Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of the HD Radio farce
 

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

The first generation is a description of the pre-FCC authorization
receivers. Second generation is what is out now, and thirds is what you
will
see in Q3 to Q4.

These were the prototypes.

Those were not prototypes. They were units like the Pioneer car stereos (the
ones nearly every engineer had) with HD and the BA Receptor.

You think what you want but your definition does not match up what
anyone in the manufacturing industry thinks.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of theHD Radio farce
 

dxAce wrote:

The only one 'obsolete' around here is YOU, 'Edurado'. You're not a radio
hobbyist. Now hit the road and stuff a sock in it, boy. Heavy emphasis on the
'boy'.


Let's not start this again, shall we?




mike

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of the HD Radio farce
 

In article nwzMj.10914$682.3683@edtnps90, m II wrote:

dxAce wrote:

The only one 'obsolete' around here is YOU, 'Edurado'. You're not a radio
hobbyist. Now hit the road and stuff a sock in it, boy. Heavy emphasis on
the
'boy'.


Let's not start this again, shall we?


You will like this one Mike.

http://www.unitedmedia.com/comics/pearls/archive/pearls-20080329.html

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of theHDRadio farce
 

m II wrote:

dxAce wrote:

The only one 'obsolete' around here is YOU, 'Edurado'. You're not a radio
hobbyist. Now hit the road and stuff a sock in it, boy. Heavy emphasis on the
'boy'.

Let's not start this again, shall we?

Again?

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of the HD Radio farce
 

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
. ..

[snip]


The first generation is a description of the pre-FCC authorization
receivers. Second generation is what is out now, and thirds is what you
will
see in Q3 to Q4.



OK, so what's the actual difference between these generations? Hardware?
Software?

And which of these generations are ready for subscription radio?

Frank Dresser

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of the HD Radio farce
 

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
. ..

[snip]


The first generation is a description of the pre-FCC authorization
receivers. Second generation is what is out now, and thirds is what you
will
see in Q3 to Q4.



OK, so what's the actual difference between these generations? Hardware?
Software?

Chipset, software.

And which of these generations are ready for subscription radio?

None. I have never heard subscription radio talked about, in fact. Most
subscription based services are using other technologies.

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of theHD Radio farce
 

David Eduardo wrote:
"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...
"David Eduardo" wrote in message
. ..
[snip]

The first generation is a description of the pre-FCC authorization
receivers. Second generation is what is out now, and thirds is what you
will
see in Q3 to Q4.


OK, so what's the actual difference between these generations? Hardware?
Software?

Chipset, software.
And which of these generations are ready for subscription radio?

None. I have never heard subscription radio talked about, in fact. Most
subscription based services are using other technologies.



David, David, David...now that's in direct conflict to something
discussed here a year ago. A conversation YOU chimed in on and admitted
that conditional access has been under test.

Now, c'mon...you may be busy, but you're not so busy you can'r
remember your own participation in a conversation on a worldwide forum.
Are you?

Or is there another reason you conveniently forgot?

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of theHD Radio farce
 

D Peter Maus wrote:
David Eduardo wrote:
"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...
"David Eduardo" wrote in message
. ..
[snip]

The first generation is a description of the pre-FCC authorization
receivers. Second generation is what is out now, and thirds is what you
will
see in Q3 to Q4.


OK, so what's the actual difference between these generations?
Hardware?
Software?

Chipset, software.
And which of these generations are ready for subscription radio?

None. I have never heard subscription radio talked about, in fact.
Most subscription based services are using other technologies.


David, David, David...now that's in direct conflict to something
discussed here a year ago. A conversation YOU chimed in on and admitted
that conditional access has been under test.

Now, c'mon...you may be busy, but you're not so busy you can'r
remember your own participation in a conversation on a worldwide forum.
Are you?

Or is there another reason you conveniently forgot?



Peter, what makes you think David is busy? he seems to live here
on this newsgroup 24/7.

Drifter...

--
"Regulatory capitalism is when companies invest in lawyers, lobbyists,
and politicians, instead of plant, people, and customer service."
- former FCC Chairman William Kennard (A real FCC Chairman,
unlike the current Corporate Spokesperson in the job!)

