Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 45
  1. #21  
    Originally posted by ngarland
    here in the UK we have digital radio. this is free (no subscription) and channels suppied through the BBC carry NO advertising.
    Uh, I'll bet 100 pounds that you're paying for it through taxes whether you want the service or not.

    Don't you have to pay taxes for every TV you own?

    I personally don't want the government deciding which programming choices I have.
  2. #22  
    I don't mean to be discouraging, but I would definitely poll your potential users first. It seems to me that music is going the way of huge storage like the ipod. At the level of 30GBs pretty much anyone music collection becomes a radio by pressing the random button. Furhtermore it would be easy to simulate radio channels by just grouping the types of music (easily available in MP3 ID tags) together for random play.

    Pros to the hard drive approach
    ---------------------------------
    - No communications hardware to develop, just hard drive space, which exists in portable packages like the ipod today.
    - Huge hard drive solution could be used for video and other media

    Cons to the hard drive approach
    ---------------------------
    - You don't get real radio. I.E. I have to have mp3's of Nelly if I want to listen to him.
    - You don't get live radio experience. I.E. you wouldn't be able to get breaking news on this. (Although if you had the Treo 600, getting news should be easy enough through the web)

    Cons to the XM solution
    ------------------------
    - Monthly subscription fee.
    - Can't listen local AM stations for sports and such? (let me know if this is possible on the 100 channels, I'm guessing no because local stuff would eat up 70 or so)
    - I'm holding something that's a satelitte receiver to my head - potentially a lot of radiation there?
    - Is line of sight true? If so, I think a lot of people who can afford it and the Treo 600 would be the type to be home or in the office most of the time. This may be a problem.

    Clarifications
    -------------
    I don't have XM, so I only know the specs and a couple of articles I've read. This isn't meant to be an attack on XM or creative thinking. I'm mostly trying to put on (digital) paper some of the challenges that are faced by such an idea. Through market research they might be proved correct or incorrect.

    For me personally, I think that if I had an FM/AM (and yes, I'd want AM for sports) SDIO radio and a SDIO (or built-in) hard drive of 10+ GBs, I would have all the audio I'd really ever need to listen to (unless in cases of a rare channel like say CNBC radio). In addition, such an approach would also give me storage for video, of which I could import my shows from Tivo, ReplayTV, Snapstream, etc. That will be more important as the Treo gets a hi-res screen.
  3. njchris's Avatar
    Posts
    459 Posts
    Global Posts
    475 Global Posts
    #23  
    I'd rather have Sirius. But I wont hijack this into an XM vs Sirius debate.

    THAT being said.. having an MP3 collection big enough to cover 60+ streams of radio wouldn't be practical.

    you'd have to search for the songs you want and then you'd have to always get new stuff that you hear from where since you aren't listening to radio... If you aren't listening to radio and only your own MP3 collection, how would you know what's out there?

    What about the dozens of talk/news/sports/entertainment stations? Should I get MP3s of these too?

    I have Sat radio in my car (Sirius, obviously - hehe) and I love it. I thought I wouldn't but I rarely listen to regular radio anymore.

    I think it's one of those things that is hard to really "get" unless you have it.. Like Tivo.
  4. #24  
    I don't think there's enough money out there to make it worth your while.

    XM does have to have line of sight unless you're in a big town that has ground-based repeaters.

    The market seems to small. There are around 1,000,000 XM Customers, of those, how many also have a Treo 600 or other SD enabled cell phone? Of those how many would want this technology combined? I don't think it's worth it.

    There are some other opportunities that have been mentioned here, but I'm sure there are other companies actively working on it; bluetooth, am/fm with memory...

    If I did the XM project, I'd try to get the blessing of, and some funding from, the XM folks.
  5.    #25  
    I agree; there's not much of a market out there, and I would have to get the XM folks heavily involved. Their broadcast format is highly proprietary.

    I really enjoy all of your input so far; thanks!
  6. #26  
    Originally posted by njchris
    THAT being said.. having an MP3 collection big enough to cover 60+ streams of radio wouldn't be practical.

    you'd have to search for the songs you want and then you'd have to always get new stuff that you hear from where since you aren't listening to radio... If you aren't listening to radio and only your own MP3 collection, how would you know what's out there?

    What about the dozens of talk/news/sports/entertainment stations? Should I get MP3s of these too?
    Well, with 30+ GBs of mp3s that are tagged correctly (this is automated with lots of ripping programs), software can easily divide them up into virtual channels based on the genre tag. It's also about 512MB per each of those 60 streams or 500 minutes of music at what most people encode MP3s at. With Ogg Vorbis you'd get double. So I think 60,000 minutes of total music is sufficient to create something random enough to approach radio. Most radio stations I know don't have that 1/10th that kind of variety. Plus you could even customize it more by rating your favorites like iTunes does and create new channels that you couldn't with XM.

