Slashdot Mirror


Portable Internet Radio to take on XM?

TheDude writes "A friend who works for a design company attended the Australian EDN awards last night and was impressed with one of the winners, in the wireless category, which was won by Grey Innovation for their Infusion device . It's a Linux based portable internet radio that streams Internet Radio over WiFi. Is this the future of Radio? Given the big push by XM and Sirus , the potential of Podcasting and now the "inFusion", in which direction is mass-audio-broadcast heading? And why isn't anyone really pushing Digital Audio Broadcast (DAB), like they have in the UK ?"

231 comments

  1. I want one! by jvagner · · Score: 1

    I've been wishing for this for a while. I spend a lot of time in urban areas and am pretty happy with my streaming options.

    1. Re:I want one! by dabigpaybackski · · Score: 1
      It looks cool as hell. If only they could find a way to safely put a ferrite-bar antenna in it...

      Nevertheless, this device, or ones like it, will catch on with listeners. I wonder when conventional analog radio will croak altogether. If Internet radio keeps gathering steam, that moment may come sooner than anybody can predict. The Internet is transforming the breadth of radio from a narrow range of choices limited to the ones on the dial, to a vast range of "stations" that are really just IP addresses. The old paradigm of radio is like visiting a restaraunt (i.e., a geographic location with its particular stations,) whereas the new model, Internet radio, is like being able to order whatever you desire from virtually any location in the world with no dimunition in quality over distance.

      --
      "OH SHIT, THERE'S A HORSE IN THE HOSPITAL!"
    2. Re:I want one! by Janitha · · Score: 1

      Ever since I got into streaming music, I have been waiting for this. Until now, I would simply set up my laptop and hook up the sound output of that to the car sound system. A dream come true.

    3. Re:I want one! by morlock_man · · Score: 0, Offtopic

      You want an Internet Radio to tune into? Try this one. www.newdor.com All the music is available for purchase directly from the site. We offer live DJs on a schedule we're currently working out. It's all independent music you've never heard before, and we've got an archive of our live broadcasts so you can listen when we're not broadcasting. -Andrew Abbass

      --
      no more webaddresses in my sig, ok?
    4. Re:I want one! by IANAAC · · Score: 1
      Damn! How many times you gonna repost?

      Ferchrissakes, quit spamming. Once is enough, K?

    5. Re:I want one! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Don't bother, it sucks.

    6. Re:I want one! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      conventional analog radio will never croak as long as you can still build a reciever with $1.50 worth of discrete components.

  2. But... by pmazer · · Score: 1, Funny

    Yes, but does it run Lin... oh, wait

  3. XM works a LOT of places Wifi doesn't... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Unless you live on a college campus or in San Francisco, this is pretty much useless. Come back and try again once 802.16 becomes widespread.

    1. Re:XM works a LOT of places Wifi doesn't... by connorbd · · Score: 1

      Agreed. It's an interesting idea, but not a particularly workable one outside a limited area. I don't honestly see how it's different from a SoundBridge -- granted the ability to hand off like a cell phone would be rather useful, but overall it's hardly a satellite killer.

    2. Re:XM works a LOT of places Wifi doesn't... by ScrewMaster · · Score: 1

      ... but overall it's hardly a satellite killer.

      No argument there. When the things are able to launch a cloud of small steel balls into geosynchronous orbit, let me know.

      --
      The higher the technology, the sharper that two-edged sword.
    3. Re:XM works a LOT of places Wifi doesn't... by connorbd · · Score: 1

      +1, Funny

  4. The best Radio is FREE. by tetrahedrassface · · Score: 4, Interesting
    The best internet radio is the free kind. Somewhere along the way we lost the true value of art. It supposed to be shared even if you suck. Go ahead and share it! Myabe you can influence someone somewhere. Period. The best music will most likely never happen due to greed. We all have to eat.

    http://209.235.176.54/reverse_evolutionblues.mp3

    Best heard under Heavy surround sound because it hasn't been mixed yet.lol

    However I live by words, and YES i do suck. But here is my take. And its free for you. You need surround sound and good stereo to appreciate it, but i give it to you. That way its still mine. :P

    And yes I wrote this and performed all the instruments. So its mine to give.

    1. Re:The best Radio is FREE. by birge · · Score: 2, Funny

      Not sure about the music, but your taste in recreational drugs is impeccable. :-)

    2. Re:The best Radio is FREE. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "somewhere along the way we lost the true value of art"

      yes.. please savior... show us where we have lost our way and how we get back on track. Artist should do their art without pay.. knowing that they bring happiness to everyone.

    3. Re:The best Radio is FREE. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You know, it's not what I usually listen to, but this isn't at all bad. I could definitely see a niche for something like this. Keep it up, man. :)

    4. Re:The best Radio is FREE. by TaGirl_Keri · · Score: 0

      I quite like this, I just sent it to my Zen mp3 player. No u don't suck, definitly worth a couple of bucks

      --
      My fav units are dead Mavs
    5. Re:The best Radio is FREE. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Words, I dig your view. Keep up the creativity. If you people want the future, make it. I'm currently in the process of making my own odd electronic musical instruments which I'm going to compose music on.

    6. Re:The best Radio is FREE. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      if your mix sounds like shit in mono, it sounds like shit in stereo. --veteran mastering engineer

    7. Re:The best Radio is FREE. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I like it. It's not overproduced, and it's real.

      Thank you.

    8. Re:The best Radio is FREE. by vmfedor · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Nice. I don't think it sucks, it has a very nice melody and the guitar sounds nice, fat, and wet. Very well mixed and mastered. And I like your voice :)

      --

      I like my women how I like my sugar.. granulated.

    9. Re:The best Radio is FREE. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Hey, not bad!

      I'm sending it to my friend in LA. Sorry, he's a writer for a comedy show, but I'll pass it on to him.

    10. Re:The best Radio is FREE. by tetrahedrassface · · Score: 1

      mmmkay, By the way, thanks to everyone that was polite. I appreciate it. Its special to me, and i will never forget it. Peace, D

    11. Re:The best Radio is FREE. by tetrahedrassface · · Score: 1

      Thanks, I just registered www.hackingbluegrass.com :) Be sure to check in from time to time. D

  5. smt 5600 by GregoryD · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I stream radio from the internet to my Audiovox SMT 5600 cell phone. Unlimited data plan so there is no charge for me other then the monthly.

    I heard of some people streaming live tv through a home computer and a program called orb to their cell phone.

    It looks like wireless media is here.

  6. I wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Funny

    I wonder what would happen to one if you pried it open with a screwdriver after washing it...

    1. Re:I wonder by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Just in case, make sure your Mom has access to a telephone.

  7. what's on it? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Baseball; football? Sports sells.

    Howard Sterns sells (well, maybe not to Hyundai owners:

    http://www.edmunds.com/insideline/do/News/articleI d=105622)

  8. Not gonna happen by Anonymous+User+2000 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Wifi Radio wont catch on until it's truly portable, i.e. you can listen to it in your car like satellite radio, and that wont happen until WiFi is everywhere and that wont happen until cities start funding WiFi municipally and that wont happen. At least not if Verizon, et al. have their way.

    1. Re:Not gonna happen by birge · · Score: 1

      Why should it happen? Do you think the government should provide internet access to everybody? (Read: should we all be forced to pool our money and buy each other internet access?) The government is so efficient and competent at everything else, why not, huh?

    2. Re:Not gonna happen by pmazer · · Score: 1

      "and that wont happen until cities start funding WiFi municipally"

      Why? Couldn't a company come in and put up WiFi access points all over and have people pay a subscription fee to use them? I personally feel that would be a much better solution to wireless internet than these dial up cell phone based services. I don't see why it would have to be a city to do it and I think the city would do a much worse job than a for-profit company.

    3. Re:Not gonna happen by devnullify · · Score: 1

      A network is a communal resource. Is it really that far-out?

    4. Re:Not gonna happen by birge · · Score: 1
      No, it's not that far out, but it's not neccesary. The criteria for having the government do something should definitely not be "well, it's not far out for them to do it, so why not?" but rather "well, there's no other way to get this done so we'll have to bite the bullet and have the government handle it." The fact that so many people think the first is good enough is probably why the government costs the average person over half their income now, as opposed to less than a tenth in 1920.

      emember that when the government does anything, they pay for it via forced confiscation of people's income. That's a perfectly reasonable (or at least unavoidable) thing to do for many things, and I'm not inherently anti-government. But if you remember that fact, it makes it a bit hard to suggest we have local governments indulge us with something like free wireless when it can already be done in the private sector. Buy your own net access, and quit suggesting your neighbor be forced to chip in against her will for your luxury.

    5. Re:Not gonna happen by Goldfinger7400 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      WiFi radio won't catch on until internet radio stops sucking. It's nice to have a big selection of music, but having the stream pause inexplicably every now and then due to connection hiccups, or having the average quality be pretty average isn't going to win people over from hi quality, readily available and professional satellite stations.

    6. Re:Not gonna happen by quinto2000 · · Score: 1

      that's how rural electrification happened. a similar movement is taking place to have municipal internet, not necessarily wifi in all instances though. why should something so basic a need for modern communications as high-speed internet be restricted only to the high-profit regions of the country? we wouldn't stand for that with the postal system or telephone service, would we?

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un post
    7. Re:Not gonna happen by birge · · Score: 1
      that's how rural electrification happened. a similar movement is taking place to have municipal internet, not necessarily wifi in all instances though. why should something so basic a need for modern communications as high-speed internet be restricted only to the high-profit regions of the country? we wouldn't stand for that with the postal system or telephone service, would we?

      You explain to me how wireless internet is a basic human need that can't be provided without government intervention and I'll agree with you. The government wasn't originally supposed to be a device for the realization of everybody's individual notion of an ideal society. Hell, I think everybody should have a car. That's far more useful than WiFi, especially for poor people. Why not have the government buy each citizen a car?

      There's a cost to every government action, and it's not just money. Maybe we should spend our collective resources on bigger issues than yuppies downloading stock reports in Starbucks on their laptops.

    8. Re:Not gonna happen by yog · · Score: 1

      If a consensus develops as to the usefulness of municipal wi-fi, then it will happen, much as consensus has justified all the roads, sewers, traffic signs and lights, firefighting systems, crime fighting systems, snow plowing and ice salting in wintry climates, publicly funded K-12 schools, and public libraries.

      I agree with you that government is not the most efficient agent to implement something as complex as wi-fi, but there are real benefits to be realized by universal access that may transcend the inevitable corruption and inefficiencies that would accompany it.

      Just imagine if everyone, and I mean everyone, in a twenty-square mile area could IM each other, quickly check a restaurant's hours and menu and reservations, access global positioning info while on the road, be warned of accidents or obstacles on their route via "push" messages, and basically be totally connected.

      It would be bad for companies like Verizon and Comcast who obviously want to monopolize broadband services, but on the other hand these companies would likely get fat contracts to implement and manage a lot of the infrastructure. It would be great for companies that market cheap wireless gadgets.

      Regarding the topic of streaming audio, it would empower basically everyone to broadcast their own shows. You would have hundreds if not thousands of little "radio" stations, each spewing its own take on affairs of the day, music (somehow regulated for royalties), and whatever creative applications people come up with.

      It seems to me the plusses will outweigh the minuses.

      --
      it's = "it is"; its = possessive. E.g., it's flapping its wings.
    9. Re:Not gonna happen by jrockway · · Score: 2, Interesting

      You're completely wrong. By your logic, my taxes shouldn't pay for roads because I don't drive. The road system doesn't sound like "well, there's no other way to get this done so we'll have to bite the bullet and have the government handle it"... if the road system were private whoever owned it would be the richest person on Earth.

      Basically the government spends money on what it wants to, and it's too bad if you don't like it. I want WiFi, you want roads. You can't always get what you want...

      --
      My other car is first.
    10. Re:Not gonna happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well why should the goverment build roads when it could be done in the private section(Toll Roads)

      What about water (Bottled water companies)

      What about sewage (Old Days:A Sewage truck came and got your waste from your toilet)

      I can think of plenty of other examples but to keep the post short I will stop.

    11. Re:Not gonna happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But if you remember that fact, it makes it a bit hard to suggest we have local governments indulge us with something like free wireless when it can already be done in the private sector. Buy your own net access, and quit suggesting your neighbor be forced to chip in against her will for your luxury.

      The wireless spectrum is limited. Having 20 different private companies roll out APs would be a waste of spectrum and money, making service more expensive for all the users, and resulting in spotty coverage.

      Government-provided WiFi is not the same as free net access. They could just provide the intrastructure (i.e. set up a network of access points along highways) and let private companies provide the internet service, while collecting a large enough portion of the profits to pay for the system.

    12. Re:Not gonna happen by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ofcourse it will NEVER HAPPEN. Bah ofcourse we all know we don't get wifi where ever your standing, but things are getting better. Who knows maybe a new form of WiMAX will be developed in the up coming months. I'll wait and see how it all unfolds. Total coverage would be totally awesome and open alot of avenues for creativity.

    13. Re:Not gonna happen by dangitman · · Score: 1
      Why should it happen? Do you think the government should provide internet access to everybody? (Read: should we all be forced to pool our money and buy each other internet access?

      Why not? It makes a lot more sense than pooling our money to pay for nuclear weapons and war, more freeways, or to bail-out failing airlines, or to subsidize pharmaceutical companies.

      Internet access is valuable to most people, where as many of the government pork is only of benefit to a limited number of people and corporations.

      The government is so efficient and competent at everything else, why not, huh?

      Well, governments around the world have been doing a better job than American industry in terms of providing health care and other infrastructure. Indeed, why not? the government could do this more efficiently than private companies.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    14. Re:Not gonna happen by dangitman · · Score: 1
      You explain to me how wireless internet is a basic human need that can't be provided without government intervention and I'll agree with you

      Why does something need to be a basic human right for the government to be allowed to provide it?

      The government wasn't originally supposed to be a device for the realization of everybody's individual notion of an ideal society.

      Yeah, and your point is? It's supposed to be a device for the realization of a collective society. If people collectively want WiFi, why can't they vote to support it, just like the electorate does when they want other things? It doesn't really matter what government was "originally" intended to be - what matters is what people want today. The original founders are long dead and beyond caring.

      Hell, I think everybody should have a car. That's far more useful than WiFi, especially for poor people.

      not really, because it would decrease the usefulness of roads, cause massive pollution and an energy crisis.

      Why not have the government buy each citizen a car?

      because it's far more expensive, practical and necessary than providing WiFi. The government already provides the roads - just as the government would supply the infrastructure her, but not give you a laptop.

      There's a cost to every government action, and it's not just money.

      And often the benefits outweigh the costs. Just because something costs something, doesn't mean it isn't worthwhile.