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of the HD Radio farce
 

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...
"David Eduardo" wrote in message
. ..
[snip]

The first generation is a description of the pre-FCC authorization
receivers. Second generation is what is out now, and thirds is what you
will
see in Q3 to Q4.


OK, so what's the actual difference between these generations?
Hardware?
Software?

Chipset, software.
And which of these generations are ready for subscription radio?

None. I have never heard subscription radio talked about, in fact. Most
subscription based services are using other technologies.

David, David, David...now that's in direct conflict to something
discussed here a year ago. A conversation YOU chimed in on and admitted
that conditional access has been under test.

That's not subscription radio, that is data with a fee. The things I have
heard of being tested are data streams, like stock quotes, weather, traffic
info (that's the biggie) and such, but not programming. FMeXtra is the
preferred substitute for subscription services over an FM station, as it can
carry many more program services than HD at decent quality and with the
ability to lock usage to enabled subscribers. There are LA stations already
with two or three subscriber based FMeXtra channels going.

Now, c'mon...you may be busy, but you're not so busy you can'r remember
your own participation in a conversation on a worldwide forum. Are you?

Again, it's data streaming that is or was being tested. Not pay-for-play
audio channels.

Or is there another reason you conveniently forgot?

No forgetting... it didn't exist.

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of theHD Radio farce
 

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...
"David Eduardo" wrote in message
. ..
[snip]

The first generation is a description of the pre-FCC authorization
receivers. Second generation is what is out now, and thirds is what you
will
see in Q3 to Q4.


OK, so what's the actual difference between these generations?
Hardware?
Software?
Chipset, software.
And which of these generations are ready for subscription radio?
None. I have never heard subscription radio talked about, in fact. Most
subscription based services are using other technologies.
David, David, David...now that's in direct conflict to something
discussed here a year ago. A conversation YOU chimed in on and admitted
that conditional access has been under test.

That's not subscription radio, that is data with a fee. The things I have
heard of being tested are data streams, like stock quotes, weather, traffic
info (that's the biggie) and such, but not programming. FMeXtra is the
preferred substitute for subscription services over an FM station, as it can
carry many more program services than HD at decent quality and with the
ability to lock usage to enabled subscribers. There are LA stations already
with two or three subscriber based FMeXtra channels going.


Splitting frog hairs, brother. Conditional access is conditional
access. It's ALL data. Audio, weather, traffic, stock quotes--In the
digital universe it's ALL data. If conditional access can be applied to
ONE commodity in a digital feed, it can be applied to ALL commodities in
a digital feed.

Subscription radio. By definition.

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of the HD Radio farce
 

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...

Splitting frog hairs, brother. Conditional access is conditional access.
It's ALL data. Audio, weather, traffic, stock quotes--In the digital
universe it's ALL data. If conditional access can be applied to ONE
commodity in a digital feed, it can be applied to ALL commodities in a
digital feed.

Subscription radio. By definition.

To me, it ain't radio if it does not talk after being decoded. A pure data
stream never consisted of audio at the other end, and that is what is being
or was being tested.

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of the HDRadio farce
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...

Splitting frog hairs, brother. Conditional access is conditional access.
It's ALL data. Audio, weather, traffic, stock quotes--In the digital
universe it's ALL data. If conditional access can be applied to ONE
commodity in a digital feed, it can be applied to ALL commodities in a
digital feed.

Subscription radio. By definition.

To me, it ain't radio if it does not talk after being decoded. A pure data
stream never consisted of audio at the other end, and that is what is being
or was being tested.

Nice spin, 'Eduardo'.

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of theHD Radio farce
 

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
Splitting frog hairs, brother. Conditional access is conditional access.
It's ALL data. Audio, weather, traffic, stock quotes--In the digital
universe it's ALL data. If conditional access can be applied to ONE
commodity in a digital feed, it can be applied to ALL commodities in a
digital feed.

Subscription radio. By definition.

To me, it ain't radio if it does not talk after being decoded. A pure data
stream never consisted of audio at the other end, and that is what is being
or was being tested.



Frog hairs, again, Brother. We're not talking 'to you'. We're
talking what is, the realities of this technology, and the intentions of
the gatekeepers who dole it out.


