craigm wrote:
Telamon wrote:

The statements that I have seen before about DRM being an open
standard are as far as I see false because the software is not in
the public domain.


Like this one?
http://sourceforge.net/projects/drm/



No I don't like it. This is another computer - radio. You do realize
that most of these units need a computer to operate? These are not
stand alone radios. The link I provided is the one stand alone SW
radio that I know about.


The reply was in response to your statement that the software was not in
public domain. Source code is available so your argument fails.


Availability for development and beta testing is not the same as
public domain. The source code is not available for unrestricted use.
Like iBiquity, use of DRM source code in distributed products,
commercial or otherwise, incurs license fees, which can be costly. On
both transmission and reception ends.


Just because the software runs on a computer today, doesn't mean it must
always run on a computer. Initially MP3 encosded music only ran on a
computer. Now you can easily find battery operated MP3 players.


Good case in point. You are aware that Thomson/Fraunhofer receives a
royalty on every MP3 player sold. MP3 is a licensed technology. And
early on, MP3 was not inexpensive. My first MP3 encoder cost more than
$300. "Professional" versions (feature sets for heavy users in
commercial environments) could cost twise that. Though not so costly
today, they're still not free.

But MP3 had wide application in general market audio file
transmission/reception at a time when such technology solved problems
faced by large numbers of users on street level that were not solvable
by other means at the time.

For DRM, also a licensed technology, like the wire recorder, which
also met street level users' needs, there are already technologies in
place and in use that meet the same user expectations or better for the
same money or less, while presenting greater convenience than current
DRM receivers allow.

Whether or not DRM, or iBiquity, take off remains to be seen, but the
outlook is questionable. The technical advantages against competing
technologies are, at best, minimal. The technical obstacles are many.
And the costs for both broadcasters and listeners are high.

And the public are uninterested.

As with AM Stereo, there is no public clamor for these technologies
to be widely implemented. If the public were to make such noise, there
would be nothing to stop the tidal wave of implementation. Because there
would be money in it. Large money.

Returning to the example of MP3, there was public and professional
demand for smaller audio files due to the high cost of storage and the
limited transmission rates available at the time. MP3 met this handily.
Today, with storage cheap and transmission rates high, MP3 is more of an
institution than a necessity. As evidenced by the number of portable
players that now embrace uncompressed files.

But for now, there is no public clamor for DRM. And absent a
regulatory mandate, without a public demand there is no motivation for
implementation.

The market driven future for DRM, and iBiquity, is dim.









There are some that run 70 hours on a single AAA battery. Battery life
does not need to be an issue either.


The other links are not SW radios or they need computers to operate or
they are rack mount units that are and will continue to be very
expensive. The rack mounts are not consumer units.



Once a semiconductor manufacturer produces an ASIC for DRM it will be
possible to produce battery operated radios with DRM. A receiver
manufacturer could also create a custom ASIC.





craigm