Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

When Internet Radios Get Affordable

Posted by timothy on from the slightly-more-convergence dept.

DeviceGuru writes "Grace Digital Audio has just released a new device that functions like an Internet radio tuner in a whole-house audio system and is being sold at a surprisingly affordable price point. The Solo Wi-Fi Receiver works in tandem with Reciva's Internet radio station selection web service, provides excellent Pandora support, and also supports optional Internet services such as Live365, MP3tunes, Aupeo, and Sirius. It has built-in buttons and a display for easy control, comes with a dedicated IR-remote, and is supported by a free iPhone remote access/control app. We hear a lot about the high-end Sonos gear, but at just over $100, this little gadget seems like a breakthrough in cost-effective Internet radio, much as the Roku Netflix player broke ground in low-cost Internet video streaming."

139 comments

  1. don't forget squeezebox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I managed to pick up a couple Squeezebox Touches for $125 each recently (thanks to a snafu on Logitech's site). At that price, they are absolutely amazing whole-house audio/internet radio devices.

    1. Re:don't forget squeezebox by 2.7182 · · Score: 1

      When it gets affordable, I'll still be happy with analog.

    2. Re:don't forget squeezebox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I will still be happy making my own using a Linux box

    3. Re:don't forget squeezebox by PopeRatzo · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I've got to admit that I get a lot of use out of iHeart Radio.

      I still won't pay for radio, though. I buy a lot of music that I hear on radio, so I figure it's a good enough promotional mechanism for music that it should be free. As far as "talk" radio, no thanks. I don't need any more voices in my head telling me what to think. I'm happy with the occasional podcast (some of which I'll subscribe to, such as Red Ice Radio from Sweden or Mysterious Universe from Australia).

      The player or "internet radio" is a different matter though. I don't see why it should ever cost more than a regular radio plus a $10 wireless adapter. And I'll either plug it into my existing speakers or a pair of headphones. I guess I'm old fashioned but listening to radio via 3G feels wrong, like why should I take up bandwidth to hear music that I can get otherwise. I know it doesn't make sense because iPhone and iPad users don't seem to worry about it, but that's the kind of hairpin I am.

      And, depending upon where I'm at, the "regular" radio is plenty good for me. Like if I'm near Monterrey, CA, there's a great station that plays Hawaiian music 24/7 and in New York there's a half-dozen stations that play great rock, jazz or classical music with minimal commercials. Things have been a little rougher here in Chicago ever since the public station WBEZ stopped playing jazz all night. Still, there's enough good stuff on there that I keep my car radio glued there just like the middle eastern cabdrivers. When I walk the dog, I take the mp3 player, which has an FM radio. Except for sports, AM radio is a total waste of the spectrum. Everybody is hollering about how Obama is black and doesn't have a birth certificate or how the mexicans are taking over, interspersed with commercials for erectile dysfunction (which leads me to believe that conservativism and E.D. go together somehow, though it seems they don't have any trouble getting it up for their 18 year-old rentboys).

      One more thing that I like radio for is sports. For some reason, probably dating back to my childhood, I'd rather listen to a White Sox game on the radio than watch it on TV. With a good announcer (like Bob Elston when I was a kid and Ed Farmer now), my brain does a better job of creating the visuals than television cameras ever could. Oh, I also like the Bears and Blackhawks on WGN. The announcers are all homers, just like it should be. I don't listen to the Cubs, ever, because they suck dick and anyone who likes them sucks dick (you can look it up).

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    4. Re:don't forget squeezebox by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 2, Interesting

      One more thing that I like radio for is sports. For some reason, probably dating back to my childhood, I'd rather listen to a White Sox game on the radio than watch it on TV.

      Hell yeah. Back in the day we used to crowd around the muted TV, watching the game while we listened to it on the radio.

    5. Re:don't forget squeezebox by iamhassi · · Score: 1

      I have to agree, I don't get the price. I picked up a used core2 duo Dell desktop with 2gb and 160gb for $130 last week. Could turn it into a htpc and have videos and Internet radio for only a few dollars more that just Internet radio. The people this is marketed to, the tech savvy, can find cheaper devices to do only Internet radio (old p3 laptop? They're under $100) or will spend a few dollars more and get a multifunctional device. At that price this is just a few years too late, it'd have to be under $40 before I'd even consider it

      --
      my karma will be here long after I'm gone
    6. Re:don't forget squeezebox by Pojut · · Score: 1

      As far as "talk" radio, no thanks. I don't need any more voices in my head telling me what to think.

      I completely agree...which is why my radio at work is always set to C-SPAN Radio (I work in Rockville, MD, about 40 minutes from DC, so I can pick up the non-HD terrestrial signal). The portions where they have people call in during the early morning and late afternoon shows suck, but it doesn't get more unbiased then a direct audio feed from Congress and the Senate :-)

      --
      Living With a Nerd
    7. Re:don't forget squeezebox by DirtyCanuck · · Score: 1

      Original Xbox with Linux + XMBC

      Kind of sad that original Xbox is more useful than any current console offering.

      God bless open source.

      Most people can pick one up for 20$ these days

      The bonus is the ease of use, plug and play

    8. Re:don't forget squeezebox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why should you have to turn on the tv or a monitor to listen to the radio?

    9. Re:don't forget squeezebox by Mike+Buddha · · Score: 1

      I'm sure that Xbox looks totally sweet sitting there on your nightstand with its monitor. It's totally the exact same thing as the Squeezebox only way cheaper, without the monitor.

      --
      by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
    10. Re:don't forget squeezebox by DirtyCanuck · · Score: 1

      The innards of the xbox can easily fit into a cheap home theater PC case. It also happily produces sound without a monitor.

      I (and room mates) would never even be listening to internet radio without the xbox. It was just a natural fit since in Northern Ontario radio stations are pretty repetitive for ambience. Turned all of us onto music we would absolutely never be exposed to otherwise.

      Most people have a few spare xbox's kicking around. I know I do, might as well hack the shit out of them and put them to work.

    11. Re:don't forget squeezebox by siloko · · Score: 2, Funny

      Most people have a few spare xbox's kicking around.

      May I suggest a walk outside. The fresh air is lovely.

    12. Re:don't forget squeezebox by Mike+Buddha · · Score: 2, Funny

      The innards of the xbox can easily fit into a cheap home theater PC case. It also happily produces sound without a monitor.

      Having a home theater PC case on my nightstand would be even better. I stand corrected.

      --
      by Mike Buddha -- Someday the mountain might get him, but the law never will.
    13. Re:don't forget squeezebox by sillybilly · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Analog will be soon banned/phased out. Because it represents the old mentality where you can listen to unmetered programming, and are free to make a recording with a tape deck. Where intellectual property is regarded as a temporary reward, an incentive to enhance creativity, and remove secrecy, but ultimately everything is meant to enter the public domain, as soon as further prolonging of property terms does not sufficiently enhance initial creativity, or release of private knowledge, private secrets into public domain. Recording radio programming with a tapedeck? Are you out of your mind? These days such violations of intellectual property laws, even the mere thought of copying any information, let alone it "eventually" entering public domain, have to be eradicated from the minds of people. These days we have to convert to a system where every time you start up the radio you click an accept button, that you agree that all content coming through it is owned by da man, for da man, and only for da man, and only by his grace and infinite kindness are you allowed to listen to any of this wonder and amazement for such a low low introductory monthly rate. Otherwise you're considered a heretic/pirate/thief, who probably just expects to get everything for free in life, and not have to pay for it. There is no such thing as a free lunch.