And, Sweetheart...ALL digital audio is a pure data stream.

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of the HD Radio farce
 

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
. ..

[snip]


The first generation is a description of the pre-FCC authorization
receivers. Second generation is what is out now, and thirds is
what you will see in Q3 to Q4.



OK, so what's the actual difference between these generations?
Hardware? Software?

Chipset, software.

SNIP

You mean chips and salsa?

Or maybe salsa chips?

I like guacamole with my chips and salsa.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of the HD Radio farce
 

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

[snip]

Is that would be the vaporware chip-set and the BS software?

Oh, set us straight on the details with some links please.


It would seem, in the HD radio biz, that no plan happens until it happens.

From about a year ago:

"RadioGuard-capable radio receivers are planned to be introduced to the
market by the holidays."

http://www.orbitcast.com/archives/ibiquity-to-int.html

Frank Dresser

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of theHD...
 

Wet TV,,,,, do y'all cats ''git it? Wet''
cuhulin

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of theHD Radio farce
 

Frank Dresser wrote:
"Telamon" wrote in
message
...


[snip]
Is that would be the vaporware chip-set and the BS software?

Oh, set us straight on the details with some links please.


It would seem, in the HD radio biz, that no plan happens until it
happens.

From about a year ago:

"RadioGuard-capable radio receivers are planned to be introduced to
the market by the holidays."

http://www.orbitcast.com/archives/ibiquity-to-int.html

Frank Dresser





Not also, in direct conflict to David's denial, that the conditional
access specifically includes subscription access to audio content.


This passage particularly says it all:



"We believe this will be key for monetizing HD Radio," said Tom
Rucktenwald, director of data applications security for NDS.

Services that could be made possible through RadioGuard include
pay-per-listen options for live concerts or other events, improved
reading services for the blind, private channels for emergency
services, and free opt-in events sponsored by advertisers. So HD
Radio will not just be competing with satellite radio
Siriusly-Speaking May-07 for listening time, but soon will be
competing for subscription dollars as well.




You'd think he'd get the message: We're not buying it.

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of the HD Radio farce
 

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
Frank Dresser wrote:
"Telamon" wrote in
message
...


[snip]
Is that would be the vaporware chip-set and the BS software?

Oh, set us straight on the details with some links please.


It would seem, in the HD radio biz, that no plan happens until it
happens.

From about a year ago:

"RadioGuard-capable radio receivers are planned to be introduced to
the market by the holidays."

http://www.orbitcast.com/archives/ibiquity-to-int.html

Frank Dresser





Not also, in direct conflict to David's denial, that the conditional
access specifically includes subscription access to audio content.

I've never heard of pay per program or pay per channel propositions; the
ability of even a cluster of several stations to garner subscriptions looks
bleak. When you can get channels at about a dime each on satellite, that
means that the HD's of one company would be worth less than a buck a
month... and the processing charges would eat most of that. There does not
seem to be a viable model, while FMeXtra is on with hundreds of channels in
SCA-like subscriptions with locked receivers... I know of one LA station
renting facilities to two Chinese broadcasts and one in Japanese under
FMeXtra.

There does not look to be a viable business model for HD pay channels for
audio services, although data services may create revenue.

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of theHD Radio farce
 

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
Frank Dresser wrote:
"Telamon" wrote in
message
...


[snip]
Is that would be the vaporware chip-set and the BS software?

Oh, set us straight on the details with some links please.

It would seem, in the HD radio biz, that no plan happens until it
happens.

From about a year ago:

"RadioGuard-capable radio receivers are planned to be introduced to
the market by the holidays."

http://www.orbitcast.com/archives/ibiquity-to-int.html

Frank Dresser



Not also, in direct conflict to David's denial, that the conditional
access specifically includes subscription access to audio content.
I've never heard of pay per program or pay per channel propositions;
That's false on it's face. We discussed them here. I fact, Frank was
the one who came up with the information that testing was underway, and
you acknowledged that he was correct.
There is data via HD-3, but nothing I have ever heard indicates audio
programming fpr pay.

