HD radio died in 2006, if it ever lived at all.

[vsa]

It's gotten to be a lot like memory lane around here lately. It's all well and good, but are you basing your livelihood on the status quo in radio? For your sake, I pray not.

2007 is going to prove to be the year where HD radio's death will become plain for all to see. HD radio was eclipised yet again yesterday. It's happenning at a breakneck speed now - daily. A couple of examples just from yesterday...

At the SXSW festival in Austin, Texas Wednesday (3/14/07), Broadband Instruments launched the potentially disruptive "Slacker" music ecosystem, which combines interactive webcasts, satellite radio, and traditional MP3 playback in a next-generation device that could make Apple's iPod -- and even its upcoming iPhone -- look, well, a little unconnected. As for music copyright fees, BI is dealing directly with the record companies.

http://blog.wired.com/music/2007/03/slacker_steals_.html

Oh, as for the next step, wireless broadband, expect the wireless Internet to be everywhere in 2009.

Tech Companies Push for Wireless Internet on TV Frequencies

The proposal by many of the leading high-tech companies, including Microsoft, Intel, Google and other computer manufacturers, would allow smart devices to operate in the television band to send and receive wireless Internet signals, without interfering with television users after television's digital transition is complete. The companies have already provided the FCC with a prototype device for testing.

http://www.broadcastlawblog.com/arc...-for-wireless-internet-on-tv-frequencies.html

You tell me how HD radio competes. Are you ready to stake your future on it?

 

[davideduardo]

You tell me how HD radio competes. Are you ready to stake your future on it?

Unlike all the new concepts you described, radio exists now and has existed for over 80 years. HD is simply an enhancement to well-established radio broadcasts. It's success in not independent of the current analog model, just part of making the product better a little bit at a time.

 

[vsa]

DavidEduardo wrote: "Unlike all the new concepts you described, radio exists now and has existed for over 80 years. HD is simply an enhancement to well-established radio broadcasts. It's success in not independent of the current analog model, just part of making the product better a little bit at a time."

With all due respect, your point would be well taken if the success of HD radio did not require the purchase of new radios to replace the almost one billion existing analog units out there. Therefore, you really need to compare the features offered by HD radio to the features offered by its new digital competitors. They are flooding the marketplace. HD radio has already missed its window of opportunity. HD radio is us trying to establish a new distribution method while another method (Internet) mushrooms in popularity. Count the sales so far, David. It's a losing battle. Put your eggs into where the listeners want to be and will be, not where we'd prefer them to be.

 

[R.F. Burns]

DavidEduardo wrote: "Unlike all the new concepts you described, radio exists now and has existed for over 80 years. HD is simply an enhancement to well-established radio broadcasts. It's success in not independent of the current analog model, just part of making the product better a little bit at a time."

With all due respect, your point would be well taken if the success of HD radio did not require the purchase of new radios to replace the almost one billion existing analog units out there. Therefore, you really need to compare the features offered by HD radio to the features offered by its new digital competitors. They are flooding the marketplace. HD radio has already missed its window of opportunity. HD radio is us trying to establish a new distribution method while another method (Internet) mushrooms in popularity. Count the sales so far, David. It's a losing battle. Put your eggs into where the listeners want to be and will be, not where we'd prefer them to be.

OK perhaps I can answer your questions. No one is forcing anyone to purchase a new HD radio. Don't want a new radio? Don't buy one and listen to your radio (if that's what you chose to do and as of today radios audience beats its competitors by millions) in analogue mode. Want to listen to the new formats that HD radio offers? I guess it's like wanting to watch TV in color instead of black and white. If you want it, it's there to be purchased. The competition? Maybe in a few years internet radio may be available in a mobile environment but my use of the word "few" is being very charitable and how much will it cost for that connectivity? Hey if you don't want to buy a new radio, why would you want to buy a new internet receiver plus pay for the service, because I'm sure you realize someone is going to pay for wide area internet service. Hey, my high speed already costs 50$ a month. What do you think the ongoing charges will be to pay for the huge infrastucture wireless will require? Satellite? It's so successful that there's talk that if they don't merge they will go out of busineess. Yea, a major success and I guess what it shows is that there are people who will be thrilled to pay for radio. Just not enough people. Another point that I believe sways some peoples views as to whether HD will succeed. Most of us aren't housebound or physically challenged and so we leave our houses and spend at least 8 to 10 hours every day outside and away from the internet. You can't receive the internet in a bus, in a car, in a subway, on a train and on and on. What I take from reading your post is that you really are either ignorant of what goes on in the real world or you get off on coming up with rediculous scenarios.