      Well, they say the best thing in life are free: sunshine, air, love, mothertongue, and it used to be the radio, you "payed for it" by being subjected to advertising, but now you'll get advertising + you have to pay for it in cold cash too. We can start with the radio first, while x-ing off all those things from the list of best things in life are free. Well, at least you have the option not to listen to the radio, like I do, or not to buy the radio programming decryption monthly card, the kind they sell for satellite tv programming. And life is still good. I can personally attest to that - I have not watched tv, nor have I turned on my car radio for 2 years now. Ok, here and there, but I don't miss it at all. When you have to start paying for the sunshine and air you consume, because it's owned by da man, it's gonna be very difficult to live happily without those things. Oh, by the way, since last February 2009, over a year now, I've been vegetarian, and doing just fine. Well, I did eat meat here and there, like pepperoni pizza, or company burger cookout, but I can go on fine without it, I don't miss it at all.

    14. Re:don't forget squeezebox by sillybilly · · Score: 1

      Oh and guess what.. I don't have much of a life, but I can say that I have been able to abstain from watching a single DVD movie so far. Ever since DVD's appeared on the scene. Because of the gargantuan copyright crap they instilled into it. I don't care what anyone else does, it's their business, but it's not for me. I've watched VHS tapes, quite a few, that my "bum" friend showed on his VCR, a few years ago, "unbum-like-ly" careful not to show a DVD, and parading gutted tapedecks from the 70's as DJ mixing rigs. I don't know what's right or wrong about intellectual property, I can't tell others what to do, but I can make a choice on what I do and don't do. And then everyone is free to live their life as they please, as long as they let me be the way I wanna be too. Oh, and, even though my father was an alcoholic, I've been able to abstain from alcohol, I drink a sip here and there, but have never got drunk. Have I said I don't have a life? How about trying to abstain from Windows or Apple, or any proprietary computer systems? It's extremely difficult, especially when the hardware you buy only has windows drivers provided, and the devices is lobotomized, and most of the functions are implemented in software. I still keep good old Windows 2000 around, but I realize its days are numbered too. I have a cellphone, but I don't enjoy it, because it's not hackable, I don't feel like it's mine. It's full of secrets. I open it, use it, done with it, put it away. Same with a car, use it, done with it, but don't get the intellectual joy of hotrodders out of it, like they used to back in the days, that tinkle, sparkle in the eye kind of joy. The only joy in the computer and computer like things comes where I'm free on it, in things like Linux/Freedos or assembler. But I know these days are numbered too, and there will be a point in time, where I'll simply open up a computer, get whatever needs to get done, done, and close it off. It will be no source of excitement. The fallback for now is hardcopy books. Like Newton had them. When paper books are banned, to save trees, or burned, like the inquisition used to burn forbidden texts, because they contained "unmanaged", "raw" text, and only Kindle-like devices are allowed, where how long you spend on each page is monitored by da man, to make sure you're not reading or thinking something illegal, that you do not exhibit any statistical criminal thought patterns, in the name of public safety and security, when that time comes, I guess I'll have to give up reading too. I don't know what the heck I'll do then, but I hope that will be after my time.

    15. Re:don't forget squeezebox by vtcodger · · Score: 1

      ***May I suggest a walk outside. The fresh air is lovely.***

      Maybe where you are. Where I am, the wind is howling and it is snowing. If you could give me an IP where I can pick up a stream of weather a bit warmer and without the wind, it would be appreciated.

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    16. Re:don't forget squeezebox by vtcodger · · Score: 2, Insightful

      ***When it gets affordable, I'll still be happy with analog***

      1. If analog has the programming you want, it is almost certainly a superior way to get it. No synchronization delay. No glitches. I listen to a bunch of NPR programs most Saturday mornings. I can get them either via the Internet or Over The Air. I tried the Internet for a while. I found OTR to be much more reliable.

      2. The failure/refusal of internet content providers to settle on a single open format for Internet Radio (or anything else) and to stick with a single http:/// get request format for their "transmission" is not only annoying, it makes acquiring programming a major annoyance. If your analog radio channels moved around and used occasionally varying encryption, you'd probably turn the analog radio off and leave it off.

      3. I've played around with a lot of digital audio stuff at various times. The only thing that I occasionally actually use is streaming albums around the house from an Edna server ( http://edna.sourceforge.net/ ). Edna (a python script) runs fine as a background task on a VIA C3 system that doesn't even have enough computing power to run Google Earth. I expect it'd run on any 486 or higher CPU.

      4. Podcasts would seem to be an attractive alternative to Internet Radio. Except the #$@(& content providers go out of their way to make acquiring podcasts difficult/impossible except through manual selection. And of course, they have managed to screw up RSS feed format beyond all possibility of reliable decoding.

      In short -- Internet Radio and its cousins are so unreliable and unintentionally difficult to use, that it's hard to envision them replacing over the air for most people most of the time.

      --
      You can't see ANYTHING from a car, You've got to get out of the goddamned contraption and walk...Edward Abbey
    17. Re:don't forget squeezebox by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sounds like you've had more than a few sips.

    18. Re:don't forget squeezebox by GuyRiley · · Score: 1

      This post is either one of the most amazing parodies of Slashdot stereotypes ever put together, or very, very sad...

    19. Re:don't forget squeezebox by sillybilly · · Score: 1

      You know paper books are on the way to getting banned, when toilet paper culture is changed to bidet's, where water is considered a renewable resource but paper is not. As long as I can take comfort in taking a reassuring peak that there is a roll of toilet paper right next to me, as I'm reading, I don't have to worry about book paper in front of me being legally banned, even if that "book" is an LCD screen for now, and traditional, "antique" paper books are hard to come by.

    20. Re:don't forget squeezebox by adolf · · Score: 1

      Back in the day, I used to have a set of cron jobs that would record programs from NPR over an antenna. It worked very well. Things would get recorded as PCM, which would get encoded as VBR MP3 once the program had finished. I ran it on a K6-2 350, which was nowhere near fast enough to encode with my settings in real time, and would sometimes have 3 or 4 nice'd encoder processes running at once... Not that FreeBSD gave a shit about that. :)

      It was absurdly reliable, and with NTP, the timing was eerily dead-on. Appropriately named and timestamped MP3s would land in appropriately named directories, and every now and then I'd just go through and either delete or archive them to CD-R. During all of this, the box was also doing everything from multilink PPP with a handful of 56k modems, to dealing with printers, to downloading porn from usenet, to...you get the picture.

      The script first would set the record level on the sound card (just in case it'd changed for some reason). Then, it'd fire up brec (which has a FIFO buffer in RAM in case the disk is hogged up doing something else) to a raw PCM file (no need for WAV headers), LAME would encode it into an MP3 in the correct directory with the correct filename (formed using an appropriately-formatted date command), and the original file was then deleted. IIRC, I used mid-side encoding (like FM uses), and 44.1KHz with a ~16KHz lowpass filter to get rid of any aliasing or encoding of unwanted noise (FM doesn't go up higher than 15KHz).

      I used an old Kenwood standalone digital tuner and a rooftop antenna as a source. It worked without any glitch at all for a couple of years, and it always sounded great. I used it until I moved to an apartment where I couldn't get radio reception, the BSD box died, and I lost interest.

