Slashdot Mirror


Campaign Demands Telecoms Unlock the FM Radio Found in Many Smartphones (www.cbc.ca)

An anonymous reader cites an article on CBC: Your smartphone may include an FM radio chip but, chances are, it doesn't work. Now, an online campaign has launched in Canada, putting pressure on telecoms and manufacturers to turn on the radio hidden in many cellphones. Titled, "free radio on my phone," the campaign says that most Android smartphones have a built-in FM receiver which doesn't require data or Wi-Fi to operate. The U.S. arm of the campaign believes iPhones also have a built-in radio chip but that it can't be activated. Apple wouldn't confirm this detail. The radio chip in many Android phones also lies dormant. But the campaign says it can easily be activated -- if telecom providers ask the manufacturers to do it. In Canada, however, most of the telecoms haven't made the move to get the radio turned on. They'd prefer that you stream your audio, depleting your phone's costly data plan, claims campaign organizer, Barry Rooke.

340 comments

  1. FM radio's last gasp? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I wonder how much of this is actual consumer demand for listening to ads and the same songs every hour to avoid data overages vs. FM radio's last desperate gasp to remain relevant now that streaming is offering an alternative?

    --
    I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    1. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      Hello,

      Public radio tends to be quite good. NPR in the states, France Info, Inter, culture (etc...) in france... and I assume similar chanels in other countries.

      Cyrille

    2. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by SQLGuru · · Score: 4, Insightful

      FM sucks. AM or nothing.

      Actually, I tend to listen to more AM than FM when I listen to the radio because I prefer talk radio over music (granted, most of that sucks, even)...... So I'll just stick to the various podcasts I listen to.....better content and downloaded over wi-fi so I don't use up my data.

    3. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by larwe · · Score: 2

      Not to mention that FM radio is possibly going away ish in favor of digital broadcasts (of course, this has been happening forever... http://www.radioworld.com/arti... )

    4. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by fyngyrz · · Score: 3, Informative

      Broadcast AM (@ ~1MHz) is somewhat tougher to receive without a considerably more substantial antenna as compared to broadcast FM (@ ~ 100 MHz.)

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    5. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Interesting

      I disagree - and there are tested historical facts to show my point.
      At 9/11, the cell towers couldn't handle the load and basically cell
      phones became useless as communication devices. And with no
      data, no "FM" app would work either.

      Now, an analogue FM radio won't allow you to phone home, but
      with an emergency like that, you'd at least be able to get some
      sort of news, maybe helpful information about the event. And it's
      not like the chips in the phone are defective FM receivers, they
      are intentionally disabled by iApple (and other like-manufacturers)
      to force you to use an app to gain that functionality. Sadly, users
      believe that the app is the FM receiver and they're not corrected
      by the salesman.

      I'd like to see this as an FCC mandate (that cell phones are required to
      have a non-app working FM receiver) since it really is a public safety issue.
      That's just common sense, IMHO.

      CAP === 'invented'

    6. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      FM in most of Europe is good.

      FM is decent bandwidth.

      FM is analogue, which means it degrades far more gracefully than digital.

      Local FM is more likely to reach your receiver than a mobile signal.

      FM doesn't get congested as the number of listeners goes up.

      FM doesn't require me to pay for a data plan.

      et fucking cetera.

      FM is a great solution for local radio. It's the difference between me a) writing down a message on a piece of paper, photocopying it, and handing it out to everyone in the auditorium; and b) ensuring everyone can hear me at once by increasing the volume of my voice.

    7. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 5, Insightful

      I certainly don't doubt that FM broadcasters are...looking kindly and charitably... on this oh-so-grassroots campaign(and possibly doing some direct assisting); but it seems like a situation where it isn't an either/or: As a handset owner I'm clearly better off if the FM tuner I already have is decrippled(even if I don't end up using it, I've already paid whatever pittance it costs to implement FM reception with modern hardware, so I'm no worse off for actually having the option to use it; and if I do feel like using it I'm obviously better off); and FM broadcasters are certainly in a much better position if they are a roughly equal option, relative to streaming services, when I pick up my phone and choose an audio player application to use. Merely being present won't save them if they suck; but being able to tune in as easily as I can start whatever streaming app makes me a lot more likely to bother than needing a separate radio to do so.

      There are some situation where the lobbying is an ugly business of two or more industries fighting over the right to screw the customer; but this seems like a case where, even if the free-our-phones side is largely a shill for broadcasters, it's still the shill acting in the interests of users.

      Now, if they were pushing to make FM support legally mandatory (probably for some BS 'safety' reason) or playing the support-local-culture card to demand that the FM tuner app be given a suitably prominent and impossible-to-delete position in order to save Canadianness from the internet, or similar nonsense, that would be a serious problem; but if it just so happens that a nontrivially powerful industry pressure group also wants your phone's firmware to suck less? That sounds like a bonus.

    8. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Sir_Eptishous · · Score: 5, Insightful

      There is Public Radio(NPR) that have very few ads, and fantastic quality programming.
      They also play BBC content which is also great.
      Then there are "community" radio stations that play all sorts of music and news programs that are great.

      Perhaps you should pull your head out of the internet for a moment and take a look around at what else is out there.

      --
      We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
    9. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      NPR is about as "state run" as Sesame Street and Antiques Roadshow.

    10. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Funny

      So how are cars receiving AM without 160 meter long antennas?

    11. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Not state-run, public. Admittedly, it's got more and more commercials/sponsors now, but very little money actually comes from the feds. It's probably a misnomer to call it "public", but that's what it's known as. And since they lean quite liberal, it's sometimes antagonistic to the party in power - hardly a mouthpiece of the state.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    12. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Eravnrekaree · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Whats killing FM is the HORRIBLE noise that passes for music these days, including Perry, Gaga and all the rest of that trash. NPR definitely has the best music selections. Some say the news is biased for"public" radio, when there are plenty of other outlets that offer such biased news. Nevertheless as a Republican, I support it anyway for the classical music and folk music that commercial stations don't touch.

    13. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Wycliffe · · Score: 2

      I'd like to see this as an FCC mandate (that cell phones are required to
      have a non-app working FM receiver) since it really is a public safety issue.
      That's just common sense, IMHO.

      CAP === 'invented'

      I know you're probably referring to a "fake FM app" when you say "non-app FM" but I think it's worth mentioning. It would obviously be hard to control the FM receiver without some sort of app. As the receiver is already there, I would love for the FM receiver to be opened up to third party app developers. It might even be possible to see innovation in this space. "Tivo for FM" would be an app I might actually pay for and use. Other creative uses could probably also be found.

    14. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      I like to listen to NPR morning edition I also think that a lot of spanish speakers may want to listen to spanish language stations and not use up data.
      The thing is if the chip is in the phone and can turned on easily then why not have the option?

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    15. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Eravnrekaree · · Score: 1

      a feritt rod is more substaintial than a telescoping FM antenna?

    16. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Holi · · Score: 1

      With a twin coil ferrite or loopstick antenna, which while it is significantly smaller then a random wire, or dipole it still is larger then you want to stick in your pocket.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    17. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by pchasco · · Score: 5, Insightful

      NPR is not state-run. They receive some (diminishing) state funding, but that's all. And if you actually listen to it you'll realize that any single journalist on NPR has more integrity than all of the "journalists" on for-profit cable and radio news combined. NPR has no qualms with reporting uncomfortable facts and asking tough questions of public figures and politicians, regardless of any party affiliation, from local politicians all the way up to President Obama. And they are the only news media I regularly consume which explicitly informs consumers of any affiliation NPR has with a subject of their reporting so that you can decide yourself whether or not that is a factor in how the story was reported.

    18. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Eravnrekaree · · Score: 1

      They already have digital broadcasts on the FM band, piggybacked on the analog signal, called HD Radio. Best Buy has a portable that can recieve the HD Radio signals.HD Radio on the FM band has been more controversial due to the negative impact on long range DX reception of AM clear channel stations, something which can actually still be quite valuable.

    19. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Eravnrekaree · · Score: 1

      I meant to say on the AM band it has been controversial.

    20. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Lumpy · · Score: 1, Interesting

      HDFM (Hybrid Digital FM, not what they want you to think it is) Is not getting any decent traction anywhere. The radios stations hate spending money so they usually dont upgrade the modulator to get the HDFM signal, and almost NO radios support receiving HDFM..

      Broadcasthas been dying for years, I have not listened to FM for 10 years now, I grabbed Sirius and haven't looked back. And contrary to the poor people that whine about Sat radio and how nobody uses it... Last report was over 28,000,000 subscribers with an average of two receivers (I personally have 4). Comcast has fewer customers.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    21. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by tepples · · Score: 4, Insightful

      a [ferrite] rod is more [substantial] than a telescoping FM antenna?

      Yes. A lot of FM radios get away with using the earbuds as an antenna that telescopes all the way up from your pocket to your ears.

    22. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 4, Informative

      FM is decent bandwidth.

      You are correct, FM does use a lot of bandwidth which could be used far more efficiently.

      FM is analogue, which means it degrades far more gracefully than digital

      Sure, if you're comparing it to a digital signal with no error correction. If you use vaguely modern error correcting codes (as in, developed in the last 50 years), then digital signals can correct all errors long after analogue signals are indistinguishable from white noise to a human. The reason that this idiotic myth persists is that the switch to digital radio and TV broadcasts came with a slight decrease in range as a result of a huge decrease in transmitter power.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    23. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by fishscene · · Score: 4, Insightful

      When the power goes out or you are stuck in the wilderness or there's some other lack of Internet infrastructure, I prefer to not have my critical source of information handicapped because of someone else's greedy hands. If the hardware is there, ENABLE IT. If the hardware is there in other countries DONT REMOVE IT specifically for other countries. I'm looking at you, Samsung Galaxy S3 (Europe version has FM radio, US does not)

    24. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Comboman · · Score: 2

      And contrary to the poor people that whine about Sat radio and how nobody uses it... Last report was over 28,000,000 subscribers

      How many of those are people who bought a new car in the last year and got 1 year of Sirius for free?

      --
      Support Right To Repair Legislation.
    25. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Indeed. There will never be a smart phone with an integral ferrite bar antenna. AM is a real throwback in terms of wavelength; 540–1610 kHz in the US. That's kilohertz; 5 orders of magnitude lower than most FM radio. Nothing really wrong with that except you can't detect it well without a long enough piece of wire, so AM radio and very small portable devices are fundamentally incompatible.

      There is a good public safety argument to be made in support of FM radio reception. FM stations radiate a lot energy and cover much larger areas than cell towers. When the proverbial shit hits the fan they are likely to still be operating and broadcasting valuable information to people out of range of cell or cut off from cell by congestion. There is absolutely no technical reason smartphones with a headphone wire (the antenna) couldn't receive FM radio with extremely high fidelity.

      Likelywise, there isn't any technical reason a smartphone couldn't also receive digital television broadcasts... They could easily contain the digital codecs (if they don't have them already.) $20 USB dongles do this now.

    26. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by tepples · · Score: 1

      HD Radio on the FM band has been more controversial due to the negative impact on long range DX reception of AM clear channel stations

      That and the fact that iBiquity never published a complete spec for the audio codec used in the NRSC-5 receiver and transmitter.

    27. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by PublicSchill · · Score: 0

      Not to mention how much of the spectrum is wasted with FM radio. If we got rid of it and used those frequencies for something else we'd all be better off.

    28. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by oh_my_080980980 · · Score: 1

      More so than Fox News *eye roll*

    29. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by phrostie · · Score: 1

      my current phone is not a carrier branded phone.
      I bought it on amazon.
      it has a number of features that would have been blocked or deleted on a branded phone.
      it also is lacking the bloat that the carriers install on top android.

      it's definitely the way to go.

    30. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sometimes. I listened to a segment on NPR a few weeks ago about how Craig Write invented Bitcoin.

    31. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by kheldan · · Score: 2

      Guess what, friend? We can enable the FM receiver on your phone right now, without your permission -- and nobody is forcing you to use it at all. You can go on about your business as usual, using up your dataplan to listen to streaming services, or your own music, or whatever, and it won't change anything for you. On the other hand, people who'd like to use it on their own phone are then free to do so, and profit thereby. If I didn't know any better, I'd be tempted to think that in so many words you're saying 'Stop liking what I don't like!', but of course that would be silly, now wouldn't it? I'd also be tempted to wonder if you're a paid shill for the telecom companies or some other competing interest, but that would be rather silly, too, wouldn't it?

      If the hardware is there, people have paid for it, they should be allowed to use it, plain and simple.

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    32. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by pr0fessor · · Score: 1

      Maybe but then again you can blow an awful lot of money letting a streaming service run 8-10 hours a day in the back ground while you are working and not necessarily listening intently.

    33. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Insightful

      You are correct, FM does use a lot of bandwidth which could be used far more efficiently.

      Could be, but doesn't need to be. I don't need a hundred low quality local stations (bitrate AND content). There's enough spectrum for FM.

      Sure, if you're comparing it to a digital signal with no error correction. If you use vaguely modern error correcting codes (as in, developed in the last 50 years), then digital signals can correct all errors long after analogue signals are indistinguishable from white noise to a human.

      Proof please, using a codec that's actually used in broadcasting.

      The reason that this idiotic myth persists is that the switch to digital radio and TV broadcasts came with a slight decrease in range as a result of a huge decrease in transmitter power.

      Proof please, using UK transmission power and coverage data collected from users.

    34. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by fyngyrz · · Score: 4, Interesting

      So far, though, those $20 dongles require quite a lot of additional CPU power to do WFM demodulation, which requires a minimum of 180 Khz bandwidth (in the US, WFM is allocated 200 KHz slots, within which 75% modulation is the legal maximum, which, using Carson's rule, results in about 180 KHz of bandwidth use.) They require even more to to analog television, which are (were) allocated six MHz per channel.

      As the author of SdrDx I have reason to know. :)

      I am sure, however, that the currently large CPU requirements could be gotten around with some additional specialized hardware.

      However, there are obvious financial reasons why a carrier would prefer you use bandwidth to receive information. So I wouldn't hold my breath.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    35. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If it can get FM HD, many AM stations also broadcast on HD radio

    36. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by IMightB · · Score: 2, Offtopic

      you can keep repeating the propaganda spoon-fed to you by fox as well. Doesn't make it true.

    37. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Come to think of it, you're right. Aside from NPR and academic/college radio stations there really isn't a damn thing worthwhile on terrestrial FM radio.

      Clear channel's persistent, omnipresent lobbying to remove ownership restrictions has given us persistent, omnipresent Clear Channel radio. It's all the same robot-run stations from coast to coast.

    38. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      > because they weren't liberal enough.

      They fired Juan Williams because he said he was scared of Muslims on airplanes. The only place a blanket statement like that won't get you fired is Fox News, because that's their business model.

      In the meantime, All Things Considered has weekly segments with David Brooks (a conservative editorialist) and frequently engages conservative lawmakers in their stories. They had Darrell Issa on back when the USDOJ was trying to force Apple to break into the San Bernardino shooter's phone; last week they had a GOP congressman on to discuss why he was endorsing Donald Trump.

      You can say a lot of things about NPR, but one thing you cannot say is that they actively try to prevent or otherwise diminish the presentation of non-liberal viewpoints. And frankly the only people who do actually believe that are better off going elsewhere anyway because it's obvious they don't distinguish between news and partisan cheerleading.

    39. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I was involved with the switch to narrowbanding within the public safety sector, which often involved digital radios due to brain-dead grants from the states. Despite no change in transmission power there whatsoever, digital transmissions most definitely have a shorter usable range than analog transmissions. Terrain plays a big part in it - you can only error-correct so much loss of information before you lose the digital signal completely.

    40. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting

      And that, ladies and gents, is why you need a good lawyer: they're great at making things up that sound so much like they should be true that, well, surely they are true?

      IOW, parent sounds like sensible conjecture but is totally made up. Most digital rollouts have NOT been with a huge decrease in transmitter power, and a codec that actually handles the sort of signal distortion that occurs in the real world AND maintains FM quality stereo has not been deployed in most countries.

    41. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      Guess what, friend? We can enable the FM receiver on your phone right now, without your permission -- and nobody is forcing you to use it at all. You can go on about your business as usual, using up your dataplan to listen to streaming services, or your own music, or whatever, and it won't change anything for you. On the other hand, people who'd like to use it on their own phone are then free to do so, and profit thereby. If I didn't know any better, I'd be tempted to think that in so many words you're saying 'Stop liking what I don't like!', but of course that would be silly, now wouldn't it? I'd also be tempted to wonder if you're a paid shill for the telecom companies or some other competing interest, but that would be rather silly, too, wouldn't it?