Once again, for those not wishing to admit they've participated in
the conversation:


From about a year ago:

"Services that could be made possible through RadioGuard include
pay-per-listen options for live concerts or other events, improved reading
services for the blind, private channels for emergency services, and free
opt-in events sponsored by advertisers. So HD Radio will not just be
competing with satellite radio for listening time, but soon will be
competing for subscription dollars as well."


Straight from iBiquity at NAB. That's audio. Concerts are audio.
Advertiser sponsored events...that includes audio, too. Competing for
subscription dollars with satellite radio....That's not just aviation
weather, there, Brother. That's audio.

And you participated in this conversation a year ago. At the same time
iBiquity was making this announcement.

So, once again, you've got inside information about future 'trade
secret' HD technology, but you're ignorant about iBiquity's own publicly
announced tests?

That won't fly.

Either you're an informed broadcaster or you aren't. Which is it?

Either way, you're not telling the truth to somebody.

iBiquity simply confirmed that the HD system was capable of addressing
receivers were this a requested feature. At present, I do not believe any
radio in production is addressable.


Nice try. That's not the suject of this convesation. And your
continuing attempt to divert the discussion to your denials of fact say
a lot about the intent of much of what you've posted in this forum.

The topic of conversation is:

Are they trying to do it? And are you telling the truth? You've
been saying all along conditional programming access is not in the plan
for HD, and you know this by virtue of your specialized and internal
knowledge not available to the public. By iBiquity's own admission, in
published word and practical test, conditional programming access IS
part of the HD plan. So, you're either knowingly not telling the truth,
or you're not as intimately informed as you claim.

Either way....Yes, they are trying to implement conditional access.

And no...you're not telling the truth.

By iBiquity's press. And your own words.



Which indicates that your arguments shilling HD are largely
irrelevant, as either mis- or dis- information.

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of the HD Radio farce
 

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:

iBiquity simply confirmed that the HD system was capable of addressing
receivers were this a requested feature. At present, I do not believe any
radio in production is addressable.

..


Nice try. That's not the suject of this convesation. And your
continuing attempt to divert the discussion to your denials of fact say a
lot about the intent of much of what you've posted in this forum.


Right now, no chip and no receiver is adressable. in other words, there is
no way in hell to do paid services on HD today or in the near future.

There were some tests, and the system is able to do data transmission in any
channel other than HD-1. There is no use yet for this type of service and
there is no chipset or receiver that can pick such a service up.


The topic of conversation is:

Are they trying to do it? And are you telling the truth? You've been
saying all along conditional programming access is not in the plan for HD,
and you know this by virtue of your specialized and internal knowledge not
available to the public.

As far as I know, there has been no testing of controlled limited access
programming with a subscription model in mind. There have been limited tests
of data streams, with examples being traffic data and stock quotes. Nobody
is doing this, and no equipment exists to do it.

By iBiquity's own admission, in published word and practical test,
conditional programming access IS part of the HD plan. So, you're either
knowingly not telling the truth, or you're not as intimately informed as
you claim.

My read is that conditional access can be made available. it is not at
present. And I know of no station planning to do this, as there is, so far,
no practical model for the economic part.

Either way....Yes, they are trying to implement conditional access.

Proving it can be done and doing it are two different things. With FMeXtra
and SCA, there is no apparent demand or advantage.

And no...you're not telling the truth.

Something that can be done and something radio stations want to do are very
different things.

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of theHD Radio farce
 

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
iBiquity simply confirmed that the HD system was capable of
addressing receivers were this a requested feature. At present, I
do not believe any radio in production is addressable.

.

Nice try. That's not the suject of this convesation. And your
continuing attempt to divert the discussion to your denials of fact
say a lot about the intent of much of what you've posted in this
forum.


Right now, no chip and no receiver is adressable. in other words,
there is no way in hell to do paid services on HD today or in the
near future.


ROFLMAO.

Still avoiding the point. You're denying today what iBiquity
themselves have publicly have stated as a goal. And are currently
testing. And that's AUDIO, David. Not just data.



"Services that could be made possible through RadioGuard include
pay-per-listen options for live concerts or other events, improved
reading services for the blind, private channels for emergency services,
and free opt-in events sponsored by advertisers. So HD Radio will not
just be competing with satellite radio for listening time, but soon will
be competing for subscription dollars as well."



iBiquity themselves are proving you're not as intimately connected as
you claim. Which make your arguments shilling HD are largely irrelevant,
as either mis- or dis- information.