    As for real radio (i.e. "knowing what's out there") and talk/news/sports, etc., that's where the standard AM/FM receiver part comes in. Granted then you have to deal with commercials, but you'd get local sports, news, and traffic coverage which I don't if Sirius or XM nationwide plan covers. I don't know how it can plan for that unless you sign up for a locale when you order it and they preprogram you account to get that locale.

    I thought that I explained those points in my original post. The memory + am/fm isn't ideal and requires you own the mp3s in the first place, but I think it's a case that suits 90% of the general population.

    Also consider that in future versions of Treo's you can pretty much count on a hard drive being added as well as an AM/FM functionality. Most of this stuff is around now, but just not at a price point that it can be built into the phone (i.e. like wifi) without making the phone cost $1000 and adding bulk. With costs of memory going down and the capacity of it going up, it should be about 1-2 years before the Treo (or similar phone) can be expected to have at least a 5 GB hard drive built in.

    If you've got an add-in of a combo hard-drive like in the ipod (made by toshiba I think) and an fm/am radio, I bet you'd get lot of people from both PocketPC and Palm platforms to embrace it. Maybe even more on some of the devices with better screens that can support good video.

    You'd also have to factor in streaming audio as wireless networks get even better and software is developed (mmplayer) to fully support it. I think this is going to be tough, because when everyone starts streaming, the bandwidth to support streaming won't be available anymore.
    Last edited by bmacfarland; 10/20/2003 at 12:09 PM.
  7. #27  
    Originally posted by convbcuda




    I personally don't want the government deciding which programming choices I have.

    too late, they already do
  8. #28  
    Originally posted by ngarland



    too late, they already do
    Not like in England.
  9. #29  
    thats right,

    the bbc is run by a board of governors. They do not BOW to the government or sponsors. this is born out by the critical position adopted during and after the invasion of Iraq. Whilst I am not saying that they dont look over their shoulder a bit, they're a wee bit more independant than FOX or other broadcasters. They don't have to dance to the tune of their masters political aspirations. They also don't have to worry about upsetting the advertisers and sponsors, since there are none. whilst we may have to pay a annual subscription for television broadcasts, radio and web services are free. the cost is much lower than the surcharge that sponsors may place on their products and services to pay for this.
  10. #30  
    Can you guys move this "government radio" thing to another thread in the off topics message board.

    Thanks!
  11. #31  
    Hey Mike,

    I think this is a great idea but I just have a simple technical question: do you have enough bandwidth on the IO interface ? This is a candid question: while I understand that the stream is on the 2.3Ghz frequency (like most other satellite stuff, I think DTV is 2.4Ghz), that doesn't tell me much about data throughput... From what I remember, the SDIO implementation in the T600 is 1.0 version, 1 bit only, not 4 bit. The data transfer is 24MHz, so you have a max theoretical 24 Mbit/s or 3MB/s, which looks like plenty for even a CD quality 16 bit 44.1Khz stream, but I don't know if they send all the channels as a global stream or if they have multiple transponders... From what I recall, they have two satellites (called 'Rock' and 'Roll' I think) and somewhere like 100 channels. If they have the same type hardware as, say, DTV, then they have up to 32 transponders per bird so about 3-4 channels per transponder, not a huge bandwidth issue. But if they have only one or two transponders (my guess ), how big is the stream then and can you push it through the Treo fast enough for the decoding to take place ? Additionally, what codec do they use: I know that 4-5 years ago, they were Digital Radio trials based on MP3 but I remember reading that they used something closer to the M4P from Apple Itunes (AAC+ ? better compression but also encryption for better protection) : any ideas ?

    Good luck with the project though: I'd definitely check one out if you get it working
    Since people have problems with my Einstein quotes, I will now quote my true hero: Homer Simpson.

    "Doh !'
  12. #32  
    For all those that say something like this is IMPOSSIBLE....

    http://www.marketwatch.com/news/yhoo...D24B3192592%7D
  13. #33  
    Hmm .

    instead of XM, whgat about somehtiing to let youm listen to web based radio? Or would this drive Sprints bookkeepers batty?
  14. #34  
    Originally posted by purpleX
    1. will it run PocketPC? (lol, just kidding, but will it run on multiple devices?)
    LMAO.... VPPC?