      Fair points, it's when I hear somebody doing something "for me" and is part of an organization that stands to benefit by their doing it "for me" I tend to question their true motives.

      Here's where we disagree. Just because a device has a capability doesn't mean the manufacture should make it available. They may not want the support headaches, they may be concerned that it would interfere with the proper operation of the device, or simply decide it's not a feature they want to provide. The consumer then votes with their wallet and decides if a device that has it is more valuable than one without it.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    42. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      There is Public Radio(NPR) that have very few ads, and fantastic quality programming. Perhaps you should pull your head out of the internet for a moment and take a look around at what else is out there.

      As a long time supporter of my local NPR station, who actually listens to it on an FM radio, I am well aware of what is out there. That has no bearing on whether or not the campaign is an attempt by FM to remain relevant in a changing marketplace.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    43. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by Crashmarik · · Score: 2, Informative

      And I see the left once again has that complete lack of introspection.

      If you want to see obvious propaganda from NPR on topics where it is easy to see they distort the facts

      Check out their calling Brad Torgessen a white supremacist last year.

    44. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by Crashmarik · · Score: 2

      Oh just so you understand why that is an indictment

      http://i.imgur.com/enUIiyp.png

    45. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by msauve · · Score: 1

      "Public radio tends to be quite good."

      You can stream NPR (and France Info, etc. it seems), so that's not a good response to the OP.

      --
      "National Security is the chief cause of national insecurity." - Celine's First Law
    46. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      I wonder how much of this is actual consumer demand for listening to ads and the same songs every hour to avoid data overages vs. FM radio's last desperate gasp to remain relevant now that streaming is offering an alternative?

      My Kyocera Hydro Vibe (Android) has an FM tuner and I use the free app NextRadio to listen to live radio, usually NPR, at work where streaming isn't available. My provider is Ting so I also don't want to burn data minutes by streaming. The app supports an ad-free basic mode, selecting stations by frequency and uses zilch data or an enhanced mode that displays album art for the current song/album playing on the local radio stations, station selection by tile and (reportedly) uses very little data. Small banner ads are displayed at the bottom of the screen in enhanced mode.

      NextRadio
      Supported Devices

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    47. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Firethorn · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You can stream NPR (and France Info, etc. it seems), so that's not a good response to the OP.

      Except streaming consumes data cap.

      Matter of fact, all the local radio stations I listen to(being the traditional sort) in the car offer streaming - they tell us so. Public, College, Commercial, all of them.

      Still, while I don't come close to using my cap, I think that it's not a bad idea because it should also save power - no need for transmitting for all those packets, just the FM signal.

      --
      I don't read AC A human right
    48. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      those $20 dongles require quite a lot of additional CPU power to do WFM demodulation

      I don't people have SDR in mind in this discussion. FM (both analog and digital) is implemented on $5 cores than burn 10 mA. This is a solved problem. The rest is politics/business.

    49. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I wonder how much of this is actual consumer demand for listening to ads and the same songs every hour to avoid data overages vs. FM radio's last desperate gasp to remain relevant

      Or maybe it's sports fans that would like to listen to the game. In most cases, local sports teams broadcast their games on the radio, but block those games from being streamed without an expensive subscription, and in some cases provide no way at all to stream the games.

      Terrestrial radio is about a lot more than top-40 music. Right here in my neck of the woods, there are classical stations, jazz stations, news, etc.

      If I'm paying for an FM radio receiver, I'd like to be able to use that FM radio receiver.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    50. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Sir_Eptishous · · Score: 1

      Well, your post really sounded like it came from a streamer/podcast only media consumer, who wasn't aware of the fantastic things NPR/BBC/Community Radio has to offer.
      My apologies.

      --
      We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
    51. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      Except if you look at the application they are pushing (NextRadio?), it's ad laden crapware (pinsightmedia?)

      ###### PRIVATE #SERVER_URL=http://webservicesgatewaytest.ag.sprint.com/adservice/adrequest SERVER_URL=http://ag.sprint.com/adservice/adrequest KEEP_ALIVE_URL=http://ag.sprint.com/services/keepalive

      etc. Gems like this:

      psm_mraid_bridge.executeNativeCall = function( command ) { // build command var bridgeCall = "psm://" + command;

      No. Just.. just no.

    52. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All media is biased. PERIOD! It's a platform for respective kool-aid lovers to unite.

    53. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      FM is analogue, which means it degrades far more gracefully than digital

      Sure, if you're comparing it to a digital signal with no error correction. If you use vaguely modern error correcting codes (as in, developed in the last 50 years), then digital signals can correct all errors long after analogue signals are indistinguishable from white noise to a human. The reason that this idiotic myth persists is that the switch to digital radio and TV broadcasts came with a slight decrease in range as a result of a huge decrease in transmitter power.

      The digital technology may not decrease range by itself, but the transition from analog to digital almost always does. That's an easy way to confuse the average consumer into thinking that the technology itself is the problem. We've got a multi-variable problem here and consumers are only aware of one variable (analog vs digital) even though there are others like transmitter power, as you mention. It's the same as digital TV making a lot of broadcasts worse (even over cable); insane compression levels that broadcasters choose are the main cause of that, not the digital technology itself.

    54. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Holi · · Score: 1

      "The thing is if the chip is in the phone and can turned on easily then why not have the option?"
      Because it is not such a simple thing. While yes, the broadcom wifi/bt radio does have an FM receiver, the phone itself was never designed for FM reception. So it lacks several required connections (the most important one being the antenna). So it entails more then just activating the fm module, it is not something that can be done on your phone.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    55. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by barc0001 · · Score: 1

      Yeah, as a consumer file this one under "people still listen to FM radio?" Actually I did turn on my radio in the car on the weekend and listened to a local Vancouver station that I used to listen to ages ago for a while on a drive. I concluded that:

      1. Every one of the on air personalities I used to listen to there are either dead or moved on to other things

      2. They actually paid to have jingles (multiple!) produced telling you that they are in the process of getting you back to listening to music, instead of y'know, just playing the music.

      3. They still play the same dreck from 20 years ago in frequent rotation along with the stuff the kids are listening to today.

      4. My USB thumb drive is still the preferred choice to listen to, screw the radio.

    56. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      Well, your post really sounded like it came from a streamer/podcast only media consumer, who wasn't aware of the fantastic things NPR/BBC/Community Radio has to offer. My apologies.

      No worries. I wasn't real clear that I was directing my comment at the organization pushing the idea, not that FM radio was a bad thing.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    57. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by anegg · · Score: 2

      We got our kids iPod Touches after having iPod Nanos. For those who don't know, the iPod Nanos have a built-in FM radio; the iPod Touches don't. The kids like the iPod Touches for the web access, e-mail, messaging, and streaming services, but are very frustrated that they had to give up FM radio.

      I'm curious to understand why FM radio isn't available in iPod Touches, iPhones, and other smart phones. Seems like it isn't a matter of real estate, if the chip is already there.

    58. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by MitchDev · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Don't forget the laws that let multiple stations in the same market to all be bought up by the same one or two radio companies, squelching all variety and competition...

    59. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by xeoron · · Score: 2

      Sesame Street is now funded by HBO and has first air rights now.

    60. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by Sir_Eptishous · · Score: 0

      And I see the left once again has that complete lack of introspection.

      If you want to see obvious propaganda from NPR on topics where it is easy to see they distort the facts

      Check out their calling Brad Torgessen a white supremacist last year.

      When I read posts like yours, and others complaining about NPR, or "the left", SJW's, etc, what that really displays is your lack of a nuanced understanding, and a black and white world view of "us vs them".

      Thats sad.

      --
      We play the game with the bravery of being out of range
    61. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If they had it in mind during design of the phone, they could just treat the headphones as an antenna, which should provide enough reception for an SDR AM/FM receiver.

      In fact, this is exactly what my Sony Xperia Z5 does (not sure whether or not it uses SDR though).

    62. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You're paying for FM on your cell phone in the same sense that you're paying for the rats that live in the basement when you buy a house. They're both just there and it probably costs money to get rid of them so you might as well just ignore it.

    63. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by chipschap · · Score: 1

      NPR = National Palestinian Radio

    64. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by h4ck7h3p14n37 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      They fired Juan Williams because he said he was scared of Muslims on airplanes. The only place a blanket statement like that won't get you fired is Fox News, because that's their business model.

      A person's emotions are never wrong. It was despicable for NPR to fire Juan Williams for daring to be honest about how he felt.

    65. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by laurencetux · · Score: 2

      in a WCS FM radio could be used to tell folks to "If you are currently mobile please make your way to %local landmark% where Emergency Response Teams have setup shelters. Please pass this imformation on as you can Please BE Safe."

    66. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      listen to more AM than FM when I listen to the radio because I prefer talk radio...

      Other than sports talk, the talk scene is almost entirely right-wing ranters spouting conspiracy theories about how the Evil Gov't ate their dog and their homework.

      I'd like to see "debate radio", whereby you have an interchange between a left-leaning host and a right-leaning host. Getting a one-sided view is not healthy.

    67. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by fahrbot-bot · · Score: 1

      If I'm paying for an FM radio receiver, I'd like to be able to use that FM radio receiver.

      See my post about the free NextRadio app for Android.

      --
      It must have been something you assimilated. . . .
    68. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Kjella · · Score: 2

      Sure, if you're comparing it to a digital signal with no error correction. If you use vaguely modern error correcting codes (as in, developed in the last 50 years), then digital signals can correct all errors long after analogue signals are indistinguishable from white noise to a human.

      They could in theory, but in practice they don't. Almost all of them consist of a codec and then error correction. If you can correct the error, it all decodes nice and is perfect. If you can't correct the error random bit flips in the codec turns everything to complete trash. This is what leads to the digital cliff effect. Here's an actual example from Freeview in the UK, showing how you get something barely watchable even after the digital signal has given up with normalized signal strength.

      Now for a static location that's not a big deal, if the signal was that bad you wouldn't want to watch it anyway. But on digital radio these sort of things happen a lot for very short periods of time or you're on the edge of nowhere and just want to hear the weather forecast. It would be ideal to have some kind of very low bandwidth signal like say 16 kbps mono in the most easily received bits to bridge the gaps, then some kind of delta compression/layered modulation of the rest. That way you'd have more of a two step cliff, high quality, low quality and none.

      --
      Live today, because you never know what tomorrow brings
    69. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Mysticalfruit · · Score: 1

      I would LOVE to listen to NPR in the morning while at the gym... via FM. My gym does have wifi but it kills your connection after 30 minutes!

      --
      Yes Francis, the world has gone crazy.
    70. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Holi · · Score: 1

      88Mhz to 108Mhz. I'm sorry but 20Mhz is hardly a lot of wasted spectrum.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    71. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by h4ck7h3p14n37 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Are we listening to the same NPR? They have a very strong liberal bias and tend to run one-sided segments.

      Lately they've run stories in favor of illegal immigration with their arguments basically being an appeal to emotion. They've been all over the North Carolina "bathroom bill" and how awful and discriminatory it is despite it applying to everyone equally. They've attacked Trump as not fit for office whenever possible and suggested he's trying to incite violence while dismissing any violence caused by the anti-Trump protesters. You can pretty much count on them running a story supporting the liberal cause d'jour along with whatever the Obama White House is doing.

    72. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      You're paying for FM on your cell phone in the same sense that you're paying for the rats that live in the basement when you buy a house.

      I can't listen to the hockey game on the rats.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    73. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      See my post [slashdot.org] about the free NextRadio app for Android.

      Thanks, I'll look into it.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    74. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

      Agreed. However, the GP brought it up, so I addressed it.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    75. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by SQLGuru · · Score: 1

      Yeah....most of the talk isn't that great, either. Which is why I gravitated toward podcasts. More variety and generally better content (especially more targeted towards my interests).

    76. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Holi · · Score: 1

      Just because you have a chip in your phone that allows for the reception of the FM band does not mean that the phone has the rest of the components required. Yes, they do make different models for different markets.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    77. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Pig+Hogger · · Score: 1

      Public radio tends to be quite good. NPR in the states, France Info, Inter, culture (etc...) in france... and I assume similar chanels in other countries.

      As well as CBC in Canada

    78. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by PinkyGigglebrain · · Score: 1

      Where are my mod points when I actually want to mod something?

      Your point is spot on. In an emergency the cell services are either going to be saturated with data requests, people trying to call someone, incoming calls, texts, etc.. And that is assuming that the towers are still functional, yes they have batteries but if the landline or tower has been damaged they are out of commission.

      If smart phones already have the FM receiver hardware then it should be enabled by default, and for free, to allow people to get access to emergency information. I'm kind of surprised the FCC hasn't mandated something already.

      That said I would only use the FM in an emergency, what currently passes for music on the radio doesn't interest me in the slightest. As for NPR and the like, I stream them.

    79. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by wbr1 · · Score: 1

      I got 90 days with my car. I will say this, the compression on satellite radio sucks. It is okay for talk or sports. Music, hell no. I would prefer fuzzy analog FM or pay for more data plus a cheap streaming plan first.

      --
      Silence is a state of mime.
    80. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

      Your Sony is probably FM-only. Can you point to a reference that indicates it supports AM without attaching an external SDR? I'd be very interested in such a reference.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    81. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sure, if you're comparing it to a digital signal with no error correction. If you use vaguely modern error correcting codes (as in, developed in the last 50 years), then digital signals can correct all errors long after analogue signals are indistinguishable from white noise to a human. The reason that this idiotic myth persists is that the switch to digital radio and TV broadcasts came with a slight decrease in range as a result of a huge decrease in transmitter power.

      Or maybe a lot of people find a fuzzy picture from a weak analog broadcast a lot easier to watch than the blocky picture with dropped frames you get from a weak digital broadcast.

      And range has little to do with it. Most people are going to be watching TV via cable/satellite instead of broadcast, so broadcast range usually isn't a factor.

    82. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      As a smart phone owner, I would prefer FM radio over streaming. Absolutely, with no doubt. It's cheaper, more varied, and does many things streaming can not do. I guess the fans of streaming are scared of having alternatives?

    83. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      NPR leans very centric, though individual stations may lean towards the local demographics (ie, San Francisco has spurts of far left gibberish at times but the national feeds are very mainstream). Some of my favorite shows from the past involve calm and rational debates between the left and the right.

    84. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      As a smart phone owner, I would prefer FM radio over streaming. Absolutely, with no doubt. It's cheaper, more varied, and does many things streaming can not do. I guess the fans of streaming are scared of having alternatives?

      Not really, it doesn't really impact them and offers another alternative. I just wonder what the true motivations are when an industry group pushes for someone else to change their business model.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    85. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by Darinbob · · Score: 2

      Some of the most annoying call ins I've seen is when there's a debate over Palestine. Then you hear a bunch of people call up to complain that NPR is blatantly pro-Palestine, and a bunch of people calling in to complain that NPR is blatantly pro-Israel. The two sides are so diametrically opposed that any balanced coverage is seen as biased or a pack of lies.

    86. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      I'm curious to understand why FM radio isn't available in iPod Touches, iPhones, and other smart phones. Seems like it isn't a matter of real estate, if the chip is already there.

      My guess would be the additional certification an testing it might require to have another rRF source active. Since the carriers and phone manufacturers are focused on services other than FM they probably didn't even consider it in many cases.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    87. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      NPR is reporting on those stories. They sometimes do interviews with people affected by those issues, and those interviews cover both sides. NPR is not editorializing. Now it's possible that some stations have local news reporting that is more biased than NPR on the national level.

    88. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Those FM transmitters use kilowatt and megawatt transmitters. You're going to burn more juice transmitting one high power FM signal that can power thousands and possibly even millions of lower power data network signals.

    89. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by pchasco · · Score: 2

      More accurately, NPR reports on topics of interest to a broad swath of consumers in a factual and thorough way, without making pains to appeal to the emotions of a specific subgroup. That this method of journalism does not well-align itself with conservatives, Republicans, or their agendas is not an indictment of NPR's supposed biases. Rather, it is a reflection of just how insulated from the facts and others' viewpoints some groups of media consumers have become. And guests of their shows frequently express leanings toward or away from specific ideologies, both left and right. While the guests may be pressed in ways that make them uncomfortable, in no way are they intentionally offended or denigrated by the hosts. The firing of Juan Williams was a gaffe. While I do agree that some statements he had made did make it difficult to see him as a credible and objective reporter on some topics, I do not think that it is correct to fire a journalist or any employee for personal viewpoints unless they are expressed in such a way as to be harmful or disruptive to the business.

