John Higdon wrote:
Alternative delivery (not in the broadcast band) is the future, either
in cooperation with or possibly as a replacement to terrestrial
broadcasting. My only point in my reply to the original poster was to
assure him and others that his revolutionary concepts have actually been
in development by entities who have to power to bring them to fruition.

Alternative delivery of programming is a great thing, and it's a thing
with a future.

The problem with broadcast radio, though, isn't the delivery system, it's
the programming.

If you have programming that nobody wants to listen to, they won't want
to listen to it via alternative methods either.

The primary asset that traditional broadcasters have isn' their delivery
system, but their programming. The problem is that too many of them have
neglected that for far too long.

Launch of these things is at hand.

That's great, and I will be able to adjust a channel selector on a
networked appliance and listen to Smoke on the Water on 300 of the 500
available channels.... and the other 200 will be playing Hotel California...
--scott

--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."