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of the HD Radio farce
 

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
iBiquity simply confirmed that the HD system was capable of
addressing receivers were this a requested feature. At present, I
do not believe any radio in production is addressable.

.

Nice try. That's not the suject of this convesation. And your continuing
attempt to divert the discussion to your denials of fact
say a lot about the intent of much of what you've posted in this
forum.


Right now, no chip and no receiver is adressable. in other words,
there is no way in hell to do paid services on HD today or in the
near future.


ROFLMAO.

Still avoiding the point. You're denying today what iBiquity
themselves have publicly have stated as a goal. And are currently
testing. And that's AUDIO, David. Not just data.

I have never heard the supposed chant that the goal is to go all digital.
iBiquity made the system backward compatible on AM and FM, in fact. It's the
FCC that has spoken of an all digital world. I don't know of a single person
in radio who wants this today.



"Services that could be made possible through RadioGuard include
pay-per-listen options for live concerts or other events, improved
reading services for the blind, private channels for emergency services,
and free opt-in events sponsored by advertisers. So HD Radio will not
just be competing with satellite radio for listening time, but soon will
be competing for subscription dollars as well."

"Could" means the sytem can be designed in the future to do such things. So
far, there is no broadcaster interest, as things like FMeXtra are more
attractive options and compatible with HD.


iBiquity themselves are proving you're not as intimately connected as
you claim. Which make your arguments shilling HD are largely irrelevant,
as either mis- or dis- information.


The system, the chips, the radios, the transmitters are all incompatible
which subscription services today. iBiquity can tell us that they can make
transmitters fly and oink like pigs, but unless we, the broadcasters, want
it, it will not be implemented.

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of theHD Radio farce
 

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
iBiquity simply confirmed that the HD system was capable of
addressing receivers were this a requested feature. At present, I
do not believe any radio in production is addressable.
.
Nice try. That's not the suject of this convesation. And your continuing
attempt to divert the discussion to your denials of fact
say a lot about the intent of much of what you've posted in this
forum.

Right now, no chip and no receiver is adressable. in other words,
there is no way in hell to do paid services on HD today or in the
near future.

ROFLMAO.

Still avoiding the point. You're denying today what iBiquity
themselves have publicly have stated as a goal. And are currently
testing. And that's AUDIO, David. Not just data.

I have never heard the supposed chant that the goal is to go all digital.
iBiquity made the system backward compatible on AM and FM, in fact.


Then you have exposed yourself as a fraud, Brother. iBiquity has
stated their goal was to make broadcasting all digital in their first
press release, and in damned near every appearance by Struble since.

If you're not aware of that, then you're not who, or what, you claim.

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of the HD Radio farce
 

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
iBiquity simply confirmed that the HD system was capable of
addressing receivers were this a requested feature. At present, I
do not believe any radio in production is addressable.
.
Nice try. That's not the suject of this convesation. And your
continuing attempt to divert the discussion to your denials of fact
say a lot about the intent of much of what you've posted in this
forum.

Right now, no chip and no receiver is adressable. in other words,
there is no way in hell to do paid services on HD today or in the
near future.

ROFLMAO.

Still avoiding the point. You're denying today what iBiquity
themselves have publicly have stated as a goal. And are currently
testing. And that's AUDIO, David. Not just data.

I have never heard the supposed chant that the goal is to go all digital.
iBiquity made the system backward compatible on AM and FM, in fact.


Then you have exposed yourself as a fraud, Brother. iBiquity has stated
their goal was to make broadcasting all digital in their first press
release, and in damned near every appearance by Struble since.

If you're not aware of that, then you're not who, or what, you claim.

Anyone knows that pure digital is a decade away, if ever, on FM. And a
decade from now AM will likely not exist as we know it.

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of theHD Radio farce
 

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
iBiquity simply confirmed that the HD system was capable of
addressing receivers were this a requested feature. At present, I
do not believe any radio in production is addressable.
.
Nice try. That's not the suject of this convesation. And your
continuing attempt to divert the discussion to your denials of fact
say a lot about the intent of much of what you've posted in this
forum.
Right now, no chip and no receiver is adressable. in other words,
there is no way in hell to do paid services on HD today or in the
near future.
ROFLMAO.