    90. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      There are music stations that are not Clear Channel. There's still useful stuff out there. It's still relevant, especially if you don't or can't stream in your car.

    91. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      You cna't stream all of NPR. You can only stream a select set of shows. Actually better to download those shows as podcasts rather than stream anyway.

    92. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by MightyYar · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah, NPR tries to be as neutral as they can while all voting Democrat. They make the effort. But public radio as a whole is liberal leaning (e.g. Harry Shearer's "Le Show", "Fresh Air", etc). It's all good - there certainly is no shortage of conservative radio.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    93. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      NPR is absolute liberal trash.

    94. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Solandri · · Score: 0

      it should also save power - no need for transmitting for all those packets, just the FM signal.

      I doubt it. Streaming audio is such low bandwidth (about 128 kbps) that your phone's data radio can switch on, buffer several MB (1 MB = about 1 minute of audio) in a few seconds, then switch off. An FM radio needs to be powered on the entire time you're listening.

      Really, the best argument for FM radio on phones is for emergency broadcasts in the event of a natural (or man-made) disaster, when the cellular network goes down. But a phone is a terrible device for that situation because you're probably not going to be able to recharge it for the duration of the disaster. And although a smartphone with the phone portion turned off will last nearly a week on battery, if you forget to put it in airplane mode (turn the cellular radio off) the phone will begin broadcasting at full power trying to find a tower and your battery will drain in probably a few hours. A car radio or transistor radio that takes AA batteries or even MP3 player with FM radio (if you've still got one of those) is better for that situation.

    95. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No no no, that's a neutral centrist position.

    96. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Thank you. "Newer therefore better, even after implementation trade-offs!" pervades the young engineer mindset. In the end, all that matters to the end user is what they've actually ended up with, not where the theory could have taken them.

    97. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Consumers asking for no cost choice is always the last gasp of some dying industry? Do you realize how stupid you sound?

    98. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by MBGMorden · · Score: 1

      I don't know - I don't have much interest myself (truthfully I don't listen to much music anymore - it's mostly podcasts), but given the number of people I know that listen to Pandora and other services somewhat similar to FM radio I'd wager some people still want it.

      Truthfully though - if the function is already there and would cost nothing to turn on - just do it and let the market decide if they want to use it or not.

      --
      "People who think they know everything are very annoying to those of us who do."-Mark Twain
    99. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Solandri · · Score: 1

      This has already been addressed. The government has required carriers and phones implement a system by which emergency messages can be broadcast from cell towers to phones. Not a point to point connection like a phone call, but a point to multipoint broadcast just like FM radio. There's no need to turn on the FM radio or tune in to the proper frequency. If your phone is connected to a tower in the affected area, you automatically get the broadcast. Your phone will make the annoying alert noise, and announces the emergency message at full volume over the speaker. I've already gotten several AMBER alerts and a couple severe weather warnings this way (I live near to a flood zone).

      For emergency broadcasts during a long-term (multi-day) disaster, FM radios on phones are a poor choice because when the cellular network goes down, the power grid usually goes down as well. A phone is a terrible device for that situation because most people aren't going to be able to recharge their phones for the duration of the disaster. And although a smartphone with the cellular radio turned off will last nearly a week on battery, if you forget to put it in airplane mode (turn the cellular radio off) the phone will begin broadcasting at full power trying to find a tower and your battery will drain in probably a few hours. A car radio or transistor radio that takes AA batteries or even MP3 player with FM radio (if you've still got one of those) is better for that situation.

    100. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by ewibble · · Score: 1

      Lately they've run stories in favor of illegal immigration with their arguments basically being an appeal to emotion.

      Although I haven't heard their arguments, what evidence the right put up in defense, statistics, studies etc. The only arguments I have heard are I THINK they will take our jobs, or they are terrorist, with absolutely no supporting evidence, theses are just appeals to the emotion of fear.

      They've been all over the North Carolina "bathroom bill" and how awful and discriminatory it is despite it applying to everyone equally.

      Personally I never got why women and men just can't share bathrooms (apart from urinals). Even if you take into consideration the societal convention that we shouldn't see the other sex naked. I have never seen anyone that has gone into a stall in any elevated level of undress. If someone wants to be let in because the feel that they really are a man or women then why not. If think that there is some uncontrollable sexual desire you get when you enter toilet on a sex you are attracted to then should we also have gay men's toilets, gay women's toilets. bisexual toilets, transgender toilets. Or perhaps we should just grow up.

      They've attacked Trump as not fit for office whenever possible and suggested he's trying to incite violence while dismissing any violence caused by the anti-Trump protesters.

      It is one thing for the presidential candidate to incite violence and another for some moron random protester too. Both are bad, but do you really want someone who condones violence to be the president. That there are violent morons out there is hardly even news.

      But really people if a particular show, station is left or right leaning really depends on your own political views, and if they are more left or right than you. I am probably more left than most Americans, but America is probably more right than the rest of the world. I actually don't like the left and right classification anyway, I think my and most peoples views can't be classified on a one dimensional scale.

    101. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by mysidia · · Score: 1

      I dunno.... I still listen to FM radio; in my car. It just works. I don't have to buy music, and I don't need to use internet data.

      I also don't listen to music on a phone or portable music player.... who does that these days, anyways?

    102. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Curunir_wolf · · Score: 1

      "The thing is if the chip is in the phone and can turned on easily then why not have the option?" Because it is not such a simple thing. While yes, the broadcom wifi/bt radio does have an FM receiver, the phone itself was never designed for FM reception. So it lacks several required connections (the most important one being the antenna). So it entails more then just activating the fm module, it is not something that can be done on your phone.

      That can't be true. I have the Alcatel OneTouch Idol 3 (yea, I know, nobody's heard of it, but it's a good Android smart phone). It came with the "Radio" app, which uses your headphone as the antenna. Scans and plays radio stations just fine.

      --
      "Somebody has to do something. It's just incredibly pathetic it has to be us."
      --- Jerry Garcia
    103. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      Truthfully though - if the function is already there and would cost nothing to turn on - just do it and let the market decide if they want to use it or not.

      I'm good with that; I just find the sudden push by radio station organizations interesting; I'm guessing they see no future in broadcasting as streaming takes off and people have less reason to listen to local broadcasts (which often aren't really local anymore) and may view this as one way to at least keep being available. Even the car radio is moving to streaming and pass and away from being a radio.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    104. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Is that chanel no. 5 by any chance? :p

    105. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by kevmeister · · Score: 1

      Aside from data saving, I want to be able to listen to local sports broadcasts. Last night I missed the first half of the basketball game that was broadcast locally because the audio stream was unavailable except with a payment to the NBA for the "season" audio package. I could have streamed the telecast, but that would have severely eaten into my 3Gig of shared data for the month.

      Of course, I was being cheap, I guess, but paying to listen to a game that would have been free if I had a radio was really annoying and more so as I know my phone had a perfectly good FM receiver that I could not use.

      I had access to the tuner on my old HTC Thunderbolt. A pretty crappy phone, but I found the FM tuner quite nice and missed it a lot after switching to a Galaxy S4 a few years ago.

      --
      Kevin Oberman, Network Engineer, Retired
    106. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Darinbob · · Score: 1

      But phone owners have complained about this off and on in the past, it's not a new issue.

    107. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by PublicSchill · · Score: 1

      Except you're missing the point. This campaign has been going on for years. If we scrapped the radio stations, and used that for data broadcasts for severe weather, and other information it would be a lot better. Sooner or later the same problem will be with TV stations. They're all 99% crap now that just promote health crap for people over 50. And no, this "save your data" is completely retarted too, because the USA is one of the few countries with retarded data caps and overages to begin with. What.. somehow using your phone for downloading data at 4 mbps is vastly different than using netflix... yeah, whatever T-mobile.... We'll all be better off when people realize that these companies are interested in one thing only, controlling the mass media. They're upset because the young people don't watch TV, or listen to the radio.... that's the point.

    108. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by PublicSchill · · Score: 0

      If you're out in the wilderness, and you're relying on your phone as a source for critical information than you have bigger problems than your phone's lack of FM radio reception....

    109. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by PublicSchill · · Score: 1

      Except you didn't pay for the FM radio receiver... maybe software (drivers) license wasn't bought, maybe the testing wasn't done to make sure it didn't interfere with other radios... there are probably lots of reasons. It's not like just turning on the FM receiver is the only part of the equation.

    110. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 1

      But phone owners have complained about this off and on in the past, it's not a new issue.

      It's not really a new issue but for FM stations it probably has become more important as more streaming services come online and become popular, cutting into their listener base. talk radio is probably less impacted because they can stream as well and are generally syndicated so streaming is just a new way of making money and the loss of a few FM stations won't impact them as much. My local FM station periodically runs "the evil cell phone manufacturers are preventing you from listening to FM on your phone ads" with directions to a website; that makes me think the latest push is their attempt to stay relevant. I would agree FM radio would by nice to have as an option, but I doubt many cell phone users really care about it.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    111. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by ProfBooty · · Score: 2

      NPR finds a way to inject race into a lot of topics in their news coverage. They also spend an inordinate amount of time on black people's issues, a lesser amount of time on hispanic related issues, and asians simply don't exist.

      While I enjoy Marketplace, most of these other programming has a liberal slant to it. Terry Gross's "Fresh Air" slants left, Michel Martin's old show "Tell Me More" slanted left, Dianne Rehm's "Dianne Rehm show" has civil discussions from all over the spectrum, but you can tell from Dianne's attitude and questions where her politics lie.

      --
      Bring back the old version of slashdot.
    112. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I disagree - and there are tested historical facts to show my point.
      At 9/11, the cell towers couldn't handle the load and basically cell
      phones became useless as communication devices. And with no
      data, no "FM" app would work either.

      Now, an analogue FM radio won't allow you to phone home, but
      with an emergency like that, you'd at least be able to get some
      sort of news, maybe helpful information about the event. And it's
      not like the chips in the phone are defective FM receivers, they
      are intentionally disabled by iApple (and other like-manufacturers)
      to force you to use an app to gain that functionality. Sadly, users
      believe that the app is the FM receiver and they're not corrected
      by the salesman.

      I'd like to see this as an FCC mandate (that cell phones are required to
      have a non-app working FM receiver) since it really is a public safety issue.
      That's just common sense, IMHO.

      CAP === 'invented'

      Where have you been? Wireless can handle orders of magnitude more data than in 2001.

    113. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      Except you didn't pay for the FM radio receiver... maybe software (drivers) license wasn't bought, maybe the testing wasn't done to make sure it didn't interfere with other radios... there are probably lots of reasons. It's not like just turning on the FM receiver is the only part of the equation.

      Come on. Don't try to bullshit a bullshitter. I've had cell phones with FM radios that work before and they did not interfere with calls. If a call was made or came in, it would just cut the radio audio out for the duration of the call.

      This is just a way to get people to pay for what they used to get for free. That's the business model of all the telecoms and the companies they "partner" with.

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    114. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by epyT-R · · Score: 1

      Interesting. Often, it is those groups you mentioned who have the 'us vs them' "everything is racist, everything is sexist, and you have to point it all out" mentalities. Also seen is appeals to sophistication, just like your post.

    115. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by tarpitcod · · Score: 1

      AM? Blech - who needs sidebands. CW.

    116. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by MightyYar · · Score: 1

      You'll note that I was referring to "public radio" in the US, not NPR specifically. The NPR news shows do make a very professional effort to be balanced. Some shows, like "Fresh Air" don't really emphasize that - or if they do are not particularly successful at it. I mean, there is only so much you can do when your on-air personalities and audience are overwhelmingly of a particular political persuasion.

      --
      W..w..W - Willy Waterloo washes Warren Wiggins who is washing Waldo Woo.
    117. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      I doubt it. Streaming audio is such low bandwidth (about 128 kbps) that your phone's data radio can switch on, buffer several MB (1 MB = about 1 minute of audio) in a few seconds, then switch off. An FM radio needs to be powered on the entire time you're listening.

      When you're listening to music, that's fine. When you're listening to news (and things like call-in shows) then a 1-minute delay isn't acceptable.

      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    118. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by rockmuelle · · Score: 4, Interesting

      One person's trash is another's feast. Most of the music on the radio is actually quite good, if you're a fan of music and not just a fan of one particular genre. Pop music, for all its commercial faults, is popular for a reason. People like it.

      Sure, classical and folk are good, too. So is jazz, rock, EDM, noise (yeah, it's a genre), and just about every other style people have come up with.

      I challenge you to listen to some EDM and compare it to your favorite classical pieces. While we have had 300+ years to study classical music to death, the overall structure of the music is pretty much the same as EDM: invent a theme/hook, make some variations on it, connect the variations together for dramatic effect, embellish it all using the underlying implied chordal structure by overusing arpeggios ;).

      Folk and Pop basically have the same relationship. Both tend to have rigid rules around song structure (ABAB,ABCAB, etc), use simple chord changes (almost always some mix of I, IV, V in both genres), and have lyrics that resonate with the listener base. Interestingly, they're also controlled with an iron fist by the powers in the genres - just try developing a new folk song without approval of the keepers of the Great American Songbook. ;) (I play in a country/folk band, the powers-that-be are almost as annoying as those from the jazz world, where I've also spent a lot of time)

      The meta point being: Across genres, music is more similar the different. I encourage you to go on a listening bender across your local FM stations and seed a few Pandora stations with random things.

    119. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by hguorbray · · Score: 1

      not to mention fantastic college and community stations (at least in the Bay Area):
      KFJC (Foothill College) wave of the west -cutting edge non commercial indie rock for the past 30 years (sponsored some shows for my prog band back in the '80s)
      KZSU -the zoo -Stanford also has a pretty strong signal and plays a wide variety as well as hosting Arabology music show, Philosophy Talk, Cardinals Games, etc
      KSCU -Santa Clara U
      KSJS San Jose State
      KALX UC Berkely -punk and world music
      and the hippie community stations:
      KPFA -Berkely
      KKUP -Cupertino Hippies
      KALW -SF
      and NPR: KQED FM
      abnd there are a few over in Santa Cruz as well such as UC Santa Cruz
      -I'm just sayin'

    120. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Timex · · Score: 1

      My sons have had SmartPhones with FM Radio capability, but mine have not-- not that anyone would admit, anyway.

      I think it would be a good thing, but like the OP pointed out, not for Carriers hoping for us to exhaust our data plan every month.

      --
      When politicians are involved, everyone loses.
    121. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by kheldan · · Score: 1

      If the specific implementation doesn't support the function built into the silicon then that's one thing, but if the specific device has the capability and the wireless company supporting it on their network is specifically disabling it, then I think that's wrong, they're cheating you out of a legitimate capability of the device, and as TFA alludes to, if they're doing it to force you to use up your expensive dataplan on streaming services instead, then I too would cry foul.

      --
      Are YOU using the TOOL, or is the TOOL using YOU? Think about it!
    122. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by PublicSchill · · Score: 1

      No, if it hasn't been tested by the FCC for that purpose then it can't be sold for it. Simple as that. If they didn't buy the driver to use the radio, then it won't work. And most importantly, if the radio is not connected to an antenna, it isn't going to work. If the seller of the phone believes 90% of the people aren't going to use the FM chip, then they can save lots of money by not having it tested by the FCC, not developing software/buying drivers, and not hooking up the hardware internally. Even if as you say it's the same exact phone as in Europe, and they have the license for the drivers... they may just not get it tested by the FCC. Then no matter what, it's going to be illegal to activate that radio if it was never tested by the FCC.

    123. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes sure. DVB dongles require CPU to decode WFM. Bluetooth chipsets on the other hand often have builtin FM demodulators, where the output is PCM or analog, fully decoded.

    124. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Public radio tends to be quite good

      In some places. Many of us ditched public radio with our first smartphones in favour of internet streaming services, and did so even though early smartphones had the FM tuner.

    125. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      Broadcast AM (@ ~1MHz) is somewhat tougher to receive without a considerably more substantial antenna as compared to broadcast FM (@ ~ 100 MHz.)

      It also has significantly better signal propagation characteristics meaning that while it may be harder to receive with a small antenna this is actually a problem we resolved back in my grandmother's generation. In the mean time your FM signal drops out when you look at it funny in a typical dense built up world and doesn't go very far in the bush where transmitters are few and far between.

    126. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by thegarbz · · Score: 1

      There's enough spectrum for FM.

      Where do you live? Personally I can't drive for 30min without starting to get signal overlap on a lot of the stations. The FM band in most of Europe is in places at peak capacity.

      Proof please, using a codec that's actually used in broadcasting.