 

[radiopilot]

The competition? Maybe in a few years internet radio may be available in a mobile environment but my use of the word "few" is being very charitable and how much will it cost for that connectivity? Hey if you don't want to buy a new radio, why would you want to buy a new internet receiver plus pay for the service, because I'm sure you realize someone is going to pay for wide area internet service. Hey, my high speed already costs 50$ a month. What do you think the ongoing charges will be to pay for the huge infrastucture wireless will require? Satellite? It's so successful that there's talk that if they don't merge they will go out of busineess. Yea, a major success and I guess what it shows is that there are people who will be thrilled to pay for radio. Just not enough people. Another point that I believe sways some peoples views as to whether HD will succeed. Most of us aren't housebound or physically challenged and so we leave our houses and spend at least 8 to 10 hours every day outside and away from the internet. You can't receive the internet in a bus, in a car, in a subway, on a train and on and on. What I take from reading your post is that you really are either ignorant of what goes on in the real world or you get off on coming up with rediculous scenarios.
[/quote]

RF

You couldn't be so wrong... So far many cities are going WIFI based, city wide. Many cities have already completed Wifi including San Francisco and others, Seattle is on it's way...

http://www.walkersands.com/Grand-Haven-First-Citywide-WiFi.htm

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/11/17/Portland_gets_wifi/

http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2005/12/20/if_were_tech_city_wheres_our_wifi/

http://hotspotr.com/cities

Once this happens you can get internet radio anwhere you go and it's free, no cost as advertisers pick up the tab much as radio does now, and soon it''ll envelope the nation... sure it takes time just as others say it takes time for HD to grow...

As far as I'm concerned those that believe otherwise are going the way fof the dodo bird, reel to reel, 8-track, cassette tape, etc.

Radio will be a second to satelite and internet radio... FACT.

Radiopilot

 

[R.F. Burns]

The competition? Maybe in a few years internet radio may be available in a mobile environment but my use of the word "few" is being very charitable and how much will it cost for that connectivity? Hey if you don't want to buy a new radio, why would you want to buy a new internet receiver plus pay for the service, because I'm sure you realize someone is going to pay for wide area internet service. Hey, my high speed already costs 50$ a month. What do you think the ongoing charges will be to pay for the huge infrastucture wireless will require? Satellite? It's so successful that there's talk that if they don't merge they will go out of busineess. Yea, a major success and I guess what it shows is that there are people who will be thrilled to pay for radio. Just not enough people. Another point that I believe sways some peoples views as to whether HD will succeed. Most of us aren't housebound or physically challenged and so we leave our houses and spend at least 8 to 10 hours every day outside and away from the internet. You can't receive the internet in a bus, in a car, in a subway, on a train and on and on. What I take from reading your post is that you really are either ignorant of what goes on in the real world or you get off on coming up with rediculous scenarios.

RF

You couldn't be so wrong... So far many cities are going WIFI based, city wide. Many cities have already completed Wifi including San Francisco and others, Seattle is on it's way...

http://www.walkersands.com/Grand-Haven-First-Citywide-WiFi.htm

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/11/17/Portland_gets_wifi/

http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2005/12/20/if_were_tech_city_wheres_our_wifi/

http://hotspotr.com/cities

Once this happens you can get internet radio anwhere you go and it's free, no cost as advertisers pick up the tab much as radio does now, and soon it''ll envelope the nation... sure it takes time just as others say it takes time for HD to grow...

As far as I'm concerned those that believe otherwise are going the way fof the dodo bird, reel to reel, 8-track, cassette tape, etc.

Radio will be a second to satelite and internet radio... FACT.

Radiopilot


[/quote]

As Aerosmith once sang, dream on. Let me know when any internet stations can support millions of simultanious listeners.

 

[vsa]

R.F.Burns wrote:"Want to listen to the new formats that HD radio offers? I guess it's like wanting to watch TV in color instead of black and white."