      Maybe we should spend our collective resources on bigger issues than yuppies downloading stock reports in Starbucks on their laptops.

      You mean, like providing free internet and information services to those non-yuppies who can't afford to visit Starbucks or a laptop? You know, like the point of public internet access? Do you also oppose public libraries?

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    15. Re:Not gonna happen by dangitman · · Score: 2, Interesting
      The criteria for having the government do something should definitely not be "well, it's not far out for them to do it, so why not?" but rather "well, there's no other way to get this done so we'll have to bite the bullet and have the government handle it."

      Why should that be? Because you say so?

      The fact that so many people think the first is good enough is probably why the government costs the average person over half their income now, as opposed to less than a tenth in 1920.

      Go and live in 1920 then. Living standards and general wealth are much higher these days, even with the government taking so much money. I'm sure there are plenty of places that charge little tax - but I'm not sure you would want to live in those places.

      it makes it a bit hard to suggest we have local governments indulge us with something like free wireless when it can already be done in the private sector

      Theoretically it could be done by private industry, but in reality, it is not. And it would be inefficient to have multiple competing services, instead of sharing resources. How long do we have to wait for industry to get their shit together? Just because something can be done by private industry, doesn't mean it should. After all, the government doesn't need to make a profit. With private industry you are paying a large "tax" so they make money. Why waste all that money?

      and quit suggesting your neighbor be forced to chip in against her will for your luxury.

      For many people it is not a luxury - it's a chance to get a step-up in life, and get some of the things that the privileged take for granted. For many people it could mean the difference between being educated and being uneducated or indoctrinated.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    16. Re:Not gonna happen by birge · · Score: 1
      You're completely wrong. By your logic, my taxes shouldn't pay for roads because I don't drive. The road system doesn't sound like "well, there's no other way to get this done so we'll have to bite the bullet and have the government handle it"... if the road system were private whoever owned it would be the richest person on Earth.


      Basically the government spends money on what it wants to, and it's too bad if you don't like it. I want WiFi, you want roads. You can't always get what you want...


      First off, it's hard to imagine roads being handles privately, at least by more than one company. And even with one company, it's hard to imagine. There's already a WiFi market.


      Two, your attitude is pathetic and obnoxious. If everybody had your attitude we'd be living under a monarchy. Government should be run by principles, not apathy. It may be true that abuse is unavoidable, but people like you who just throw up their hands and let the government do everything is part of the reason our government costs so much. By the time you wake up, you'll be paying 75% of your income to the various levels of government. Enjoy the "free" WiFi.

    17. Re:Not gonna happen by quinto2000 · · Score: 1

      looks like you failed economics 101. Rural electrification and municipal internet share one characteristic -- they are both semi-public goods, if not pure ones, in the case of rural communities. Cars are one of the best examples of a private good possible.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un post
    18. Re:Not gonna happen by CerebusUS · · Score: 1

      I dunno, you can get pretty decent quality over 64mbps connections these days. The codecs are only improving.

      As an example, I'll offer WOXY, a Cincinnati traditional radio station that has gone 100% internet. http://woxy.com/

      They have 6 different streams for you to choose from depending on your taste in bandwidth and player.

    19. Re:Not gonna happen by Jardine · · Score: 1

      I dunno, you can get pretty decent quality over 64mbps connections these days.

      I would hope so.

    20. Re:Not gonna happen by birge · · Score: 1
      Why not? It makes a lot more sense than pooling our money to pay for nuclear weapons and war, more freeways, or to bail-out failing airlines, or to subsidize pharmaceutical companies.

      So, you're trying to convince me by giving me examples of other stupid things we've been complascent enough to let the government get away with?

      Internet access is valuable to most people

      Do the words "tyranny of the majority" mean anything to people anymore? We're supposed to be a republic, not a democratic free-for-all.

      Well, governments around the world have been doing a better job than American industry in terms of providing health care and other infrastructure. Indeed, why not? the government could do this more efficiently than private companies.

      You know, you can't just win an argument by making shit up. Many countries in Europe are about to collapse under the weight of their own inflexible beaurocracy while people over here are giddily allowing us to head full speed towards the same illconceived form of government.

    21. Re:Not gonna happen by birge · · Score: 1
      Why does something need to be a basic human right for the government to be allowed to provide it?

      It's a good place to start unless you want to spend even more than half of your life working for the government. Just think about the fact that from January until about June, you're essentially working as a slave of sorts. Only after that do you get to keep and decide how to spend your income. We're headed towards unmanageable government. Only weak people would be happy having a central authority handle more than half of their lives. It's not that I have a problem with it inherently, it's just that whenever you give the government your money, they invariably use it in ways you didn't intend. It's best not to give it to them in the first place and put it up for political grabs.

      It's supposed to be a device for the realization of a collective society. If people collectively want WiFi, why can't they vote to support it, just like the electorate does when they want other things? It doesn't really matter what government was "originally" intended to be - what matters is what people want today. The original founders are long dead and beyond caring.

      That's a really scary thing to say. Would you feel the same way knowing the majority of people currently might like to impose religious laws, or outlaw abortion? I think you're thinking of another continent if you think whatever the majority wants is what should go. Our government is supposed to be constrained by its form to be limited in scope. The whole point of that was to avoid being destroyed by the transient whims of the people, who would tend to vote themselves benefits at the expense of the majority, creating a big power grab which we see today. You asked for it (or more likely, let it happen) and you get what you deserve every time you turn on the TV or take a peak at your withholding. Bush couldn't do the crazy shit you probably hate him for were it not for people like you why think of the government as the answer to so many things. You just complain when the government becomes controlled by people you disagree with, but don't see how having the government do everything is the flip side of the same coin.

      If you think society needs to provide WiFi for everybody, I respect and even admire that. But start a foundation to install public WiFi and let everybody else who agrees with you (and I'd be in) donate money. What could be more democratic than that? Don't use the government to physically force everybody to go along with your idea of utopia. I have no respect for people who claim to want to better society but are only willing to do so if they can force everybody else to chip in. (Or more likely, force rich people to do the majority of it.) If, like you say, more than half the people want it, then you've easily got enough people to just do it without resorting to coersion.

    22. Re:Not gonna happen by birge · · Score: 1

      If it were true that having 20 companies would be inefficient, the market will trim that down until it reaches a point of efficiency. Even if that turns out to be one company, it will still probably be cheaper to provide in the private sector. And more fair, since people will pay by use.

      To be honest, of all the stupid shit we do with government, public WiFi actually is probably not a terrible idea. I just don't like the way people are so quick to suggest the government do everything. Having the government do something should be the last resort, not the first thought.

    23. Re:Not gonna happen by birge · · Score: 1
      Why should that be? Because you say so?

      No, because people a lot smarter than you or me discovered it through experience. (And we seem set on discovering it for ourselves.) I was hoping you'd recognize that guys like Jefferson and Adams would've agreed with the second phrase and abhorred the first.

      Go and live in 1920 then. Living standards and general wealth are much higher these days, even with the government taking so much money. I'm sure there are plenty of places that charge little tax - but I'm not sure you would want to live in those places.

      Hell, you go and live in France. They're already exactly what you're dreaming of. I've lived in places with low taxes (Golden, CO) and high as hell (Boston, MA) and there is no correlation between tax rate and quality of life. Everybody should be required to live in Boston at one point in their lives, because it is the most effective argument against liberal government I've ever seen. It pretty much gives you a glimpse of where we're headed as a country if we don't get our shit together and reign in the government. The whole nation would be full of Jeffersonian libertarians if we did this. The people in Boston are self absorbed and miserable to each other (so much for liberalism being the politics of niceness) the infrastructure is rotting (isn't that the main purpose of government?) and the cost of living is horrendous (liberals will only help the poor if it won't hurt their inflated home prices).

      Don't fall for the statist BS about our standard of living having anything to do with our government. We have a high standard DESPITE our government, and only because of technology and scientific progress. As a geek, you should be ashamed of yourself for thinking a bunch of fucking lawyers had anything to do with our improved quality of life.

      For many people it is not a luxury - it's a chance to get a step-up in life, and get some of the things that the privileged take for granted. For many people it could mean the difference between being educated and being uneducated or indoctrinated.

      That's some seriously awesome WiFi you've got. I had to go to college for that. Anyway, I'm not arguing WiFi isn't the shit. I'm saying just because something is good doesn't mean we should use the government to mandate it. Your arguments here are the same arguments somebody else has used for every thing our government currently spends its yearly trillions on. I can't even fathom how many great things we could do if even a quarter of the overall government budgets were returned to the people, or how many problems the government currently "solves" wouldn't even exist without the government leaching off us in the first place.

    24. Re:Not gonna happen by dangitman · · Score: 1
      So, you're trying to convince me by giving me examples of other stupid things we've been complascent enough to let the government get away with?

      But people in some other countries don't have such problems - showing that government can deliver services efficiently. The problem is that the US' political system is so totally fucked up. To do anything good, there needs to be significant government reform and accountability. Deal with that, and the government can be useful again.

      Do the words "tyranny of the majority" mean anything to people anymore?

      Obviously not. Seeing as you seem to misuuse the word. Where's the "tyranny" in providing infrastructure? If you are going to devalue the phrase like this, then it has lost all usefulness.

      We're supposed to be a republic, not a democratic free-for-all.

      According to whom? We can be whatever the hell we want to be. Why should we care what some long-dead guy thinks government should be about?

      You know, you can't just win an argument by making shit up. Many countries in Europe are about to collapse under the weight of their own inflexible beaurocracy

      Now who's the one making shit up? Look at places like Australia - public health care is extremely inexpensive, available to all, and of high quality. Until they started privatizing it, and industry started exploiting people for profit.

      You could provide some evidence for your "collapsing under bureaucracy" remark. Also note that not all of Europe is the same. Even if some countries take it too far, doesn't mean that government-provided services are a bad idea per se. there are just as many examples of countries collapsing because of the "free market" and lack of government services. Doesn't really prove anything.

      while people over here are giddily allowing us to head full speed towards the same illconceived form of government.

      Geee, because the US form of government has been so perfect up until now. It's not as if much is changing to the form of government - it's just that the citizens have stopped expecting accountability from government, and lets the government get away with corruption. It has little to do with "forms of government" - but how involved people are in safeguarding the government from abuse, whichever form of government it takes.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    25. Re:Not gonna happen by dangitman · · Score: 1
      No, because people a lot smarter than you or me discovered it through experience.

      Gosh, they had experience of all the different forms of government that could possibly exist? By the way, amking ad hominem attacks doesn't make your argument any more credible.

      So, are you saying, that no other form of government could possibly work, except for that envisaged by Jefferson and co? That doesn't really make sense, as the US is having massive problems with its form of government, and disenfranchisement of voters. Other governments around the world are far more representational. The founders' system isn't exactly working.

      I've lived in places with low taxes (Golden, CO) and high as hell (Boston, MA) and there is no correlation between tax rate and quality of life.

      That's because the US doesn't spend taxes to help the people. If some of the tax money were used for things like public health care, then you would get better value from your taxes. One of the biggest problems is not having decent welfare. This means crime and poverty is high - which reduces everyone's standard of living.

      Don't fall for the statist BS about our standard of living having anything to do with our government. We have a high standard DESPITE our government, and only because of technology and scientific progress.

      Sorry, you're the one buying the bullshit. The government has helped your standard of living so much that you can't even see it. How the heck do you think you get strong technological and service industries? Do you think it would have happened without public education? What about The New Deal? What about the massive infrastructure projects like the railways that helped make America what it is?

      As a geek, you should be ashamed of yourself for thinking a bunch of fucking lawyers had anything to do with our improved quality of life.

      No, I don't think a "bunch of lawyers" did - but the visionary politicians who actually cared, did make a big difference.

      I can't even fathom how many great things we could do if even a quarter of the overall government budgets were returned to the people,

      I'm not surprised you can't fathom it, because it wouldn't really make any difference. Most people would just spend the money on consumer crap. meanwhile, that money will have to be paid anyway - to privately provide the services the government was subsidizing. So, you could possibly end up with even less money, if we had to pay for everything individually.

      The people in Boston are self absorbed and miserable to each other (so much for liberalism being the politics of niceness) the infrastructure is rotting (isn't that the main purpose of government?) and the cost of living is horrendous (liberals will only help the poor if it won't hurt their inflated home prices).

      Uhhh, what the hell does this have to do with liberalism?

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    26. Re:Not gonna happen by dangitman · · Score: 1
      Only weak people would be happy having a central authority handle more than half of their lives. It's not that I have a problem with it inherently,

      When did I ever suggest "a central authority controlling half our lives?" Talk about a straw-man.

      it's just that whenever you give the government your money, they invariably use it in ways you didn't intend. It's best not to give it to them in the first place and put it up for political grabs.

      So, why not demand accountability from the government, so this doesn't happen? Not paying taxes isn't going to stop this. If there was accountability, the government could provide twice as many services for half the tax money. Whining about taxes isn't going to change anything. not to mention, that money wouldn't exist if the government didn't issue it in the first place. Where do you think the currency system comes from?

      That's a really scary thing to say. Would you feel the same way knowing the majority of people currently might like to impose religious laws, or outlaw abortion?

      That's an entirely different issue, and you know it. We are talking about providing services, not telling people what they can do with their bodies. We're talking about money (issued by the government) - not human rights.

      I think you're thinking of another continent if you think whatever the majority wants is what should go.

      Not entirely. The government should not be in the business of what people do with their lives, until it hurts other people. They should be in the business of providing services and security to realize the full potential of a society.

      Bush couldn't do the crazy shit you probably hate him for were it not for people like you why think of the government as the answer to so many things. You just complain when the government becomes controlled by people you disagree with, but don't see how having the government do everything is the flip side of the same coin.

      Wrong. I'm for accountability of all governments. I don't trust them either. So keep them on a short leash. Bush would not be able to get away with these things if there was transparency. It also has a lot to do with the two-party system and the absurd "electoral college." A proportional representative parliamentary system would work a lot better than the current set-up. Bush doesn't even have to answer questions on the parliament floor! 49% of people didn't vote for him, but he still has total power.

      Having the government provide services doesn't mean we have to let them get away with everything.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    27. Re:Not gonna happen by CerebusUS · · Score: 1

      HAH! yeah, um.. Look! the "k" key is right next to the "m" key... That was the problem! yeah!

      <slinks off>

    28. Re:Not gonna happen by birge · · Score: 1
      So, are you saying, that no other form of government could possibly work, except for that envisaged by Jefferson and co? That doesn't really make sense, as the US is having massive problems with its form of government, and disenfranchisement of voters. Other governments around the world are far more representational. The founders' system isn't exactly working.

