<font color=brown>"Comparisions of these two quite different systems is hard to understand. Your thoughts?" <font color=black>
Do you mean that you find each so different that they aren't comparable? They are comparable but iPods are more complementary to terrestial radio than direct competition.
What I find unfortunate is the tendency of traditionalists to dismiss iPods as too much trouble and lacking any appeal whatsoever when compared to radio. Denying the appeal of iPods only makes them look insecure and foolish. For radio execs to slam iPods is like movie executive slamming dvd players. You can't make them go away so you better get your product in the middle of the revenue stream. Fortunately, radio execs will. A few already are.<TABLE BORDER CELLPADDING=2><TR> <TH>Radio</TH> <TH>iPod</TH><TR><TD>Has hard drive with hundreds of songs</TD> <TD>Has hard drive with thousands of songs</TD><TR> <TD>Music researched to determine popularity</TD> <TD>Music selection based on a survey of one.</TD>
<TR> <TD>Receiver is relatively inexpensive</TD> <TD>Player is relatively inexpensive</TD><TR> <TD>User "pays" with his or her time listening to spots. </TD><TD>"Pays" with time (once) to rip personal music library. Then $1 per new song added</TD><TR> <TD>Radio station controls music</TD><TD>Listener controls music</TD><TR> <TD>Talk, sometimes live, between songs</TD><TD>No talk between songs</TD><tr><TD>Some stations offers News, Traffic, Weather</TD><TD>No news, traffic, weather</TD></TR>
</TABLE>
Some of radios advantages are disadvantages when you don't want to hear them. I listen to mp3s but when I want traffic info, I know where to find it. I didn't rip the radio out of my car when I added mp3 capability. My iPod doesn't replace my radio, but it does cut down on TSL. I don't believe for a minute that radio is dying, just the present business model. And it can't happen soon enough for me. But that's another post.