This is not 1990 Mr. Burns. Here, why don't you give any of these 17,600 Internet radio station mp3 and aac+ streams a try on the computer you're using right now. They're all free. No cost. Zippo. Nada. This is only one radio tuner website. About all I see missing is an all-oboe station.

http://www.shoutcast.com/

R.F.Burns also wrote: "Maybe in a few years internet radio may be available in a mobile environment."

A national Wimax wireless network can be built for under $3 billion. That's lunch money for Bill Gates. A wired network is what takes time to build.

Have you been to a cell phone store in the last couple of years? Oh yeah, you're in New York. Correction. Have you been to a cell phone store in the last THREE years? Try Verizon Wireless or Sprint. Warning. Take your smelling salts along before you ride there on your horse.

R.F.Burns also went on to write: "Let me know when any internet stations can support millions of simultanious listeners."

It's no big deal to cluster as many servers as you want or need at multiple locations in order to handle any kind of listener load. It's done all the time.

 

[SUPERCASTER]

Millions of simultaneous internet streams of HD radio stations, XM, Sirius, plus more then 20,000 others are all being listened to and enjoyed right now. Podcasts, downloads, and Video too!
Multicasting on the net is no problem, and the internet has more then enough capacity to handle it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multicast
Most internet congestion results from server problems, not real net congestion.

R. F. Burns keeps trying to peddle his outdated rotten red herrings here.

 

[Patlabor]

A good friend of mine purchased (after a LONG wait after placing the order) a Radiosophy™ HD Digital receiver. The sensitivity was less than impressive along with the sound quality. There was only a slight
improvement in sound quality between FM analog and digital. The side/sub channels sounded "watery" and
you could tell it was a low bit rate stream. However, the difference on the AM side sounded great, but does
it really matter? The only Indy radio stations I listen to are WIBC (in the mornings for news and traffic) and
sometimes WTTS 92.3FM. I have XM in my car and the house. I stream my favorite internet radio stations
at work and at home. I also have a iPod filled with my favorite music and podcasts. Personally, I don't think
I really need HD Radio. ???

I don't wish the HD Radio folks any ill will, but I think the product/service will die from lack of public acceptance and apathy.

Just my own $0.02 worth

Tim

 

[R.F. Burns]

Millions of simultaneous internet streams of HD radio stations, XM, Sirius, plus more then 20,000 others are all being listened to and enjoyed right now. Podcasts, downloads, and Video too!
Multicasting on the net is no problem, and the internet has more then enough capacity to handle it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multicast
Most internet congestion results from server problems, not real net congestion.

R. F. Burns keeps trying to peddle his outdated rotten red herrings here.

Just check out the real world demo recorded from a Sangean HDT-1 and posted in wma128 which adds another level of compression to the audio. Remember there are no monthly fees attached.

 

[R.F. Burns]

The competition? Maybe in a few years internet radio may be available in a mobile environment but my use of the word "few" is being very charitable and how much will it cost for that connectivity? Hey if you don't want to buy a new radio, why would you want to buy a new internet receiver plus pay for the service, because I'm sure you realize someone is going to pay for wide area internet service. Hey, my high speed already costs 50$ a month. What do you think the ongoing charges will be to pay for the huge infrastucture wireless will require? Satellite? It's so successful that there's talk that if they don't merge they will go out of busineess. Yea, a major success and I guess what it shows is that there are people who will be thrilled to pay for radio. Just not enough people. Another point that I believe sways some peoples views as to whether HD will succeed. Most of us aren't housebound or physically challenged and so we leave our houses and spend at least 8 to 10 hours every day outside and away from the internet. You can't receive the internet in a bus, in a car, in a subway, on a train and on and on. What I take from reading your post is that you really are either ignorant of what goes on in the real world or you get off on coming up with rediculous scenarios.

RF

You couldn't be so wrong... So far many cities are going WIFI based, city wide. Many cities have already completed Wifi including San Francisco and others, Seattle is on it's way...

http://www.walkersands.com/Grand-Haven-First-Citywide-WiFi.htm

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/11/17/Portland_gets_wifi/

http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2005/12/20/if_were_tech_city_wheres_our_wifi/

http://hotspotr.com/cities

Once this happens you can get internet radio anwhere you go and it's free, no cost as advertisers pick up the tab much as radio does now, and soon it''ll envelope the nation... sure it takes time just as others say it takes time for HD to grow...