      I'd argue we're having those problems partly because we're going away from the original ideas of the founders. It's impossible for citizens to follow our government anymore. Of course people are disenfranchised: we produce thousands of pages of laws every year, mostly brought about by moneyed lobbies. People feel, quite correctly, that it's no longer their government. Things got out of hand because so much power and money is concentrated in DC that it became no longer prudent for people in power to leave things up to us. Once there becomes too much at stake, the people will always be taken out of the picture.

      Sorry, you're the one buying the bullshit. The government has helped your standard of living so much that you can't even see it. How the heck do you think you get strong technological and service industries? Do you think it would have happened without public education? What about The New Deal? What about the massive infrastructure projects like the railways that helped make America what it is?

      We seem to have an impasse regarding the BS assignment. You think the RRs wouldn't have happened if the barons hadn't fooled the US taxpayers into helping pay for them? The best schools and universities are private and you can have poor people educated without a public school system. Anyway, I'm not arguing a black and white position; I'm not saying we do away with government. Just suggesting maybe having about half our GDP go into the government isn't a great idea.

      I'm not surprised you can't fathom it, because it wouldn't really make any difference. Most people would just spend the money on consumer crap.

      Another great quote from a member of the Party of the People. Please explain something to me: why is it that you want to help society so much when you have such distrust and contempt for its people?

      Uhhh, what the hell does this have to do with liberalism?

      Nothing concrete, obviously, but it's an example that liberal politics is often not what it claims to be, and can often result in a reality opposite to its stated goals. Since my larger point was that despite good intentions government tends towards corruption and abuse, this is a perfect example. You won't find a more liberal place in America than Massachussetts, and yet you also won't find a worse governed. People here think government is the answer to everything, and in the end it became one of the biggest problems. I know that's not a proof, but nor do I think it's a complete coincidence.

    29. Re:Not gonna happen by birge · · Score: 1
      When did I ever suggest "a central authority controlling half our lives?" Talk about a straw-man.

      My point is that NOBODY ever suggests that. And yet it's what they implicity vote for. If you knew how much of your money went into the government, you'd be enraged. You have no fricking clue how much the government really costs us, because it's hidden in tax upon tax and fee upon fee everywhere in the production cycle. When you add it all up, though (people have tried) it looks like about half of your work output goes to the government. That's the definition of slavery (or half of it). That would piss most people off trememdously if they knew that, which is why the government is so smart about having the money come from so many little places.

      So, why not demand accountability from the government, so this doesn't happen? Not paying taxes isn't going to stop this.

      Of course it will. They can't abuse power if they don't have it. A limited government is a more accountable government. It's harder to fool people if all you're supposed to be doing is providing basic infrastructure and protecting people's property and rights. And it's harder to fool people if you don't have so much power with which to do it. The government would also be less of a target for corruption and influence if so much money wasn't involved. These aren't my ideas. They come from the enlightenment, something we've apparently forgotten about.

      That's an entirely different issue, and you know it. We are talking about providing services, not telling people what they can do with their bodies. We're talking about money (issued by the government) - not human rights.

      For the context if this discussion, it's COMPLETELY appropriate. You suggested that if the majority wants the government to do something, they should get it. You can't pick and choose when you want to be a democrat!

      We're talking about money (issued by the government) - not human rights.

      The government taxes your income even if you're paid in gold. And I consider having the fruits of my labor confiscated forcibly to be a human rights issue when it approaches the scale at which we currently find ourselves.

      Wrong. I'm for accountability of all governments. I don't trust them either. So keep them on a short leash. Bush would not be able to get away with these things if there was transparency.

      Nothing can be transparent or accountable when it has a multi-trillion dollar budget!!! You and I have no arguments about which political system is the best. We haven't even gotten there yet. I think you're probably right about parlimentary systems being better, for example. It's the SCOPE of government I'm talking about. That's gotten completely out of control. And it happened one well-meaning program at a time. No system of politics can save you once the government grows past a certain point. I don't know what that point is, but I think we've crossed it when a guy making $80,000 is presumed incapable of saving for his own retirement.

      Having said all this I appreciate many of your arguments. I've had to temper my position a bit as a result of some of your points. So please don't take my retorts to those I disagree with as me not giving honest consideration to what you've written. It's obvious you've put a lot of thought into these issues. For the most part, I agree with a lot of what you've said, especially about government accountability and representation. It's just that we disagree on what said government should even be trying to do in the first place.

  9. hey, anyone listening? by hyperstation · · Score: 1

    here's what i want: something to jack into my ipod, that plays (and maybe lets me record) internet radio, like the fine soma fm.

    i guess wifi is the only way to deliver this, airtunes style.

    this functionality could be built into future ipods and other music players. i'd pay more for it.

    1. Re:hey, anyone listening? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      there is a station like soma fm on xm radio. sell the ipod, get xm.

    2. Re:hey, anyone listening? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What are you talking about? That lame chill channel XM has? There is nothing on XM like all the different channels Soma FM has. Besides, wouldn't you rather listen to a small independent and dedicated crew of people who run a station rather than an big corporation?

      (I'm listening to Indie Pop Rocks on Soma FM right now, and there is nothing like it on XM. Nothing.)

  10. Sirius (not sirus) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Never underestimate the power of millions of Howard Stern fans signing up for Sirius all at the same time.

    Sirius will dominate the radio market starting at the end of this year.

    Portable internet radio is a great idea, and may eventually become the de facto standard, but it's not going to be anytime in the near future.

    1. Re:Sirius (not sirus) by connorbd · · Score: 1

      That's a big if -- Howard will definitely give them a boost, but I don't think enough people will want to pay to hear him.

      But I could be wrong. Howard could be Satellite Radio's killer app, which would be great for Sirius.

    2. Re:Sirius (not sirus) by Rytr23 · · Score: 1

      Oh yeah..Sirius will just dominate with a washed up rip off artist working 4 days a week on 3 channels and Martha Stewart! 7.5 mill a year for martha Stewart? Sirius is looking to be bought by XM or an unnamed media company. They are not serious about the long term. Thier losses are widening each quarter, and that does not include the 500 million they are giving to Howard. Granted he has a large following, but I sincerely doubt 8 million are going to sign up for Sirius. The technology they have stinks, and he has been mailing it in for a while now. Most of his fans are not going to spend money on that type of show.

      --
      So many injustices..so little time..
    3. Re:Sirius (not sirus) by yetdog · · Score: 1

      Hello, Troll.

      You do realize that Stern only needs to be responsible for 1m subscribers and anything over that makes his deal a moneymaker for the company? Their losses are SHRINKING each quarter, and their growth rate continues to increase.

      I'll be willing to bet you weren't around when the question was said aloud, "Why would I ever pay for television?" Please refrain from posting unless you have at least a shred of knowledge on the subject, which you obviously don't.

  11. Affordable? by tepples · · Score: 1

    I stream radio from the internet to my Audiovox SMT 5600 cell phone. Unlimited data plan so there is no charge for me other then the monthly.

    How much does an unlimited data plan cost compared to a service such as XM Radio?

    1. Re:Affordable? by GregoryD · · Score: 1

      25 a month for unlimied data though at&t, I hear you can get cingular unlimited data for 20.

      Its still a little on the expensive side, but I like having internet everywhere I go.

    2. Re:Affordable? by jx100 · · Score: 1

      Where are you? It seems to cost $40/month for a PDA in California, and $80/month for a PC card.

    3. Re:Affordable? by EvilSS · · Score: 1

      Those are handset rates.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    4. Re:Affordable? by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

      $25/mo is twice that of Sirius, 2.5 times that of XM.

      Having Internet access is nice, but using it via a tiny phone screen is not my idea of fun, I think my phone is 150 pixels in each direction. I was given a two month's trial but cancelled it within a couple weeks.

    5. Re:Affordable? by Otterley · · Score: 1

      You don't use your phone as the interface. You use it as a conduit. That's what Bluetooth is for.

      Also, the $25/month is IP traffic, not just "music" traffic. You can use it for all number of things while mobile, including real-time traffic updates, directories, you name it.

    6. Re:Affordable? by Rosonowski · · Score: 1

      I was under the impression that Cingular and ATT charged you for the airtime as well as the data charge. Is that not the case? If that's so, I may need to revisit some old ideas.

      --
      01101001 01100001 01101101 01101110 01101111 01110100 01100001 01101100 01100001 01110111 01111001 01100101 01110010
  12. No - the future is EDGE/WDCMA/EDVO by Otterley · · Score: 2, Informative

    Grey Innovation has a keen idea, but the implementation is not quite right. WiFi is great for bounded areas, like a house or a college campus, but it's not really well-suited to situations in which you need truly mobile IP access. For that, I think the new high-speed mobile IP protocols, such as EDGE, WCDMA/UMTS and EVDO are much better. Right now you can get unlimited EDGE IP traffic from Cingular for $15/month if you know what you are doing.

    Internet radio is also a very good application when done well (check the radio stations in iTunes if you haven't already), but you can do a lot more than just radio if you have Internet access. With Internet access you can also have music on demand. Rhapsody, Napster or the new Yahoo! Music Unlimited all provide this for a small subscription fee of $5-$10 US per month - much less than XM or Sirius charges. Their catalogues are pretty sizable, over 1 million tracks each.

    The key is to link this all together with a reasonable user interface. It would manifest itself in the form of a device (either standalone or built into an automobile) capable of tuning into these radio streams, or connecting to one of the music-on-demand services, with a Bluetooth interface using the Dial-Up Networking profile. Tether that to your Bluetooth-capable mobile phone, and voila. Instant kick-ass.

    1. Re:No - the future is EDGE/WDCMA/EDVO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Right now you can get unlimited EDGE IP traffic from Cingular for $15/month if you know what you are doing.

      I don't suppose you're going to let us in on the secret?

    2. Re:No - the future is EDGE/WDCMA/EDVO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

      It's $25/mo, all you have to do is ask for MEdia Net Unlimited to be added to your account.

    3. Re:No - the future is EDGE/WDCMA/EDVO by cameldrv · · Score: 1

      Can you explain how to get EDGE for $15 a month?

    4. Re:No - the future is EDGE/WDCMA/EDVO by Otterley · · Score: 1

      Sorry, $25 a month. My mistake.

    5. Re:No - the future is EDGE/WDCMA/EDVO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      OK how do you get it for 25 per month?

  13. DAB isn't the last word in radio by Larry+Lightbulb · · Score: 3, Informative

    If you want a high bit rate and stereo then the BBCs DAB broadcasts won't always be what you expect - take a look at http://www.bbc.co.uk/digitalradio/faqs/answer_03c. shtml for some of them. A quick search will find you plenty of other pages detailing the shortcomings of the current set-up.

    1. Re:DAB isn't the last word in radio by arkhan_jg · · Score: 1

      the DAB radio stations are suffering from a lack of available spectrum, which they're sharing with national analog radio, local analog radio, national DVB television, and national analog television.

      DVB tv (freeview) suffers from the same problem, though at least when they eventually switch off analog tv broadcasting (currently looking at around 2010) there'll be a huge amount of bandwidth freed up for all sorts of services, including more and higher rate digital broadcasting.

      --
      Remember kids, it's all fun and games until someone commits wholesale galactic genocide.
  14. Broadcast = good by interiot · · Score: 1
    In some cases, if we have limited bandwidth (eg. especially for things like satellite data), then we definitely want to reserve some of it for broadcast instead of unicast, as this is much more efficient use of the spectrum. Broadcast can and should be used for all sorts of audio and text (eg. news) data.

    The funny thing about this though is that broadcast => someone has to decide what the more popular channels are => corporate control => will never be as popular or as cheap as P2P / intelligence-at-the-edges. So even though unicast streaming to everyone is much less effecient, it'll still eventually be cheaper. Stick THAT in your pipe and smoke it.

    1. Re:Broadcast = good by RubberDogBone · · Score: 1

      The problem with broadcast is that someone else gets to choose what you listen to. Oh you think you choose because you have 30 stations to pick from, but that's not many and damn little variety.

      So then there's satellite radio but there are still only SO many channels and almost none of them are actual broadcast stations, which is where I find many of the shows I like.

      What if I want to listen to a radio station from another city? What if I want to listen to an LA new/talk station while traveling in Atlanta? Or vice versa?

      Both cities have huge numbers of ClearChannel stations playing the same formats (shocker, I know!) but the STATIONS and what they cover are distinctly different. Thankfully, the LA station has a streaming feed. I want to be able to hear THAT in my car in Atlanta. If not that station, then I want to pick from another or another or another. I don't want to be restricted to what's on the local dial.

      I think WiMax-enabled car receivers are going to be the answer or at least that's my killer app for WiMax.

      --
      Sig for hire.
  15. Cache? by MrSellout · · Score: 1

    I'd like to see a wifi MP3 player that could download radio playlists. Whenever you're near a hotspot, it would grab the playlist for the next hour or so and download the songs. You then have an hour of fresh music before you have to run into another hotspot. Of course legal issues would complicate producing such a player, but maybe a clever hack could improve the functionality of the player in the article.

  16. Finally by D14BL0 · · Score: 0

    Been waiting for something like this for a long time. Now it's going to be a possibility to listen to stuff that's actually good on the radio now, instead of the three same music styles you get nowadays, being classic rock, new shit-rock, and hip hop.

  17. First radio, then comes t.v. by Antony-Kyre · · Score: 1

    It's only a matter of time before we still "podcasting" audio/video. Am I correct on this?

    Sorry, this was phrased real badly.

  18. Re:No, it's not by Dun+Malg · · Score: 1
    Believe it or not, there are people who don't live in NY or LA.

    Actually, LA is a perfect example of a city where this wouldn't. Unlike NY, the "city" has no center, it's just a huge semi-dense, mostly lo-rise sprawl of thoroughly mixed commercial, residential, and industrial areas. There'll never be more than a patchy ad-hoc WiFi system here in Los Angeles for the same reason we won't ever have a decent public transportation system. There is no heart to the city where you can get a reasonable benefit for your infrastructure investment. Either you spend billions to put a WiFi hub on every third street light, or you got nuthin'...

    --
    If a job's not worth doing, it's not worth doing right.
  19. Re:No, it's not by Aeiri · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Areas outside the US... Who knows. They listen to really weird shit music anyway.

    What and Jessica Simpson, Britney Spears, Nelly, 50 cent, etc are good music?

    I'm an American, and I happen to think the best music comes from Europe. The worst from US.

  20. Beef Storm Posse radio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope ArmageddonMan of Beefstormposse fame gets one of these. He's fucking hillarious on the air, tho I'm probably the only one here who's ever heard of the BSP..