      I mention this because these days, I'm using podcasts a lot (especially in the car with my Droid), and find them to be very unreliable and of generally poor quality -- plus, a lot of stuff (All Things Considered) isn't available through official channels at all. You seem to be in about the same boat.

      --
      Kid-proof tablet..
    21. Re:don't forget squeezebox by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      Because apparently we're retarded.

      Oh, wait, it's just you.

      Why do you think that people need to turn on TVs or monitors to listen to streaming radio on an HTPC?

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  2. Chumby One by Fishead · · Score: 1

    Since the goal is cheap, what about the Chumby One?

    Oh... I live in Canada, I can't have one.

    boo.

    1. Re:Chumby One by tagno25 · · Score: 1

      and the Chumby is opensource hardware running opensource software.

    2. Re:Chumby One by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The majority of the user reports I've read have said that the Chumby is ridiculously buggy and laggy, and that the audio abilities are pretty bleh (skips occasionally, minijack audio quality sucks, etc).

    3. Re:Chumby One by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I live in Canada and I have a Chumby One - ordered for delivery to a US UPSStore.

      My Chumby works fine as an Internet radio - it is on Radio Paradise most of the day.

    4. Re:Chumby One by CityZen · · Score: 1

      My main complaint about the Chumby is that the user interface isn't ready for prime time. It's like it was designed to do the job, barely. It seems like little thought was given to polishing it and making it user friendly. It just requires far too many button (touch-screen) presses to get it to do what you want it to do.

      On the flip side, the UI is just a flash download that you could replace with your own, in theory.

  3. Doesn't take long for some sites by boogahboogah · · Score: 1

    Yup, the site acts slashdotted 8 minutes after this posted up...

    I probably won't be buying one of these anytime soon, but that is only because of my extensive music & stereo collection combined with 7 Linux & windoze machines at home. At this price, they should start selling well, Maybe they'll be the new hot xmas gift this coming season.

  4. pricepoint vs price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    How is a pricepoint different than a price. And how is 105.37 dollars a price point. Who says, "I'm looking for an internet radio, but I don't want to spend more than 106 bucks?"

    1. Re:pricepoint vs price by Nerdfest · · Score: 4, Insightful

      How is a pricepoint different than a price.

      It's harder to sound like a douchebag if you only say price.

    2. Re:pricepoint vs price by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Pricepoint is manufacturer's suggested retail price. Price is what the vendor charges, and what the customer pays.

      You don't need any kind of price to be a douchebag, you can sound like that for free!

    3. Re:pricepoint vs price by fotoguzzi · · Score: 1

      You mean the pricepoint on sounding like a douchebag is $0.00?

      --
      Their they're doing there hair.
    4. Re:pricepoint vs price by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      No, 'MSRP' is manufacturer's suggested retail price. You can tell because the first letters in 'manufacturer's suggested retail price' spell 'MSRP'. Sometimes just 'SRP' without the 'manufacturer's' at the start, because, duh, who else would be suggesting a price?

      It can also be called a 'list price', as in, the price that resellers should list it at.

      'Pricepoint' is something some douchebag economist invented to sound doucher.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
  5. Chumby One by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The Chumby One is a much better deal for $119 and it runs a variety of apps:
    http://www.chumby.com/

  6. DIY internet radio player by Bloom+Berg · · Score: 4, Interesting

    You can always make your own

    It works great, only $75

    1. Re:DIY internet radio player by eli2k · · Score: 2, Informative

      This one is pretty nice, too.

  7. Not really seeing the market... by Darkness404 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm not really seeing the market for this. So I want a device that plays internet radio, but don't want to just get an iPod dock, use a laptop/netbook and uses Wi-Fi so it isn't like your getting always available portable internet. If you have a home theater system, why wouldn't you just have a HTPC and just use VLC and connect to the internet radio that way, if you don't have a home theater system, why not just use an iPod or laptop?

    --
    Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
    1. Re:Not really seeing the market... by carlzum · · Score: 1

      I was thinking the same thing. An iPod Touch with a dock satisfies most features on his checklist, and the article's screenshots are mostly images of the iPod application. I don't see what value the additional device offers.

    2. Re:Not really seeing the market... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not really seeing the market for this. So I want a device that plays internet radio, but don't want to just get an iPod dock, use a laptop/netbook and uses Wi-Fi so it isn't like your getting always available portable internet. If you have a home theater system, why wouldn't you just have a HTPC and just use VLC and connect to the internet radio that way, if you don't have a home theater system, why not just use an iPod or laptop?

      Because some of us use Internet Radio like a radio alarm clock. I use my Internet Radio to listen to meditation music and OTR to help me get to sleep. I have a full blown HTPC but it isn’t very practical for using it in bed.

    3. Re:Not really seeing the market... by chameleon_skin · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because Grandpa has no idea what VLC is.

    4. Re:Not really seeing the market... by MokuMokuRyoushi · · Score: 0

      I have a full blown HTPC but it isn’t very practical for using it in bed.

      There's a great joke in there somewhere, but a mortal such as myself cannot discern it.

      --
      Humans are terrible replicators of Godly things.
    5. Re:Not really seeing the market... by Ethanol-fueled · · Score: 1

      Right, and a technophobe who wants a more modern radio system would go the XM route anyway.

    6. Re:Not really seeing the market... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I suppose you could put VLC on an automated task. There's got to be at least one utility that can do that. But the tricky part is how to control it remotely (bluetooth or wifi), and make it boot with a playlist acting as station presets.

      And if only it could filter the shoutcast index by bitrate... I don't care too much for the tin-can-speaker-underwater sound. It's great otherwise.

    7. Re:Not really seeing the market... by MyFirstNameIsPaul · · Score: 1

      XM compression is shite. No respectable technophobe would ever use XM.

      --

      I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.

    8. Re:Not really seeing the market... by mcrbids · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I'm not really seeing the market for this.

      That's because you are a tech weenie. For you, going to websites and downloading software patches comes as naturally as hair dye comes to a platinum blonde. But the truth is, downloading patches and setting up handler applications and all the other stuff that you have to do is... HARD for most people!

      As a software engineer, I find over and over again that "possible" isn't the same as "easy" or "automatic" or even "useful".

      Some years ago, I wrote a tool to keep paperwork in electronic format, at a tremendous savings to our client organizations. My first attempt was usable, but required significant training, and we got a few nibbles. My next revision was better, and we got some strong interest from previously cool clients. My most current revision is drop-dead simple to use, needing little more than a button click, and customers are practically lining up.

      It can be very hard to do, but easy is, for most people, the difference between doable and not worth the bother. I've many times wanted to listen to KGO radio in San Francisco. I can sorta get it with an AM radio, but it's static-y and unpleasant. I can stream it online, but to do this, I have to get a big, relatively expensive computer, plug it into the Internet, turn it on, load the browser, go to the website, and click to start, then plug the speaker jack into my stereo.

      So I end up with a pile of wires, and a laptop that likes to fall asleep every few hours of listening while burning about 60 watts. Ouch!

      If only I could just hit the power switch, and then turn a knob to the "KGO" station... ? I'd be pretty likely to buy something like this.

      --
      I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
    9. Re:Not really seeing the market... by rockout · · Score: 1

      I think you're confusing the GP's "technophobe" with "technophile". A technophobe would certainly use Sirius XM - it's extremely user-friendly these days, and although it may not be CD-quality, it certainly sounds better than FM, which is good enough for 95% of the population.

