Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Satellite Radio Network

Posted by michael on from the sale-on-tinfoil-hats dept.

BodyCount07 writes: "CNN has this article on the sea-based launch of a geosynchronous satellite that will provide US citizens with a coast-to-coast radio network. The network will provide news and entertainment channels to its subscribers. More information is available at XM Radio's official site." Well, it's interesting. But broadcast radio is free. Will people pay for radio that still has ads? I suppose if you live in the large country-music-only zone in the U.S., you might be willing to pay for something different...

10 of 89 comments (clear)

  1. Why it won't succeed by Brento · · Score: 4

    I'm probably a good example of their target demographic. I've got tastes that aren't matched by a lot of radio stations, and I'm a gadget-buyer. (I happen to dig 80's, Frank Sinatra, and blues music. Not together, of course.) Sure, I live in a big city with dozens of stations, but most of them suck, and I usually end up listening to Internet radio at home and MP3's in the car.

    I would KILL to have access to this kind of radio everywhere. Traveling is such a pain, because you spend half your time trying to find a decent radio station. Sometimes your rental car has a CD player, sometimes it has a tape deck, and carrying more equipment like an MP3 player is a pain in the butt. And no, I don't want to unpack my laptop, plug it into the cigarette lighter, and listen to MP3's on the tinny speakers (or monkey with tape adapters.)

    The solution would be XM radios in rental cars. I want to be able to log in on any radio and get my stations. The login process has to be simple - don't make me pound out my e-mail address using phone keypads. And don't make me log in every time, and don't penalize me if I don't log out - I know this makes things hard in the world of rental cars, but deal with it. They don't have this solution available yet, though.

    The next thing they need to address is XM walkmans. If I can't carry it with me on my head like my Sony that has the radio built into the headphones, I'm not going to subscribe. I don't see that as possible with their current setup, and that's definitely a drawback.

    So it seems their target demographic is restricted to people who don't rent cars, and don't use walkmans. (Walkmen?) There are other problems, but these two alone make it a bad deal for me and everybody I know. Why would I pay XM when I get digital music with my TV cable connection, and free digital radio on the internet?

    --
    What's your damage, Heather?
  2. Will people pay? by wiredog · · Score: 4
    Will people pay for radio that still has ads?

    Probably not. After all, no one pays for TV that has ads. Wait a minute. I pay for CNN, Weather Channel, and other stuff on cable. You know, this just might work.

    All joking aside, satellite radio is a good idea. Anyone who lives in an area that Clear Channel has moved into is looking forward to actual choices. (Can anyone in the DC area tell me the difference between DC101 and WHFS?) Those who live in rural areas with only one FM "rock" (which is actually top 40) one country and one NPR station will also love this. Frank Ahrens, a reported/commentator for the Washington Post has written extensively about this.

    --

    Best Slashdot Co
  3. Isn't there a better way? by marnanel · · Score: 3

    So, you can subscribe to XMR for $9.95 per month, not including the one-off expense of replacing all your old audio equipment with XM-Ready equipment. Or, assuming you already have a computer, you can put the money into a decent Internet connection, and listen to a gazillion radio stations worldwide for free.

    I know it's easy to predict the death of one technology when another comes along, and (for example) it's clear that TV hasn't killed radio yet. But considering that a fair number of Americans have Internet access already, if they put the cost of XMR access into improving the bandwidth into their house, they'd be getting radio freedom XMR users could only dream of.

    M


    my plan
    --
    GROGGS: alive and well and living in
    1. Re:Isn't there a better way? by Hellburner · · Score: 3

      "...if they put the cost of XMR access into improving the bandwidth into their house, they'd be getting radio freedom XMR users could only dream of."

      True. But I am still having technical difficulties with hooking up my ehternet cable to my Chevy. That suff is surprisingly inelastic. Maybe I can rig the car to receive pigeon packets. Come to think of it, from what I saw on my hood this morning I am already compliant to that standard.

  4. I wonder how the reception is by Sc00ter · · Score: 3
    I have a GPS in my car that has an okay size antenna and when I go under a bridge or where there's thick woods my signal dies. Be it only for a couple seconds, but still that would be very annoying with radio.


    --

    --
    Free Mac Mini
  5. What's wrong with quiet? by sjbe · · Score: 4
    Yeah yeah, I know. "Don't leave me alone with my brain! I must have crappy background music or me head will explode."

    Never could understand why some folks think a little quiet "just ain't right".

  6. I would... by TheOutlawTorn · · Score: 4

    I suppose if you live in the large country-music-only zone in the U.S., you might be willing to pay for something different...

    Ever been through Central Texas? Radio there makes you wanna scavenge through your glove box for that old Whitesnake tape you stuck in there 7 years ago.

    Shudder

    --

    He who joyfully marches in rank and file has already earned my contempt. - "Big Al" Einstein
  7. And will this too not change like Internet radio? by glebite · · Score: 3

    It's only now that I'm really getting into listening to internet broadcast radio stations that something has happened: business weasels and unions want another big chunk of the pie from advertising to the now larger audience. And now, stations are no longer broadcasting - or even worse, turning into M*zak'd stations with no DJs and no none of the flavour that made up

    Is this sattelite broadcast technology going to be broadcasting static after people have bought them and the legal world steps in? Certainly there are licensing issues here, and I'm just curious if everything has been worked out with the artists union, broadcasters, advertisers, et al...

    Personally I'm going to wait a while before getting one of these beasts - just let the market play out before buying some piece of tech that will join its brothers in the pile.

    --
    I donate all spillover Karma to the charity of my choice... Ada was still a babe despite what people may say...
  8. More of nothing to listen to... by sdo1 · · Score: 4
    Regular radio sucks, and this will suck worse. Radio stations have become homogenized slaves to the recording industry. See this salon article.

    As far as radio goes, I live in one of the best areas of the country... around Boston. There's lots of selection in many genres (unless you like country), but there's still not a damn thing on worth listening to. It's all so boring. The few bands that are worth listening to don't get any radio play. Even WBRU has gone down hill in the last couple of years...

    And satellite radio is supposed to be a good thing? It'll be the worst that traditional radio has to offer.

    -S

    --
    --- What parts of "shall make no law", "shall not be infringed", and "shall not be violated" don't you understand?
  9. XM, Sirius by eggfellow · · Score: 3

    Washington City Paper had a good article about satellite radio. See: http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/archives/cover/ 2001/cover0216.html