something like FMeXtra.

 

[ElCheapo]

All they have done with cell phones, is required for them to be hands-free, at least in Maryland. Worst case for this device, they will require people to pull over, but that will never happen, and there are such things called, passengers. Gosh, how many times have I seen someone talking directly on a cell phone, while driving past a cop, and the police do nothing about it - the same thing will happen with mobile Internet. As usual, IBOC supporters feel threatened (and, this time definately for good reason), and make up some ridiculous excuses - I can assure you, no one is going to stop mobile Internet, especially IBOC supporters. I can assure you, that Microsoft's and Ford's powerful lawyers have already looked extensively into this potential problem. Oh yes, good luck trying to legislate away people listening to Internet Radio, through this device ! In-dash HD Radio is now officially dead - LOL !

Neither Microsoft nor Ford are batting a thousand in the legal arena. If Ford thought the Explorer rollover lawsuits were expensive, they're really going to love this when people start dying. Call me crazy, but I just don't see browsing the web and driving as compatible activities. I can't wait to see all the trial lawyers shift from attacking the drug companies to this...

I'm attorney Jeff Goldwater. If you or a loved one has been injured or killed by a distracted driver using Ford's mobile internet technology, call me immediately - you may be entitled to a large cash reward...

The technology to put the internet into cars has been around for years - it's just that nobody else has been dumb enough to do it yet. Ford is teetering on the edge of bankruptcy and desperately needs a gimick to move a few cars - this is it.

Of course, an infusion of cash from Microsoft could be the real reason for this. Microsoft wants to prove they're needed in every nook and cranny of our lives, and so far they haven't had much luck getting into cars - and Ford desperately needs cash.

Either way, connectivity will still be an issue. I suspect offering streaming audio will not be Microsoft's "entertainment" goal with this anyway - selling music through their Zune music service will be. Think about it - one makes them money and the other is just a huge drain on their bandwidth.

The company I think should be concerned about this development is Sirius. I suspect their relationship with Ford might be in jeopardy. While I don't see real time streaming being viable via the mobile internet for quite some time, Microsoft could easily put together a subscription music service for the road that is non-real time and customized to each user. They could even insert personalities, traffic reports, etc. podcast style. Music would be slowly downloaded to your car over time as bandwidth allows, assembled into playlists customized to your individual tastes and function like traditional radio with one exception - you could override it and play whatever song you wanted immediately.

Hey - that's actually not a bad idea... Maybe I should patent it?

You should get the point though. Microsoft will probably find a way to monetize the entertainment options of this system. I don't see them offering a big, fat bandwidth sucking pipe to everyone that might want to listen to streaming audio.

 

[700WLW]

Phew ! It is happening, whether you like it, or not (and, that includes Robert Struble) ! You can debate it all you want, to no avail !

 

[ElCheapo]

Phew ! It is happening, whether you like it, or not (and, that includes Robert Struble) ! You can debate it all you want, to no avail !

What's there to debate? Everything I've read on the subject - and you can read a lot if you Google the words "Microsoft Ford Sync" - says DOWNLOADS not "streaming audio."

One thing you shoud know about Bill Gates is he hates losing. He has been known to create products that are 100% incompatible with his overall business plan just to annoy his competitors. Zune exists because Bill Gates can not stand the fact that Apple is beating him at something - plain and simple.

The "entertainment" options offered by this device will likely be Zune downloads. It's Billy's way of besting Apple.

There is absolutely no reason to believe this will offer people the ability to listen to streaming audio in their cars. That simply has not been said. If you can show me where someone from Ford or Microsoft has said otherwise, I'll gladly eat my words. No, Mark Ramsey is not a Ford or Microsoft employee.

 

[700WLW]

Looks, like Mark Ramsey would disagree with you - but you know what, I'll take his word over yours. You've already posted a comment on his website - looks like you are a bit worried (for good reason), and now, I'll have to post a comment, in rebuttal. And, here is Mark's rebuttal, to your comment:

"Well, "ElCheapo," I appreciate your comments but you're wrong. Radio stations stream audio every day to radios in every car, home, and workplace. And they do it thanks to a thing called advertising."

http://www.hear2.com/2006/12/at_ford_windows.html#comments

 

[ElCheapo]

Looks, like Mark Ramsey would disagree with you - but you know what, I'll take his word over yours. You've already posted a comment on his website - looks like you are a bit worried (for good reason), and now, I'll have to post a comment, in rebuttal. And, here is Mark's rebuttal, to your comment:

"Well, "ElCheapo," I appreciate your comments but you're wrong. Radio stations stream audio every day to radios in every car, home, and workplace. And they do it thanks to a thing called advertising."

http://www.hear2.com/2006/12/at_ford_windows.html#comments

Mark Ramsey seems like a bright guy, but as someone charging companies for his strategic thinking and research, he probably needs to look into doing some research of his own before sharing his streaming theories on the internet.

