D
Don Juannn
Guest
I have no idea how parroting KB's responses advances the discussion[/b]
Nobody is parroting anything...just offering thoughts which you can't seem to handle.
but I would offer, regarding "responses 1 and 2"....yes, satellite works (technically) to a satisfactory degree (as opposed to HD, which does not)
All a matter of opinion...of which yours in not the only one. HD works satisfactorily to many. Satellite is unsatisfactory to many.
and it does offer pretty good (not ideal) programming and tons of choice.
So doesn't HD.
There are hundreds of channels on the Bird, as opposed to a max of FOUR on an HD-FM,
Hundreds? You know I am dying to hear C-Span3 3 audio when I am driving down the street. ;-0
HD In Boston offers 20 extra channels. (Sorry they don't offer MSNBC audio like XM does.) ;-)
and whatever faults XM-Sirius' programming have - the material beats lame, repetitive formats-in-a-box, simulcasts of News-Talk AMs and out-of-market sister FM products.
Another opinion...of which yours in the only valid one?
90-95% of America still uses regular broadcast radio every week.
(And another prevalent HD-FM subchannel format: "dead air," frequently programmed because the closet computer has frozen or crashed and nobody's got time or interest to fix it.)
Reminds me of FM in the the late 60's early 70's. ;-)
I love how a guy with a flawed 500 watt nighttime facility (from 20 miles out of town no less) likes to throw stones at others. ;-)
As far as the argument "it's hard to beat free," I would differ.
Of course you would. What else would one expect from you.
You have no other position except that HD should cease immediately.
Nobody is parroting anything...just offering thoughts which you can't seem to handle.
but I would offer, regarding "responses 1 and 2"....yes, satellite works (technically) to a satisfactory degree (as opposed to HD, which does not)
All a matter of opinion...of which yours in not the only one. HD works satisfactorily to many. Satellite is unsatisfactory to many.
and it does offer pretty good (not ideal) programming and tons of choice.
So doesn't HD.
There are hundreds of channels on the Bird, as opposed to a max of FOUR on an HD-FM,
Hundreds? You know I am dying to hear C-Span3 3 audio when I am driving down the street. ;-0
HD In Boston offers 20 extra channels. (Sorry they don't offer MSNBC audio like XM does.) ;-)
and whatever faults XM-Sirius' programming have - the material beats lame, repetitive formats-in-a-box, simulcasts of News-Talk AMs and out-of-market sister FM products.
Another opinion...of which yours in the only valid one?
90-95% of America still uses regular broadcast radio every week.
(And another prevalent HD-FM subchannel format: "dead air," frequently programmed because the closet computer has frozen or crashed and nobody's got time or interest to fix it.)
Reminds me of FM in the the late 60's early 70's. ;-)
I love how a guy with a flawed 500 watt nighttime facility (from 20 miles out of town no less) likes to throw stones at others. ;-)
As far as the argument "it's hard to beat free," I would differ.
Of course you would. What else would one expect from you.
You have no other position except that HD should cease immediately.