      While you're talking about broadcasting it may be worth looking into the power being used. In installations I've been a part of the digital transmit power is often toned down to around 1/3rd of the original analogue counterpart and comparable receive range. People who complain about range of digital radio are the people who will often have the cheapest possible receiver coupled to an antenna that is either some stupid hybrid monstrosity or better still tuned to the original FM band and woeful for digital reception in the first place.

      Also go look up transmission power yourself. I'm not sure about the UK but in many countries that is openly published information.

    127. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by Ormy · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They fired Juan Williams because he said he was scared of Muslims on airplanes. The only place a blanket statement like that won't get you fired is Fox News, because that's their business model.

      A person's emotions are never wrong. It was despicable for NPR to fire Juan Williams for daring to be honest about how he felt.

      If he was working for me I'd fire him for being and idiot after saying that, pilot/mechanical failures claim more air-travellers lives. If he's afraid of the plane crashing due to muslims he's barking up the wrong tree and being a rude and offensive asshole about it in a very public way, perfectly firable offence in my book.

      If a particular guy on a particular occasion was looking shifty who also happened to be muslim he could have just not mentioned at all the fact the guy happened to be muslim and just said he was afraid of that particular guy and got on a later flight, I could buy that as an emotional response.

      But claiming he's afraid of every member of a major religion is not an emotional response, its prejudice. Which, let me be clear, I have no problem with aslong as he keeps it mostly to himself, declaring it as a reason for not getting on an aeroplane (whilst also working for a major radio station) makes him pretty stupid though, whether he intended to cause offence or not. Fired.

    128. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by BrookHarty · · Score: 2

      Might want to re-read what I read, NPR use to be have integrity, but they started to broadcast editorial shows that concentrate on hit pieces and is not as highly impartial news services anymore. The Wall Street Journal is rated highest between liberals and conservatives above NPR, BBC is also higher then NPR on equal trust.

      Main point, NPR is now using bias to sell programming and commercials. Thats not a troll comment, its just pointing out fact.

    129. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Where do you live? Personally I can't drive for 30min without starting to get signal overlap on a lot of the stations.

      The UK - and 30 minutes is a looong way on a motorway; I'd expect to transition between different local stations.

      The FM band in most of Europe is in places at peak capacity.

      Hm, where are you? "in most... in places..." - do you mean that in every country there is at least one place where the FM band is full up?

      While you're talking about broadcasting it may be worth looking into the power being used. In installations I've been a part of the digital transmit power is often toned down to around 1/3rd of the original analogue counterpart and comparable receive range.

      Comparable receive range according to whom? Provide some (well-designed) listener surveys, not theory nor engineer tests.

      People who complain about range of digital radio are the people who will often have the cheapest possible receiver

      What's wrong with the "cheapest possible receiver"? Designing a decent, cheap receiver is a solved problem on FM, and I can get one - hell, I can build one - for half the price of the cheapest DAB receivers in the UK. So, I would expect that the cheapest digital radio has as good a front end as a mid range FM receiver.

      coupled to an antenna that is either some stupid hybrid monstrosity or

      If the FM bands are full, it must be because it's profitable to broadcast on FM, so a "stupid hybrid monstrosity" is expected. If you're arguing that whatever system you use is so weak that it requires a dedicated digital antenna then, well, I hope you see how divorced from reality you are, and why (at least in the UK) gov attempts to push broadcasters to DAB are repeatedly pushed back.

      better still tuned to the original FM band and woeful for digital reception in the first place.

      Do you mean aftermarket digital car radios that have been wired up to the original FM antenna? In the UK digital car radios are still rare, and DAB usually means a tabletop receiver.

      Also go look up transmission power yourself. I'm not sure about the UK but in many countries that is openly published information.

      I'm not the one making the assertion that the problem with digital radio is that transmit power has decreased significantly. (Although, even if this were true, it doesn't demonstrate that digital radio is better unless reception has been properly surveyed. In fact, the greatest complaints occur when power is ALSO turned down significantly, on top of the digital cliff problem discussed in another post.)

    130. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Ormy · · Score: 1

      If the hardware is there in other countries DONT REMOVE IT specifically for other countries. I'm looking at you, Samsung Galaxy S3 (Europe version has FM radio, US does not)

      I was reading these comments wondering wtf everyone was talking about, I'm in the UK with a Galaxy S3 and I use the analogue FM radio all the time, although it needs something plugged into the 3.5mm TRS to work. I just assumed the play store would have some analogue FM radio apps that replace the default samsung one (which works just fine so I never looked before) but I've just checked right now and they're all internet/streaming based (even if they don't advertise that fact). You Americans really do get shafted sometimes don't you?

    131. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Actually, having bought a used Toyota recently I got a 3 month free trial. I'll probably go for it, but I still want AM and FM for local news and locally produced shows.
      SiriusXM is good for some music stations, but I don't want or need the sports channels, talk channels, or Christian propaganda - (a waste of bandwidth no matter what the medium, which is why I'm an atheist). BTW, I've been a sound reinforcement and recording engineer since 1965, so good sound quality matters to me, and most digital systems use way too low a sampling rate (44.1KHz - should be 256KHz minimum) and/or a poor CODEC (e.g. MP3 - should use FLAC) to produce real high quality sound. A good analog system with enough bandwidth and noise reduction will beat any digital system out there. But all that's another argument...

    132. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think he clearly ment "fake app" to be one that connects to the Internet to stream the FM signal. If the FM hardware was turned on, you'd of course need an app to control the hardware, but that app would be connected to your local fm hardware and wouldn't need the Internet.

      They don't want us to listen to FM radio for free on our phones because that doesn't use data. It's just that simple.

    133. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, those people, they are against us, so thus we must band together, to stand against them, because...

      Hey wait a second! I've seen your posts before!

      Can I be saddened by you as well?

    134. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

      No, if it hasn't been tested by the FCC for that purpose then it can't be sold for it. Simple as that.
      If they didn't buy the driver to use the radio, then it won't work.
      And most importantly, if the radio is not connected to an antenna, it isn't going to work.

      If the seller of the phone believes 90% of the people aren't going to use the FM chip, then they can save lots of money by not having it tested by the FCC, not developing software/buying drivers, and not hooking up the hardware internally.

      Even if as you say it's the same exact phone as in Europe, and they have the license for the drivers... they may just not get it tested by the FCC. Then no matter what, it's going to be illegal to activate that radio if it was never tested by the FCC.

      No, if it hasn't been tested by the FCC for that purpose then it can't be sold for it.

      Dummy, you're not paying attention. They have been tested by the FCC. Cell phones have been coming with working FM radios for years. My old RAZR flip phone had a goddamn working FM radio. Early smart phones had working FM radios.

      In summary: IT HAS BEEN TESTED BY THE FCC. It's an FM radio receiver after all. It's not alien technology. It's been around for 75 years.

      not hooking up the hardware internally

      Hey, shortbus, the hardware IS hooked up internally. It just doesn't have drivers (in the case of many Android phones, although you can find Android phones with working AND FCC TESTED radios) and in the case of iPhones, where the OS is locked up tighter than a mosquitoes vagina, who the fuck knows. You make it sound like there's some strange, alien untested FM radio receiver leaking radiation that's manufactured into every smartphone chipset that the manufacturers are somehow "unplugging" to protect us from running afoul of the FCC. Your argument is ridiculous on its face.

      Look, I'm trying to be polite here. But just give a bit of thought to what you're saying, OK?

      --
      You are welcome on my lawn.
    135. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I collect and restore valve radios, so in my biased opinion AM rocks. Unfortunately I can't say the same thing for the content that actually gets broadcast, which is why I tend to listen to podcasts through a very low power AM transmitter (legally questionable, but it is extremely low power).

    136. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by dryeo · · Score: 1

      So you're saying we'd be better off not having any way to get info on the severe weather, fires etc if the one phone line goes down? Digital carries like shit and we don't all live in small highly connected countries with low data caps.
      As it is I have 2 ways to get outside info at home, the POTS phone system which seems to use rusty barbed wire and often goes out, sometimes for 8+ hours when the copper thieves strike, and FM radio (AM as well most nights). TV is gone due to the switch to digital and higher frequencies and you have to live in town for the expensive cell coverage (starts at $30 for 100MBs).

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
    137. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In Australia we have ABC radio national (RN) on the AM band, which has some good stuff if you know when to listen (and also lots of pretentious stuff - hence knowing when to listen), pretty much all of which is also available for download. I've enjoyed to the science show on RN for as long as I can remember.

      But apart from the various ABC broadcasts AM is a bit of a wasteland here too. Mix of talk tedium, muzac, and foreign language broadcasts.

    138. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by deek · · Score: 1

      Digital streaming requires your phone to establish a two-way communication with a cell tower, initiate the digital stream, process incoming packets, send packet replies, and then send the data to a DAC, and finally to an amplifier.

      An FM chip can be almost entirely powered by the strength of the incoming FM signal. Power only needed for the amp. If everything else on the phone is shut down (cpu, display, cell transmission, etc), then I wouldn't be surprised if it was on the order of 100x more efficient than digital streaming.

      Speaking purely theoretically here. No idea about the practicality of enabling FM reception on existing phones.

    139. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      There is little to no consumer demand for fm stations anymore, which is why we are right now in the market phase where original and second-line investors are pulling out. The only value left is the spectrum itself, but until the FCC loosens the strict rules on modulation in that spectrum this real- estate is also useless.

      Is it such a leap of faith to not suspect the only interest here are fm station networks who are seeing their revenue dry up and no buyers in sight to bail them out?

      Broadcast radio simply can not compete with internet streaming where there is internet, it is really that simple in this one case. Your fm radio is going down the path of the 8- track and in a few years from now it will be a curiosity item.

      Perhaps at an auction you may one day find one hidden in a carton under a bunch of books and dishes. Turn it on! If it still works you may hear a sizzle and a screech as the fm demodulator renders whatever digital services are re- using the spectrum.

      Digital Radio? Dead on Arrival. There is not enough bandwidth between 88.7 MHz and 107.3 MHz to fit in the entire internet.

      Bottom line: A limited selection can not compete with virtually unlimited variety.

      The cards are being dealt new and the dealer is shuffling all the aces back into the new deck. If you want to listen to a former radio station, stream them in the internet where they have to compete with everybody else on a level playing field. And to the owners of fm station behind this ploy holding nothing when they had a straight flush in the play before: you're bluffing, you got nothing, nothing at all.

    140. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Agree. Why listen to homotalk radio and RIAA approved payola crap when you can just whip out your phone and plug it into your car's dashboard. You have no idea how the RIAA and broadcast owners have fought the audio jack in your car tooth and nail, and yet there it is and their boat is sinking.

    141. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by mwooldri · · Score: 1

      Right now, a lot of commercial broadcasters are abandoning broadcast frequencies below 1.8 Mhz. They're turning off the transmitters and handing in their broadcasting licences to the issuing authorities. In the USA though, some AM broadcasters are successfully acquiring "FM Translator" (relay) stations. Technically the relay/translator station is supposed to re-broadcast the signal of the parent station, but in practice the relay/translator receives a direct feed. It's a way that a broadcaster can get a FM signal where there are no full-power licences available. Other reasons why broadcasters may keep the AM turned on if they got no listeners on the AM frequency is streaming; broadcasters pay less in music royalties than do Internet-only streamers. It's one reason why Pandora purchased a broadcast station.

      iBiquity's IBOC and Digital Radio Mondiale's technology could resuscitate the "AM band", particularly in ITU Region 1 (Europe and North Africa) where "long wave radio" still serves large populations with a single high powered transmitter. Music was a main reason why people left AM for FM, so fm-like sound quality on HF, MF and LF bands can make these bands attractive to broadcasters again.

    142. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      Well, outside the US and Canada these FM receivers work. All of my phones have had working FM receivers... and I have never used any of them, for all the radio annoyances you mention. The closest would be on the day the phone is received, checking out the features - I may put the FM on for a few seconds to hear it working, then I switch it off and it's never turned on again.

      My current phone has 64Gb of storage space, that holds more than enough music on the phone itself to get through my commute and not hear the same song more than once every 2 weeks or so. No need for either data plan or the annoyances of FM radio.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    143. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      > They've been all over the North Carolina "bathroom bill" and how awful and discriminatory it is despite it applying to everyone equally.

      A law or rule which has the practical effect of significantly affecting one group more than others is discriminatory regardless of whether that group is named in the law or group. This is not even just an American thing, it's the legal standard all over the world. Here in South Africa it is even written into the constitution.
      So for example if you live in a city with a particularly strong racial correlation to economic class, and your restaurant goes and puts up a dress code which would require clothes that almost no non-white person could afford, that would be considered de facto racial discrimination and be illegal.
      Not having the law says that would mean all discrimination would have continued utterly unabated - people would simply find proxies for race that work equally well.

      The bathroom bill is probably the single most egregiously discriminatory law passed since the civil rights act. North Carolina is on the wrong side of history (somehow the hard reds always seem to find themselves there) and I would just say that our grandchildren will look at this law the way we look at Jim Crow - and I for one would prefer my grandchildren to say "At least my granddad was on the side that was against these terrible laws". My own grandfather was a member of a miltant Nazi-propaganda group at that time, in that place, this was seen as nobel - but that doesn't make it any less despicable. Do you think Sam Rockwel's grandchildren are going around bragging that their grandpappy founded the American NAZI party ?

      But sure, go support our generation's Jim Crow. Start a lynch mob while your at it, you won't be hated any less by future generations for NOT starting a lynch mob, they will probably assume you were in one regardless.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    144. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by silentcoder · · Score: 1

      >Although I haven't heard their arguments, what evidence the right put up in defense, statistics, studies etc.

      They can't provide evidence because all the statistics are against them. Economics show that mass immigration has always, in all countries, created more jobs than the immigrants took and there is solid mathematical reasons why this is the only possible outcome so the "taking our jobs" claim has to be false because it's about as impossible as claiming you just threw a baseball into orbit. Of course economics is buffeted by many forces, and it's possible the US would be an exception at this time - but that is a seriously extraordinary claim, which requires seriously extraordinary evidence (like claiming that a variety of human may have evolved with the upper arm strength to throw a baseball into orbit without it catching fire on the way). Hell they constantly complain about a "growing number of immigrants" and even that claim is factually false since immigration rates with Mexico has been a nett negative for many years. More people are leaving the US to go TO Mexico than the other way around (mostly people who are of Mexican descent but that doesn't change the maths).
      It's actually quite ironic, if Trump does build his wall, it would actually increase the number of Mexicans in America next year - because it would limit the emigration to those who have the papers to leave the country legally (hint: none of those who came in illegally have them).

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    145. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by silentcoder · · Score: 2

      Somebody should point out that on every metric, from structure to final product the truth is that heavy metal is the most like classical music today. It would not be a stretch to call the best metal bands of today (notably the Slavic and German powermetal movements) the contemporary form of symphonic music, with heavy inspiration (and usage) of opera and operatic concepts (indeed, most European metal singers have classical opera training).

      My all time favourite symphonic pieces is the 1812 overture and the 9th, and if you can't their echoes in the works of Powerwolf then you don't know how to listen for it.

      --
      Unicode killed the ASCII-art *
    146. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Or maybe a lot of people find a fuzzy picture from a weak analog broadcast a lot easier to watch than the blocky picture with dropped frames you get from a weak digital broadcast.

      It's a false dichotomy. Take the two signals, side by side, broadcast quality. Introduce the same amount of noise into them. For a long time, the analogue signal will become increasingly fuzzy while the digital signal will remain entirely clear. For digital radio, if you allocated the same amount of spectrum (bandwidth) as an FM channel, then you could perfectly reconstruct an error-free channel with a signal to noise ratio of 1:100 or worse. With analogue FM, you would just hear white noise.

      Typically, when systems switch from analogue to digital broadcast, they significantly reduce both transmission power and bandwidth for the digital, while aiming to get approximately the same coverage as the analogue equivalent. Often they will reduce one or both a bit too far, but not always. My stepfather, for example, was a relatively early adopter of DAB because, although the DAB signal was lower power, used less bandwidth, and came from the same places as the FM signal, the DAB signal was clear in his rural house (surrounded by hills), whereas the FM signal was very noisy and dropped out a lot.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    147. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by havana9 · · Score: 1

      Normally I listen the FM radio with my cellphone. first of all there are some news and interview programmes thar are quite interesting or *gasp* I like in the summer afternoon listen at the football and basket radio description while jogging or walking the dog.

      I could surely use the streaming service from the radio but: normally I jog in the countryside so it's possible to have poor cellular coverage or only 2G coverage, but more importantly FM radio battery consumption is way lower than having to leave the 3G/4G data transfer on, not to mention to save the data cap.