Still avoiding the point. You're denying today what iBiquity
themselves have publicly have stated as a goal. And are currently
testing. And that's AUDIO, David. Not just data.
I have never heard the supposed chant that the goal is to go all digital.
iBiquity made the system backward compatible on AM and FM, in fact.

Then you have exposed yourself as a fraud, Brother. iBiquity has stated
their goal was to make broadcasting all digital in their first press
release, and in damned near every appearance by Struble since.

If you're not aware of that, then you're not who, or what, you claim.

Anyone knows that pure digital is a decade away, if ever, on FM. And a
decade from now AM will likely not exist as we know it.



Once again, not the conversation at hand.

You really do act more like a shill, every day. Not really addressing
the point, but changing the subject to assert not that it's not
happening, but that it's not happening NOW. Your way of saying that we
should acceed to this strategy because the undesireable outcome is a
decade away.

LOL!.

You have exposed yourself for what you really are, David. And, in
the process, what you really are not.

Have a good evening.


p

Admitting,

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of theHDRadio farce
 

D Peter Maus wrote:

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
Frank Dresser wrote:
"Telamon" wrote in
message
...


[snip]
Is that would be the vaporware chip-set and the BS software?

Oh, set us straight on the details with some links please.

It would seem, in the HD radio biz, that no plan happens until it
happens.

From about a year ago:

"RadioGuard-capable radio receivers are planned to be introduced to
the market by the holidays."

http://www.orbitcast.com/archives/ibiquity-to-int.html

Frank Dresser




Not also, in direct conflict to David's denial, that the conditional
access specifically includes subscription access to audio content.

I've never heard of pay per program or pay per channel propositions;

That's false on it's face. We discussed them here. I fact, Frank was
the one who came up with the information that testing was underway, and
you acknowledged that he was correct.

And here, iBiquity's own sources are admitting that program test is
underway.

Now, you claim to have all this inside information about HD. And here
iBiquity is openly discussig conditional access and subscription
programming for HD.

Yet, you've not heard of it? How is it you have all the details on
upcoming technology from vendors, but have no idea about iBiquity's own
testing projects?

C'mon, David...either you're an informed broadcaster or your not.
Either way, you're not telling the truth about something

That's our 'Eduardo'!

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of theHDRadio farce
 

dxAce wrote:

D Peter Maus wrote:

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
Frank Dresser wrote:
"Telamon" wrote in
message
...


[snip]
Is that would be the vaporware chip-set and the BS software?

Oh, set us straight on the details with some links please.

It would seem, in the HD radio biz, that no plan happens until it
happens.

From about a year ago:

"RadioGuard-capable radio receivers are planned to be introduced to
the market by the holidays."

http://www.orbitcast.com/archives/ibiquity-to-int.html

Frank Dresser



Not also, in direct conflict to David's denial, that the conditional
access specifically includes subscription access to audio content.
I've never heard of pay per program or pay per channel propositions;
That's false on it's face. We discussed them here. I fact, Frank was
the one who came up with the information that testing was underway, and
you acknowledged that he was correct.

And here, iBiquity's own sources are admitting that program test is
underway.

Now, you claim to have all this inside information about HD. And here
iBiquity is openly discussig conditional access and subscription
programming for HD.

Yet, you've not heard of it? How is it you have all the details on
upcoming technology from vendors, but have no idea about iBiquity's own
testing projects?

C'mon, David...either you're an informed broadcaster or your not.
Either way, you're not telling the truth about something

That's our 'Eduardo'!




No kidding.

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of the HD Radio farce
 

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:

Anyone knows that pure digital is a decade away, if ever, on FM. And a
decade from now AM will likely not exist as we know it.

Once again, not the conversation at hand.

Of course it is. It's all about the ability to predict the future.

Let's say that BMW does a press conference about the new 1 series, and a
dumb journalist asks if the 1 will fit in the Space Shuttle. The BMW guy,
spotting a promotional opportunity, says that they will test the fit... and
later announces that, indeed, the 1 series BMW will fit in the Space
Shuttle. Of course, there is no useful purpose in putting a car in orbit, so
we don't hear any more about this. BMW got some press, though.