      --
      I've learned that they're worthless, so I don't read AC comments anymore.
    10. Re:Not really seeing the market... by davek · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I'm not really seeing the market for this. So I want a device that plays internet radio, but don't want to just get an iPod dock, use a laptop/netbook and uses Wi-Fi so it isn't like your getting always available portable internet. If you have a home theater system, why wouldn't you just have a HTPC and just use VLC and connect to the internet radio that way, if you don't have a home theater system, why not just use an iPod or laptop?

      I reject this argument for three very important reasons:

      1) people have been predicting the death of radio ever since the invention of the TV, yet somehow, its still here. With the invention of the internet, people still predict the death of live media and live broadcast. They remain wrong. Internet radio will adapt to become as simple as the transistor radio is today.

      2) I can play my internet radio station on an iPhone anywhere that 3G service is available. However, I would not purchase a $100 radio and a $50/month contract just to listen to internet radio. If the cost was $20, and the contract non-existant (in some download-only data plan, for example), then everyone could get one for the car and internet radio would explode.

      3) live broadcast will never die. I've gotten into several arguments with people who think that since I can just "listen to a podcast," then live broadcast media is effectively dead. This is obviously false, since people seem to tend to want to be part of the crowd, and therefore will want to be listening to the same thing at the same time; that is, live broadcast, or "radio."

      I believe internet radio will become ubiquitous. Internet video and TV will only happen /after/ internet radio becomes normal.

      -dave

      --
      6th Street Radio @ddombrowsky
    11. Re:Not really seeing the market... by jeroen94704 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well, I have an HTPC, but still I recently built and installed a DIY-version of the Squeezebox. Why? Because for listening to music an HTPC is a bit impractical (need to switch on TV, HTPC and Amp) and overkill (That's a full fledged PC used exclusively to play a dinky little FLAC/MP3). Also, it's nice to have an internet radio/alarm clock in your bedroom, or be able to distribute music throughout your home.

      --
      He who laughs last, thinks slowest.
    12. Re:Not really seeing the market... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree: What we have most lost by moving away from the world of only AM/FM 'streaming' is the selection metaphor; I can no longer point a visitor to my home to one "tuner" with 10 preset buttons. With the widened choice of broadcast/streamed/piped audio beyond traditional AM/FM to include HDRadio, satellite, internet, and (e.g.) Comcast CATV 'expanded basic' carrying [the content from] around 30 local FM stations, my short-list of favorite 'stations' are played from multiple devices because there is incomplete 'station replication' on all possible media! So I would prefer to concentrate all of them in an (instant on!) integrated stand alone tuner unit with 'selectable' plug-in modules (something like Denon's TU-604CI or Onkyo's T-4555 . . . but at some reasonable price!)

      From the perspective of 'the dumb user interface', none of these audio-only sources need be distinguished by source-type. If I'm "listening to the radio", I just want a row of 'favorite stations buttons' -- I shouldn't need to remember the source media on which my three most-listened-to Classic Rock stations are located!

    13. Re:Not really seeing the market... by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      Why the fuck would you be using VLC on a HTPC?

      Seriously, do you know what an HTPC is? It's a computer with an interface that's operated by remote control control, usually running a single application. It's a damn custom built 'Tivo', except many of them don't do any recording.

      People who build HTPC use something like XBMC, which can, tada, be operated via HTTP requests, so it would be trivially easy to have it start doing anything at any time you wanted. If timing it's not built in it's easy enough to run wget from the cron.

      Plenty of HTPCs already know enough to turn themselves on at secific times, to record shows.

      And of course trying to figure out the 'tricky' problem of how have some sort of 'remote control' over an HTPC is akin to figure out how to have some sort of 'remote control' over a television...I wonder how that could possibly work.

      The problem the parent has is that apparently he doesn't have an HTPC near his bed, and doesn't want to set one up.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    14. Re:Not really seeing the market... by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      I have no idea why you think PCs can't have speakers built in, or why you have to have the TV on.

      A lot of people seem very confused about how a HTPC 'must' operate. There is absolutely nothing stopping an HTPC from operating without the screen on. There is nothing stopping them from having tiny LED displays for when the TV is off. There's nothing stopping them from having control buttons on the front.

      In fact, plenty of them already fit all those qualifications.

      If you want an internet radio device just does audio, well, that's fine. It's good to know there are low-power devices that can be cannibalized into them, especially cheap ones.

      But there's no need to go inventing reasons that HTPCs are impractical. There's nothing stopping anyone from having them do anything that article described. Hell, you can even fit them in cases that small. (Although a lot of that space was wasted in that article. Obviously, devices based off routers can be smaller that devices based off PCs.)

      An HTPC will just be more expensive, use more power, and probably be bigger than an audio-only device. All valid concerns.

      'switching on TVs and amps', however, are not.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    15. Re:Not really seeing the market... by soppsa · · Score: 1

      I disagree that it certainly sounds better than FM. I have used Sirius XM in several cars (none my own) including Mazda 3, Audi A6, Volkswagen Jetta, and I have yet to hear on where the compression isn't much worse than a good FM system.

      --
      Ogre Wedding Planners llc.
  8. The State of Multicast? by thms · · Score: 1

    And on the other end(s) of the loudspeaker, is the idea of multicasting going anywhere? After radio more and more TV, eventually in HD, will be streamed and having a full 1-1 connection for every client seems terribly wasteful.

    Is multicast tied too tighly to IPv6, already obsolete, can it be jury-rigged into IPv4 by the ISP and a smart enough router? I always feel bad when listening to a niche radio station for the bandwidth cost I incurr...

    1. Re:The State of Multicast? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm not a network guy and always wonder about multicast. In principle it seems so useful and simple. If it's implemented in ipv4, why is it that no broadcaster or p2p service gets to use it?

    2. Re:The State of Multicast? by maxume · · Score: 1

      If you weren't paying for it, you probably wouldn't be able to use it.

      --
      Nerd rage is the funniest rage.
    3. Re:The State of Multicast? by tagno25 · · Score: 1

      Is multicast tied too tighly to IPv6, already obsolete, can it be jury-rigged into IPv4 by the ISP and a smart enough router? I always feel bad when listening to a niche radio station for the bandwidth cost I incurr...

      You seem like a troll (because you say IPv6 is obsolete). Multicast was designed on IPv4.

    4. Re:The State of Multicast? by tepples · · Score: 1

      If it's implemented in ipv4, why is it that no broadcaster or p2p service gets to use it?

      It works over LANs but not the Internet. As I understand it, this is because the backbone providers and the last-mile ISPs don't know how to bill for multicast traffic.

    5. Re:The State of Multicast? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      Is multicast tied too tighly to IPv6, already obsolete

      You seem like a troll (because you say IPv6 is obsolete).

      No, he was saying "Is multicast tied to tightly to IPv6, is multicast already obsolete, etc"

    6. Re:The State of Multicast? by thms · · Score: 0, Troll

      Indeed, fellow literate :) - And troll is such a harsh word...

      Never attribute to malice that which is adequately explained by stupidity. (not saying whose)

      Does it think too far ahead and thus has the same problems as IPv6? Does some other technology make it obsolete for carriers? Such as maybe the technology of deep packet inspection and bundling known internet streams into one.