    1. Re:Beef Storm Posse radio by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 1

      Didn't he try to start shit with mc chris? If I remember correctly, he (ArmageddonMan) lost a remix contest to Baddd Spellah and put out a song attacking (poorly) both mc chris and Baddd...

      --
      Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
    2. Re:Beef Storm Posse radio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Naw, that's not how it went. He only attacked mc chris, turns out it was some sort of inside joke between them. And I wouldn't say Disshead was poor.

  21. What if it just changed? by morlock_man · · Score: 0

    You want an Internet Radio to tune into? Try this one. Straight out of Canada... (With one band from Egypt.)

    www.newdor.com

    All the music is available for purchase directly from the site. We offer live DJs on a schedule we're currently working out. It's all independent music you've never heard before, and we've got an archive of our live broadcasts so you can listen when we're not broadcasting.

    -Andrew Abbass

    --
    no more webaddresses in my sig, ok?
  22. Re:No, it's not by bnet41 · · Score: 1

    I only listen to radio in my car. Thats why I have Sirius, I can get it anywhere with basically no interruptions. This stuff is more of a niche product for indie productions, but really isn't for the mainstream audience.

  23. Bad fit for a packet network by birge · · Score: 2, Funny

    File this under "Just Because We Can Doesn't Mean We Should." For on-demand streaming, great. But using a packet-switched, short-range wireless IP network to do broadcast audio is one of the worst ideas I've ever heard of. A good way to broadcast radio would be to put a single transmitter really high up where millions of people could have line-of-sight reception of the same transmission. If only we had a way to put an antenna up so high that we could all see it...

    1. Re:Bad fit for a packet network by morlock_man · · Score: 1

      Why not just broadcast from the biggest server matrixes in the country? And play only content you can buy directly from whatever Internet Media company is selling it using DRM models to ensure that everyone pays their fair share will encouraging people to both share and trade their music for profit for themselves? http://www.weedshare.com/

      --
      no more webaddresses in my sig, ok?
    2. Re:Bad fit for a packet network by birge · · Score: 1

      I'm not arguing anything but the physical means of transmission. I like your idea, but no reason why not do it over the ample satellite bandwidth. Using the Internet to handle wide area broadcasting to mobile users (i.e. the target audience of satellite radio) is like swatting a fly with a field howitzer.

  24. Wireless Radio? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Oh sure - like that's ever gonna catch on...

  25. An interesting possibility by zaren · · Score: 1

    One of the only things I really miss about ditching my contract job in Indianapolis and moving back to Michigan was listening to the Big Dumb Show on the drive to and from work. If this "radio" could make it easy to grab a chunk of show and listen to it while traveling, it could have potential.

    --
    Come to the University of Mars! Classes starting soon!
  26. Re:DIY Music distro system. by WhatAmIDoingHere · · Score: 2, Interesting

    That's like the 20th post with the same message you've added to this conversation. Stop advertising in the messages. Get an editor to post an advertisement.. I mean story, for you.

    --
    Not a Twitter sockpuppet... but I wish I was.
  27. Re:DIY Music distro system. by Aeiri · · Score: 2, Informative

    Look at his user page: morlock_man

    Every single post of his is an advertisement for that site. Guess what site I'm never going to?

    I guess his advertisements are going to have the inverse effect than the one he wanted. I guess that's what you get when you post on a site that advertises the fact that it's for intelligent people.

  28. Not yet. by PrivateDonut · · Score: 1

    I doubt it will take off until widespread wifi is installed, until then though it may be relevent in an office environment, where your boss can record some announcement or instructions and you can access those from anywhere in the building or campus.

    1. Re:Not yet. by PrivateDonut · · Score: 1

      to clarify, this will only help if the infrastructure to setup this type of system will be cheaper than giving each employeed portable email readers.

  29. Re:No, it's not by gmhowell · · Score: 0, Flamebait

    Wow, can't believe it took until the second reply to point out the quality of US music. FWIW, the only decent music comes out of the UK: Eric Clapton, Beatles, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, etc, etc.

    --
    Jesus was all right but his disciples were thick and ordinary. -John Lennon
  30. XM is quite horrendous by AIX-Hood · · Score: 1

    I recently bought a new car that was equipped with XM radio and a free 3 month trial. After 1 month in, I'm pretty sure I'm not going to sign up. It's like they didn't get the RIAA contract that the regular stations have. Their general selection of rock and hard rock stations is atrocious. It's all music from artists I've never heard of, and Dokken and Ratt's best hits, although I was unaware they had any. You're really lucky if you manage to catch a top 40 song (in the hard rock genre) on any of their stations; and if it is one, it's just the same track they repeat of that artist every 24 or 48 hours. I'd take the single hard rock station in my area (KROCK 92.3 FM NYC) over all of XM's channels any day of the week. Bring on the alternatives!

    1. Re:XM is quite horrendous by connorbd · · Score: 1

      I think you're a troll. A very subtle troll, but a troll nonetheless. (I got two words for you: "Deep Cuts.")

    2. Re:XM is quite horrendous by IANAAC · · Score: 1
      You're really lucky if you manage to catch a top 40 song (in the hard rock genre) on any of their stations; and if it is one, it's just the same track they repeat of that artist every 24 or 48 hours.

      That's what FM/Clearchannel is for.

    3. Re:XM is quite horrendous by AIX-Hood · · Score: 1

      I'm glad any kind of negativity is now branded "troll". Go ahead, pay the 12 bucks a month and the hundred or 2 on an XM satellite radio. Report back here with your findings if you think I'm so far off the mark.

    4. Re:XM is quite horrendous by balthan · · Score: 1

      Best thing about XM:

      O & A Party Rock!

    5. Re:XM is quite horrendous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Hmmm...someone who listens to KROCK and is bashing XM...are you by chance a Howard Stern stooge?

      You forgot to say "Ba-Ba-Booey."

    6. Re:XM is quite horrendous by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Although I subscribe to Sirius, let me say that you're off the mark. Try driving half-way across the country listening to one station with your big, bad FM station. Yeah, you can probably do that, but it ain't gonna be through your car stereo.


      Then again, you have a point to a certain extent. To each their own... while I'm listening to music, you'll be listening to commercials, commercials, commercials, oops... here comes a song.


      In either case, there's a simple solution to your problem -- change the channel. See ya.

    7. Re:XM is quite horrendous by jejones · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You're really lucky if you manage to catch a top 40 song (in the hard rock genre) on any of their stations

      You're persuading me to give XM serious thought. Avoiding Top 40 isn't a bug, it's a feature.

      For example...the problem with "oldies" stations is that they're not oldies stations; they're oldies Top 40 stations. The only thing that keeps them from being as wretched as modern Top N stations is that they select their material from a time when radio was less specialized, so that they achieve some variety despite themselves. Even so, you'll never hear Quicksilver Messenger Service, or Pearls Before Swine on most oldies stations. Heck, you won't even hear the Nazz's "Hello, It's Me" as opposed to Todd Rundgren's solo version.

    8. Re:XM is quite horrendous by jlink7 · · Score: 3, Informative

      First of, sir, you're obviously listening to the wrong stations. Unless you explore more than a couple of the available stations, yes, it may seem like they play music that is a bit more uncommon to hear than on normal broadcast radio-- but then again, broadcast radio rock MUST play the same music over and over (and over) again on the same station.

      On XM, there is more than one "rock station" that would play music that broadcast stations must play on the same station, save some of your huge market cities where there may be a bit more selection of stations. XM offers quite a few different "genres" of rock stations-- Ethel plays songs from the alternative genre.. from Blink 182 to Nirvana. Boneyard plays your hard rock, which has a pretty huge fanbase...

      Aww hell, just look for yourself. The description on the XM Radio [XMRadio.com] website does a fairly good job in explaining this anyway.

    9. Re:XM is quite horrendous by jerrystem · · Score: 1

      I've had XM for 1.5 years & love it. They have, what, 16 rock stations?? I got XM to get AWAY from Top 40 (even in the genre), I want to hear more than the current 10 "cool" songs. I want more than Led Zepplin & Lynrd Skynrd mixed in with a few "new" songs to call themselves a Rock Station.
      The local Clear Channel conglomerate plays the same 2-3 hours set over and over....WEBN in Cincinnati. Led Zep, Skynrd, Metallica and a few new songs if time left over...
      Plus the news, comedy, and other selections make it worthwhile to me!

    10. Re:XM is quite horrendous by AIX-Hood · · Score: 1

      I agree about not hearing the same top 10 over and over, but the top 40 is a good thing in my mind. The problem is that they don't even play the Led Zeppelin or the Skynrd. I keep flipping through the stations every morning on my way to work, trying to find anything even remotely good and it's 16 channels of crap as far as I'm concerned. I've been listening to music of all sorts for 20+ years and I'm not picky, but XM feels like they're only playing what's currently in the bargain bin all the time with one or two good ones to keep you from canceling.

  31. Nah... by angst7 · · Score: 1

    While it may be nice for around the house, it wouldn't replace XM or Sirius. I got XM when I bought a new Accord a couple months back. It's terrific. I drive 10 miles to/from work and regularly much farther on the weekends. I dont have to worry about loosing stations or reception problems (except under tunnels). WiFi radio isn't suitable for this. Not to mention, if there were that much wireless coverage, what a waste of bandwidth it would be.

    --
    StrategyTalk.com, PC Game Forums
  32. Future of radio? nahhh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Clear Channel should get some republican senators
    to lobby the FCC to put a stop to this sort of thing...or regulate it ...or something like that.

    Choice confuses and frightens people. Industry and conservative government should help give people easier choices.

  33. Re:DIY Independent Music Radio by morlock_man · · Score: 1

    I'm just laughing. I check out www.weedshare.com. Anyone can do this an make money from the music, not the advertising. Just apply for a license.

    --
    no more webaddresses in my sig, ok?
  34. Re:DIY Music distro system. by morlock_man · · Score: 1

    It's good that these words will be here for a while.

    --
    no more webaddresses in my sig, ok?
  35. Re:No, it's not by Jeff+DeMaagd · · Score: 1

    Yeah, WiFi doesn't even do much for short haul people unless they spend most of their time within reach of a mesh.

    XM sounds very nice but I'm really not ready for it, I have other priorities. Maybe when my iPod breaks, but I'm hoping to be able to use it for a long time. The current portable XM players are more than twice the bulk of an iPod, so there needs to be some improvement in that regard.

    Maybe if there was a merge of the two, like it would switch to WiFi if inside a large steel building when reception gets bad, but I bet most of that sort of infrastructure may be for business use, too many people using WiFi might simply degrade the performance of the network too much.

  36. Digital Audio Radio in the US by smilinggoat · · Score: 2, Interesting

    ...why isn't anyone really pushing Digital Audio Broadcast (DAB), like they have in the UK ?

    Because DAB is shared across all stations. They take the spectrum and use wavelength division multiplexing and time division multiplexing to spread all of the stations with digital broadcasts across the spectrum. This allows high station density and no problems associated with signal drop out from distance nodes. However, this situation requires cooperation between competitors vying for listeners, something that is nearly impossible to achieve in the fiercly independent business environment of the USA.

    The US alternative is Digital Audio Radio (DAR) using In-Band On-Channel (IBOC) broadcasting. IBOC uses a station's existing carrier frequency and puts the digital signal in the low-power extremeties of the carrier as mandated by the FCC. This is not as efficient as DAB because you don't eliminate the issue of signal dropout from fequency nodes, and you may suffer from interference when listening to the analog signal. The good thing is that setup costs are much lower compared to DAB and, as is true with all digital audio radio situations, the digital signal carries further with lower power than analog.

    So why isn't IBOC popular? It's not as robust as DAB and there is little incentive for stations to switch. Who has a DAR receiver in their car? Here's hoping that one day this will be a reality.

    1. Re:Digital Audio Radio in the US by connorbd · · Score: 2, Informative

      I think those pushing for digital radio are overlooking the key advantages that analog radio has -- simple equipment, and a massive installed base. There is no point to IBOC on the AM bands, and it's at best a value-added for the FM bands.

    2. Re:Digital Audio Radio in the US by smilinggoat · · Score: 1

      Interestingly, IBOC is not that difficult to set up. Sure, the quality is lower on AM than FM because of the lower bandwidth (who listens to AM anyway?), but in terms of overall startup costs, it is lower than DAB. Plus, digital has a much larger coverage area, watt for watt. To recieve a good analog FM signal, you need a carrier to noise ratio of around 30dB, but with digital, you only need a C/N of 6dB. You can see, that given the same power of broadcast you will get a much larger coverage radius. Thus, IBOC is not just value-added.

      I agree with you on the point that traditional radio is fantastic for its simple equipment and ease of use for both broadcasters and listeners, that's why I'm involved in radio (KCSB, WVUM) and listen to it daily!

    3. Re:Digital Audio Radio in the US by wfberg · · Score: 1

      I think those pushing for digital radio are overlooking the key advantages that analog radio has -- simple equipment, and a massive installed base.

      On the other hand, digital radio has distinct advantages, especially in moving vehicles. Even when using RDS/EON to track the best frequency to receive a station on, the frequency switches are audible on analog. Digital doesn't care that the signal is fading, it either works or doesnt, and if it works, the sound is always the same volume. Getting good reception out of digital with simple, low-quality components is a lot easier than building an analog set that filters out all those analog hisses and pops and whatnots. You just need to build a checksum, do some errorcorrection, and if you can't recover the frame, drop in some silence.
      I'd much prefer this over the upsetting noises my car radio can sometimes scare me with when driving (especially crosstalk from other stations when crossing bridges).

      --
      SCO employee? Check out the bounty
    4. Re:Digital Audio Radio in the US by Synic · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't a central authority branch off the FCC for coordinating digital radio make it easier to achieve the scenario you outline with regards to DAB? People who think that the national economy works only by invisible hand alone are misled. There are distinct reasons as to why the Sherman and Antitrust Acts were put into law, and it's a shame that they aren't more vigorously applied in the media conglomoration spaces. The fact that 90% of radio in the US is owned by two companies, Infinity and Clearchannel, is just plain sad when you realize that nobody did anything to stop them from buying out all of their competitors like the FEC often does in mergers and aquisitions between large companies that compete in the same space.

      Also, as per receivers in cars and what not-- nobody had XM or Sirius until recently... The only incentive that manufacturers need is some companies and organizations committing to making real broadcast stations and infrastructure setup. Honestly I don't see how consumers could ignore the fact that you could get quality on par with satellite radio (correct me if I'm wrong) and no subscription fee. You would get nation-wide, as they explain that stations in France carry the same signal in the UK still.

      I would love this tech!

    5. Re:Digital Audio Radio in the US by hedora · · Score: 1

      I think the US radio stations should take a page out of the cell phone companies books.