The same thing applies to paid or lockied services via HD. There is no
business model for paid programming (defined as audio, whether originally
digital, analog or pig grunts) on individual HD channels. There are better
and cheaper was of providing non-program data streams, like traffic infor.
So there is no demand for either locked progrmming or data. But there is the
ability to provide same, and iBiquity got some publicity out of this... it
made you pay attention, didn't it?

You really do act more like a shill, every day. Not really addressing
the point, but changing the subject to assert not that it's not happening,
but that it's not happening NOW. Your way of saying that we should acceed
to this strategy because the undesireable outcome is a decade away.

A shill is someone paid to hawk something. I don't qualify. I do, however,
have an interest in putting free radio into all and any new distribution
channels, and HD is one of them. So are WiMax and related technologies, and
unless radio gets into all of them, they run the risk of not having a
position in the next new standard of delivery. And that is because it is
certain that AM has a finite and relatively short life and FM will last
longer, but divided with other delivery methods.

My interests are based on the future of radio, unlinked to the distribution.
I hope HD works, but I also hope the industry covers all other bases too.

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of theHD Radio farce
 

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
Anyone knows that pure digital is a decade away, if ever, on FM. And a
decade from now AM will likely not exist as we know it.
Once again, not the conversation at hand.

Of course it is. It's all about the ability to predict the future.


No. It's not.

It's about you claiming one thing. iBiquity saying that you're wrong.

It's about you saying you've not heard of conditional access
programming on HD and you having participated in a conversation a year
ago in this very forum where it was presented in iBiquity's own
announcement that conditional access programming was under test.

It's about YOU claiming to have trade secret, proprietary information
about HD technology, from third party producers, and yet being unaware
of iBiquity's own stated intentions and current projects under test for
the technology.


Bottom line: It's NOT about the ability to predict the future. This
conversation has been about what's going on RIGHT NOW.


And in that, so far, by your own statements in conflict with
iBiquity's own words, you've not been telling the truth.

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of the HD Radio farce
 

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:


"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:

Anyone knows that pure digital is a decade away, if ever, on FM. And a
decade from now AM will likely not exist as we know it.

Once again, not the conversation at hand.

Of course it is. It's all about the ability to predict the future.

Let's say that BMW does a press conference about the new 1 series, and a
dumb journalist asks if the 1 will fit in the Space Shuttle. The BMW guy,
spotting a promotional opportunity, says that they will test the fit... and
later announces that, indeed, the 1 series BMW will fit in the Space
Shuttle. Of course, there is no useful purpose in putting a car in orbit, so
we don't hear any more about this. BMW got some press, though.

SNIP

Well that settles it. Your posts belong in orbit along with the BMW.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of theHD...
 

That's nothing.I just now checked channel 40 FOX tv (in Jackson) to see
if Gomer Pyle, U.S.M.C. is going to be on there in the next few days.
cuhulin

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of the HD Radio farce
 

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
Anyone knows that pure digital is a decade away, if ever, on FM. And
a decade from now AM will likely not exist as we know it.
Once again, not the conversation at hand.
Of course it is. It's all about the ability to predict the future.

No. It's not.

It's about you claiming one thing. iBiquity saying that you're wrong.

1. (Snip )


You're apparently determined not to address the real topic of this
conversation.

The only topic is that, while iBiquity has shown addressable receivers can
be engineered for HD, nobody wants to develop a system using this feature,
which is about as useful as an ice dispenser in a toilet.

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of the HD Radio farce
 

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
. ..


[snip]

And which of these generations are ready for subscription radio?

None. I have never heard subscription radio talked about, in fact. Most
subscription based services are using other technologies.



Ibiquity has been talking about it.