    7. Re:The State of Multicast? by Kizeh · · Score: 1

      Multicast works just peachy over IPv4, and has for a long, long time. That's how we distribute much of our streaming media on campus and over Internet2. Also, many interior routing protocols such as OSPF use multicast, as do various other systems management protocols/tools.
      Why ISPs like aren't using it for video and radio delivery is beyond me.

    8. Re:The State of Multicast? by amorsen · · Score: 1

      As I understand it, this is because the backbone providers and the last-mile ISPs don't know how to bill for multicast traffic.

      More likely it's because every multicast flow requires every router which touches it to keep state about that flow. Noone has invented a router which can keep track of millions of multicast flows, and anything less is going to be a problem on the open Internet.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
    9. Re:The State of Multicast? by amorsen · · Score: 1

      Why ISPs like aren't using it for video and radio delivery is beyond me.

      They do, but only the content they themselves provide. The whole point of the Internet is that you don't have to contact every ISP in the world when you set up a server.

      --
      Finally! A year of moderation! Ready for 2019?
  9. Waste of bandwidth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If I'm going to spend my bandwidth with audio, it better be something I get to KEEP. So, thanks but no thanks, I'll stick with torrenting.

    1. Re:Waste of bandwidth by jubei · · Score: 1

      Streaming sources like Pandora and Last.FM are free and legal. I don't have to search for music I like, and I don't have to worry about running out of storage space.

    2. Re:Waste of bandwidth by icebraining · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Streaming sources like Pandora and Last.FM are free and legal.

      Yes, if you don't count any country besides the US, UK and Germany.

      --
      Dilbert RSS feed
    3. Re:Waste of bandwidth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      TuneIn Radio (http://www.tunein-radio.com) for the iPhone/iPod Touch/iPad lets you record streams. I just started using this app last week and it's the nicest Internet radio player i've ever seen (be even better when iPhone OS 4.0 and multitasking is released).

      The price is a reasonable £1.19 (or $1.99 in funny money).

    4. Re:Waste of bandwidth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What, you count those other countries?

    5. Re:Waste of bandwidth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We don't.

      The site is owned by Geeknet, Inc. and run by its founder, Rob "CmdrTaco" Malda, working out of his home in Dexter, Michigan

  10. pricepoint is a repulsive word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    what is wrong with price ?
    pricepoint is pretensious market speak, use of which indicates lack of thought

    1. Re:pricepoint is a repulsive word by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Misspelling "pretentious" indicates pretense.

  11. Ipod Touch fulfills that function and many more by riker1384 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    An Ipod Touch can receive Internet radio through various apps, and it can fulfill many other functions as well. Why bother buying these one-purpose devices that usually cost almost as much, if not more than an 8GB Ipod Touch? There are probably smartphones (including the iPhone) that can do it, as well.

    1. Re:Ipod Touch fulfills that function and many more by Mutio · · Score: 1

      Exactly, I'm a paying pandora user and have many other internet radio stations that I use regularly. The answer to this is my Android phone, there are multiple apps for internet radio (shoutcast and others) and there is a dedicated Pandora app. With a touchscreen, and a very close price (i got my phone for $200 Ebay), i see no need for a device like this.

    2. Re:Ipod Touch fulfills that function and many more by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      But you could get the specialized device AND an iPod Touch to control it.

    3. Re:Ipod Touch fulfills that function and many more by Nerdfest · · Score: 1

      Why bother buying these one-purpose devices that usually cost almost as much

      Better sound quality?

    4. Re:Ipod Touch fulfills that function and many more by dangitman · · Score: 1

      Better sound quality?

      Buh? An iPod is capable of providing higher quality audio than any of the internet radio streams offer, so what are you talking about?

      --
      ... and then they built the supercollider.
    5. Re:Ipod Touch fulfills that function and many more by Hurricane78 · · Score: 2, Informative

      Except for the ability to use YouTube on it. Or play J2ME games on it. Or make phone calls. Or make photos. Or install what you like. Or have infinite space trough a memory card slot. Etc, etc, etc. ;) (I’m not informed on the latest from Apple, so feel free to remove what is now available.)
      I’m not saying you shouldn’t use what you like. Go ahead, have fun! :)

      I’m just saying that my mobile phone does all of the above, and lots more, costs less, and the sound quality is great. I use a Internet flat-rate with it that costs me 20€ a month.

      So in some way I agree, but think an Apple product is a bad example. (For the above reasons.)

      Internet Radio is already completely affordable. I have lots of ShoutCast streams on there. And I can stream my whole collection from home.

      --
      Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
    6. Re:Ipod Touch fulfills that function and many more by MyFirstNameIsPaul · · Score: 1

      SomaFM is offering its Groove Salad station in 128 kbps AAC.

      --

      I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.

    7. Re:Ipod Touch fulfills that function and many more by discojohnson · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Because it just works simply enough that I turn it on and turn it up. No crazy menus or the like. My kids can use it. Plus it does one thing well, unlike the bolt-on camera on my phone. I do not have an Internet radio standalone unit, but I do have a divx player that my 4 year old operates (no moving parts and no disks). The price point still makes me cringe though, and historically these web music players have been overpriced. My $70 picture frame is wireless, gets images over UPnP, but can still stream divx (with sound) off the network (why?) and has room for flicker feeds. If it can do all that and still have a good pricepoint, why not these specialized units?

    8. Re:Ipod Touch fulfills that function and many more by DavidTC · · Score: 1

      Except for the ability to use YouTube on it.

      Oh, a YouTube App. Why, on an iPod Touch, that takes several seconds to launch!

      Or play J2ME games on it.

      You can play J2ME games on your internet radio hardware? Weird.

      Or make phone calls.

      You can make phone calls on your internet radio hardware? What, using Skype?

      Or make photos.

      You can make photos on your internet radio hardware? Isn't it awkward having to get everyone in the right room in the right place? Can't your cell phone just take a picture wherever you are?

      Or install what you like.

      Hey, look, that might actually be possible, if you get, for example, a Sony Dash.

      Or have infinite space trough a memory card slot.

      ...why do you need space on internet radio hardware? Yes, yes, local music, but a NAS really sounds like a saner plan.

      I’m just saying that my mobile phone does all of the above, and lots more, costs less, and the sound quality is great.

      The sound quality better be great if you're using a damn mobile phone for an internet radio!

      I use a Internet flat-rate with it that costs me 20€ a month.

      Do you not have an internet connection in your house already? Why on earth would you pay a fee on top of that, for a shittier connection no less?

      And I can stream my whole collection from home.

      WOW! You can access your home music from home! That's amazing!

      Perhaps you should actually learn what this entire damn article and discussion is about, and what an iPod Touch is. Hint: iPod Touchs have no monthly fee at all, and do not not come with an internet connection.

      We are discussing pieces of hardware you install on a home network to listen to music both from the internet and on said network. We are not discussing cell phones. Someone mentioned a device, which is not a cell phone, called an iPod Touch that can get on a local network via wifi and present a music-playing interface.

      It was a generally stupid idea, because an iPod Touch is at least twice as expensive as dedicated devices without batteries and smaller screens and whatnot, but at least it made sense, and might be reasonable for people who want both a portable mp3 player and an internet radio...get them both as one thing. Likewise, smartphones, with wifi, might be a good choice. Not to buy one for this purpose, but if you have one, put it in a dock in a good location, hook it to your stereo, and fire up a streaming radio app.