      First, they should nearly bankrupt themselves by seting up one subtly incompatible DAB variant (each on a distinct frequency range, of course) for each radio station in the city. Then, run one station over each variant. Once the costs of setting up the network is recouped, add more stations. At that point, the technology will be obsolete, and they can scrap it all and start over.

      (As I was typing this, it occurred to me that this is already happening with XM / Sirrius. At least there are only two major competing standards in sattelite radio at the moment... *sigh* Why can't access to the sattelite's spectrum be public, and licensed out by an independent, not-for-profit agency? Then we could have competition between our national radio stations, we'd be making more efficient use of spectrum, and there would be more stations to choose from.)

  37. This whole thread is ludicruous by birge · · Score: 1
    FWIW, the only decent music comes out of the UK: Eric Clapton, Beatles, Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, etc, etc.

    Whatever. If you like classical, it's Europe. If you like jazz, it's America. Prog rock, UK. Hard rock, America. Etc. If you like crap, take your pick. Next time you feel compelled to say something as stupid as "the only decent music comes out of the UK" I suggest you make use of the "Post Anonymously" button. That's what it's there for.

    1. Re:This whole thread is ludicruous by pipingguy · · Score: 1


      birge, meet troll. Troll, birge.

      Oops, I guess IHBT as well with this reply.

    2. Re:This whole thread is ludicruous by birge · · Score: 1

      I disagree. I think, by definition, a troll is out to hook anybody. A nasty but directed response to said troll may have been dumb of me (as you correctly pointed out) but it is more properly classified as a flame. Eventually, somebody will be compared to a Nazi, but I can't remember the word for that.

    3. Re:This whole thread is ludicruous by pyrrhonist · · Score: 1
      Prog rock, UK.

      I listen to a *lot* of progressive music, and there's a metric buttload of good progressive music coming from just about any part of the world right now - not just the U.K.

      Some examples are: Ritual, Echolyn, Hourglass, Nightwish, After Forever, Opeth, Symphony X, Sonata Arctica, Lacuna Coil, Star One, and Dream Theater

      That's just a drop in the bucket, and none of them are from the U.K.

      If you want to check them out and more, go to Progged Radio.
      Another great way to hear what's out there is to listen to the Canvas Prog Hour

      Also, Nightwish is on the listening stations in Borders this month.

      --
      Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
    4. Re:This whole thread is ludicruous by quinto2000 · · Score: 1

      godwin's law.

      --
      Ceci n'est pas un post
    5. Re:This whole thread is ludicruous by birge · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the refs, pyrrhonist. I'll check them out. I shouldn't have been so flip, especially about prog rock, which I'm admittedly not that up on (I'm just a fan of the old bands like the Who, Yes and Floyd). I was just trying to point out that it's impossible to say good stuff only comes from one place. I probably completely abused the term progressive rock.

    6. Re:This whole thread is ludicruous by pyrrhonist · · Score: 2, Interesting
      Thanks for the refs, pyrrhonist.

      Sure, anytime!

      I shouldn't have been so flip, especially about prog rock

      Oh, you weren't. You message came across right, I was just adding to it. I guess I came off more "intense" than I was aiming for.

      I probably completely abused the term progressive rock.

      It's actually a very difficult term to pin down exactly. One person's progressive rock, is another person's plain old rock & roll. For instance, Spock's Beard is very different than Lacuna Coil, and the later has the more radio friendly sound and running times.

      Another problem is that bands change over time. For instance, compare "The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway" era Genesis with "We Can't Dance" era Genesis, "Tales from Topographic Oceans" era Yes with "90125" era Yes, and "2112" era Rush with "Moving Pictures" era Rush. Sometimes the later incarnations are not considered very progressive. Many people have difficulty believing Genesis was a progressive band!

      It's made worse, by the fact that the artists don't always see themselves as a progressive band. For instance, Porcupine Tree doesn't consider themselves progressive, but many people classify them as such. They have certainly made progressive music, but they have also changed their sound many, many times.

      There are also several genres of progressive rock. You can have progressive metal and progressive folk, for instance.

      --
      Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
    7. Re:This whole thread is ludicruous by mbourgon · · Score: 1

      Great comments overall. Scary to see someone else listening to all the stuff I listen to. (Well, except for the Ritual - hate the second album).

      So, what's Hourglass like? Not familiar with them. Thanks!

      --
      "Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
    8. Re:This whole thread is ludicruous by pyrrhonist · · Score: 1
      Great comments overall. Scary to see someone else listening to all the stuff I listen to.

      Thanx! :) Apparently there's a lot of us listening to this stuff. Like I said, I saw Nightwish on the Borders listening station this month. You know progressive is coming back when Borders makes a point of displaying obscure Finnish symphonic progressive metal.

      (Well, except for the Ritual - hate the second album).

      I love the pirates! That song gets blasted a lot. :)

      So, what's Hourglass like? Not familiar with them. Thanks!

      They're kind of a mix of old-school progressive with modern progressive metal. You can listen to quite a bit of them at their site. You can also get both of their albums for $21.

      You can make a request on Progged as well, I know they have at least one of the Hourglass albums, or I wouldn't have heard of them. That radio station has made me spend more money in the past month than alt.music.progressive did in 10 years (and I bought the Ozric Tentacles boxed set through Ranjit!).

      --
      Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
    9. Re:This whole thread is ludicruous by mbourgon · · Score: 1

      Yes, seeing Nightwish at a Borders is surreal. And thanks for making me feel old - I haven't heard Ranjit (okay, or a.m.p) mentioned in, gods, over a decade.

      Speaking of which, I need to call Greg tonight and order some stuff - any recommendations? Tonight is Greg, tomorrow is Ken. On my list, I have Present, White Willow, Univers Zero, Isildur's Bane, Meshuggah, Pain of Salvation, Deus Ex Machina (if they've done anything new in a while), and a few others.

      --
      "Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
    10. Re:This whole thread is ludicruous by pyrrhonist · · Score: 1
      And thanks for making me feel old - I haven't heard Ranjit (okay, or a.m.p) mentioned in, gods, over a decade.

      LOL! The funny part is, I haven't read a.m.p. in about a decade, so thanks for stressing the old bit. ;)

      Speaking of which, I need to call Greg tonight and order some stuff - any recommendations? Tonight is Greg, tomorrow is Ken.

      Forgive my ignorance, but who are Greg and Ken?

      On my list, I have Present, White Willow, Univers Zero, Isildur's Bane, Meshuggah, Pain of Salvation, Deus Ex Machina (if they've done anything new in a while), and a few others.

      Hmmm, I'm going to have to add most of your list to my list of music to look into (I'm not the biggest fan of Pain of Salvation). Meshuggah was already on my list.

      Recently, I've been into Lacuna Coil, Nightwish, and Opeth. I managed to find the original two disk set of Lacuna Coil's "Comalies", so I've been blasting it.

      So, what do I recommend....

      For new progressive rock, I recommend bands like Echolyn, Spock's Beard, or The Flower Kings. Echolyn may be very hard to find, but the newest album is supposed to be amazing. Spock's Beard's latest, Octane, is also very good. Most fans of the Flower Kings don't like their latest album, "Adam & Eve", as much as their older ones.

      Ozric Tentacles is interesting if you like instrument rock with some folk and dance music thrown in. I recommend the middle era OT, as it seems to be the most progressive. Their best albums are probably, "Strangitude", "Arborescense", "Become the Other", and "Waterfall Cities".

      If you want a completely unpredictable band from album to album, by all means, get Porcupine Tree. Their style varies from 30 minute Pink Floyd meets Ozric Tentacles jams on "The Sky Moves Sideways", to hard rock and Beach Boys choruses on "In Absentia". Their best known works are "Signify" and "In Absentia". If you like a good mix, you basically can't go wrong with "In Absentia" (which is available in DTS 5.1 if you want). Most of the time, I just play their concert albums, "Coma Divine" and "Warszawa".

      For progressive metal, I still recommend Dream Theater. "Scenes From a Memory" is good if you like concept albums with a mix of styles, and "Train of Thought" is a more grounded progressive metal sound. The second album, "Images and Words", is a classic, but does suffer a bit from a bad mix.

      If you want an interesting DT ripoff, I would suggest Dali's Dilemma, "Manifesto for Futurism". It's interesting in that if you listen to DT, you can hear snippets of DT riffs. The album also has a very nice bass solo on the second song, so as instrumentalists, they aren't bad.

      As for DT supergroups, I would go with O.S.I. They don't sound so much like DT, but rather a heavy Pink Floyd. It's very strange. There aren't any amazing solos on the album, but the instrumental sections are still pretty cool. One of the songs features Porcupine Tree's Stephen Wilson. The recommended version of this album is the Limited Edition one, mainly for the fact that the second disk contains an instrumental suite of an early cut of the songs on the album.

      If you don't like the DT sound, but still want progressive metal, try Symphony X. They have a different sound than DT, and, like DT, their first album is awful. Subsequent albums are a huge improvement over the first. The definitive SymX album is, "V: The New Mythology Suite", which is a concept album. However, their best song is, "The Divine Wings of Tragedy", off the album of the same name. The latest album, "The Odyssey", is also fantastic. If you like live albums, "Live On The Edge of Forever", is quite the treat, as the live version of "The Divine Wings of Tragedy" is amazing.

      If you want a cheesy space opera inspired album, go with Star One's "Space Metal". The vocals are top notch, since it's from the mastermind of supergroups, Arjen Anthony Lucassen. There are also great Hawkwind and David Bow

      --
      Show me on the doll where his noodly appendage touched you.
    11. Re:This whole thread is ludicruous by mbourgon · · Score: 1

      Let's see if we can keep this thread going. If not, feel free to email me. my last name (my first initial is M) at gmail.

      Echolyn may be very hard to find, but the newest album is supposed to be amazing.

      If you're talking about "Mei", it is. Not much of a fan of Spock's Beard or Flower Kings. (I'm also assuming you have stuff like Anekdoten, Anglagard, etc, which aren't metal and probably not Modern, but are damn good anyhow)

      Ozric Tentacles is interesting if you like instrument rock
      Yeah, I love 'em. Seen them live once - aside from the getting-high-from-simply-breathing, it was a blast. I always describe them as "Space Reggae". My first exposure (and fave album) was Jurassic Shift, but I like the albums you've mentioned. You might try Erpland - that one is really good as well.

      If you want a completely unpredictable band from album to album, by all means, get Porcupine Tree.

      Oh, yeah. Just got my limited-edition-AC3-dvd-book-cd of Deadwing. My fave albums are probably Sky Moves Sideways, Stupid Dream (which is hilarious, since I remember telling my wife, after the first listen, that they'd "lost it" and put out a crap album)

      For progressive metal, I still recommend Dream Theater.
      Yup, though I haven't been impressed at all with the last two. A shame, since 6 Degrees was pretty damn good, and I&W and Awake are classics. The only downside to them is all the knockoff bands.

      Speaking of which..
      If you want an interesting DT ripoff, I would suggest Dali's Dilemma, "Manifesto for Futurism".
      LOL. Agreed. I wouldn't mind, except that in interviews they were so... perturbed that people, for some Unknown Reason, thought they were influenced (or knocking off) Dream Theater. Um, yeah. Pull the other one, guys. Admit that you love them, and get on. Don't pretend otherwise. I would've liked a second album. While I'm thinking of it, a couple recommendations: Bozzio/Levin/Stevens, (I'll assume you have or know about Liquid Tension Experiment) & Gordian Knot.

      As for DT supergroups, I would go with O.S.I. They don't sound so much like DT, but rather a heavy Pink Floyd.
      Agreed. Kevin Moore did a fantastic job, though I equally enjoy the original jam that was "processed" by Kevin to become OSI. Kevin's solo stuff (at least the first two albums) were excellent, though I haven't listened in a while.

      If you don't like the DT sound, but still want progressive metal, try Symphony X.
      Yup. Of the modern neo-classical prog-metal bands out there, they're probably my favorite. (Close second - Blind Guardian, especially "Nightfall in Middle Earth". Third - either Angra's Holy Land or Rhapsody's Symphony of Enchanted Lands. All of those are neo-classical prog metal)

      like DT, their first album is awful.
      No kidding. You can see the potential, but it's not there yet. I am _so_ damn glad they keep getting better with each album. Each one is fantastic, and then the next one is Even Better. I love The Odyssey, but I think you're right about V being the best thus far. Eagerly awaiting the new one.

      If you want a cheesy space opera inspired album, go with Star One's "Space Metal".
      Or anything else by Ayreon. My fave is probably The Final Experiment, or maybe Into the Electric Castle (if you cut it down to 1 CD - Fish was awesome on that). Cheesy beyond belief, but that's part of the fun.

      If you like the Progressive Death Metal thing, I recommend Opeth.
      Seen them live once, own everything. Some others I heartily recommend:
      Sleepytime Gorilla Museum - have to be seen to be believed, but their CDs will almost do. Check out their web site. Cross between metal and avant-garde, with a healthy helping of strange.
      Meshuggah (get Destroy Erase Improve, I, Nothing, or Catch 33),
      Therion (awesome symphonic/orchestral black metal with opera singers - start with Theli or Vovin), Dan Swano (Moontower - Neo-pr

      --
      "Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
  38. well, here's how "alternative" radio works by swschrad · · Score: 2, Insightful

    I used to trade cassettes by mail with a friend for years. did my own collections on cassette for the car -- in fact, with access to broadcast studios and music libraries, in high school I was doing that for the bus trips on debate. currently, I have CDs in the car and my iPod for exercise and work.

    now, that's the original alternative radio format, and you control it yourself, all of it, every bit. with shuffle and random play options on most everything except linear tape products, it's truly random (most-played on the 'pod is about the same as top rock radio.)

    radio when it works has always been a locally-focussed medium... the jukebox aspect is the filler for the local chatter, news, information, sports, and the like. radio when it doesn't comes off the big bird and you get two drop-in spots at the half hour and can donut the top of the hour.

    the point is, none of those guys do what you are used to. it once upon a time was a sure thing to expose you to new venues, music types, and new songs and artists, when you could have beach boys bumped up against patsy cline and followed with the frank chacksfield orchestra and nilsson.

    three new songs a week on any top-chart station is all the new you get, and it's all of a sameness.

    radio has to get back to local to save itself, and I mean without all the invective of screech radio. until then, I format it myself, which I have done since before I strained the ether with my college radio hour.

    --
    if this is supposed to be a new economy, how come they still want my old fashioned money?
    1. Re:well, here's how "alternative" radio works by smilinggoat · · Score: 1

      the point is, none of those guys do what you are used to. it once upon a time was a sure thing to expose you to new venues, music types, and new songs and artists, when you could have beach boys bumped up against patsy cline and followed with the frank chacksfield orchestra and nilsson.

      three new songs a week on any top-chart station is all the new you get, and it's all of a sameness.


