On Sep 20, 8:48 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Frank Dresser" wrote in message

...



Ibiquity sets the price of their chipsets. If radio sales remain dead in
the water, they might decide they need a new game plan. Selling the chips
cheap might encourage most of the rest of the broadcasters to buy and
license broadcast equipment from ibiquity.

Several fabs will be selling chipsets in Q1, starting with Samsung, at low
prices and in power saving designs capable of making competitive protables
possible... iBiquity is in the development, not the chip business. The
license fees are not as high as people think for the third party fabs.



- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Is this going to have any impact on the price of your ginseng
supplement?

On Fri, 21 Sep 2007 00:48:34 GMT, "David Eduardo"
wrote:


"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...


Ibiquity sets the price of their chipsets. If radio sales remain dead in
the water, they might decide they need a new game plan. Selling the chips
cheap might encourage most of the rest of the broadcasters to buy and
license broadcast equipment from ibiquity.

Several fabs will be selling chipsets in Q1, starting with Samsung, at low
prices and in power saving designs capable of making competitive protables
possible... iBiquity is in the development, not the chip business. The
license fees are not as high as people think for the third party fabs.


They should be paying people.

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...


Ibiquity sets the price of their chipsets. If radio sales remain dead in
the water, they might decide they need a new game plan. Selling the chips
cheap might encourage most of the rest of the broadcasters to buy and
license broadcast equipment from ibiquity.

Several fabs will be selling chipsets in Q1, starting with Samsung, at low
prices and in power saving designs capable of making competitive protables
possible... iBiquity is in the development, not the chip business. The
license fees are not as high as people think for the third party fabs.


You do not understand the semiconductor business.

You are making illusions to "low power" designs that are false.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

On Fri, 21 Sep 2007 19:23:01 GMT, "Frank Dresser"
wrote:


"David Eduardo" wrote in message
.net...

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...


Ibiquity sets the price of their chipsets. If radio sales remain dead
in
the water, they might decide they need a new game plan. Selling the
chips
cheap might encourage most of the rest of the broadcasters to buy and
license broadcast equipment from ibiquity.

Several fabs will be selling chipsets in Q1, starting with Samsung, at low
prices and in power saving designs capable of making competitive protables
possible...

Doesn't IBOC use digital technology developed by Texas Instruments? How
come, three or four years later, TI hasn't already started making the low
power chipsets?


iBiquity is in the development, not the chip business.

I know ibiquity only developed the chips, but calling them ibiquity chips is
a reasonable sort of shorthand. It's like all those Celene Dion CDs at the
record store. I can't really blame the manufacturer.


The
license fees are not as high as people think for the third party fabs.




I think ibiquity's fees have accounted for the bulk of the price difference
between a standard radio and a HD radio.

And wouldn't Texas Instruments get an even lower licensing fee than Samsung
since some of the technology is already owned by TI and TI is one of the
buddies in the HD radio alliance?


Frank Dresser

Lucent?

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...


Ibiquity sets the price of their chipsets. If radio sales remain dead
in
the water, they might decide they need a new game plan. Selling the
chips
cheap might encourage most of the rest of the broadcasters to buy and
license broadcast equipment from ibiquity.

Several fabs will be selling chipsets in Q1, starting with Samsung, at
low
prices and in power saving designs capable of making competitive
protables
possible... iBiquity is in the development, not the chip business. The
license fees are not as high as people think for the third party fabs.


You do not understand the semiconductor business.

You are making illusions to "low power" designs that are false.

Radio World ran some "battery life" comparisons of a first generation HD
chip to the design spec consumption of the Samsung chip.... 10 times more
"on time" than the early chip, and acceptable comparisons to consumption for
analog signal reception. To the consumer, it's about how long the batteries
will last, not formulae.

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
news

And wouldn't Texas Instruments get an even lower licensing fee than
Samsung
since some of the technology is already owned by TI and TI is one of the
buddies in the HD radio alliance?

The HD Alliance is a group of large radio broadcasters who banded together
to create a unified on-air ad campaign and marketing materials. Neither
iBiquity nor TI have anything to do with it.

David Frackelton Gleason, still posing as the faux Hispanic, 'Eduardo', wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...