      Your suggestion of 'a standard cell phone' does not make sense, as standard cell phones do not have wifi.

      --
      If corporations are people, aren't stockholders guilty of slavery?
    9. Re:Ipod Touch fulfills that function and many more by Luyseyal · · Score: 1

      Nokia E75 (S60 platform) does Internet streaming over wifi rather nicely. I bought it to listen to my beloved WOXY, but alas, they are dead right now.

      -l

      --
      Help cure AIDS, cancer, and more. Donate your unused computer time to worldcommunitygrid.org. Join Team Slashdot!
    10. Re:Ipod Touch fulfills that function and many more by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      //so what are you talking about?//

      He's probably talking about speakers, a radio is only as good as the speakers it has and these devices usually have quite good speakers attached to them. Adding 100-200 dollars to the cost of a ipod touch reduces it's value compared to all in ones such as the Squeezebox Boom.

  12. Internet radio ? No thanks, at least here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    where I live internet connections fail for at least a hour (if not days...) whenever a thunderstom strikes our village. On the other hand, most AM/FM and TV stations here are unaffected by power failures. It seems a good reason to keep my good old Sony.

    1. Re:Internet radio ? No thanks, at least here... by ctrl-alt-canc · · Score: 1

      Another good reason to keep your Sony is that power consumption for a radio receiver is usually quite small. I just measured the absorption of my radio receiver: it absorbs a mere 0.5 W while keeping the volume high enough to fill the kitchen with music. The internet receiver described in the article if I am right absorbs 2 W while running, 1 in standby. To this you have to add the power needed for powering up your network router, so you probably have to burn about 10 W for listening to the radio. Can we label internet radio as a green technology ?!?

  13. older palm tops work well too by i.r.id10t · · Score: 1

    Older palm tops like my Nokia 770 work well too. I have an old P75 with Debian and Darwin Streaming Server installed, plays my mp3 collection non stop on a few different play lists, I use the Nokia as a radio while mowing the lawn.

    --
    Don't blame me, I voted for Kodos
  14. Streaming media is a crock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Informative

    Internet radio can't be cheap as long as unreasonable download caps exist, as are common, at least in Canada. Broadcast radio costs effectively nothing, leave the radio on 24/7 if you want. If you try that with your net connection you'll be paying for surplus usage long before the month end.

    1. Re:Streaming media is a crock by MobyTurbo · · Score: 1

      Internet radio can't be cheap as long as unreasonable download caps exist, as are common, at least in Canada. Broadcast radio costs effectively nothing, leave the radio on 24/7 if you want. If you try that with your net connection you'll be paying for surplus usage long before the month end.

      Maybe for Canada, for USAians, we typically have "unlimited" service which is quite reasonable. Now, if you start running servers or doing a lot of bittorrent, you'll get temporarily capped or even booted off for running a server against your TOS, because upstream bandwidth is rationed, but downloading a radio stream at 128kbps? No problem.

    2. Re:Streaming media is a crock by corychristison · · Score: 1

      Not sure where you live in Canada...
      I live in Saskatchewan. The provincial gov't owned Sasktel does not impose any caps that I am aware of (well, at least they don't enforce them, if they do define them in the ToS).

      I would consider myself a heavy internet user in the sense that I download a lot (various sources, and mostly legal). I used to run a web server for development and testing but now rent a very cheap VPS after my hardware died. My wife watches and listens to streaming media daily while I'm at work (she's on maternity leave at the moment).

    3. Re:Streaming media is a crock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I'm in Ontario and use a third party dsl provider with a reasonable limit that isn't enforced but Bell has just been given the right to enforce caps on their resellers. Rogers is no better.

      Anyway the real problem with commercial streaming media is that you pay for it twice when you listen to it and you don't even get to keep it for repeat listening.

      You don't pay Shoutcast (for example) for any of their streams but they still have an associated cost that you pay your provider.

      Then again Broadcast radio has an associated cost to your sanity from the advertising and inane DJ chatter.

    4. Re:Streaming media is a crock by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Maybe having a 100GB monthly cap is better than a vague TOS. At least if it increases over the years.

    5. Re:Streaming media is a crock by MobyTurbo · · Score: 1

      You aren't going to use up a 100GB cap with 128kbps internet radio.

  15. Software radio=better. by elucido · · Score: 1

    Internet radio? What if the internet goes down? Now software radio on the other hand can be useful in all sorts of situations whether you use the internet or not.

  16. Opensource by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Icecast + Liquidsoap is all you need for your internet radio broadcast needs.

  17. O2 Joggler by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Bit late now, but O2 here in the UK had O2 Joggler's going for £50 ($75) for a fortnight last month.

  18. So who need Internet Radio? by BrentRJones · · Score: 1

    What is the point?

    --
    Help end the use of Sigs. Tomorrow
    1. Re:So who need Internet Radio? by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

      Maybe you should get out more.

      Nowadays, few people are born, grow up, settle down, marry, get children, grow old and die in the same little village.

      There is a whole world out there with hundreds of countries and thousands of states, with thousands of radio stations, that you cannot receive over the air in your little burg.

      --
      Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
    2. Re:So who need Internet Radio? by Internalist · · Score: 1

      I was going to post something about that statement maybe being valid in North America and Western Europe, but not for the bulk of the world's population, but it turns out that a few minutes' Googling hasn't given me anything to back my position up with...go figure.

      --
      Research is what I'm doing when I don't know what I'm doing. -- Wernher von Braun
  19. Useless "review" by metamatic · · Score: 1

    The entire review is apparently predicated on the idea that you'll control the thing from an iPod Touch or iPhone.

    If you have an iPod Touch or iPhone, what the hell do you need this thing for?

    Tell us what it's like to actually use the device itself.

    --
    GCHQ Quantum Insert installed. If only our tongues were made of glass, how much more careful we would be when we speak
  20. Roku SoundBridge by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You can usually pick up a Roku SoundBridge from ebay for about £50. Excellent devices :-)

  21. radio is free why would i pay for internet radio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    /.

  22. Convergent device by irober02 · · Score: 1

    I've a couple of DAB+ digital radios that also have WiFi/LAN connection options so I can tune in or play music from UPNP shares on my home network and network radio (and FM broadcast too but I've no need for that as the broadcast stations of interest to my ears all broadcast digitally now). I quite like these Linux-driven devices and think the convergence quite handy - clock radios that can play practically any audio content I'm interested in. I hardly ever use them as network radios but, should I have a sudden desire for some Romanian Gypsy Pop Fusion, I'll know where to turn ;-)

  23. Teguh Alam Hidayat by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    wasn't it already free?

    Teguh Alam Hidayat

  24. One more vote for Squeezebox by r3b00tm0nk3y · · Score: 2, Informative

    It's worth a bit more but worth it. The cumulative benefit of the system is great, considering you can add nodes easily once its in place and sync or not sync. Especially awesome when combined with MusicIP.

    TFA looks like a troll. There are actually a lot of devices out there which meet the criteria.

    If you're conscious about price and have lax wireless security get find a linksys wmls11b on line. For $30-40 it can't be beat!

    --
    This sig is alpha and shouldn't be viewed on production machines
  25. Mod whole story "slashvertisement". by mattdm · · Score: 1

    Seriously.

  26. $100 isn't that big a deal for an Internet Radio by uksv29 · · Score: 1

    I've had a freecom Internet Radio[1] for about 2 years now which cost about $100 (GBP 60).