      Start listening to your local college radio.

  39. May You Live in Interesting Times indeed by imperious_rex · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Given yesterday's Slashdot item about radio, the next few years will be an interesting time indeed for the world of radio. Under dual assault from satellite and online, terrestial radio is truly going to take a beating, and it will take more than upgrading to HD radio and offering localalized programming and news bites to staunch the bleeding. If terrestrial radio is to survive, it will have to exercise significantly greater imagination and (pardon the word) innovation than what most radio execs have exhibited so far...

    1. Re:May You Live in Interesting Times indeed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They came into bad times through only looking at their short term interests. I'd be surprised to see them change even right up to the point where they effectively shoot themselves in the foot.

      They won't use imagination - they'll look at Crazy Thrursdays, make Tuesday Crazy as well, and leave Wednesday alone as some kind of counterpoint.

      Someone do me a favour and copy this into every thread that has money-grubbing and stupid behaviour from a corporation or government.

    2. Re:May You Live in Interesting Times indeed by ch-chuck · · Score: 1

      it will take more than upgrading to HD radio

      A local fm station is b'casting hdfadio - I can see the digital sidebands in a spectrum analyzer but 1) the cheapest radio I could find for it are high end gear and 2) the encoding format is closed source so I can't hack together a receiver. So, yeah, that's two strikes against it right off. That'll boost ratings, make it more expensive and difficult to listen to crappy content. I sometimes listen to DRM b'casts on shortwave (Radio Canada, BBC, Sweden, Germany) because I can get a free decoder, DReaM - it sounds great (when propagation is good) and wish there were more of that.

      --
      try { do() || do_not(); } catch (JediException err) { yoda(err); }
    3. Re:May You Live in Interesting Times indeed by jelle · · Score: 1

      You've got a point.

      Even "Kramer", in his tv show "Mad Money" on CNBC played the death-march for FM-radio last week...

      --
      --- Hindsight is 20/20, but walking backwards is not the answer.
  40. i have an xm radio by u-238 · · Score: 1

    and i only ever use it for the Opie and Anthony show.

    i know a very sizeable portion of subscribers are there for the same reason.

    and consider how many sirius owners are buying that equipment just for stern, and will likely hardly explore the service after receiving it (which they won't have long to do, because sirius is going down faster than .... something that goes down very fast pending a stupid business decision[see: 1/2 a billion dollars for howard stern + fewer subscribers than xm]).

    the market for satellite radio is about 4-5 million big including xm and sirius, relatively small compared to ipod owners and internet radio streaming listeners. and neither sat radio services have eeked out a signifcant presence in the place where it really matters - the auto industry. the furthest it's gotten is xm included in hyundais (http://www.sciencedaily.com/upi/index.php?feed=Bu siness&article=UPI-1-20050323-16064200-bc-us-hyund ai-xm.xml), hardly braggable.

    1. Re:i have an xm radio by Desert+Raven · · Score: 1

      the furthest it's gotten is xm included in hyundais

      XM was an option in my 2003 Avalanche, so GM has been offering it at *least* that long. Easy enough to spot, just look for the GM vehicles with *two* stubby little antennas on the roof (the other is for OnStar).

      I'd be willing to bet that XM has been an option for Ford and Chrysler as well...

    2. Re:i have an xm radio by jerw134 · · Score: 2, Informative

      I'd be willing to bet that XM has been an option for Ford and Chrysler as well...

      Actually, Ford and Chrysler have partnered with Sirius. I don't know about Chrysler, but Ford doesn't push Sirius at all. You have to get a premium (Mach) radio for it to even be satellite-ready.

    3. Re:i have an xm radio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the furthest it's gotten is xm included in hyundais

      And GM, Ford, BMW, VW, Audi...and probably others that I haven't seen. I didn't know about Hyudai.

      Satellite radio has made excellent inroads into the OEM market.

      FWIW, I use my XM radio for music and news. I gave up sophomoric radio (O&A, Stern) when I grew up. It doesn't take a genius to be stupid on the radio.

    4. Re:i have an xm radio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't take a genius to be stupid on the radio.

      So you could get a $500 million contract, just choose not to?

    5. Re:i have an xm radio by cve · · Score: 1
      (...)because sirius is going down faster than .... something that goes down very fast pending a stupid business decision[see: 1/2 a billion dollars for howard stern + fewer subscribers than xm]).


      I would think securing popular content would be a good business decision for a content provider.

      The "1/2 a billion dollars" isn't being paid up-front, so Stern has to deliver.

      Sirius has the content - let the market decide.

    6. Re:i have an xm radio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sheesh, do a little research before you post something this dumb? XM is in a ton of new cars now - that's where most of their new subscribers are coming from. Honda/Acura, Toyota, that Hyundai deal was just the latest one, not the *only* one.

  41. Re:Future of radio? nahhh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Fortunately for you, I have personal convictions against using "troll", "flamebait", and "overrated" when I mod. If anything, you deserve all three at once but I won't give you the satisfaction. I guess that's the conservative side of me that believes that all people have a right to say what they want - even moronic and ignorant statements like yours.

  42. Old Wine in a New Bottle. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    " It's a Linux based portable internet radio that streams Internet Radio over WiFi. Is this the future of Radio? Given the big push by XM and Sirus , the potential of Podcasting and now the "inFusion", in which direction is mass-audio-broadcast heading? "

    I'll say one thing which I'm sure the majority will deny. We like being consumers, regardless of how the goods are delivered, or who's doing the delivering.

    The majority of what will be carried by all this new-fangled technology, will not be mass individualism, all banging pots and pans together. But pretty much old wine in new bottles.

    Maybe someday the pool will be bigger, and the overall structure will be flatter. But a tool doesn't a talent make. And all the technology hasn't solved the human problem of how to make more artists. Only how to empower the one's you already have.

  43. Some help here by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Linux based portable internet radio that streams Internet Radio over WiFi."

    From TFA, it's a radio 'receiving' device. It doesn't stream, it receives a stream. It's the appliance nature, like a portable player, that makes it special. connecting to a stream using a laptop over WiFi isn't that big a deal. We were messing around with it a couple of years ago. We couldn't figure out how to do broadcast from the AP's though.

    'future of radio'?

    Radio need not be real time. Podcasting has a huge delay and it's still seems to be popular based on what I've been reading. The problem with distribution on the internet is cost and at least for radio, the answer is relaying. With most high speed connections offering 256-284kbps upstream it's a little tight as the tree branches very slowly and there's not a lot of room for overhead of people coming on and off line.

    RANT ON!
    It's being done on purpose. The old line content distributors want to retain control of their provider-consumer model. As soon as the consumers become the providers, the old line guys believe they will be screwed. This it the only reason we have these crappy upstream speeds. Cost is a drop in the bucket compared to what they spend to acquire and keep customers.

    The BIG PROBLEM is that there are all sorts of really neat applications for distribution by and for 'the people' that are not being developed in the USA because there is no market so long as the stranglehold on bandwidth exists. IMO these applications would make the overall pie much bigger and the old line guys would benefit along with everyone else. The BIG PREBLEM is that here we have an area that's begging for development and products and the economic gain is going to be realized elsewhere. The development is going to happen elsewhere. Hell, M Powell and the friggin BPL crap is still 'broadcast' mindset. The govt. says USA innovation is important and focus on broad band technology but only form the corporate to consumer POV. What needs to happen is for a mess O folk to write their elected officials and explain what's what about this big economic 'thing' that's not going to happen here and why.

    It's not just music. It's video. It's other stuff we haven't thought of yet.

    "why isn't anyone really pushing Digital Audio Broadcast (DAB)"

    Look at all the trouble getting HDTV through, even with govt. mandates. DAB will be even harder because the difference in quality between FM stereo and DAB isn't enough. Where's the compelling reason? Unlike HDTV, DAB allows more stations in the FM band. The few companies that control most of FM certainly don't want moresegmentation in the markets because it costs more money for catering. They certainly don't want competition.

    1. Re:Some help here by stratjakt · · Score: 1

      The govt hasnt mandated HDTV, just digital broadcasting - ie; 480i, so long as it's digital.

      HDTV turned out to be a big, huge, gigantic clusterfuck. Most HDTV devices are fixed-pixel (LCD, plasma, DLP), yet they never nailed down a fixed resolution format. So if you get a native 720P, you're screwed for 540P or 1080i, and so on. I've been looking into HDTV, I have no idea what to get. What's the content going to be in? They say sports and such in 1080i, movies and such in 720P.. But then HD-DVD will be 1080P, so whatever I buy today will be obsolete..

      Meh, like I said - a clusterfuck. Now throw EDTV and "HDTV" compatible sets on the pile, that aren't HDTV at all..

      I started to try to explain this to a non-techie friend who wanted one of "those big flat TVs that hang on the wall".. Lost cause. Eventually I just shrugged and told him to buy whatever the guy at Sams club was selling - you're going to get fucked either way.

      Digital content delivery is a mess. Where we used to have cassettes and CDs (ok, CDs are digital, but my point remains), we now have umpteen zillion audio formats, and umpteen zillion music stores. If I sign up for iTunes, I just know that my favorite band will be exclusively on Napster, and vice versa. In the end I'd be nickel-and-dimed to death by all these services.

      So whats my point? Me, a lifelong geek, no longer gives a flying rats ass about the future of "digital media". I'll keep my analog cable, FM radio, and CD player for as long as they continue to work.

      --
      I don't need no instructions to know how to rock!!!!
    2. Re:Some help here by tsotha · · Score: 1
      So whats my point? Me, a lifelong geek, no longer gives a flying rats ass about the future of "digital media". I'll keep my analog cable, FM radio, and CD player for as long as they continue to work.

      But that's the problem, isn't it? Congress has mandated the sunset of analog radio and TV. I watch so little TV it seems a shame to spend any money on a new one, but in a couple of years (who knows when, exactly) my set is gonna stop working when they stop broadcasting analog. I don't want to spend gobs of money and I don't want to get stuck with another Betamax. Hopefully the FCC will get its act together enough that I can buy something that lasts a few years.

      The thing that really pisses me off is it seems none of the broadcasters is really interested in high definition. They want digital so they can cram more channels into the same band. So I'm gonna trade my analog set for a lower quality digital picture and the choice of 10 reality shows instead of 5. Great.

    3. Re:Some help here by Circlotron · · Score: 1
      So whats my point? Me, a lifelong geek, no longer gives a flying rats ass about the future of "digital media". I'll keep my analog cable, FM radio, and CD player for as long as they continue to work.


      Ahhh ha ha ha.... You have discovered two things: 1, the "digital lifestyle" thingo is basically a load of crap. 2, You are now officially a grumpy old cuss, just like me ;-)


      Regards, Circlotron. 46-year old fossil with 30 year old car etc etc etc.

  44. carmesh WiFi? by AussieVamp2 · · Score: 0

    actually being LA, wouldn't putting a tiny little one in every car work very well?

  45. Re:No, it's not by pipingguy · · Score: 1


    What, you mean hip-hop and rap aren't the highest form of musical sophistication and lyrical construct?

  46. The best Pain is FREE. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "However I live by words, and YES i do suck. But here is my take. And its free for you. You need surround sound and good stereo to appreciate it, but i give it to you. That way its still mine. :P

    And yes I wrote this and performed all the instruments. So its mine to give.[Emphasis mine]"

    Ladies and genteman. I give you "The New, and Improved" business model. Have fun!

  47. Yes it does; Linux or the original. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am happy to say that it is twice as good as reported.

  48. Everyone wants to live off the governement... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    forgetting that the government lives off of us.

    Remember that when the government does anything, they pay for it via forced confiscation of people's income. That's a perfectly reasonable (or at least unavoidable) thing to do for many things

    For a variety of reasons, whenever the government does something, it generally costs more than it would if the private sector did it. For instance, schooling. So, even if the government funds the project only from those whom it would benefit, everyone would most likely pay more.

    For myself, I'd like to save that sort of magic for the important stuff that wouldn't otherwise happen.

    1. Re:Everyone wants to live off the governement... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      For a variety of reasons, whenever the government does something, it generally costs more than it would if the private sector did it.

      This is because the government is obligated by law to provide a standard level of service. Private sector businesses generally exist to create profit, so corners are cut left and right to maximize this profit.

      Of course, I could also bring up the gravy train that government contractors (ie, private-sector companies out to make a fat profit) are riding as a reason why government services cost so much more...

  49. Needle in an Internet Stack. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Every single post of his is an advertisement for that site. Guess what site I'm never going to? "

    Ahhh! The dark side of the "New and Improved Business Model" that everyone brags about, every time radio, or the RIAA get mentioned. A multitude of talented, and not so talented, all clamoring for our ear. Vainly the audiance searching an ever deeper stack, for that one needle that makes it all worthwhile.

    Makes you wish for the "Good old days".

  50. Re:No, it's not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We liberals have utter contempt for anyone who doesn't live in NY or LA, or another american metropolis which emulates either.

    Everyone else is a redneck hick who watches NASCAR and shops at Wal-mart, and are all incredibly stupid, and need the brilliant intellectual elite of folks like Whoopi Goldberg and Rosie O'Donnel to set them straight.

  51. yes! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I had an idea similar to this in that it would be so kick ass to cruise around town while listening to my favorite stream on some Linux portable. Sadly total coverage wifi is not here yet.

  52. Some help here-Man-smashing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "So whats my point? Me, a lifelong geek, no longer gives a flying rats ass about the future of "digital media". I'll keep my analog cable, FM radio, and CD player for as long as they continue to work."

    But, but. How are we going to "bring down the man", if everything remains analog?

    1. Re:Some help here-Man-smashing. by dangitman · · Score: 1
      But, but. How are we going to "bring down the man", if everything remains analog?

      Duh. Roneo machines, Cap'n Crunch whistles and crystal radio sets, dude!

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    2. Re:Some help here-Man-smashing. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The man shit's on your circlotron...
      But it's not becauser he doesn't want you to have it.
      No, he's just protecting his place in the market. He doesn't give shit about you. He's all about numbers and statistics.

      But he's not stupid. He knows that if you get too much freedom you won't need whta he's selling so he sellsyou on the idea that he 'doing all he can' and by implication, the more insidious idea that you CAN'T do for yourself.

      Society has bought whole tricania ridden hog into this and swallows the tainted meat while saying. 'thank you man'....

      Has he sold you?

  53. Re:Future of radio? nahhh.... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I thought it was the conservative side (ala Janet Jackson overreaction, FCC censorship, etc) of you that would make you want to mod someone down.