      Of course I have always the solution to take back my old MP3 player+FM radio and the smartphone and solve my problem, but actually the deal maker for my current cellphone was the FM Radio Option

    148. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      In that case; I propose 'purge them with fire and sword' as the minimum appropriate response.

      "Receive FM Radio" is a task for which you'd need a damn good reason to even request network access at all; much less have a credible excuse to spatter ads all over the place.

      If the FM receiver hardware exists, making it available is still good; but an FM receiver is essentially just an audio input that needs to support being fed a target frequency. I hope whoever wrote the firmware for that got paid; but even if you buy into the 'ad-supported' model of application distribution, there's just not enough on the application side to justify the ongoing nuisance and intrusion.

    149. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by fuzzyfuzzyfungus · · Score: 1

      Oh, and 'leave not one stone upon another' and 'salt the ashes so nothing will ever grow again', did I forget those? Probably best to mount their heads on spikes as a warning to others, as well.

    150. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why is it not acceptable? How would you even know, or care, if there is a one minute delay? This isn't some kind of first person shooter game, this is one-way broadcast.

    151. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      digital signals can correct all errors long after analogue signals are indistinguishable from white noise to a human

      What on earth kind of utter bullshit is this? Analogue colour TV - first you'll get noise on the picture, then you'll lose colour (and likely have noise on the audio), then will eventually lose frame lock (but probably still be able to make out the audio), it takes horrific interference to mean you cannot get *any* information out of an analogue TV signal.

      Digital TV signal:

      Perfect -> Blocky shit with jumping distorted audio -> NO SIGNAL

      Usually caused by a few rainclouds in the way. So no, I call bullshit.

    152. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are we listening to the same NPR? They have a very strong liberal bias and tend to run one-sided segments.

      Facts have a well known liberal bias.

    153. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then I want to stick it in my pocket?

    154. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by Rich_Lather · · Score: 2

      David Brooks is the New York Times' impression of a nominally conservative editorialist. They only have him on so the listeners can hear him foam at the mouth about how much he hates Trump. I have yet to hear him assert any opinions that are conservative. At best he is a centrist elitist. NPR does balanced much like Fox News does balanced: the counter argument is always weak.

    155. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Big+Hairy+Ian · · Score: 1

      Here in the UK every mobile phone I've ever had has had a built in FM Radio which was enabled all you had to do was plug in your ear buds (Which it used as a dipole antenna) launch the radio app and choose which channel you wanted to annoy the rest of the commuters with :D

      --

      Build a Man a Fire, and He'll Be Warm for a Day. Set a Man on Fire, and He'll Be Warm for the Rest of His Life.

    156. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by mrchaotica · · Score: 1

      A delay would be unacceptable in any of the following instances:

      • "Be the Nth caller to win!"
      • Listening to a major-league baseball game while watching it (radio announcers are better than the in-stadium ones)
      • Directly-relevant breaking news
      --

      "[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz

    157. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They've been all over the North Carolina "bathroom bill" and how awful and discriminatory it is despite it applying to everyone equally.

      That's hilarious. How do you even?

    158. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A person's emotions are never wrong.

      Hahahahaha!

      Oh wait, you're serious. Let me laugh even harder.

      HAHAHAHAHAHAHAAHAHAHAHAHA!

    159. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by interstellarsurfer · · Score: 1

      You guessed it. This is AstroTurfing brought to you by lobbyists for the national radio networks. People who care about having access to FM radio, choose a handset with a working FM radio - It's not like you don't have a choice.

    160. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by volmtech · · Score: 1

      I'm glad you feel that way. Now tell the TSA to quit worrying and let people just get on-board airplanes like they did before 9/11.

    161. Re: FM radio's last gasp? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Lately they've run stories in favor of illegal immigration with their arguments basically being an appeal to emotion.

      Although I haven't heard their arguments, what evidence the right put up in defense, statistics, studies etc. The only arguments I have heard are I THINK they will take our jobs, or they are terrorist, with absolutely no supporting evidence, theses are just appeals to the emotion of fear.

      Perhaps that they broke our laws to enter this country? Actual immigrants from South American countries hate the illegals because they bypassed the legal immigration path that is open to everyone.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    162. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      Including that horrible right wing talk radio that NPR puts out...

      Anyone that types from a partisan viewpoint should automatically be labeled -1 wrong, as inevitably, they are completely wrong.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    163. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      That was what I did when my XM/Sirus trial ran out. I couldn't see spending $20 a month for radio when I spend a bit more than that on my cell phone.

      http://www.siriusxm.com/ourmos...

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    164. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Coren22 · · Score: 1

      That applies to my phone and your phone, but not every phone. Most phones, while having the right chips, don't have the FM functionality because it was never hooked up. This article is about those phones that don't already have the fm radio app, and don't have it enabled. Often those phones are hardware disabled by lacking important components like the antenna connection to the headphones or the chip connection to headphone for audio.

      --
      APK likes to ask for responses to the same things over and over. Maybe he just likes the responses?
    165. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Shirley+Marquez · · Score: 1

      Recharging a phone during a disaster is not a problem. There are lots of portable charging stations. They're called cars. They have gasoline powered generators that are independent of the power grid, and even without running the engine a car battery can recharge a phone quite a few times. Many cars now have USB ports; for older cars with no port, charging adapters and cables are readily available in a nearby drug store.

    166. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Tablizer · · Score: 1

      NPR is usually FM. The topic was AM, as I interpreted it. Further, it doesn't have near the ratings as the top AM talk shows (commercial) and thus has a very limited impact on public opinion in comparison.

    167. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by cthulhu11 · · Score: 1

      Are you talking about Public radio, or about NPR? You mention both as though they have anything to do with each other. The P in NPR stands for Pretentious. Can you get on NPR? No. Nothing public about it.

    168. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Shirley+Marquez · · Score: 1

      HD Radio can be problematic even on FM, though only in a few areas. When I lived in Setauket, Long Island many years ago, receiving my favorite station (the late lamented WNEW-FM in its progressive rock days; the current incarnation once again has the WNEW call sign but is a hot adult contemporary station) from New York City was challenging because WDRC-FM in Hartford CT is on the adjacent channel; although my location was outside the primary coverage area of WDRC, the water-enhanced propagation path (part of it is across Long Island Sound) meant that the two stations were about equally strong. Careful antenna placement to point a null in the direction of the unwanted station was necessary.

      Nowadays it would be much harder. Both stations broadcast in HD, which means that each one is effectively broadcasting digital noise on top of the other.

      The FCC rules on placement of radio stations is supposed to insure that reception situations like that don't arise. But there will always be some boundary cases where it breaks down and people experience trouble receiving radio stations they want to listen to. And HD Radio makes those boundary cases even more difficult than they used to be.

    169. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Shirley+Marquez · · Score: 1

      Advantages of analog include simpler receivers and a large installed base. That means that people will actually have the receivers if an emergency happens, whereas they're far less likely to own receivers for digital radio.

    170. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Shirley+Marquez · · Score: 1

      Most unlocked phones have FM radio apps. It's the ones that carriers sell that lack the capability.

    171. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well, remember that this is a Canadian petition.. probably half of these people are FM radio retro rock stations, which are actually pretty good here.. and the other half , like me, listen to CBC FM, which is actually very good.. The retro rock stations though, really are beter than the US ones. I don't know when this started to be the case, because it used to be that the US FM stations were usually better.. like KZOK in Seattle.. but something DID change.. perhaps advertiser pressure,, copyright rubbish.. who knows?

    172. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by rtb61 · · Score: 1

      Pop music is only popular because psychopathic executives, with degrees in psychology, target children with manipulative marketing, not regular marketing but 'saturation' marketing (targeting those children from every possible venue, as often as possible), to drive the popularity of purely manufactured drugged up drunken minstrels, with the lion share of the profits going to the publisher and hopefully, according to the wishes of those psychopathic executives, those drunken drugged up minstrel choking to death on their own puke or over dosing (which many of the children exposed to message that music as well as the marketing also do), just as they come off their prime, so the publisher can retain ownership and hawk the profits off the dead carcases of the drunken drugged up minstrel. So it is shit music with psychopathic manipulative marketing targeted at children and fuck the consequences of the psychological harm those children suffer. There is no dressing up that bullshit except with more bullshit, that governments and politicians back that is even fucking worse.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    173. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Whats killing FM is the HORRIBLE noise that passes for music these days, including Perry, Gaga and all the rest of that trash. NPR definitely has the best music selections. Some say the news is biased for"public" radio, when there are plenty of other outlets that offer such biased news. Nevertheless as a Republican, I support it anyway for the classical music and folk music that commercial stations don't touch.

      >gatdam whippersnappers and their rap music!
      >by the way, I'm a Republican!

      Woah who saw that curveball coming

    174. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by TheRaven64 · · Score: 1

      Simpler receiver is definitely true, though that starts to fall down with FM radio. FM radios are now typically ICs and so being simpler doesn't really buy you much when the cost of the FM demodulator chip is no cheaper than the cost of a digital radio decoder chip. As for installed base, I'm not sure I agree. I would be very surprised if, at any given time, more people are within hearing distance of an FM receiver than a mobile phone.

      --
      I am TheRaven on Soylent News
    175. Re:FM radio's last gasp? by Shirley+Marquez · · Score: 1

      I was talking about the installed base of FM radios vs the installed base of digital FM radios for a hypothetical new digital radio service. People may not be in hearing distance of an FM radio at any given time but most have easy access to one, either an old portable radio or one in a car, so it can be useful for emergency information.

  2. "Chances are"? by K.+S.+Kyosuke · · Score: 0

    Your smartphone may include an FM radio chip but, chances are, it doesn't work.

    This must be some Canadian specialty. I haven't seen a phone with the FM radio deactivated yet.

    --
    Ezekiel 23:20
    1. Re:"Chances are"? by stealth_finger · · Score: 1

      Same, every phone I've had has been able to get radio in one way or another. Not that it's a feature I've really used or looked for but it's been there. Maybe a coincidence but probably not.

      --
      Wanna buy a shirt?
      https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
    2. Re:"Chances are"? by ganjadude · · Score: 2

      havent seen a phone with a working FM chip in the states

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    3. Re:"Chances are"? by Lumpy · · Score: 0

      I have. every single NEXUS phone has a working FM chip, just install the app if you dont have it. Dont buy crap phones from a crap company (AT&T/Verizon/Sprint/etc) and you get a far better phone with all the features.

      Also the One Plus Phones all have working FM. Again, stop buying garbage phones from Samsung and HTC where they hate the user and cater to the carriers.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    4. Re:"Chances are"? by ncc74656 · · Score: 1

      havent seen a phone with a working FM chip in the states

      Try looking at unlocked phones. I have an Asus Zenfone 2 and a Moto G; each came with a radio app that works while headphones are plugged in (the cable is used as an antenna). I think there was also radio hardware in the Moto X I used previously, but it was crippled by AT&T.

      That said, I've not had much use for the radio so far. If I'm in my car, it's easier to just use its radio. If I'm playing something on my phone, it's most likely a podcast or a cached playlist downloaded over WiFi, or (less often) streamed from Google Play (where I've uploaded my collection).

      --
      20 January 2017: the End of an Error.
    5. Re:"Chances are"? by Frederic54 · · Score: 1

      My first Android Phone was a Galaxy S2 running Android 2.3 and it had a true FM radio chip inside, with an app to use it.
      My Motorola G2, bought in a BestBuy in the USA, unlocked, has an FM radio with an app.
      My Asus Zenfone2 also has an FM radio chip, and you can buy this phone in the USA.

      Cellphone =/= iPhone.

      --
      "Science will win because it works." - Stephen Hawking
    6. Re:"Chances are"? by ganjadude · · Score: 1

      ahhh, see i got on the samsung train with the s3 and am on an s7 now, no FM chip for me (verizon locked) guess thats been my problem the whole time. thanks! not sure i can see me wanting an fm chip but nice to know there are options

      --
      have you seen my sig? there are many others like it but none that are the same
    7. Re:"Chances are"? by Holi · · Score: 1

      Any major phone from Verizon, ATT or T-mobile. Or any iPhone ever.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    8. Re:"Chances are"? by freeze128 · · Score: 1

      Earlier HTC phones had the FM tuner enabled. The HTC droid incredible 2 for example.

    9. Re:"Chances are"? by AF_Cheddar_Head · · Score: 1

      Motorola G and X series both have working FM chips if not purchased through a carrier. Some of the carriers disable the FM chip.

      I currently have a Moto G third edition and my daughter has a Moto X Pure Edition purchased directly from Motorola with working FM chips.

      IMO they are the best deal for the money when it comes to mid-range (Moto G) and flagship (Moto X) phones purchased outside of a contract.

      GSM phones working with ATT network.

    10. Re:"Chances are"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I believe the point is, your phone likely already has FM chip built in, whether you wanted it or not. It's such an easy function these days, almost falls in by accident while designing a cell phone chipset.

  3. obviously by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    that is one more reason you don't buy from a provider.

  4. Built into Windows Phone by DogDude · · Score: 1, Informative

    FM radio functionality is built right into Windows Phones. It's pretty great, so long as you use wired headphones. The phones use the headphones as antenna, so it doesn't work with Bluetooth, unfortunately.

    --
    I don't respond to AC's.
    1. Re:Built into Windows Phone by Gojira+Shipi-Taro · · Score: 2

      Well one would also need to buy a Windows Phone so...

      Kidding aside, the headphones are required as antenna for Android as well.

      --
      "Oh my God. This is terrible. This is the end of my Presidency. I'm fucked."; ~ Donald J. Trump
    2. Re:Built into Windows Phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      FM radio functionality is built right into Windows Phones. It's pretty great, so long as you use wired headphones. The phones use the headphones as antenna, so it doesn't work with Bluetooth, unfortunately.

      Glad it works well for both of you.

    3. Re:Built into Windows Phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Well, you have it for now. MS is removing it. http://www.windowscentral.com/microsoft-confirms-fm-radio-app-removal-windows-10-mobile

    4. Re:Built into Windows Phone by Errol+backfiring · · Score: 1

      It's also present in my pocket dinosaur, the Nokia N900. Also with the headphones as antenna, but for some obscure reasons you have to switch on bluetooth.

      --
      Nae king! Nae laird! Nae yurrupiean pressedent! We willna be fooled again!
    5. Re:Built into Windows Phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Same with BlackBerry. I use it a lot, actually.

    6. Re:Built into Windows Phone by b0bby · · Score: 1

      They're removing their built in app, not support for the chip - you'll still be able to use 3rd party apps.

    7. Re:Built into Windows Phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      the FM radio is on the same chip as Bluetooth. most android phones would be in the same boat. btw I wanted that phone, but could never justify the cost until it was already past its prime

    8. Re:Built into Windows Phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What third party app uses the radio?
      All third party apps I've tried stream online.

    9. Re:Built into Windows Phone by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I had an Android where the firmware disabled the chip... no driver... no FM.

  5. fuck the radio by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    fuck the radio. and fuck network and crappy cable television.

  6. If it was truly free, then yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    But guess what? It's not free. The telecom providers got these devices cheaper because things like the FM receiver were disabled.

    1. Re:If it was truly free, then yes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Then why are phones more expensive if you buy them from a mobile network provider?

    2. Re:If it was truly free, then yes by PublicSchill · · Score: 1

      Because mobile network providers are greedy fucks... any other questions?

  7. Would anyone use this? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I haven't listened to FM in 15 years due to the obnoxious commercial load. If this were enabled on my phone, I would not use it and couldn't care less if it were available or not.

  8. Not So Smart Phones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    My ~$20 Alcatel has a built in FM tuner; it works OK.
    Of course, I'm now a pay-as-I-go. After 15 years of monthly-plan/2-year-lockin-crap, I finally decided that I just needed a phone to be a phone. The FM tuner and Digicam are nice extra features, but I wouldn't miss them if they weren't included.
    (Yes, I also have an iPad with Cell/GPS. I use the GPS bits.)

  9. Doh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That would seriously hamper my ability to choose a smartphone, as i do not want to pay GIS tax. In Austria you have to pay monthly if you have a device that is capable of receiving TV or Radio over DVB.
    Many fight this out of principle, because you have to pay even if you don't consume state TV and Radio. Having a capable device is enough to be extorted. Even though it would be really trivial to just encrypt the DVB stream and let people opt in.

    1. Re: Doh. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This article and campaign is specifically about FM, not DVB/DAB. FM radios require so little circuitry they're included in most 3/4G and GSM chips as an aside.