As far as I'm concerned those that believe otherwise are going the way fof the dodo bird, reel to reel, 8-track, cassette tape, etc.

Radio will be a second to satelite and internet radio... FACT.

Radiopilot


[/quote]


This is rediculous. You're talking about a very small city geographically. Just read this line from the story "blanket its six square miles and provide coverage 15 miles into Lake Michigan. WiFi, for wireless fidelity" NYC alone is about 20 miles from east to west and nearly 50 miles north to south and that doesn't include the metro area with is enormous. I know you have to start somewhere but seamles Wi-Fi is years if not decades from becoming a reality. Check out the west coast where you're talking hundreds of miles which have to be covered. An aside here; As an extra class licensed amateur op (CW is my thing) I say, say no to BPL.

 

[Chuck]

As an extra class licensed amateur op (CW is my thing) I say, say no to BPL.

Yeah, me too, but the FCC didn't. BPL is well on its way, whether we like it or not.

 

[R.F. Burns]

As an extra class licensed amateur op (CW is my thing) I say, say no to BPL.

Yeah, me too, but the FCC didn't. BPL is well on its way, whether we like it or not.

Unfortunately ham ops and bands are treated poorly. You want interference, try 145.25 Mhz in an urban area. Cable TV is a secondary user on that frequency and yet they cause all kinds of problems due to unterminated splitters or better yet they cut the coax and let it free radiate. What a mess.

 

[stevenNOLA]

The competition? Maybe in a few years internet radio may be available in a mobile environment but my use of the word "few" is being very charitable and how much will it cost for that connectivity? Hey if you don't want to buy a new radio, why would you want to buy a new internet receiver plus pay for the service, because I'm sure you realize someone is going to pay for wide area internet service. Hey, my high speed already costs 50$ a month. What do you think the ongoing charges will be to pay for the huge infrastucture wireless will require? Satellite? It's so successful that there's talk that if they don't merge they will go out of busineess. Yea, a major success and I guess what it shows is that there are people who will be thrilled to pay for radio. Just not enough people. Another point that I believe sways some peoples views as to whether HD will succeed. Most of us aren't housebound or physically challenged and so we leave our houses and spend at least 8 to 10 hours every day outside and away from the internet. You can't receive the internet in a bus, in a car, in a subway, on a train and on and on. What I take from reading your post is that you really are either ignorant of what goes on in the real world or you get off on coming up with rediculous scenarios.

RF

You couldn't be so wrong... So far many cities are going WIFI based, city wide. Many cities have already completed Wifi including San Francisco and others, Seattle is on it's way...

http://www.walkersands.com/Grand-Haven-First-Citywide-WiFi.htm

http://www.bit-tech.net/news/2006/11/17/Portland_gets_wifi/

http://www.boston.com/business/technology/articles/2005/12/20/if_were_tech_city_wheres_our_wifi/

http://hotspotr.com/cities

Once this happens you can get internet radio anwhere you go and it's free, no cost as advertisers pick up the tab much as radio does now, and soon it''ll envelope the nation... sure it takes time just as others say it takes time for HD to grow...

As far as I'm concerned those that believe otherwise are going the way fof the dodo bird, reel to reel, 8-track, cassette tape, etc.

Radio will be a second to satelite and internet radio... FACT.

Radiopilot

This is rediculous. You're talking about a very small city geographically. Just read this line from the story "blanket its six square miles and provide coverage 15 miles into Lake Michigan. WiFi, for wireless fidelity" NYC alone is about 20 miles from east to west and nearly 50 miles north to south and that doesn't include the metro area with is enormous. I know you have to start somewhere but seamles Wi-Fi is years if not decades from becoming a reality. Check out the west coast where you're talking hundreds of miles which have to be covered. An aside here; As an extra class licensed amateur op (CW is my thing) I say, say no to BPL.
[/quote]

The largest hurdle I see in these city-wide WiFi networks is the "handoff" from one antenna to the next. Will a listener wait for their internet receiver to lock onto then next signal while driving on the road. We've had cell phones for 15+ years now and they can't even do a reliable hand-off to the next tower. I don't know about other people but I expect my technology to work for an extended period of time, especially when on a trip. Satellite radio nicely accomplishes this. Thanks to terrestrial repeaters it's seamless in most cities, even in parking garages.