  54. Short answer: YES... by msimm · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I've been keenly interested in music all my life, I've played in bands, collected music, got to know the musicians and now (for the second time) am getting ready to launch a internet radio station myself.

    I follow the music and technology closely (systems administrator by trade) and have followed both XM and Sirius with a good deal of interest. But there's the catch: the reason I've followed them with such great interest is because the right alternative hasn't been available. And thats (aside from the desktop) internet radio.

    Why is internet radio the right format? Because its a totally open system. Look at programs like Off The Hook for example. Thats the kind of programming that couldn't exist in a closed system, but on the internet the field is wide open.

    Why on earth we'd want anything less then that is beyond me. We've already had our closed system, its called the public airwaves. Everyone knows Clear Channel perfected it, but they aren't to blame the system was flawed from the start. Anyone can have a website and thats all it takes to run a broadcast.

    I don't know anything about this product, but I do know I'm a firm believer that internet radio is the answer to a question a lot of us have been asking ourselves for as long as we've been listening to music.

    Props to XM and Sirius for broadening the horizon, but I can't see their (still limited) approach as much more then a stop-gap measure until WIFI broadband becomes ubiquitous enough that people can tune into their favorite radio station or flip on something they've never even heard before.

    If I sound a little giddy its because my favorite syles of music aren't available at your local Virgin Mega Store, in fact since the arts and music explosion on the internet I can't even find most of my favorite bands down at the local alternative record store and I live in a major metropolitan city.

    Even with all the existing media outlets combined they don't even begin to scratch the surface of whats available. And theres a lot of good stuff out there.

    Sorry for going overboard. I feel passionate about it. This is a very exciting time in general and as a art and music lover doubly so. The beauty of the internet is that it's so totally open and I've been doing this for a long time now and I still find myself saying "wow".

    Don't ever put this genie back in the bottle.

    --
    Quack, quack.
    1. Re:Short answer: YES... by dangitman · · Score: 1
      Why is internet radio the right format? Because its a totally open system. Look at programs like Off The Hook for example. Thats the kind of programming that couldn't exist in a closed system,

      Would you care to explain why not? And how do you define "closed"? Almost anyone can get a gig broadcasting from a public or college radio station.

      Just because Clearchannel is the current monopoly, doesn't mean it has to stay that way.

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
  55. Uh Hello?! I've got this one covered. by bedammit · · Score: 1

    I have been streaming audio via the internet on my pocket PC phone for over a year. What do you need? A Pocket PC phone, T-mobile unlimited data (GPRS) an FM transmitter or tape adapter and links to online audio streams. I recently drove in Florida on I75 for 4 hours with only 4 signal drops!!!! I was listening to Air America Radio BTW.. (www.airamericaradio.com) Worked like a champ! You can also use ORB. This is a (currently nearly stable) service that allows you to stream your own MP3s from home... Now there are some things they need to get going.. but all in all its pretty cool. They also provide links to external content!!!! Maybe I should post a how to guide.. but.. its pretty easy.. BeDammit

  56. The reason people aren't pushing DAB is... by BluhDeBluh · · Score: 1

    because DAB is rubbish. Seriously. I'm in the UK, and the implementation is very poor.

    It has worse sound quality than a good quality FM signal (yay, 128kbps MP2), the radios are still prohibitively expensive and aside from the fact the stations have a longer range so you can pick up another dozen or so, it doesn't seem worthwhile.

    There is also no killer app to make me want one. Personally, I'm still happy with my cheap FM radio and it's not going anywhere anytime soon.

  57. Radio tuner encoders by MavEtJu · · Score: 1

    Recently I was asked to see what the possibilities are to encode data from a radio tuner card into an (for example) mp3 stream.

    I only found cards which could do one channel at the same time.

    My question is, does somebody know radio tuner cards which can listen to / encode more than one channel at the time?

    --
    bash$ :(){ :|:&};:
  58. WiFi radio by pedicabo · · Score: 0

    Quote: "Is this the future of radio". No

  59. Happy with DAB in the UK by tobyp · · Score: 0, Interesting

    Well I'm very happy with my DAB radio. I'm in central London and I get a better signal than FM, plus I can pause and record programs on a memory card.

    Guess it works for some of us...

    Toby

  60. Internet Radio=NO CLEAR CHANNEL by iamlucky13 · · Score: 1

    I haven't had the opportunity to listen to XM or Sirus yet, so I can't compare, but one thing I definitely like about streaming radio compared to regular FM is the music. Meaning they actually play music. There is no stupid DJ filling half of his 2 hour morning show with really stupid, naive, and/or ill-informed rambling, mixed in with phone calls from dim-witted listeners.

    Not that DJ's are bad. On rare occassion they can quite pleasant. There are only two stations I've found in my area where the DJ's tell you what songs their playing, toss in some brief trivia, and give you some local news. Unfortunately, my favorite (Oldies 97.1, KISN FM) just got dropped onto the AM band by its owners. So that leaves one with decent sound quality.

    With global distribution from any point and relatively low cost, I doubt Clear Channel stands a chance of dominating streaming the way it has the FM band.

  61. Sirus by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That's Sirius, not Sirus.

    I just recently got a Sirius radio. If kicksass. Wherfe i live and as i drive i get somewhat spotty reception, on the way to work it goes out 1 or 2 times. But i live out in the middle of nowhere. I have taken it to 'town' (nashville) and its very nice having the terrestrial feature, im sure XM offers it too, but its nice to be able ot go inside and not have access to a window and still pick up the kickass radio.

    I chose sirius over xm becaus eof the jam band scene. Im very pleased with wha ti hear. It plays some of my favorite (lots of live shit) and also a lot fo stuf i havent heard. Which is v ery nice.

    Psy

  62. Wow! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "the market for satellite radio is about 4-5 million "

    That's amazing! Because together XM and Sirius already have over 5 million subscribers, which means they're selling more than there's a market for.

    Amazing!

    No seriously, your information is already dated. Every manufacturer has already partnered with one of the services...I don't know all of them, but BMW is Sirius, GM is XM, Honda is XM, Toyota is XM, Ford is Sirius, Daimler-Chrysler is Sirius... I think its more likely the market for Satellite radio is closer to 30-40 Million, which is a huge dent for conventional radio in that people who pay money for satellite radio are likely to actually listen to it.

    What will happen in satellite is that next year, Stern will go to Sirius, which will have an impact of 2-3M subscribers for sirius. That's 2.5M * $13/M * 12 months in a year. That's $390M/year and they're paying stern $100M a year. That's a no-brainer in ANYBODY's book.

    And once these guys pass the 10M mark for subscribers, you're going to see rates start to come down a little. My guess is that they'll settle in at $8/M.

    That's a pretty strong indictment of how badly Clear Channel and the FCC have f*cked up terrestrial radio.

    (p.s. my guess is you work for one of the broadcasters...probably CC. Hope clear channel goes down along with all their crappy horrible radio stations).

  63. Re:No, it's not by usedcarsalesman.com · · Score: 0

    Elite conservatives, too. Of course LA with a few Walmarts (none now) and a NASCAR track (OC's Long Beach Grand Prix and impromptu "The Fast and Furious" street races are it) would be even more kickass. An NFL team wouldn't hurt either. I hate to say it but, if we are talking about enjoying life and having fun, the liberals may be right about NYC and LA

  64. Authentication by dk.r*nger · · Score: 1

    I bet the InFusion device is missing the same thing as every other WiFi device (eg. the wireless ZyXel VoIP phone) .. it can't authenticate on the wireless authentication gateway that is at universities, pay-"Hot spots" etc.

    How about some sort of XMLRPC protocol, so this authentication could be automated? It still sucks that I have to fire up my browser to enter my username/password, which is store in there anyway..

  65. Not exactly portable by MImeKillEr · · Score: 1

    But we're going to get one of these for the home stereo:

    Roku Soundbridge. Thank the gods it works with my router.

    Convetional radio sucks. Especially the local stations. Moreso now that ClearChannel has a cookie-cutter KISS-FM here.

    The wife likes listening to the 80s channel and I like listening to jazz and traditional irish folk/pop. The latter of which have no market or stations here in Austin, TX. YOU try to give culture to this place. It doesn't work for the most part.

    --
    Cruising the internet on my TI-99/4A @ a whopping 300 baud!
  66. 2 Responses by Y+Ddraig+Goch · · Score: 1, Troll

    First off all the satelite radio services suck. There is no diversity of music. Just the same crap that Clear Channel and the other big conglomerates push on us. Secondly http://slimdevices.com/ has a really great OS product called SlimServer. Works over ANY networking that can be attached to a PC. Supports Linux and has a great hardware player.

    --
    Meddle thou not in the affairs of Dragons, for thou art crunchy and with most anything.
    1. Re:2 Responses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      you're full of shit. of course what did i expect from slashdot.

    2. Re:2 Responses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No diversity of music? There are 60+ music channels on XM (probably about the same on Sirius), and ALL of them play different music. Sure, there are the pop channels that play the same stuff over and over, but the other channels have very deep playlists. You have obviously never listened to either satellite radio service.

    3. Re:2 Responses by mbourgon · · Score: 2, Informative

      Are you on crack? I had the chance to play with one a few weeks ago, and it almost convinced me to go buy one. The Old Time Radio channel (of which there were two, btw) was playing stuff that probably hasn't been on the radio in decades. (And yes, I've caught a couple OTR shows on the radio) And the Audio Lab channel had stuff you'll _never_ hear on Clear Channel. I think you listened to the pop channel, and I'm sure that's intentionally like Clear Channel. But go find a real channel, and be amazed.

      --
      "Sometimes a woman is a kind of religion, she can save your soul & set you free from all your sins" - Bad Examples
  67. internet writers vs establishment writers by Cryofan · · Score: 1

    You are wrong, and the proof of what I say is all around you--internet writers (bloggers, if you will).
    Before the internet, if you wanted to read some deceent writing, you had to go to the library or pay for it--newspaper, magazine, book, etc. Now all you have to do is fire up the browser, and viola, informed and talented writers are freely available. As a longtime reader myself, and a published writer as well, I can assure you that I what I get on the Net is every bit as good (or better) as what I got back in the pre-Internet days. You just have to be able to navigate the Net moderately well.

    So, I see no reason why music and radio talent should not be easily available on Internet radio. Remember the aggregating, filtering and disseminating powers of tte internet. All we need is maybe a hundred such unpaid talents, and then you have enough for the whole world.
    Realize that even just one unpaid radio talent can feed all the internet radio listeners in the world, given enough mirrors, bandwidth, etc. And also recall that there are about 500 million people in the english speaking world. I think we can manage to scrape up enough free internet radio talent.

    --
    eat shiat and bark at the moon
  68. Re:No, it's not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    If 50 cent's music is bad, then why was his album 12x platinum within 2 months of it's release?

    What metric are you using to determine if music is good? I'm using the "people like it" scale.

  69. Re:Uh Hello?! I've got this one covered. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Get XM radio. I used to listen to mp3s but now I don't even bother. There is nothing to "get going" - it just works.

  70. Streaming on my Treo by _aa_ · · Score: 2, Interesting

    On Sprint's CDMA cellular network, one can reasonably reliably listen to 56kbps shoutcast streams with a smart phone such as the treo. Lower bitrates are even more reliable. Sprint's unlimited data plan is $15/mo on top of your regular phone charges.

    This can't compete with XM on quality and obviously not on signal reception. But a treo with a wifi card would beat the device referenced in this article hands down, in my opinion.

    1. Re:Streaming on my Treo by Otterley · · Score: 1

      It can compete with XM if the site wisely encodes in AAC+ (AKA AAC-HE) instead of MP3. At 48kbps AAC+ streams sound almost as good as MP3 streams at 96kbps.

    2. Re:Streaming on my Treo by _aa_ · · Score: 1

      I'm not certain about the software I use, pocket-tunes's ability to stream formats other than mp3. It will play ogg's but I've had no success in getting a stream to work. I'm unaware of an AAC+ plugin for pocket-tunes, but tcpmp, a young but rapidly growing open source media player for palm, with play the files. I'm certain streaming is in the works.

    3. Re:Streaming on my Treo by rustman · · Score: 1

      We really need a aacPlus player for the Treo. I love the way 48k aacPlus streams sound, and I really wish I could get them on my Treo.

      PS- *BSP* warning, SomaFM now is streaming 3 channels in 40kb aacPlus RTSP/LATM for 3GPP phones. So if you have one of the few Sprint 3GPP phones (Samsung and some Sanyo models) you can get our streams on those phones now.

  71. Try Irate radio by ByteMangler_242 · · Score: 1

    I think you need to check out Irate radio, it's similar to your idea. If you had a portable that ran Java and had WiFi, this would be your idea, for the most part. It might not gracefully recover if you changed wireless hotspots, lost connection, etc.

    It's a great alternative to streaming if you have a high latency connection, since you keep your downloads, and the client plays only songs that have finished downloading. Note that the artists will be unknowns 99.9% of the time, due to the licensing issues.

    Best of all, it tries to learn from your preferences and download music you would like.

    --

    Rule of the open mind
    People who are resistant to change cannot resist change for the worst.

  72. I've already got a portable EV-DO solution! by disc-chord · · Score: 1

    In my work I spend about 30% of my time driving and 30% of my time walking; and I have a diminished attention span. So I listen to Sirius in my car, and internet streams on my Verizon Audiovox XV6600 using their unlimited EV-DO network here in the Chicago Burbs.

    I had tried the same thing with a Treo650 on Cingular's EDGE but encountered nothing but headaches with the Treo. I've been a Palm fanboi since `97 and sadly the Treo650 changed all of that. It was completely unreliable even in factory settings just being used as a phone! The damn thing crashed when I received phone calls, when I received Emails/SMS, and once got into a reboot loop when I had the nerve to receive a SMS while on a phone call. I had it for 2 weeks and unable to resolve my troubles.

    There are a few things I should warn about though in going the route I have. This burns through an amazing amount of battery, especially when used in conjunction with my iTech Bluetooth Stereo Headset which I highly recommend to anyone thinking of pursuing this route. It instantly makes this the coolest portable music route to take. But you'll need to also invest in a much bigger battery, I personally opted for a 2200mAh Li-Ion but there are 3300mAh also available. Of course you'll need a stylish case that can comfortably fit the engorged battery. My 2200 barely fits in my Covertec. Lastly, you'll need a decent SD Card if you don't have one already. You will be amazed at how much difference a spare gig of storage can make, and this actually makes for a nice portable video player as well.

    Let us review the cost of convergence:
    Audiovox XV6600 = $600
    Stereo Bluetooth Headset = $70
    2200mAh Li-Ion Battery = $80
    Covertec Leather Case = $40
    Corsair 1Gig SD Card = $80
    Never being alone in the harshness of meatspace without the warm buzz of the collective = Priceless.