      However, they frequently aren't connected to any aerial (or headphone socket), so wouldn't work even if enabled

  10. Android implementation is crap anyway by JonnyCalcutta · · Score: 1

    If only Android would let you send the audio to bluetooth. My bluetooth speaker doesn't have an audio in socket and I'm not buying another one. (And yes, I know you need the headphones to act as an antenna, but that shouldn't prevent sending the audio to bluetooth. You can send the audio to the phone's speaker, but not to bluetooth).

    Apart from that, I've never seen a phone with an FM chip that wasn't activated but maybe its lower end phones.

    1. Re:Android implementation is crap anyway by sbaker · · Score: 3, Informative

      My ancient Moto-G phone has working FM radio - the reason it doesn't work with Bluetooth (well, sorta) is that FM radio's *need* a couple of feet of antenna - and the way the chip is set up is that it uses the headphone wire as the antenna. So if you don't plug in a physical set of wired headphones, it won't work.

      The app I have tests that the headphone is plugged in and won't run without it.

      Now, whether you can plug in a fake headphone wire and use BlueTooth for audio transmission - I don't know - it's not something I've tried.

          -- Steve

      --
      www.sjbaker.org
    2. Re:Android implementation is crap anyway by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Why would you need an audio in socket if you're going to stream over bluetooth?

    3. Re:Android implementation is crap anyway by NekoYasha · · Score: 2

      You can do this, after app updates. I had a 2013 Moto G, and you can listen to FM radio on Bluetooth, as long as you have a wired headphone plugged in.

      I've tried with an audio cable without headphones, and it works; but perhaps because the connector is low-quality, the phone thinks I'm pressing the headphone remote button, which makes the radio randomly pause.

      This is specific to Motorola, which seems to record the analogue radio output, and then sends it through Android's audio system as digital audio. The app can also record FM broadcasts. This does sometimes mess up the system audio output, but stopping the radio app Activity usually fixes it.

      I also remember that installing CyanogenMod on the Nexus One would enable its FM radio, but there is no recording or Bluetooth functionality.

    4. Re:Android implementation is crap anyway by larwe · · Score: 1

      Isn't the actual reason for this that the FM received audio is never in the digital domain, so couldn't be sent to BT unless it was fed into an ADC somewhere? My understanding is that the FM tuner audio output is an analog line fed into the analog amp/mixer chain that feeds the headphone jack.

    5. Re:Android implementation is crap anyway by larwe · · Score: 1

      Quite a few BT (and BT/WiFi) speakers give you a hardwired analog in option as well, though it's obviously not a NECESSARY feature, as you point out.

    6. Re:Android implementation is crap anyway by JonnyCalcutta · · Score: 1

      That makes a lot of sense actually. Thanks

    7. Re:Android implementation is crap anyway by illtud · · Score: 1

      My N900 could do this - I bought a 3.5mm antenna to plug in the headphone socket but channeled the audio through BT.

    8. Re:Android implementation is crap anyway by sbaker · · Score: 1

      No - I don't think so - my FM tuner has a record facility...so somewhere along the line it's got to get into the digital domain.

      But it's a bundled app that came with the Moto-G - so it may not be something that all android phones can do.

      --
      www.sjbaker.org
    9. Re:Android implementation is crap anyway by larwe · · Score: 1

      yeah... obv the phone *has* an audio ADC anyway to handle the microphone, so it *could* feed the FM signal in through that. I guess it depends on the individual phone design (spare mixer pins, for example) as to whether they route it this way. I just looked at the datasheet for the WiFi/BT/FM chip (well, module really) in an Android device I work with - it's an older device based on an OMAP processor - and that chip does in fact feed out the FM audio in analog.

  11. Nexus Devices by Luthair · · Score: 2

    If it were the carriers, wouldn't Google's unlocked Nexus devices offer FM radio? Seems like there might be more to it than the evil carriers.

    1. Re:Nexus Devices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Google doesn't seem to want that. The Motorola-sold version of the Moto G (2013) has the radio enabled and includes an app to use it. The Google Play edition doesn't include an app and if you install one, it says the radio is disabled.

    2. Re:Nexus Devices by jrumney · · Score: 2

      It will need the drivers as well as the app. The biggest problem with FM Radio on Android is that there is no standard API, so every phone comes with its own custom solution which is incompatible with other phones (even from the same manufacturer if the hardware is different and a different team was called in to get the radio working, deciding that it was easier to start from scratch than to try to figure out the undocumented mess from the previous model).

    3. Re:Nexus Devices by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hear that Android was all "open-source" and stuff. Maybe SOMEONE could write some software enable this feature?

      HA HA HA! Just kidding.

      Even if you could convince manufacturers to tell which bits you need to flip to enable FM - which they won't tell you, just to spite you - there's a high likelihood that you won't even have permissions to alter the system image. Or maybe you can, but the process is more painful than it was for me to set up FreeBSD on my laptop (spoilers: it was very painful), so you give up.

      You can thank Google for that mess.

    4. Re:Nexus Devices by DaHat · · Score: 1

      It will need the drivers as well as the app

      Exactly!

      Ignored by many is that this is by no means free. Even if the chip manufacturer has a sample driver & code for making the FM radio work, it's still up to the device manufacturer to validate that it works on their particular device... and even sometimes then get the carrier to sign off on the code.

      Given how many Android devices are effectively abandoned by their manufacturer after they are shipped... you might be able to convince manufacturers to support it going forward, but likely not for existing devices... doubly so when noting guarantees that the existing chip works as is (could be too susceptible to interference or not have sufficient antenna).

    5. Re:Nexus Devices by EvilSS · · Score: 1

      Yea it's not the carriers so much as Google/Apple, who happen to sell music downloads and streaming services, that don't want them turned on.

      --
      I browse on +1 so AC's need not respond, I won't see it.
    6. Re:Nexus Devices by gwolf · · Score: 1

      I have owned at least three different cheap Android phones (one with Android 2.2, one 4.1 and one 4.4) from three different cheap brands (ZTE, BLÜ and VeryKool), and they all offered a FM radio application. The second one had quite bad reception, but worked. They all used the same application (with the same silly "five favorite stations only" cap).
      I don't know if Android does not offer a standard API for FM radio, but it does offer a standard app at least — which, I guess, is left out or disabled by those that want /not/ to offer it.

    7. Re:Nexus Devices by jrumney · · Score: 1

      Mediatek does seem to have donated an FMRadio app to the Android Open Source Project, and since Android 5.1 it has been moved out of the platform specific source, presumably to encourage other chipset manufacturers to commonize their APIs to work with it. A lot of cheap Android phones use Mediatek chipsets, so quite likely they are taking advantage of this. It still doesn't help the phones using Broadcom chipsets, which also feature an FM receiver and transmitter but only very basic open source drivers are available for one older IC. And with Broadcom rumoured to be getting out of the WiFi business, manufacturers are moving en-mass to Qualcomm/Atheros who do not put FM in their WiFi/Bluetooth combo ICs.

  12. Some phones already have it by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have a Moto G, 3rd generation. Stock, it comes with an "FM Radio" app. It claims to use the headphones as an antenna.

    The phone was less than $200 unlocked. It's not a budget phone, but it's far from a high-end phone. Perhaps if your phone doesn't have FM Radio available, it's time for a different vendor.

  13. Safety by captaindomon · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I do some safety consulting for disasters etc. This would be very helpful for disasters. You could even have an app that just tunes into the local emergency FM frequency. It's way easier to broadcast emergency instructions over FM to three million people in a metro area, than to support three million active streams over a data network, especially in an emergency.

    --
    Just because I can hook a shark from a boat, I do no offer to wrestle it in the water.
    1. Re:Safety by PublicSchill · · Score: 1

      pretty sure most phones already have emergency information. Mine almost always blasts a warning whenever there has been a kidnapping, tornado, or other severe weather.... We don't need to use the highly inefficient FM system to distribute warnings anymore.

    2. Re:Safety by PublicSchill · · Score: 1

      Also not to mention that every FM radio chip on a phone I have ever used requires to use headphones for an antenna. So it won't do much good in an emergency unless you wear your headphones 24/7.

    3. Re:Safety by captaindomon · · Score: 2

      To use the emergency alert system, your phone must be connected to the cellular network. That works great for things like tornado warnings or Amber alerts, etc. But two weeks into a disaster, when all the cell towers have been dead for well over a week, that gets a lot more difficult. And the emergency alert system is for short messages - i.e. "Tornado! Take cover!" or "Look for this license number...". They don't work well for long lists of water distribution locations and updated stock, instructions for leaving the area with bus schedules, etc. It is a lot easier to provide emergency power to one radio station operating independently than to a thousand cellular towers, which are all connected by fiber lines that will be severed when an earthquake hits. So for immediate duck and cover type warnings, the existing cellular system works great. For coordinating large-scale multiple-week disaster efforts, they fall apart quickly. That's why emergency response teams have phones and connected devices, but also have complete stand-alone systems like VHF radios.

      --
      Just because I can hook a shark from a boat, I do no offer to wrestle it in the water.
    4. Re:Safety by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 2

      To use the emergency alert system, your phone must be connected to the cellular network. That works great for things like tornado warnings or Amber alerts, etc. But two weeks into a disaster, when all the cell towers have been dead for well over a week, that gets a lot more difficult. And the emergency alert system is for short messages - i.e. "Tornado! Take cover!" or "Look for this license number...". They don't work well for long lists of water distribution locations and updated stock, instructions for leaving the area with bus schedules, etc. It is a lot easier to provide emergency power to one radio station operating independently than to a thousand cellular towers, which are all connected by fiber lines that will be severed when an earthquake hits. So for immediate duck and cover type warnings, the existing cellular system works great. For coordinating large-scale multiple-week disaster efforts, they fall apart quickly. That's why emergency response teams have phones and connected devices, but also have complete stand-alone systems like VHF radios.

      While I agree a phone with FM would be great for an early warning, two weeks into a disaster the battery is likely long dead versus a pack of AA's and a cheap FM radio. As you point out, it's important to have an alternate reliable means of communication when land or cellular connections go down.

      --
      I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
    5. Re:Safety by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Also not to mention that every FM radio chip on a phone I have ever used requires to use headphones for an antenna. So it won't do much good in an emergency unless you wear your headphones 24/7.

      Big fucking deal. Speaking as one who has experienced two 6-day post-hurricane power outages up here in New England, putting on some headphones to listen to news and entertainment on the phone FM radio is not a problem. You can only listen to the birds chirp and the wind rushing through the trees for so long before you welcome the opportunity to feed your brain. Besides, a few hours in to the outage, the generators start to come on, so headphones are good for drowning that noise out, particularly at night when trying to sleep.

    6. Re:Safety by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      For the prolonged disaster scenario you propose, you would be better off chucking the phone in favor of a hand-crank radio. After all, if power to the cell towers is still down after two weeks, then so is the power to charge your phone.

    7. Re:Safety by stephanruby · · Score: 1

      It's way easier to broadcast emergency instructions over FM to three million people in a metro area, than to support three million active streams over a data network, especially in an emergency.

      Or you could just use sms to text them (or use a combination of text and text-to-speech).

      After all, even if their chip supports FM, the physical phones themselves haven't been built with the required FM antenna, so they must rely on wired headphones/earbuds (which most people don't have, or have stashed somewhere they have no idea where - comes the time of a disaster).

  14. Sweet! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That would be awesome to have an FM radio in a cell phone.

    1. Re:Sweet! by Paradise+Pete · · Score: 1

      That would be awesome to have an FM radio in a cell phone.

      You are easily awed.

  15. It's not just software by larwe · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Sure, many integrated WiFi/BT chipsets also include an FM receiver. But turning it on, in a phone that wasn't shipped with it turned on, is not just a software matter. With the LO powered up, you'll need to repeat conducted and radiated emissions tests. And if the phone wasn't intended to be shipped with the radio enabled, the necessary passives to connect it to the earphone jack as an antenna likely won't be on the PCB. And in the case of Apple, since they absolutely never intended to use the FM capability, I'd be amazed if the relevant pads from the WiFi package are even led out to traces.

    1. Re:It's not just software by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Conducted? From a phone? Really?

    2. Re:It's not just software by mykepredko · · Score: 2

      I was hoping to see a comment like this - I was going to add it.

      Along with the device not having the correct wiring for the FM function, don't count on the FM part of the GPS/WLAN/BT/FM (GPS is normally a standard feature) on the chip to be fully tested/verified by the manufacturer.

      When I was at RIM and were getting different products pitched to us, I asked about the FM functionality and was told by a TI FAE that FM was just there to round out the datasheet. The macro for the FM receiver functionality was on the chip, but as nobody had specifically asked for it, it wasn't tested - they would be happy to validate it for a fee.

      This is a case of somebody looking at the tear down of a smartphone, seeing a part which is advertised as having the FM functionality and demanding that it be used, without doing any kind of validation that it is properly wired and the part's function actually works.

    3. Re:It's not just software by larwe · · Score: 1

      Remember that thing you plug into the butt of your phone every day or so, to charge it? Yes. Conducted emissions test is required.

  16. Re:why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Well, you certainly have covered all 1000 use cases.

  17. Re:why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    because having a RADIO is not the same as MP3's on your device.

    RADIO is crucial in emergencies, particularly weather-related ones. cell towers could be down, the internets could be unreachable, but the RADIO would rely on neither to provide important news and weather information. there is a reason why a RADIO is crucial component of first aid, emergency and weather kits, not a fucking smart phone.

  18. Re:why? by HeadSoft · · Score: 1

    MP3s don't have the features of FM (live announcements, local news bits, etc.) along WITH the music that you don't have to pick (how can you easily discover music if you only hear your same old MP3?)

    Personally, I'm rarely outside wifi range-- but when I am, I never use data *at all*. I would much appreciate FM.

  19. Misleading campaign statements by Zen · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Not all phones have the FM Chips, but the campaign misleads us into thinking all phones have them, and the carriers just disabled them. I use a Nexus phone. There's no chip. My wife's LG does have a chip. According to the campaign website, Sprint already allows it, and T-Mobile has stated they will support.

    If you purchase your phone and it is unlocked, the carrier is irrelevant. You can do what you want with it (provided it has the chip). If you bought a locked phone through a carrier, then you're at the whim of what they want to allow you to do with your device. Why is this news?

    I may be missing something here, but I don't fully understand the emergency beacon type responses. Yes, of course I understand that the more options available for getting emergency information out the better. Of course that makes sense. But I get emergency beacons every once in a while on my phone today through either text or SMS (I've never investigated the mechanism). OK - now I've done 13 seconds of google-fu, and they apparently are not text messages and are specifically designed to not be bogged down during emergency periods with high congestion:

    https://www.fcc.gov/consumers/...
    Are WEAs text messages?

    No. Many providers have chosen to transmit WEAs using a technology that is separate and different from voice calls and SMS text messages. This technology ensures that emergency alerts will not get stuck in highly congested areas, which can happen with standard mobile voice and texting services.

    So having FM radio for emergency broadcasts would be good. But we already have emergency broadcasts using our cell phones - even the ones like mine that do not have an FM chip. The argument for carriers to unlock because it's a security concern seems a bit like fearmongering. It might just work, and I would applaud if all carriers unlocked the chips so we can use them. But we did sign contracts with our carriers when we bought the phones, and they control what we can do, so I'm not sure what leg we have to stand on. Unless you paid full price and bought an unlocked phone.

    1. Re:Misleading campaign statements by Lumpy · · Score: 1

      My Nexus 3 and Nexus 4 had FM and my friends Nexus 6 has FM after he cyangenmodded it.

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
    2. Re:Misleading campaign statements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      just as an FYI the nexus 6 uses a BCM4356 for WiFi and Bluetooth. The BCM4356 also has support for FM radio. All Moto/Google needed to do to enable it was make sure the pads on the BCM4356 went to the audio system and the antenna pad was drawn to the headphone. I would bet money that the majority of phones use bluetooth/WiFi chips that support FM as well. Most chips thrown that in there.

    3. Re:Misleading campaign statements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We had a tornado come through here last year and the first thing that went down was the cell towers. The year before that was a fire, which took out the primary power feeds to the town, forced evacuations, and in both cases, there went the land based internet as well. Because of the positively minuscule cost, I personally would not have any issue with it being "mandated" for emergency purposes.

      The problem with the generator for the house or going to a vehicle is the amount of power draw and that you are fixed to that location. Yeah, portable radio, blah blah, but I don't carry one of those everywhere I go. I do carry my phone.
         

    4. Re:Misleading campaign statements by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      >> ... Unless you paid full price and bought an unlocked phone.

      Your argument is weak. Everyone pays full price (just perhaps not up front). It's your phone, not the carriers.