    Its a flexible unit with WLAN, Ethernet etc.

    Andy

    [1] http://www.freecom.com/product.asp?CatID=1148017

  27. Slashvertisement by kriston · · Score: 1

    This is a veiled slashvertisement for Parallax Propellor.

    In related news, each of my WiFi internet radios cost under $150.
    We're almost there already.

    --

    Kriston

    1. Re:Slashvertisement by Kizeh · · Score: 1

      I was wondering if I was the only one the slasdot posting struck as straight ad copy, for a product that's not particularly new, unique or cheap.

    2. Re:Slashvertisement by kriston · · Score: 1

      The original article just completely changed to something else that doesn't even mention the Propellor. You have to love the journalistic integrity around here.

      --

      Kriston

  28. So then you agree? by SuperKendall · · Score: 1

    SomaFM is offering its Groove Salad station in 128 kbps AAC.

    And what is your point? The Touch can reproduce audio with a lot higher quality than a 128kbps stream offers... itunes by default now is 256k for music.

    Really though, the question would be how well each device would do with audio output... I think either would be more than able to reproduce a 128k stream perfectly well, but as the original poster noted a Touch is more flexible.

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:So then you agree? by MyFirstNameIsPaul · · Score: 1

      My understanding is that 128 kbps AAC is better than CD quality. What is the source material?

      My point is just that nearly any device capable of decoding an AAC stream can produce extremely high quality music. Most headphone jacks, even very cheap ones, have a very flat frequency response and little noise, especially considering the final amplifier.

      --

      I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.

    2. Re:So then you agree? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      My understanding is that 128 kbps AAC is better than CD quality. What is the source material?

      From the 2 or 3 posts I've read of yours so far, it's absolutely crystal clear that you have NO IDEA what you're talking about and are 100% out of your element. I'd suggest taking Lincoln's maxim to heart: "Tis better to be silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and remove all doubt." OTOH, from the nature of what you've written, you probably have no idea what that saying even means...

    3. Re:So then you agree? by FaxeTheCat · · Score: 1

      >My understanding is that 128 kbps AAC is better than CD quality.

      Your understanding is totally wrong. How can a compressed version be better than the original?
      After all, most of the source material are CD's.

    4. Re:So then you agree? by MyFirstNameIsPaul · · Score: 1

      Actually, that was a totally screwed-up amalgam of two sentences. What I meant to say is that most people are getting their material from either iTunes or a similar service or torrents, which are not CD quality, and generally lower than 128 kbps. I fully realize that AAC is a 'lossy' compression and not as good as a CD, but the bast majority people are not buying CD's and then converting to FLAC and playing on their iTouch or what have you.

      To tell you the truth, I've been totally disappointed with the music industry ever since the mid-90s. When they announced they were creating newer formats like DVD-Audio, I thought that finally we would get something that, from a fidelity perspective, was truly an evolution in playback. The CD was actually a downgrade from reel-to-reel and often, depending on the quality of final mixing, worse than even record players. Of course that format never came down in price to match CD's, which I had hoped for since it's basically the same manufacturing process and no more expensive to produce an album for, but that never happened. And XM and downloadable music is pretty much a complete joke.

      --

      I once took an excursion to Reddit, and later HN. Unlimited up/down voting sucks when dealing with a hive-mind.

    5. Re:So then you agree? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And just who is included in this "bast majority"??? And what you "meant to say" just happens to be the exact opposite of what you did say...twice? Sounds like after being called an idiot (yeah, that was me) you bothered to take a few moments to do a little bit of research. Next time, try doing that little bit of research BEFORE you start making moronic posts.

    6. Re:So then you agree? by soppsa · · Score: 1

      128kbps AAC is def not CD quality. The compression is quite noticeable. It's better than 128kbps MP3 to be sure... but CD quality? nope. Having said this it really does depend on the kind of music and the quality of the equipment you are listening to it on. Highend headphones will make this most apparent.

      --
      Ogre Wedding Planners llc.
  29. Touch comes with YouTube. by SuperKendall · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Except for the ability to use YouTube on it.

    Dude, it ships with a YouTube app!

    Or play J2ME games on it.

    HA HA HA HA HA HA HA.

    Wouldn't you rather play some of the literally 50k commercially produced games that are in fact written for the Touch??

    I seriously cannot believe you are saying you'd rather buy a device that supports J2ME over a Touch for GAMES!!!

    I'm just saying that my mobile phone does all of the above

    Right, it "does" that in the same way a rock and a stream "does" laundry.

    I use a Internet flat-rate with it that costs me 20 a month.

    The Touch is even cheaper since it uses your home WiFi.

    Since we are talking about a home solution for internet radio...

    --
    "There is more worth loving than we have strength to love." - Brian Jay Stanley
    1. Re:Touch comes with YouTube. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ##Or play J2ME games on it.

      #HA HA HA HA HA HA HA.

        Its this kind of smarmy reply that makes me want to stay away from the iPod touch

      "you want to drive on the highway? HAHAHAHAHA! You can't drive on those roads, but we have plenty of roads (controlled by us) that are available."

  30. I just broadcast in FM by cat_jesus · · Score: 1

    I got myself a ramsey fm transmitter from here and hooked up a cheap dedicated PC with my 3 terabyte music collection and I can hear my music from anywhere in the house or outside on cheap fm radios.

    Sometimes people over think things.

  31. Internet radio and Jazz in NYC? by Announcer · · Score: 1

    Jazz? On which station? There used to be one, but they dropped the Jazz format about a year ago. Unbelievably, they dropped it and became YET *ANOTHER* rock station... a real waste, because there are already about 20 of those on my radio! (I kid you not!) No jazz, anymore. None.

    Internet "radio" certainly has its place, but with the hands of the Music MAFIAA reaching pretty deeply into so many pockets, it's not easy to make it FREE. Even Pandora cuts you off after a certain number of hours per month, now... DESPITE their annoying commercials. Terrestrial stations that are also streaming, shell out pretty big bux for those streams. Internet-only stations do, too, and have a bunch of draconian restrictions on how they can format their music! (No more than 4 songs by any one artist in a THREE HOUR time span, for example.) So much for 1'st Amendment Freedom?

    --
    Willie...
    1. Re:Internet radio and Jazz in NYC? by camperdave · · Score: 1

      they dropped it and became YET *ANOTHER* rock station... a real waste, because there are already about 20 of those on my radio!

      Where is that? Around here all the rock stations are turning to dance/hip-hop stations.

      --
      When our name is on the back of your car, we're behind you all the way!
    2. Re:Internet radio and Jazz in NYC? by Newer+Guy · · Score: 1

      Jazz in NYC-WBGO 88.3 FM. www.wbgo.org They stream too.

    3. Re:Internet radio and Jazz in NYC? by Announcer · · Score: 1

      We cannot hear WBGO in this area. Here is their coverage map:

      http://www.radio-locator.com/cgi-bin/pat?call=WBGO&service=FM&status=L&hours=U

      My workplace is in Norwalk, CT. The Jazz station that changed format used to reach well past Fairfield.

      --
      Willie...
    4. Re:Internet radio and Jazz in NYC? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      I hate it when a good station changes format. Chicago used to have real jazz all night every night on WBEZ, now it's international news.