    There are some things money can't buy, for everything else resistance is futile.

  73. Does it do Real Media format? by tetranz · · Score: 1

    This is where most of these type of things fall short for me since I like to listen to the BBC and others who only do Real.

    Reciva who were featured on /. some time ago, look promising but its not clear if their product is really available. They seem to be supplying OEM's but I'm not sure who.

  74. Re:No, it's not by nealrs · · Score: 0

    you are also probably one of those crazy ex-pat types who love the advantages of this country (uh seriously, we have amazon,netflix,tivo, and a ton actual non internet related things which are supersweet), but want to move out so hard. "god, the US is so lame. im moving to australia, or europe, or anywhere where they are sane". guess what buster, the U.S. is sweet even with all the crap thats happening around us (ie, our shitty president)

    on another note, people crib about music as if they can make some actual claims about it. did you know that everyone who claims to like country music but hates like... modern rock and roll just is being blind to history? music isnt original, its stolen back and forth and given a new style and spin and then its traded back and forth again. i mean, its obvious. music evolves and devolves, etc. gah. troll or not, you cant deny it. "i hate american music" what a crock of shit. "european music is so superior" half of those popular european acts are just emulating major american singers who are just emulating them who are emulating their idols from years gone by! stop hating on popular music. god! just... just end yourselves.

  75. Re:Uh Hello?! I've got this one covered. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Considering that both XM and Sirius carry Air America, your idea is quite useless and lame. Plus, with XM, I can switch over to the old Alternative station and listen to Foo Fighters and Cake when Al Franken gets boring.

  76. uhhh... by rtphokie · · Score: 1

    what does it matter what OS it runs?

  77. Re:No, it's not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Britney Spears has sold ~100 million albums you dumbass. She rocks!

  78. Will Satellite radio fall to cell based radio? by Marble68 · · Score: 1

    I was talking to some industry peers the other day and I boldly (perhaps ignorantly? :) ) said that I thought in the long run, the Cell phone companies stood as the biggest threat to Satellite based radio. My thinking is that since bandwidth to cell phones is increasing, latency is dropping, and some of the amazing G4 stuff going on outside the US; it's only a matter of time before you can buy an aftermarket in dash radio with a cell phone built in whose primary purpose is receiving streams. How killer would it be to have all the eclectic streams on the Internet available to you in your vehicle? I can only imagine the laws they'll try to push through to keep us from being distracted...

    --
    /me sips his coffee and ponders a new sig...
  79. Use existing IP satellites by jonsmirl · · Score: 1

    Seems like anyone with an existing IP satellites could get into the satellite radio business. Is it possible to receive these satellites while moving or do they need a big dish? The radio stream could be sent out on UPD to remove the need for two way communication and make it into a broadcast.

  80. Re:No, it's not by bad-badtz-maru · · Score: 1


    Because it's a count of units shipped and not units sold?

  81. When In Roam by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Until radio Internet access forms an uninterrupted coverage area, Internet radio will be relocatable, not truly "mobile". Like the difference between a "luggable" KayPro PC and a Palm Pilot, only convenient mobility will be palatable to the masses (not just geeks, early adopters, and scattered specialists). That limitation means not only that cost will remain prohibitive until industrial scales are marketable, but that the network won't really be populated enough to really be social - except as an echo chamber of the same hackers and antisocial worker drones we've already got on Slashdot ;). That might have been better for Usenet, before AOL piped into the Internet, but the path to riches and humanization runs right through the washed masses.

    WiFi (and its descendants) will be just the place to settle down, or breathe free. But hotspots will be spotty for some time, as our society's P2P buildout continues inexorably, but unplanned. The way this environment will reach a basic mobility platform includes interspot coverage by barely-adequate 3G "phone" networks, with roaming among them and hotspots, interchangeably. Motorola has announced a WLAN/GSM roamer due by Q32005. BT promises a WiFi/GSM "phone" by Q42005, and is launching a Bluetooth/GSM project. These vendors are trying to both extend cell/PCS service to enterprise WLANs (SCCAN), and roam VoWLAN connections to cell/PCS networks (UMA). And the IEEE already has a new "WiFi" descendant, WMM, that promises better roaming and QoS over the WLANs, for seamless telephony interop.

    The upshot for devices like this cute little inFusion Internet radio is popularity well beyond shoppers at ThinkGeek. Which bigger global market means cheaper devices, easier to use, and more jobs for geeks. But it also means a bigger audience for content, within which niche producers can find supporting consumer scale for even the least popular content. So the leveled multimedia playing field can support people who tie other people together across the globe. Let's get it on!

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  82. Broadcast Flag Considered Helpful by Doc+Ruby · · Score: 1

    Their inFusion demo says it can record the streams. Much streaming content is copyrighted, though not all, which allows streams but not copies. How are we to know that we're not legally able to copy incoming content, without some associated metadata at least whether a copyright is asserted? Just because content's copyright is reserved from the consumer doesn't mean the consumer can't copy it (fair use, etc). So the recording device has no business blindly violating our rights by enforcing the copyright assertion. But without that, we'd have to at least assume that it's copyrighted, unless there's some way to detect a less restrictive license. A centralized database would, in reality, be incomplete and more complex than including that info in the content data itself. Have we finally realized that the "Broadcast Flag", abhorred on Slashdot, is actually in our own interest?

    --

    --
    make install -not war

  83. Re:Uh Hello?! I've got this one covered. by bedammit · · Score: 1

    Dude... XM radio and Sirius has a monthly fee XM radio and Sirius pump you their stuff. The solution I mentioned... Is all your stuff, you can host your own MP3s with Orb. BTW ppl GSPlayer is great for shoutcast streams.

  84. Re:No, it's not by Aeiri · · Score: 1

    you are also probably one of those crazy ex-pat types who love the advantages of this country (uh seriously, we have amazon,netflix,tivo, and a ton actual non internet related things which are supersweet), but want to move out so hard

    All I said was the music is bad here, and you assume all of this? Wow.

    I do want to move, good guess. But only to California. I dislike the whole president deal, the (MP|RI)AA, big corporation stuff, etc, but that's not going to get me to move out of the country.

    half of those popular european acts are just emulating major american singers who are just emulating them who are emulating their idols from years gone by!

    Another assumption. Wow, good job man. None of the European music I listen to even have words. There is no way for them to be emulating American singing if they don't sing at all.

    Most, if not all, of the people I know that listen to American music listen to "Top 100" stations. I don't think people in America ACTUALLY LIKE the music they listen to, they listen to it because they are told it's popular music by radio stations.

    I'm not saying that about everyone, I'm sure there are people that like that sort of music, and that's fine, but don't listen to the top of the charts music stations and make it your only source of music for your entire life.

  85. Re:No, it's not by roche · · Score: 1

    I think you are looking at the Sirius units. XM has a reciever that is portable and will fit in your hand. It has a battery and a internal antenna so you can listen as you are taking a walk. It also has the ability to record 4 or 5 hours of programming for playback at a later time.

    Check it out. They are awesome. http://xmradio.com/myfi/index.jsp

    --

    roche
    Bah Humbug!
  86. I have one already by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have one of these already. It's called a "WiFi-equipped laptop."

    Seriously, this device isn't going to change anything because it relies on WiFi, which typically has no range. You can't even walk down the street and keep listening to the station. Even the web page linked above says "when used at a WiFi hotspot." If we want a true roaming Internet radio device, it's going to have to be satellite or WiMax or something else other than WiFi.

  87. Re:No, it's not by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    yay britney

  88. -1, Stupid by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You haven't quite got the hang of the moderation system yet, have you?

    Either that, or you've just used the /. equivalent of "LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!! ME TOO!!!!!!!"

    1. Re:-1, Stupid by connorbd · · Score: 1

      You're very perceptive. But I signed my name to it.

  89. Here's where you're wrong by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're mostly right.

    But you miss an important point.

    That Plasma EDTV for the most part looks better than most of the HDTV's out there for a very fundamental reason: nobody broadcasts in anything other than 720p. Comcast doesn't do 1080i.

    So what you've got is a plasma (which inherently looks flashier in the studio) up against some HDTV could put the EDTV plasma to shame, except that nobody has any *content* at 1080i. So you're left to compare a plasma versus non-plasma, plus the plasma hangs on the wall. Add that up and you've got people making a very rational decision... buy an EDTV plasma for $2k at costco. Its actually a good decision in the current climate.

  90. Sure... by msimm · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Because the airwaves can only accommodate a finite number of broadcasts, even if we bother to increase this (satellite radio anyone?) we are still limited and in the case of XM or Sirius who do I talk to if I want my broadcast to be available? How well will that scale as more people take interest in broadcasting?

    Right now Shoutcast.com alone is listing 8,751 stations. Thats just *one* portal.

    I define 'closed' as being limited by available resources. You provide college radio as an alternative, but thats just one alternative station per regional market: shoutcast lists 1000's. Do you see the difference?

    --
    Quack, quack.
  91. Taking on Satellite Radio? I don't think so by GSNitro · · Score: 1

    I live in a rural area of Canada, and having a constant wifi area not around my house is virtually non existant. I do have XM and I can get it anywhere I go. I drive 200 metres out of my driveway and this solution is gone for me. The two just can't compete.

  92. I Had That Idea! (Read On) by RoyLopEar · · Score: 1
    Wow.. I had been thinking about writing an e-mail to some companies about this very concept for the past few months. I imagined a device where you entered in a URL for any of a set of different types of digital sound data streams (RealPlayer, WinAmp, Ogg Vorbis, etc) and then over a wireless signal it sends you the broadcast of the Internet-resident radio station.

    A great way to thwart the RIAA/FCC supression of Internet Radio stations via their little gimmick with forcing people to keep track of songs and pay double royalties for each one played would be to have a grass-roots movement of bands creating songs that have a Creative Commons Copyright... so the songs can be played for free by anyone, but if some Corporation wants to make money off the song, THEY are the ones who have to pay. This would also be a boost for street musicians who have no contracts with the big music industry.

  93. Re:Uh Hello?! I've got this one covered. by RoyLopEar · · Score: 1

    But he doesnt have to pay for XM or Sirius, in this case...

  94. why don't we have DAB? I'll tell you why by xfrosch · · Score: 1

    And why isn't anyone really pushing Digital Audio Broadcast (DAB), like they have in the UK ?

    for basically the same reason we have five different incompatible underengineered digital mobile phone systems, rather than one that really works: because the Reagan administration transformed the government agency responsible for spectrum management in the USA into a committee of lawyers obsessed with spectrum license revenue maximization, to the exclusion of any kind of prescriptive role in, or enforcement of, engineering standards.

    When it comes to engineering, the FCC just gives industry what it wants. That's how we keep winding up with turkeys like IBOC and ATSC.

  95. Not enough satellite bandwidth! by rustman · · Score: 1

    XM and Sirius each have only 12.5 mhz of bandwidth.
    That's not much room at all for tons of broadcast channels.

    1. Re:Not enough satellite bandwidth! by birge · · Score: 1

      I think you're mistaking their engineering choice as a limit. They only have that right now because it's all they need to support the hundred or so channels they want to provide. In theory, a satellite can provide hundreds of MHz of bandwidth, allowing for more audio channels than you could ever want to have to sift through. Second, you don't need to limit yourself to just one satellite. In any event, a satellite is much more efficient for mobile broadcasting than a huge network of wireless access points. That's why you'll spend almost $100 to get unlimited wireless data but only $10 to get unlimited satellite radio.

    2. Re:Not enough satellite bandwidth! by rustman · · Score: 1

      Nope, it wasn't an engineering choice, it's all about licensing and competing for spectrum. There always competition for bandwidth, and Satellite frequencies have to be shared with other services, terrestrial and in orbit. And a satellite can't broadcast on frequencies used terrestrially.

      In the last round of negotiating for spectrum, 25mhz was allocated for SDARS (satellite digital audio radio services). Originally it was going to be much more, but congress decided to order the FCC to allocate/auction a lot of that bandwidth to terrestrial wireless uses. XM and Sirius both paid around $90 each for their 12.5 mhz.

      This scarcity of satellite bandwidth is why DirecTV has to upgrade all their receivers for their future expansion, to move to MPEG4 rather than MPEG2, more efficiency of the bandwidth they have now.

      For a mobile service like XM or Sirius, selectively pointing a high gain antenna a different sats on the same frequencies from a mobile or handheld device is not very practical right now. So frequency re-use is out of the question. I understand that they both use multiple satellites for diversity, that is, the same content is transmitted from both sats and your receiver picks the strongest receiver.

      Satellite also means that I won't have any interactive features as it would a 2-way system based on a huge network of wireless access points. And these networks of access points are coming, be it over your wireless phone or vi WiMax or similar technologies.

      Just because a protocol isn't ideal doesn't mean it won't make business sense. If that was the case no one would be using VoIP!

      (FYI- I spend only $20 to get unlimited wireless data with Tmobile, and only $15 with Sprint on my Treo)

    3. Re:Not enough satellite bandwidth! by birge · · Score: 1

      Thanks for the response. I wasn't aware of the limit of the spectrum allocation. I thought they chose not to buy more because they felt they didn't need it. My (apparently false) assumption was that with satellites, I guess I was wrong.

      My guess is that the cellular networks would be the providers of digital audio before WiFi networks. (We're already seeing this with video, oddly enough, before audio.) It just seems that WiFi was never designed for mobility and range. I'm not certain, but I just can't imagine that it would make economic sense to try to duplicate the coverage of cellular networks with WiFi. Even at that, I can't imagine any IP network would be able to handle the load if every commuter who now listens to radio started using the IP networks. And it just seems ludicrous to me to imagine a thousand drivers in a metropolitan area listening to the Howard Stern show, all using their own packet stream.

    4. Re:Not enough satellite bandwidth! by rustman · · Score: 1

      I wasn't speaking about WiFi specifically, I was thinking more about WiMax which is designed to serve tons of customers at the same time, or wireless phones.

      For popular programming, IP multicasting is effectively broadcasting over IP networks. Multicasting hasn't taken off big on the internet because of issues relating to ISP peering and routing protocol standards. However, universities and large corporations are using Multicast to deliver real time video to thousands of desktops at the same time.

      But you're right, for large scale mass media, a satellite broadcast makes a lot of sense (except in areas where the sat can't be received well - e.g. office buildings). But for larger amounts of niche programming (there are well over 10,000 internet radio stations now) the bandwidth isn't there for satellite services to be broadcasting all of them all the time.

  96. yes by sucati · · Score: 1

    XM and Sirius are definitely cool, but I kind of see it as beta vs vhs. I'd be more interested in a service that doesn't lock you into hardware e.g. this internet radio.