      I have been buying non-carrier specific phones for years and one of the reasons I don't want to move from my three-year old Sony (along with the dock for charging) is because of the FM radio.

      As you and others pointed out, emergency usage could be a concern but simply listening to local talk radio (I work where cell coverage is not great) and NPR is fantastic. Also using it at the gym - turned to one of their many TV FM broadcasts is beyond priceless.

      But go figure...

    5. Re:Misleading campaign statements by Zen · · Score: 1

      Interesting information on the Nexus 6. Any links? My phone is a 6P. If you google "nexus 6p fm radio" there will be lots of webpages saying the 6P does not have an FM radio, including this one:
      http://www.ubergizmo.com/produ...

      I bought Nexus specifically so I can run stock Android and have all my features run smoothly. I don't really want to run cyanogenmod. But the option is interesting.

  20. Re:why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    To avoid using cellular data to download the aforementioned mp3. I don't think the mentioned smartphones have AM band enabled either.

  21. FM enabled, or not by fyngyrz · · Score: 2

    Apart from that, I've never seen a phone with an FM chip that wasn't activated but maybe its lower end phones.

    It can be a decision made by the carrier.

    For instance, the Galaxy S7, definitely a higher end device, has FM receiver hardware. Sprint enabled it when the S7 was shipped; T-Mobile enabled it during an S7 system update; Verizon has not enabled it as of this posting.

    And of course, I enjoy FM, and my S7 came from Verizon.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  22. Mobile DTV, Digital radio on smartphones with DVR by Danathar · · Score: 1

    IF I was able to receive DTV broadcasts and/or digital radio and be able to record shows to my phone directly I can say I'd probably watch more shows as they would be on my phone ready to watch when on a subway, back seat of car, etc. Too bad the broadcasters can't convince the smartphone people that is worthwhile...

  23. Tangentially on-topic by Hognoxious · · Score: 1

    You should write your sig on the studio wall.

    --
    Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  24. Re:why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I listen to a lot of podcasts. I don't use cellular data. I usually don't even use wifi. I download them on my computer.

  25. Re:why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    and if its erws, talk, or sport then you're better off with the AM band.

    Unless you want more than three channels in your own language, of course.

  26. Re:why? by pastafazou · · Score: 2

    Because I like listening to the DJ's of my local rock station, that's why. They're interesting and funny and talk about local events and stuff.

  27. "Most" Android Smartphones by Chibi+Merrow · · Score: 1

    And yet of the 5 Android phones I've owned, none of them have FM chips...

    --
    Maxim: People cannot follow directions.
    Increases in truth directly with the length of time spent explaining them
    1. Re:"Most" Android Smartphones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And yet of the 5 Android phones I've owned, none of them have FM chips...

      Have you looked though? Just checking if you could use FM radio on your phone would have been entirely missing the point. Without providing some kind of link or additional information to support that assertion, it seems equally possible that some or all of those five phones had fm chips, but _disabled_. Which is exactly the point of this campaign.

      Not that I really care either way to be honest, if my phone has fm radio or not.

    2. Re:"Most" Android Smartphones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They most likely did have the hardware, but not work was done to enable it. most BT chips also do FM.

    3. Re:"Most" Android Smartphones by Holi · · Score: 1

      Most likely your Bt chip has fm capability, that does not mean that your phone was designed to use it.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    4. Re:"Most" Android Smartphones by Holi · · Score: 1

      Except they aren't usually "disabled", more likely they were never designed to use that functionality at all in the first place.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
    5. Re:"Most" Android Smartphones by bobf0648 · · Score: 1

      I have two Android and a couple of Windows phones, and they all have FM radios that work.

    6. Re:"Most" Android Smartphones by Chibi+Merrow · · Score: 1

      Yes, I did look.

      The Motorola Backflip, Galaxy S3, Galaxy S4, Nexus 6, and Nexus 5S all lacked FM chips. With the exception of the Backflip, those are all pretty popular phones, as well..

      --
      Maxim: People cannot follow directions.
      Increases in truth directly with the length of time spent explaining them
  28. Color me surprised... by gwolf · · Score: 1

    I believe that all of the (not so many) cell phones I have bought since my first one, around 2003, have had FM radio capabilities. And it's always been one of the features I have most used. Except for the Nokia N95 I bought in 2008, my phones have always been at the cheap end of the category — I currently have a "Verykool" (yes, that's the brand) that costed under US$80, bought it because it's a dual-SIM, unlocked, decently-recent-Android, decent-camera phone.
    Anyway, a FM chip is probably one of the cheapest functions to implement in a phone. I never doubted that every phone should carry it, as it brings value that many of us still use. One more thing to check when my phone finally gives the ghost — hopefully a couple of years from now.

  29. AM radio antenna systems by fyngyrz · · Score: 5, Informative

    So how are cars receiving AM without 160 meter long antennas?

    While the whip antenna on a car is short, it has a substantial ground plane to work against (the body of the car.) This increases the signal level developed between ground and the antenna input. Sometimes the actual antenna is not as short as you might initially think, either; look closely, and on many car antenna systems, you'll see a fine wire that spirals up the outside of the whip; that's the AM broadcast band antenna, not the whip itself. The whip is just used as a mechanical support when receiving AM. This approach provides significantly stronger signals to the radio.

    In order to obtain signals of a similar strength in a portable radio, the usual approach is to wind a lot of wire around a ferrite core and make it resonate with the appropriate matching capacitance. With proper design, this can result in a highly effective narrow-band (just a few channels), tunable, directional antenna capability.

    Antennas aside, most car radios don't have very good AM sections. Just as with home stereo and theater receivers, manufacturers tend to not treat AM seriously. Historically speaking, there have been exceptions. For instance, Sansui produced an AM / FM tuner that had a pretty good AM section in it; early tube receivers also typically tried to do a good job. A good AM band receiver has control over IF bandwidth, and in a truly modern design, this is done with a software defined radio, so that the bandwidth is precisely controllable and essentially devoid of roll-off.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    1. Re:AM radio antenna systems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Antennas aside, most car radios don't have very good AM sections. Just as with home stereo and theater receivers, manufacturers tend to not treat AM seriously.

      Dunno where you're coming from, but in the US, the best AM reception comes in the car stereos. AM is made for long distance audio transmission (at great power consumption). Back in the days when car manufacturers controlled everything in their car, they wouldn't tolerate mediocre AM radio reception because they didn't want to risk losing a sale from the bad reputation of a car defect (in this case, crappy AM). American consumers cared about their AM reception back then, because you can't watch TV while driving your car in your 1+ hour commute. Compounding all this, its harder to have quality AM reception equipment in cars, given the biggest cause of radio interference; the electrical system of your car.

      Perhaps the quality of AM reception has dropped in cars in the past five years given the changing culture and advancing techology. (Why listen to the AM radio for traffic reports every ten minutes when you have waze? Why listen to idiot radio talk shows, when you can playback podcasts with the content of your choice, or symphonic quality orchestral recordings, and unlimited library?) But while I've noticed that AM reception has markedly dropped in home stereo equipment, I haven't noticed any drop in AM reception in cars.

    2. Re: AM radio antenna systems by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

      No, the best AM (and shortwave) reception is achieved with an SDR, a loop antenna such as the pixel pro, and good SDR software. Car radios are terrible, generally speaking. Also, the noise issues you speak of are not generally addressed at the radio in a car; that's about shielding the radiators and filtering the power supply. It's a very rare car radio that actually implements any form of active noise suppression (which is just one of the areas SDR hugely exceeds their performance.) Most people have never experienced a high-quality AM receiver, ever. With analog techniques, it's very hard to make such a thing.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    3. Re:AM radio antenna systems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      on many car antenna systems, you'll see a fine wire that spirals up the outside of the whip; that's the AM broadcast band antenna, not the whip itself.

      That's for aerodynamics. It significantly reduces antenna vibration. You can sometimes see spirals on antennas as inductors or for circularly polarized signals, but that's not what you're seeing on a car's radio antenna. The spiral on mine is covered by conductive chrome, so obviously isn't part of the antenna.

    4. Re: AM radio antenna systems by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      No that spiral wire on your whip antenna is not your AM antenna. If your radio has AM capability then the radio has a ferrite antenna in the radio body. Your whip antenna only receives FM.

    5. Re: AM radio antenna systems by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

      If your radio has AM capability then the radio has a ferrite antenna in the radio body.

      Definitely not.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    6. Re:AM radio antenna systems by fyngyrz · · Score: 1

      Mine (on a 2002 3/4t Chevy Avalanche) has separate coaxial feeds; both go to inputs on the radio. One comes from the spiral, one comes from the whip. It may well be that yours is cosmetic; on the other hand, that may not be chrome - it could just be plastic, like many things are these days. Can't say without prodding your antenna and cabling. But I have been over mine, and it's definitely two separate elements.

      --
      I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
    7. Re: AM radio antenna systems by Shirley+Marquez · · Score: 1

      Once upon a time, cars had some of the best AM radio receivers you could get. Somewhat later, they were the only place that AM Stereo was ever commonly available. About the only thing that could beat them were communications receivers used by ham radio operators and serious shortwave listeners; those are still an excellent tool for AM reception.

      Those days, alas, are long gone. Car radio manufacturers stopped paying attention to the quality of the AM side a long time ago. (Decreasing interest in listening to AM is a big factor. The FCC has also allowed the band to devolve into a horrible mess by authorizing a lot of tiny stations.) The noise from all the electronics in a modern car interfere with reception. And the large whip antennas found on older cars have been replaced with smaller ones, both for visual appeal and to reduce aerodynamic drag.

      FM radios for cars also used to lead the way technologically. They were usually better in quality than most home receivers - though not for achieving the ultimate in sound quality, because the design emphasis was on things like selectivity and weak signal capability rather than fidelity. They are usually still pretty good. And nearly all have RDS displays, something that most home radios lack. Surprisingly, the car manufacturers haven't jumped on the HD Radio bandwagon; I guess they're more interested in pushing satellite radio subscriptions instead.

      But you are right. A good SDR can now beat everything else out there. It's actually possible to receive adjacent channels on an SDR if they are not being obliterated by HD Radio sidebands; the nearly perfect filters that can be implemented digitally make it possible. On FM, only one very expensive McIntosh tuner and some equally expensive tuners made for the broadcast industry came close.

  30. hidden? by Frederic54 · · Score: 1

    FM radio was working on my Samsung Galaxy S2, Motorola G2 and now my Zenfone2 (I just realised I have something with the number 2...)

    --
    "Science will win because it works." - Stephen Hawking
  31. Are we talking about ab "FM receiver"? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Or the "FM transmitter?"

    How do we know a device isn't broadcasting data from its "FM receiver"?

    1. Re:Are we talking about ab "FM receiver"? by larwe · · Score: 1

      Because as an intentional radiator, the FCC filings for the device will show exactly what emissions the device is making, and at what frequency and power level. And if it's emitting something that isn't in its type approval, any monkey with a scanner can detect that, and the FCC can and will lower the hammer of Thor onto the manufacturer's corporate scrotum (translation: huge, per-unit-sold fines).

  32. Built into BlackBerry 10 by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    (except for the initial device of the series, the Z10) - built in, just as someone mentioned about Windows phone. Just use a wired headset/earbuds/patch cable to whatever aux input. Works great.

  33. The problem is that they still require data by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And leave you trackable.

    The FM radio comes with an "app" where you can "share" with people what you're listnening to. This tells me it a) wont work if the data link is down or b) is shitty quality and c) they're using "free" FM radio as just another way to monitor what you're doing.

  34. Ferrite effectiveness vs whips by fyngyrz · · Score: 4, Informative

    At low frequencies, yes, it is.

    It has to do with the wavelength of the signal, and the approach to the EM field. A ferrite antenna (actually a particular case of a loop antenna) couples to the magnetic field. A whip couples to the electric field. You can learn more about loop antennas and the differences from whip and dipole and other antennas via Google, if you're really interested.

    --
    I've fallen off your lawn, and I can't get up.
  35. Unlikely to work by gnu-sucks · · Score: 1

    Unless these chips somehow share the antenna of the Bluetooth or 3G system -- which is unlikely as the wavelength is vastly different -- you would only pick up the strongest of signals.

    I agree though that having a basic analog receiver in every phone could be very handy in emergencies and in rural areas where low power FM is normal and 3G/whatever isn't.

    Plus I would just like to use it for music and news.

    1. Re:Unlikely to work by Bugler412 · · Score: 1

      all phones I have witnessed that have the FM radio hardware require wired headphones for it to operate, the headphone cable acts as the antenna

  36. Re:why? by Rik+Sweeney · · Score: 1

    download the .MP3s to your phone

    Download? What is this, 2010?!

  37. Comparing national and regional providers by tepples · · Score: 1

    Last report was over 28,000,000 subscribers with an average of two receivers (I personally have 4). Comcast has fewer customers.

    That's because the big C's (Comcast, Cox, and Charter) have chosen to divide the cable market up among themselves by city. Sirius, on the other hand, has a single nationwide market. To compare them fairly, you have to add all C's.

  38. Re:why? by TangoMargarine · · Score: 1

    Radio stations let you listen to a random sampling of music you probably don't own, without a subscription fee.

    --
    Unity? Screw that: XFCE. Slashdot Beta? Screw that: SoylentNews. Australis? Screw that: Pale Moon. UX developers DIAF
  39. Not just for traditional radio! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I want this not for the awful radio stations we have left, but for use when at a drive-in that uses FM radio for the audio. We typically sit on lawn chairs and use a boom-box, but if the FM radio chip in our phones work, I could use it.

  40. Windows phones fwiw by Bugler412 · · Score: 1

    Nearly all Windows phones have the FM hardware (wired headphones required for an antenna) since Windows Phone 7 days, but the software to use it has been hidden, but still present in the base OS. You just need to load any third party FM radio app from the store, then you can save shortcuts to your stations once the radio is playing and can remove the third party software, basically the third party software just calls the underlying OS included FM radio functions. MS has said they are removing the software from their upcoming "anniversary release" of Windows 10 in July though.

  41. Weather Radio? by braindrainbahrain · · Score: 2

    Instead of campaigning for vapid, advertising filled pop music, how about a campaign for NOAA Weather Radio? This could actually be useful as during severe weather, cell service is easily knocked out. Listeners could be alerted to severe weather events in their area: tornadoes, flooding, etc.

    1. Re:Weather Radio? by LWATCDR · · Score: 1

      I do like that idea. It would be nice if the noaa stations included some digital sub carriers with extra data in them as well like road condition warnings.

      --
      See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
    2. Re:Weather Radio? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      because maybe devices are manufactured and sold worldwide, noaa is a u.s. government thing that serves the u.s. homeland. fm, on the other hand, is a global common standard with only small differences in some countries (e.g. japan) that software can accommodate for given a hardware standard that does work everywhere.

    3. Re:Weather Radio? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The problem with the NOAA radios is that they don't have the granularity I want. I can enter my SMART code (I think that's what it's called), but I can't filter out severe thunderstorm watches and other watches that had not yet progressed to warnings. Consequently, I was awakened several times for alerts that I didn't really need to jump right up, and so were my children. Try getting the 1-year-old back to bed after a severe wind warning starts bleating at 2AM.

      I'm not a shill, but for my money (free), I'll take Simple Weather Alert app for Android and filter everything except tornado warnings (very important in my neck of the woods). I'll hold off on the NOAA until they allow me to filter down to the warnings I want.

    4. Re:Weather Radio? by Bob+the+Super+Hamste · · Score: 1

      That is some commie talk right there. Go shut your red commie pie hole. /sarcasm

      I seem to remember a few years back some GOP senator ranting like a retarded monkey about how we can't afford the NWS providing a free service and that everyone should just get the weather report from the internet like they did. Seriously though this would be a godsend and why it isn't car radios is beyond me. My previous car had it but my current one doesn't. Even when I had to replace the head unit on it I tried to find one that had NOAA Weather Radio but it was like talking to a wall trying to find out about car stereos. Hell finding one that could get HD radio and could play MP3s from a USB stick was damn near impossible. At least my CB gets the NOAA broadcasts, so if you ever see a red BMW sedan with a large CB antenna towing a trailer or 13' sail boat that it is probably me.

      --
      Time to offend someone
  42. Re:why? by Tailhook · · Score: 1

    just download the .MP3 s to your phone and listen to the selection of music that you want

    Uncoil your back. Lift your head. Try to focus your eyes on something beyond your front paws, if you still can. There is a lot more going on in the world than just listening to recorded music. FYI.

    AM is a no-go; antenna problems. They do news, talk and sports on FM too, just so you know.