Ibiquity sets the price of their chipsets. If radio sales remain dead
in
the water, they might decide they need a new game plan. Selling the
chips
cheap might encourage most of the rest of the broadcasters to buy and
license broadcast equipment from ibiquity.

Several fabs will be selling chipsets in Q1, starting with Samsung, at
low
prices and in power saving designs capable of making competitive
protables
possible... iBiquity is in the development, not the chip business. The
license fees are not as high as people think for the third party fabs.


You do not understand the semiconductor business.

You are making illusions to "low power" designs that are false.

Radio World ran some "battery life" comparisons of a first generation HD
chip to the design spec consumption of the Samsung chip.... 10 times more
"on time" than the early chip, and acceptable comparisons to consumption for
analog signal reception. To the consumer, it's about how long the batteries
will last, not formulae.

To the fake Hispanic, it's not how big the lie is, but how long he can get away
with it.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

Don't do business with the Huntington Investment Company.

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
. net...

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
news

And wouldn't Texas Instruments get an even lower licensing fee than
Samsung
since some of the technology is already owned by TI and TI is one of the
buddies in the HD radio alliance?

The HD Alliance is a group of large radio broadcasters who banded together
to create a unified on-air ad campaign and marketing materials. Neither
iBiquity nor TI have anything to do with it.



Oops. Looks like I miscatagorized TI into the HD radio alliance. That's
what I get for writing off the cuff. I could have call them one of
ibiquity's "strategic partners". But that dosen't really make any
difference to the question -- Why Samsung and not TI?

Well, a bit of research reveals that Texas Instruments isn't just a
strategic partner. They are investors in ibiquity. That's right, TI owns a
share of the company which is presumeably sending business off to a
competitor.

http://www.ibiquity.com/about_us/investor_information

So, why isn't TI making the lower power chips right now? Why didn't they
start making them a couple of years ago?

Could Texas Instruments have lost faith in the future of HD radio?

Frank Dresser

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
. net...

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
news

And wouldn't Texas Instruments get an even lower licensing fee than
Samsung
since some of the technology is already owned by TI and TI is one of
the
buddies in the HD radio alliance?

The HD Alliance is a group of large radio broadcasters who banded
together
to create a unified on-air ad campaign and marketing materials. Neither
iBiquity nor TI have anything to do with it.



Oops. Looks like I miscatagorized TI into the HD radio alliance. That's
what I get for writing off the cuff. I could have call them one of
ibiquity's "strategic partners". But that dosen't really make any
difference to the question -- Why Samsung and not TI?

Well, a bit of research reveals that Texas Instruments isn't just a
strategic partner. They are investors in ibiquity. That's right, TI owns
a
share of the company which is presumeably sending business off to a
competitor.

Samsung is a consumer products manufacturer first and foremost... and
substantially vertically integrated. Samsung's first goal is to create chips
for its own products, then sell them. iBiquity wants as many different
companies manufacturing receivers as possible. Anyone can license the
technology and make chips.

On Sep 22, 1:38 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Frank Dresser" wrote in message

...







"David Eduardo" wrote in message
.net...

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
news

And wouldn't Texas Instruments get an even lower licensing fee than
Samsung
since some of the technology is already owned by TI and TI is one of
the
buddies in the HD radio alliance?

The HD Alliance is a group of large radio broadcasters who banded
together
to create a unified on-air ad campaign and marketing materials. Neither
iBiquity nor TI have anything to do with it.

Oops. Looks like I miscatagorized TI into the HD radio alliance. That's
what I get for writing off the cuff. I could have call them one of
ibiquity's "strategic partners". But that dosen't really make any
difference to the question -- Why Samsung and not TI?

Well, a bit of research reveals that Texas Instruments isn't just a
strategic partner. They are investors in ibiquity. That's right, TI owns
a
share of the company which is presumeably sending business off to a
competitor.

Samsung is a consumer products manufacturer first and foremost... and
substantially vertically integrated. Samsung's first goal is to create chips
for its own products, then sell them. iBiquity wants as many different
companies manufacturing receivers as possible. Anyone can license the
technology and make chips.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Does this mean Samsung is getting into the colloidal silver business
as well?