    Virtual Pocket PC....only for Palm sized Apples.

    hehe

    Okay okay...enough.

    I would consider buying a XM SD ready card. That would be sweet because then I wouldn't need the tuner in my truck for those long-out-of-range drives in the desert. I could use the stereo mini jack converter and plug a casette tape adapter to it and play till my hearts content.

    Cost is the smallest issue of all...after all, XM receivers aren't cheap to begin with, and lets not forget the subscription costs. But heck, as long as it isn't ONE MMMIIILLLLLION DOLLARS, it will be perfect!
    <CENTER>
    <strong>
    <span style="color: blue;">Where's the "Make Coffee" button again?</span>
    </strong>
  15. #35  
    Originally posted by convbcuda


    Uh, I'll bet 100 pounds that you're paying for it through taxes whether you want the service or not.

    100 pounds of what?
    <CENTER>
    <strong>
    <span style="color: blue;">Where's the "Make Coffee" button again?</span>
    </strong>
  16. willp2's Avatar
    Posts
    115 Posts
    Global Posts
    116 Global Posts
    #36  
    Originally posted by Stevesm
    Hmm .

    instead of XM, whgat about somehtiing to let youm listen to web based radio? Or would this drive Sprints bookkeepers batty?
    I'll have to agree. It seems that with data access getting faster and faster on these mobile devices and more of them being always connected, there would probably be a bigger market for streaming content.

    Of course with current data rates and quality of service issues, the sound quality and consistency of the service may be sketchy, but who wouldn’t want to be able to listen to music or baseball games or whatever without needing to buy additional hardware or subscribe to XM.
  17. #37  
    Originally posted by willp2

    I'll have to agree. It seems that with data access getting faster and faster on these mobile devices and more of them being always connected, there would probably be a bigger market for streaming content.

    Of course with current data rates and quality of service issues, the sound quality and consistency of the service may be sketchy, but who wouldn’t want to be able to listen to music or baseball games or whatever without needing to buy additional hardware or subscribe to XM.
    Great in theory, but even with wireless speeds growing, people's use would multiple too, nullifying the bandwidth growth each person would get. We'll get there some day, but I wouldn't expect it for quite awhile, unless you are talking about wi-fi.
  18. #38  
    The bandwidth issue is interesting. A problem with current Internet is that downstream connections are dedicated to users. I.e. if you and I are "listening" to NPR on our T600s, each of us needs a seperate data stream.

    I wonder if there is a way around this that is more like XM? What if Sprint were to offer data channels that were synchronous rather than asynchronous? Why couldn't an essentially infinite number of people "listen" via their Treos to such data?

    The syncronous internet would not not require much new bandwidth because it would work over existing data streams just as CDMA does now. The cost to Sprint would be no more than the current cost of the two way data, actually a lot less. The potential profit is interesting as well because they coud compete/collaborate with Sirius or XM for content.
  19. njchris's Avatar
    Posts
    459 Posts
    Global Posts
    475 Global Posts
    #39  
    Originally posted by bmacfarland


    Well, with 30+ GBs of mp3s that are tagged correctly (this is automated with lots of ripping programs), software can easily divide them up into virtual channels based on the genre tag. It's also about 512MB per each of those 60 streams or 500 minutes of music at what most people encode MP3s at. With Ogg Vorbis you'd get double. So I think 60,000 minutes of total music is sufficient to create something random enough to approach radio.
    Ok, you are assuming EVERYONE owns 30 gb of MP3s. Or those that have enough CDs will want to take the time to MAKE those MP3s. I can say not everyone will be going "yippee" to that.

    As for real radio (i.e. "knowing what's out there") and talk/news/sports, etc., that's where the standard AM/FM receiver part comes in.
    No it does not. I have Sirius and cannot receive BBCnews, CNN, tons of talk, many ESPN channels, E!, Classic Radio (old radio shows), etc..etc..etc) on regular radio.

    I thought that I explained those points in my original post. The memory + am/fm isn't ideal and requires you own the mp3s in the first place, but I think it's a case that suits 90% of the general population.
    I disagree here. 90% of the population wont have enough songs on MP3 already and they won't want to convert their collection.
  20. #40  
    Originally posted by Stevesm
    The bandwidth issue is interesting. A problem with current Internet is that downstream connections are dedicated to users. I.e. if you and I are "listening" to NPR on our T600s, each of us needs a seperate data stream.
    Talk radio like that takes only 20kb bandwidth or less. If you have a RealOne player for the Treo 600 you should be able to do that now. It works on my Nokia phone via GPRS.
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions