Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Why UK FM Needn't Be Killed For Broadband

Posted by timothy on from the next-we'll-cure-all-known-diseases dept.

superglaze writes "Alarmed by rumours of the UK telecoms regulator Ofcom considering a shut-down of FM radio in order to give more spectrum over to broadband, ZDNet UK's Rupert Goodwins has proposed another idea: the reuse of the mostly disused 'Band I' and the creation of a new, national open mesh network — a plan that could bring internet connectivity to everyone at very low cost."

8 of 108 comments (clear)

  1. They can't kill FM any time soon by Nick+Fel · · Score: 5, Informative

    I don't know what Ofcom is thinking. Take-up on digital radio is low, costs are still high, and the benefits to the consumer are minimal when compared to digital TV. I really can't imagine people retrofitting every car and replacing every alarm clock.

    1. Re:They can't kill FM any time soon by mattsday · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Exactly this. I have a DAB (Digital) Radio in my car. However, I find myself using FM (or even AM) about 20-30% of the time just to get a good signal.

      Problems I've had:

      • No graceful degradation of quality. There are three modes - good, awful and "no signal". By 'awful' think a poorly encoded MP3 from a scratched CD downloaded in ASCII mode.
      • Semi-frequent drop-outs. I read that most people listen to the radio in their cars these days. However, even sticking to the UK Motorway system, I end up with "No Signal" quite frequently, even along major routes.
      • Time lag - DAB lags more than a couple of seconds behind FM, so when I'm using the 'pips' to set my watch it's off by a long way (minor grudge I guess)

      In short, I'm someone who went and bought in to the DAB idea and I like some features (e.g. having 5 live and Absolute Radio available in most places not counting the above). However, I think DAB needs some serious re-thinks before it can fully replace FM. Unless you can drive the length of the country and experience the same reception and quality as FM then it shouldn't be replaced.

      --
      Now there's one hoopy frood who really knows where his towel is!
    2. Re:They can't kill FM any time soon by itsdapead · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Contrary to that most people belive, you do NOT have a god-given right to listen to radio on a device that was sold before the semiconductor was invented.

      Whereas people do have a god-given right to wireless broadband wherever they choose to live?

      Anyhow, the issue is not people having to replace the 1930 cat's whisker rig in their living room: its people having to replace all the cheap, modern FM radios in their bedrooms, cars, boats, showers, potting sheds, phones/personal audio players with expensive DAB sets which might not even be able to receive a signal and offer few other advantages.

      Don't do it over night, but set a clear deadline, ie. 2015, 2020.

      ...and people will ignore it until right before the deadline :-)

      You also need to have a viable alternative in place - currently, DAB is not that alternative.

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    3. Re:They can't kill FM any time soon by itsdapead · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I don't know what Ofcom is thinking. Take-up on digital radio is low, costs are still high, and the benefits to the consumer are minimal when compared to digital TV. I really can't imagine people retrofitting every car and replacing every alarm clock.

      Hmm. Is the DAB band any good for broadband? If so, I think we have a winner.

      DAB is a waste of space: its redundant in the living room, with many of the radio channels available in better quality over DVB or internet radio, and its a non-solution to the problem of cheap portable radios with widespread reception. Kill it with fire.

      --
      In a survey of 100 programmers, 111111 thought that duck-typing was a good idea.
    4. Re:They can't kill FM any time soon by Teknikal69 · · Score: 3, Interesting
      I don't rate digital radio at all it's worse quality than FM not to mention the radios themselves suck up way more power and seem to break incredibly quickly. Of all things digital I can think of digital radio is the only one that's really a step backwards in my opinion.

      Wouldn't suprise me if they forced this through anyway though for a short term profit.

  2. Would Government approve and open mesh? by Thnurg · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Please correct me of I'm wrong, but an open mesh network would completely decentralise internet connectivity leaving the Government with no way to implement website blocking and three-strikes laws etc.
    While a truly democratic government would support open mesh in the public interest I doubt our lot would approve it.

    --
    The months are just too short. I can count the number of days on one hand.
  3. The real reason behind killing fm... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny

    The UK government (and, well, various lobby groups of course) is rooting for rolling out digital radio (the already outdated and creaky DAB) and since few listeners care for a worse listening experience ("mud bubbles") at the price of more expensive radio sets with shorter battery life, any other reason to kill FM radio is welcome.

    And yes there's plenty of unused spectrum available now so that FM needn't be killed. In fact, there's a consultation going on right now about 600MHz which basically poses the question "what the bloody blazes shall we do with it? Any ideas? Anyone? Puhleeze?!?" virtually with exclamation marks and all.

  4. I repeat it once again, dear Anonymous Coward by VAElynx · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Stop hiding behind the "we" and state who really needs it - manufacturers and sellers of DAB, and assorted companies to carry out the conversion of emitter stations...
    Even though some problems can be addressed, things like inherent high power consumption of digital devices and the fact that a digital signal doesn't degrade well (and having more error recover codes means you have to transmit more signal per second worsening the first problem) will stay here no matter what you use. (the last will probably force building more emitters... or doing it the US way of not giving a crap about those too far)
    And why the fuck is "analog age coming to an end" ? I thought it's best to use whatever technology does the best job.. but then i have the outdated 20th century belief that technology should serve man and not the opposite.