      There is a new AM signal that's religious programming during the day, but after dark turns into some very cool jazz. I was walking the dog the other week and switched around after the Hawks game. In one set, I heard Johnny Hartman and John Coltrane do My One and Only Love, Ornette Coleman's Soapsuds Soapsuds and an duet of Blossom Dearie and Bob Dorough singing Too Much in Love. On some nights, they do a live feed from the Green Mill lounge, which is a jazz landmark in Chicago. Just a few minutes ago I heard a live set by Ken Vandermark's group, which is pretty outside.

      Unfortunately, being an AM signal, the fidelity isn't that good. There are still a few college FM stations nearby that I can sort of pick up (I'm in the shadow of the Sears Tower) that will play jazz and an eclectic assortment of other music. I can relate to those stations because I was a college DJ myself back in the Bronze Age.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
  32. Um...how is this better than AirTunes/PandoraJam? by droopus · · Score: 1

    What am I missing here?

    Ok, I run wifi via an Airport Extreme and Optimum Boost (30mbps down, $10 a month extra.)

    I have four Airport Expresses with AirTunes and PandoraJam sending either "radio" (AirTunes) or Pandora to each Express, each hooked up to its own stereo/wireless speakers.

    I can send different content to each Express, which I don't think a Roku/Grace device can do. So what's the advantage? Serious question, not being rhetorical....

    --
    "The pie shall be cut in half and each man shall receive.....death. I'll eat the pie."
  33. No thanks. by nataflux · · Score: 1

    Or I can just set up my psp/droid phone/netbook to my sound system and stream 128k+ shoutcast stations for free

  34. Streamtuner by flyingfsck · · Score: 1

    Streamtuner works for me. One does need a good internet connection of course, else the sound will be choppy on these things.

    --
    Excuse me, but please get off my Pennisetum Clandestinum, eh!
  35. ARIR-205 by Newer+Guy · · Score: 1
    I've had one of these for over a year, and it works very well. It also receives AM and FM stereo, has 512 megs of memory for audio record/playback and also will play files off a USB drive. It doesn't do AAC, but does do Real Audio. It has a headphone output and sounds quite good. It works with an Internet portal. It also has personalized weather forecasts, an atomic clock, alarm, and works with Slacker, etc.

    83 dollars including shipping and also comes with a wireless access point.

    http://www.amazon.com/RCA-RIR205-Infinite-Tabletop-Internet/dp/B0016OI1BY/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1273383534&sr=8-1

    They also sell an RCA branded one for the same price:

    http://www.amazon.com/RCA-RIR205-Infinite-Tabletop-Internet/dp/B0016OI1BY/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=electronics&qid=1273383900&sr=1-2

  36. Revos by Noodlenose · · Score: 1
    Most Revo models do DAB, DAB+, Wifi or Ethernet powered internet radio, FM, play your Windoze hd and your ipod. http://revo.co.uk/

    NN

  37. Internet radio is great, but... by Peet42 · · Score: 1

    I bought a refurbished Revo Blik a few months back, and it's fantastic! The only problem is if I go to bed having queued up three or four files on BitTorrent it's impossible to listen to it as you fall asleep - you get five seconds of sound, ten seconds of silence repeated until the BT download finishes.

  38. Sony Dash - touchscreen for mother by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    How about the Sony Dash?

    Sure, it costs $199 but it has wireless wifi, has a 7 inch touch screen, acts as an alarm clock as well as streams video from Netflix Youtube and whatever to it's 7" screen with a higher resolution than a DVD and also does Pandora and other Internet Radio. It can also check the weather/news etc and has a customizable "desktop". It has over 1500 custom free apps available for it and you can use it to check as well as send your email.

    I just found out about it yesterday and am seriously thinking about getting it for my mother. She isn't very good with computers but loves Star Trek and could definitely get into using it's touch screen like she's seen on Star Trek. It's also really good looking and is shaped much like a clock/radio she already has. I think it would be a really good bridge for her to get used to using computers, and I could actually finally email her if she had it sitting next to where she normally sits! Here is a link to the official page for the Dash, I also found it for sale at Newegg.

    http://www.sonystyle.com/webapp/wcs/stores/servlet/ProductDisplay?storeId=10151&catalogId=10551&langId=-1&productId=8198552921666081675

    I would have logged in to post this but I'm at work and don't remember my current password.

    1. Re:Sony Dash - touchscreen for mother by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      But that is...illogical.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
  39. slashvertisement fail by drinkypoo · · Score: 1

    http://www.gracedigitalaudio.com/solo-wireless-radio-media-streamer-p-94.html

    145 Table './gracedig_gracedigital/zen_gda2_whos_online' is marked as crashed and should be repaired
    in:
    [delete from zen_gda2_whos_online where time_last_click '1273407072']

    Don't these incompetents know that you have to prepare for heavy traffic when you purchase a slashvertisement?
    $100 is about two times too much for this; when you can get HD video for $99, paying $99 to stream internet radio seems retarded. You could buy a used PDA at a flea market or yard sale and do the same thing (Except you'd have access to a lot more streams) for the same amount or less.

    --
    "You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
  40. Squeezebox RADIO by ChrisCampbell47 · · Score: 2, Informative

    By posting this, I'm undoing some much-needed moderation I already did on this thread, but nobody's said anything about it so I gotta do it.

    Squeezebox RADIO. No, not a Squeezebox, a Squeezebox RADIO.

    http://www.logitechsqueezebox.com/products/squeezebox-radio.html

    Knobs. Buttons. A little display. Wired and wireless Ethernet. A powerful loudspeaker.

    Quote: If only I could just hit the power switch, and then turn a knob to the "KGO" station... ? I'd be pretty likely to buy something like this.

    And I did exactly that a couple months ago. Drove over to my local big box electronics retailer and drove home with a Logitech Squeezebox Radio (it was definitely hard to find in the store, though, since it straddles the world of boomboxes/radios and internet gear).

    At $150 it's not really that cheap, but it does exactly what many people here are clamoring for: gives them SIMPLE one-button access to internet radio, without having to fire up a full-blown PC app. I bought it for my elderly father, and have a preset button (a hardware button) set to KCBS (San Francisco), WINS (New York), an internet station that plays Celtic tunes, and so forth. Two button presses (power + preset) and he's got the sound filling the room, and the PC can stay off.

    And soon the battery module will be available for sale and he'll be able to carry the radio around, even.

    This is a solved problem, folks. Go buy one for your elderly relative.

    --
    One simple rule for its versus it's
  41. Logik IR100 broke the ground first by jrumney · · Score: 1

    About 3 years ago, the UK Currys/Dixons in-house brand Logik came out with the IR100 (also Reciva based) at GBP79.99. Within a few months they were marked down to GBP39.99 - a significantly lower price point than the USD100+ for the Solo.

  42. A surprisingly affordable pricepoint! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So, it is 'cheap' then.

  43. roku radio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    roku radio has been around for quite some time now for around the same price point.

  44. Misused Jargon Alert by fm6 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    A price point is an economic term. It refers to a theoretical optimum on a price curve. The word for the actual price of something is (drum roll please) "price."

    Yeah, I know, this sort of semantic nitpicking is obnoxious. But I can't help myself, because people keep giving me money when I do it. Hence the name of my website.

  45. $100 and hackable by Matt_Bennett · · Score: 1

    Microchip has an "Internet Radio" with an OLED display as a demo board: http://www.microchipdirect.com/ProductSearch.aspx?keywords=DM183033 It is completely hackable, the complete source is available.