A typical office of a hundred or so employees is served by a T1 link to the internet. This can easily meet their e-mail, web browsing and web based corporate applications.

A T1 circuit offers 1544 kbps connection to the internet.

Now lets suppose a few employees start streaming audio at 48 kbps per stream... Your entire internet bandwidth would be eaten up by just 32 employees. If 15 were doing it, half your bandwidth would be eaten - by an activity that is not enhancing your company's profitability. Your network slows to a crawl and your employees can't do their work.

Mark may know a thing or two about radio research and programming, but he is clearly not an engineer.

Unless the radio stations he's speaking of want to pay to upgrade the internet connections of every office in America, his statement just doesn't hold water.

 

[700WLW]

Since I assume, this will be done through existing cell phone infrastructures, I don't see how bandwidth is going to be a problem. With my boys' new Cingular BlackJack cell phones, they can even watch real-time football games, over the G3 network, which I'm sure, eats up a lot of bandwidth. I'm sure, Micrsoft and Ford have addressed any potential problems, since they have probably sunk hundreds-of-millions of dollars into this technology. Same goes for the on-going WiMax infrastructure (maybe the new, "Sync", uses WiMax). At any rate, I'm sure, this new rollout will succeed, unlike HD Radio, which is now dead in-dash.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

ElCheapo said:

What's there to debate? Everything I've read on the subject - and you can read a lot if you Google the words "Microsoft Ford Sync" - says DOWNLOADS not "streaming audio."

Streaming audio is just listening to audio while it is downloading. Done millions of times every hour. Why the deception?

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Looks, like Mark Ramsey would disagree with you - but you know what, I'll take his word over yours. You've already posted a comment on his website - looks like you are a bit worried (for good reason), and now, I'll have to post a comment, in rebuttal. And, here is Mark's rebuttal, to your comment:

"Well, "ElCheapo," I appreciate your comments but you're wrong. Radio stations stream audio every day to radios in every car, home, and workplace. And they do it thanks to a thing called advertising."

http://www.hear2.com/2006/12/at_ford_windows.html#comments

Mark Ramsey seems like a bright guy, but as someone charging companies for his strategic thinking and research, he probably needs to look into doing some research of his own before sharing his streaming theories on the internet.

A typical office of a hundred or so employees is served by a T1 link to the internet. This can easily meet their e-mail, web browsing and web based corporate applications.

A T1 circuit offers 1544 kbps connection to the internet.

Now lets suppose a few employees start streaming audio at 48 kbps per stream... Your entire internet bandwidth would be eaten up by just 32 employees. If 15 were doing it, half your bandwidth would be eaten - by an activity that is not enhancing your company's profitability. Your network slows to a crawl and your employees can't do their work.

Mark may know a thing or two about radio research and programming, but he is clearly not an engineer.

Unless the radio stations he's speaking of want to pay to upgrade the internet connections of every office in America, his statement just doesn't hold water.

Let's say a company chooses to make available 8 or 10 of the most popular streaming internet stations and sources for duplication and distribution through their networked computers to their employees. This is commonly done today, without the bandwidth problems you mention. A single stream can be distributed to multiple locations, and users, on a computer network.

Companies are moving from old, slow, expensive, T-1 connections to better, more reliable, cheaper, much faster, high capacity fiber optic quickly. T-1 is old news.

Why all the deception?
It is your posts that "don't hold water".

 

[ElCheapo]

Streaming audio is just listening to audio while it is downloading. Done millions of times every hour. Why the deception?

Surely you don't even believe that...

Yes, streaming is listening to audio while it's downloading - unlike a regular download though, streaming depends on a constant and reliable stream of data. Downloads can usually survive hiccups on the network with no ill effects. In streams, they manifest as dropouts.