"Finally, regarding product availability, Ibiquity reports that software
is
complete and new HD Radio chips that include RadioGuard will be ready for
implementation in receivers by later this year. Some first-generation
devices will require an add-on chip to provide the radio's ID number, but
it
is expected that by mid-2008, most if not all HD Radio chips will simply
include RadioGuard as standard - just as multicast was incorporated into
all
HD Radio receivers from the second generation onward. "

http://www.rwonline.com/pages/s.0054/t.8141.html


My comment is that no broadcaster is interested in paid audio programming
services, as there is no useful economic model to be found. Since SCAs and
FMeXtra cover much better than an HD data service, it is unlikely that
anyone will want to rent an HD data channel for this purpose, either, as
there are better options.

iBiquity may be enabling the chips, but at this moment there is no
broadcaster interest in using them for audio or data. And that is what the
people I have talked to are bringing back from Las Vegas.

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of the HDRadio farce
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
. ..


[snip]

And which of these generations are ready for subscription radio?

None. I have never heard subscription radio talked about, in fact. Most
subscription based services are using other technologies.



Ibiquity has been talking about it.

"Finally, regarding product availability, Ibiquity reports that software
is
complete and new HD Radio chips that include RadioGuard will be ready for
implementation in receivers by later this year. Some first-generation
devices will require an add-on chip to provide the radio's ID number, but
it
is expected that by mid-2008, most if not all HD Radio chips will simply
include RadioGuard as standard - just as multicast was incorporated into
all
HD Radio receivers from the second generation onward. "

http://www.rwonline.com/pages/s.0054/t.8141.html


My comment is that no broadcaster is interested in paid audio programming
services, as there is no useful economic model to be found. Since SCAs and
FMeXtra cover much better than an HD data service, it is unlikely that
anyone will want to rent an HD data channel for this purpose, either, as
there are better options.

iBiquity may be enabling the chips, but at this moment there is no
broadcaster interest in using them for audio or data. And that is what the
people I have talked to are bringing back from Las Vegas.

Watch out, they may transmit a disease to you that they also brought back from
Las Vegas.

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of theHD Radio farce
 

David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:
Anyone knows that pure digital is a decade away, if ever, on FM. And
a decade from now AM will likely not exist as we know it.
Once again, not the conversation at hand.
Of course it is. It's all about the ability to predict the future.
No. It's not.

It's about you claiming one thing. iBiquity saying that you're wrong.
1. (Snip )

You're apparently determined not to address the real topic of this
conversation.

The only topic is that, while iBiquity has shown addressable receivers can
be engineered for HD,



Once again, that's not the subject of this conversation. If you'd
like me to repeat again for you, let me know.

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of the HD Radio farce
 

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


Watch out, they may transmit a disease to you that they also brought back
from
Las Vegas.


Obviously, you are so dumb and/or drunk you do not realize that the NAB was
this week in Vegas-

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of the HDRadio farce
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


Watch out, they may transmit a disease to you that they also brought back
from
Las Vegas.


Obviously, you are so dumb and/or drunk you do not realize that the NAB was
this week in Vegas-

Did I mention Vegas? By golly I think I did, oh faux one!

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of the HDRadio farce
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...


Watch out, they may transmit a disease to you that they also brought back
from
Las Vegas.


Obviously, you are so dumb and/or drunk you do not realize that the NAB was
this week in Vegas-

Obviously, you were so dumb and/or drunk that you couldn't even graduate from
high school.

Have you been diagnosed with ADHD?

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of theHD Radio farce
 

dxAce wrote:

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...

Watch out, they may transmit a disease to you that they also brought back
from
Las Vegas.

Obviously, you are so dumb and/or drunk you do not realize that the NAB was
this week in Vegas-

Obviously, you were so dumb and/or drunk that you couldn't even graduate from
high school.

Have you been diagnosed with ADHD?




Probably not. But he has claimed to be slightly dyslexic.

Eduardo is just angry about the latest Arbitron study of the HD Radio farce
 

"D Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
dxAce wrote:

David Eduardo wrote:

"dxAce" wrote in message
...

Watch out, they may transmit a disease to you that they also brought
back
from
Las Vegas.

Obviously, you are so dumb and/or drunk you do not realize that the NAB
was
this week in Vegas-

Obviously, you were so dumb and/or drunk that you couldn't even graduate
from
high school.

Have you been diagnosed with ADHD?




Probably not. But he has claimed to be slightly dyslexic.

Around 8% of the population has some form of dyslexia... it often makes
conventional learning difficult, particularly for more intelligent students.