"Chrysler announces wireless Internet access in 2009 models"

It's called UConnect Web, and Chrysler will announce it at an event in
Detroit tomorrow spotlighting its 2009 lineup.

According to the LA Times:

The automaker did not disclose pricing, but said there would probably
be a base charge for the option, plus a monthly or annual fee.
UConnect Web is an extension of the company's UConnect system, which
provides Bluetooth connectivity for cellphones and MP3 player
integration with the car stereo. Rival Ford provides similar services,
but without Web access, in its popular Sync system.

With the added Internet connectivity, drivers and passengers will be
able to get such devices as laptop computers and Nintendo Wii consoles
online. As to what users can download while in the car, Chrysler's
Leung said anything was fair game.

"There are no limitations in content," he said.


As long predicted in this blog and elsewhere (okay, everywhere), it is
inevitable that every new car driving off a showroom lot will
eventually be high-speed Internet enabled. And the consequences for
the radio industry - both good and bad - are profound.

There are at least five critical issues facing radio as a result of
this unambiguous trend (and I'll consider these more thoroughly after
I get a peek at the Chrysler system):

First, an Internet enabled car will have an all-new user interface
which may substitute for the radio. Will this interface provide one-
button access to what used to be a separate radio? Or will it be
installed above the radio and have nothing to do with it? (If I were
designing it, it would be the former).

If this new interface replaces the radio unit (while not eliminating
radio reception) then automakers have essentially turned a radio into
an entertainment tool where at least some of the driver's time will be
spent off the radio dial (so to speak) and outside the advertising
universe under the control of the radio industry.

Under no circumstances would Chrysler or any other automaker do away
with the ability to receive local radio in its traditional form. But
the value-add of this technology to automaker offerings speaks for
itself.

Second, the fact that your station streams (and it does, doesn't it?)
does not mean it will be easily accessed on these new systems. Just as
low channels on Cable systems are prime positions with larger
audiences, so will there be premium placement on these new Internet
entertainment systems. Who, for example, is likely to strike a better
deal with the Chrysler's of the world, your station, your group, or
AOL Radio (and their friends at CBS), Slacker, Pandora, AccuRadio, and
their kind?

Third, what does it mean to be "radio" in a world where audio is fully
integrated into an experience that includes video, text,
interactivity, and personalization? The attraction to these services
will not only be that they're supplemental to radio, but that they
expand the definition of radio. And that expansion will benefit only
those broadcasters and their partners smart enough to recognize that
the advantage of a broadcast tower is non-existent in this context.

Fourth, that tiny whimper you just heard was the final gasp of HD
Radio. Time to move on to the real challenges, radio.

Fifth, why do I want a satellite radio when an Internet-enabled device
offers so much more?

Based on the importance of the auto listening audience to radio's
sales equation, there are few questions more important than these.

I suggest that David Rehr at the NAB spend less time bending the ears
of the FCC over satellite radio and more time focusing on the true
issues which can leverage radio's future.

http://www.hear2.com/2008/06/chrysle....html#comments