    --
    Maw! Fire up the karma burner!
  43. Campaign Doesn't Understand Hardware by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just because the chip can do it, doesn't mean it's configured so. Most phones that have the combo chip do not have the necessary supporting hardware to use the FM receiver, like the coupling network to connect the antenna port to the headphone jack. No amount of software tinkering or legislative decree can change that.

    1. Re:Campaign Doesn't Understand Hardware by mark-t · · Score: 1

      The idea would be, I presume, that if the chip is there, manufacturers would have to have a means by which the consumer can activate it. It will do nothing for existing phones, but would make a difference for phones sold next year, for instance.

  44. It's not an FM chip by Snotnose · · Score: 1

    Not to be pedantic, but the FM circuitry is actually built into the baseband chip. This is the chip that has 2-3 ARM cores, CDMA bit twiddling, graphics, and in fact is about 80% of the phone's capabilities. The ones I worked on had a baseband chip, a PMIC (power management IC), and a chip to handle the RF signals.

    Now that I think about it, the circuitry probably has to be in both the baseband and the RF chip.

    1. Re:It's not an FM chip by larwe · · Score: 1

      It depends on the chipset in use. For example, I work with a device (sort of a smartphone) that uses a single integrated baseband/WiFi/BT/FM SoC (single ARM core, old tech) - and the FM stuff is disabled in this application by blowing polyfuses at manufacture. No amount of software can turn it back on. I'm looking at a phone right now in my hand that has an integrated AP/baseband SoC, and uses an external BT/WiFi/FM chip. That chip uses strapping resistors and software commands to enable/disable the various modules.

  45. CDMA2000 let VZW and Sprint restrict phones by tepples · · Score: 1

    Until LTE became widespread, subscribers had to buy from a provider because two of the major U.S. carriers (Verizon and Sprint) used CDMA2000, not GSM/UMTS. CDMA2000 allows a carrier to choose to either issue removable CSIM cards or program the subscriber identity directly into the handset. The U.S. CDMA2000 carriers chose the latter and generally refused to activate any handset that they did not sell, ostensibly because no other phones supported the correct bands. Last time I checked, LTE-capable phones on Verizon and Sprint still needed a CDMA2000 subscriber identity for voice calls, text messages, and use in areas that do not yet have LTE coverage. Though LTE-capable phones have a slot for an access card, I don't know whether such phones for the North American market store the CDMA2000 part of the subscriber identity on the card or on the handset.

    1. Re:CDMA2000 let VZW and Sprint restrict phones by anegg · · Score: 1

      Yes, Sprint does continue to block the free market as much as they can in the US. Boost Mobile and Virgin Mobile are both Sprint brands and use the Sprint network, but a phone bought under one of the brands is either very difficult to get provisioned under another brand, or impossible to get provisioned, depending on who you listen to and what dodge they managed to work on the customer service folks. One consequence is that the used market in Sprint-network compatible phones is very fragmented.

    2. Re:CDMA2000 let VZW and Sprint restrict phones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      With Sprint, the main device identification is stored in the device itself. LTE devices (at least the ones I've worked with) use sim cards, but they only allow the LTE to authenticate. There is no reason to ever take the factory issued sim card out of the socket because putting it in something else won't do anything (unless it was a spare sim card and you were missing one in the other phone).

    3. Re: CDMA2000 let VZW and Sprint restrict phones by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I disagree; times are changing. You didn't even mention the most interesting Sprint MVNOs. These are Ting, Freedompop, and Ringplus. Spoiler: best service and quality is Ting. Best deal is Ringplus, assuming they stay in business while practically giving away service.

  46. Re:why? by yes-but-no · · Score: 1

    when walking carrying your computer, how do u handle the wired ethernet? do you have someone carry a large spool of wire? just curious

  47. There used to be no discount for BYOD by tepples · · Score: 2

    Then why are phones more expensive if you buy them from a mobile network provider?

    Until about 2013, buying a phone separately and using it on VZW, AT&T, or Sprint was hundreds of dollars more expensive because there was no discount for not taking a subsidized phone. The carrier would still add $20 or so per month to your bill even after the contract ended or even if you brought your own device. T-Mobile's "Un-carrier" ad campaign in 2013, which promoted the fact that T-Mobile itemizes the service and the installment payment for the phone separately, forced the other carriers to adopt similar price cuts. (T-Mobile had already been doing this for years under the name "Even More Plus", but it wasn't well promoted.)

    1. Re:There used to be no discount for BYOD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      In which country is that? I've never heard of a mobile network provider charging the same amount for a SIM-only subscription as for a subscription that includes a phone. I cannot imagine that that is legal, as the customer is effectively forced to subscribe to two services at the same time: network subscription and paying the phone in installments. In Europe at least, that is very explicitly forbidden.

    2. Re:There used to be no discount for BYOD by tepples · · Score: 1

      buying a phone separately and using it on VZW, AT&T, or Sprint [...] hundreds of dollars

      In which country is that?

      Verizon Wireless, Sprint, and the company formerly known as American Telephone and Telegraph all serve the United States market.

      SIM-only subscription

      The CDMA2000 system allows a carrier to provide a subscriber identity in one of two ways. The carrier can provide a removable CSIM, or the carrier can "activate" the phone by programming the subscriber identity directly into the phone. U.S. carriers using CDMA2000, such as Verizon and Sprint, have historically chosen to "activate" phones and even to leave CSIM slots off their branded phones entirely until they added LTE service, as LTE mandates a USIM slot.

  48. Can't speak for Canadian radio but US is bad by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    We don't want this, please stop trying to do it, thank you, carry on.

    1. Re:Can't speak for Canadian radio but US is bad by mark-t · · Score: 1

      Nobody would be twisting your arm and forcing you to use it if you don't want to.

      Unless you are assuming that it will drive up your costs, what difference should it make to you?

    2. Re:Can't speak for Canadian radio but US is bad by Holi · · Score: 1

      Speak only for your self AC. I would like the added capability of a working FM receiver in my phone.

      --
      Sorry, teleporters just kill you and then make a copy. A perfect, soul-less copy.
  49. If you want it unlocked by jader3rd · · Score: 1

    If you want it unlocked get a Windows Phone. They don't bother to lock it on those.

  50. DEMAND by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    FORCE

  51. Mine works just fine by spaceyhackerlady · · Score: 1

    My Samsung Galaxy something-or-other has FM radio and it works fine as long as you have headphones plugged in.

    I'm in Canada, my phone is on Telus. I don't have data on it, it's too bloody expensive.

    ...laura

  52. Re:why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The word "radio" is not an acronym and should not be in all-caps. If you merely meant to emphasize the word, I'd like to introduce you to <b> and <i>. They can create bold or italic type for you. Don't forget to close them with the corresponding </b> or </i> tag. Use them like a highlighter, starting and ending a span of text with them.

    Your main point stands, though. A radio is a good thing to have. But don't think it's infallible. It relies on a tower, just like cellular service. It just has a larger coverage area and a simpler type of interaction, requiring fewer towers and drastically reducing the chances that any given weather event could take down that tower. It also relies on a signal source, which could also be incapacitated by weather. And then there's the trasmitter site link, linking the signal source to the transmitter at the tower. That's also a radio link in most cases, and is a point of failure. It's been a long time since the broadcast booth was in a building at the base of the tower. Radio has a statistically lower chance of being knocked out by weather, but it has many more points of failure and many fewer backups than a data network, including cellular.

    TL;DR: Don't get cocky. Radio has its problems.

  53. Moto G has it enabled by jzarling · · Score: 1

    My MotoG 3rd Gen has it enabled.
    I haven't used it much, but when I have its been, average enough.

    --
    It is better to be the hammer than the anvil.
  54. radio is useless to me by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I would never use it, free radio is worthless to me. Radio is 70% advertisement and 30% music I don't want to hear. If I don't have my phone to stream or listen to my playlists I never turn on the radio. Radio is like having somebody else push their agenda down your throat the whole drive.

  55. Why Canada? by freeze128 · · Score: 1

    Enabling the FM receiver chip would be very useful for emergency situations, like terrorist attacks or dangerous weather. It would be most useful in the southeastern United States where there are hurricanes and tornadoes. You don't really see a lot of those in Canada, so I can only imagine that the reason for the campaign is consumer rights.

    1. Re:Why Canada? by dryeo · · Score: 1

      We get dangerous weather here in Canada. Where I live we get wind storms (often knock 100,000 customers out of the grid), snow storms, ice storms and fire storms. The fire storms are the scariest and seem to be getting more frequent (see whats happening up north) and once the one phone line burns (or the copper thieves cut it), we're left with FM radio and hopefully police/firetrucks PA systems telling us whether the one road is open or where to marshal for the helicopters to pick us up. It would be nice to have a visible cell tower but unless you're in town or on a main highway...

      --
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_totalitarianism
  56. Sesame Street is now funded by HBO and has first a by AF_Cheddar_Head · · Score: 1

    And you prove GPs point. If they had the government funding that some people think they wouldn't need to partner with HBO to fund a popular show like Sesame Street.

    Same goes for CBC/BBC and Australian Broadcasting Corporation (ABC). In fact the incumbent governments of each nation are attempting to cut funding because they don't report the government line.

  57. Info on Verizon and Sony FM Chips by Kainaw · · Score: 4, Informative

    I was just told about this thread - so this may be old. But, I've done a lot of research into Verizon and the Sony Z3V, which has an FM chip.

    TLDR: The chip is not disabled. The OS is altered to mute FM output.

    I have three Sony Z3V phones. All three have an FM chip. I can check to ensure the FM chip works by using the Sony diagnostics tool. Dial *#*#7378523#*#* and you get a diagnostics menu. Select hardware tests and test the FM chip. If it was disabled, it wouldn't work. It does work. Just type in the frequency to tune to and you get radio. The problem is that this screen will timeout. When it does, the radio goes away. Also, there's no volume adjustment. It is at max volume only.

    In the original OS distribution, Verizon simply didn't include an FM app with the phone. You could download one (such as Spirit FM) and listen to the radio. With the 5.1.1 update, the radio stopped working. But, there was a catch. If you used Sony's FM app - which you have to download from a "trusted source" and install as an untrusted third party app - it still worked. You could listen to the radio. Then, there was the second update to 5.1.1. Instead of "disabling" FM, Verizon went another route. They mute the FM audio. So, you can download just about any FM app. You can run it. You can tune it in. You can see that it has a signal. You can see the over-the-air identification text, which is usually the song being played. But, there is no audio.

    Now, controversy: Verizon has quoted multiple times that it would cost up to $100/phone to "enable" the FM chip in the phones. The chip is enabled. They are spending effort in muting it. Verizon has also quoted multiple times that an FM tuner interferes with normal phone operations. Before the upgrade to 5.1.1, I listened to the radio on my phone all the time and never had any trouble with any other operations. In my opinion, Verizon simply wants you to use data to listen to music. They don't want you to listen to music for free.

    --
    The previous comment is purposely vague and generalized, but all of the facts are completely true.
  58. I still remember the phony iphone factory story by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I still remember the fake iphone factory story, and the factory worker crying after seeing an iphone in use. I thought it was bullshit when I heard it, and it turned out it was. I haven't forgiven NPR since then. There are talk radio stations in the AM band, you can sometimes find a decent radio program.

  59. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  60. Comment removed by account_deleted · · Score: 1

    Comment removed based on user account deletion

  61. Re:Sports? On FM? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Good luck with that.

    Most radio sports games are broadcast on AM.

  62. Re:Sports? On FM? by PopeRatzo · · Score: 1

    Most radio sports games are broadcast on AM.

    Not any more. We live in an age of HD Radio on the FM band. You can pick up all the big AM stations on the FM band and the major sports are all broadcast on big stations. Even on standard FM, the big flagship stations almost always partner with a local FM station. For example, I can hear every Yankees game on 97.9 The Fan and all Red Sox games on 96.5-2.

    Back in Chicago, Bears games are on 105.9 FM and Hawks games on 88.5 (though I think WGN may have sold that FM frequency.

    You've got to look around, but you can find the big local sports on FM.

    --
    You are welcome on my lawn.
  63. Re:why? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    You're weird. I have about 40 podcast episodes on my phone right now. I'll download more before I run out of those.

  64. I doubt anything will change by Bratch · · Score: 1

    I've been annoyed by the lack of FM radio on my phone for years now. My Samsung Omnia and Motorola Droid X on Verizon had the basic FM radio (not HD), but my Samsung Note 2 and Note 4 on Verizon do not have a working FM radio. The same phone on Sprint has the radio, and they even advertise it with the NextRadio app. I've seen an HTC M8 with a working FM radio on Verizon. I could have switched to the M8, or maybe it's time to try Sprint, since I had a recent bad sales experience with Verizon.

    I've asked about this in forums, and one explanation was that the carrier and manufacturer must pay licensing and spectrum testing fees to the FCC. Some carriers and some manufacturers won't pay the additional cost for the FM radio testing. Another explanation is that HTC left the hooks intact, but removed the radio app, and Samsung actually removed the hooks to the FM radio on Verizon phones, but not in Sprint phones. Maybe it was at the request of Verizon, to force users into streaming radio. Customer service doesn't seem to know anything about this, some don't even know the difference between FM radio and streaming.

    I've heard that HD is proprietary and manufacturers don't want to pay licensing. It would be nice to have some kind of digital broadcast available, like they have in Norway. Plain old FM radio at least.

    Another argument is that it's not worth the effort since radio listeners are declining. They could leave the FM tuner working and let the owner decide to use it or not. If you don't like it, don't listen. I listen quite a bit, by carrying around a small Insignia HD. A few years ago I won so much stuff on the radio that they sent me a W-2 form, which included $2,404 in cash prizes.

    This was discussed on NPR last year:
    http://www.npr.org/sections/al...

    --
    Beware of the Redittor who loans you a Sharpie.
  65. Re: Sesame Street is now funded by HBO and has fir by TimMD909 · · Score: 1

    See, the BBC has toed the party line since 4 score and 7 yonks ago now... FTFY

  66. Re: I still remember the phony iphone factory stor by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    That wasn't an NPR story.

  67. I love FM! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I hope that FM or analog radio of any kind stays active forever. I find it fun to play with the dial and/or antenna to see what I can pick up. Sometimes when the conditions are conducive to "skip", its possible to pick up a station hundreds or thousands of miles away. I work outdoors for a living and listen to radio everyday. I sometimes work in places with little or no cell reception, so without FM my phone would be useless (luckily it has a working FM chipset and uses headphones for the antenna, but can still play over phone speaker) until I get back into range for streaming. Why is there a huge debate? If its in the phones already, why not just make it useable? You don't have to use it if you don't want to. But, at least the option is there if you do.

  68. My BlackBerry 10 phone has it! by RandomActOfKindness · · Score: 1

    Much like someone mentioned of Windows phones, my Z30 has it built right in, works great.

  69. As a Canadian veteran by WillAffleckUW · · Score: 1

    As a Canadian veteran, I support this additional freedom that only Canadians have, while America promises much and delivers little.

    FM means Freedom March!

    Corporations aren't people in Canada, btw.

    --
    -- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
  70. NFC also spec'd but disabled by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Such as with Virgin Mobile, which is part of Sprint.

    Bought one of their more expensive android phones because they listed NFC as a feature only to find that it was disabled. The phone is also has FM radio, which was also briefly listed as a feature, also disabled.

    Also noticed that all their most pricey phones which are known to have NFC and FM radio, and which were described as having NFC and FM radio on their website, now frequently omit listing these features on their website and disable them on the phone.

    I'd say they were acting in bad faith and committing fraud, especially if I had a copy of their web pages claiming the NFC & FM radio they chose to disable and not deliver as advertised.

  71. FM still exists? by hucker75 · · Score: 1

    I thought FM had been turned off and replaced by DAB? It has in the UK at least.

  72. open the phone by peawormsworth · · Score: 1

    There will be no success on pressuring the carriers. They will only act under law or if it serves their own purposes. The article states that it does not.

    Why not let the consumer install their own operating system so the own can decide how to utilize the product they own.

    I hate the idea of having to ask permission in order to use my property the way that I want. Therefore, I hate smart phones.

  73. Not a problem in India by Rexdude · · Score: 1

    India was always a Nokia bastion since around 1998 till the company's unwarranted demise(in the mobile space). Nokia launched their first phone with an FM radio around 2002 - a feature phone, mind - and since then millions of people listen to FM on their phones (and continue to do so with the latest Androids at various price points from dirt cheap to unlocked iPhone level expensive). It is asinine to have to use up data bandwidth for streaming when there's a perfectly good radio chip disabled for no reason.

    --
    "..One hosts to look them up, one DNS to find them, and in the darkness BIND them."