Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "D. Peter Maus" wrote in message ... On 12/16/09 13:48 , fdgdfgfdg wrote: "D. Peter wrote in message ... On 12/15/09 17:35 , Brenda Ann wrote: "Bob wrote in message news:4b2a08da.2108125@chupacabra... If HD is really the loser some would have us believe, it will still linger because the stations that already have it won't have any incentive to ditch the gear they've acquired, because it wouldn't bring much beyond scrap metal value in the used market. Of course whenever I listen to the table radio in the other room it'll probably be an HD station. ...and any listener feedback from me will likely reflect my satisfaction with the improvements that technology brings. So what's a station GM to do, keep what some listeners (the ones that respond) say they like, or listen to a few querulous snivelers on usenet which is known as a forum for whiners? Neither. They'll look at the dismal sales curve for the receivers and the near zero Arbitron ratings for their IBOC streams and eventually conclude that it isn't worth the extra electricity to keep the IBOC running. There's still the matter of investment. With well into 6 figures for a single station, manglement, investors, and corporate interests will not simply let it die and go away. Like AM stereo, which actually worked, it took nearly 20 years to go away. But, UNlike AM stereo, which had a "marketplace based" approach and competing standards all on the air at once....HD Radio standard has been chosen. There is no battle among the formats on the air. Listeners can enjoy it from the get go. With AM Stereo, one had to decide which system to buy...and then could only listen to certain stations. HD learned from that fiasco...and is avoinding the pitfalls. The uptake is slow... So? It's not in a race? Apathy is everywhere in radio, satelite, SW, AM, FM, HD. Consumers aren't rushing to do anything with radio. the technology is flawed Debatable. and the implementation is poor. Implementation is pretty good! Consumers in most places can pick up an HD radio and start enjoying it immediately. (Unlike the AM Stereo "marketplace solution".) But the investment has been spectacular. In the scheme of things, not really. |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 12/16/09 14:26 , fdgdfgfdg wrote:
"D. Peter wrote in message ... On 12/16/09 13:48 , fdgdfgfdg wrote: "D. Peter wrote in message ... On 12/15/09 17:35 , Brenda Ann wrote: "Bob wrote in message news:4b2a08da.2108125@chupacabra... If HD is really the loser some would have us believe, it will still linger because the stations that already have it won't have any incentive to ditch the gear they've acquired, because it wouldn't bring much beyond scrap metal value in the used market. Of course whenever I listen to the table radio in the other room it'll probably be an HD station. ...and any listener feedback from me will likely reflect my satisfaction with the improvements that technology brings. So what's a station GM to do, keep what some listeners (the ones that respond) say they like, or listen to a few querulous snivelers on usenet which is known as a forum for whiners? Neither. They'll look at the dismal sales curve for the receivers and the near zero Arbitron ratings for their IBOC streams and eventually conclude that it isn't worth the extra electricity to keep the IBOC running. There's still the matter of investment. With well into 6 figures for a single station, manglement, investors, and corporate interests will not simply let it die and go away. Like AM stereo, which actually worked, it took nearly 20 years to go away. But, UNlike AM stereo, which had a "marketplace based" approach and competing standards all on the air at once....HD Radio standard has been chosen. There is no battle among the formats on the air. Listeners can enjoy it from the get go. With AM Stereo, one had to decide which system to buy...and then could only listen to certain stations. HD learned from that fiasco...and is avoinding the pitfalls. The uptake is slow... So? It's not in a race? Apathy is everywhere in radio, satelite, SW, AM, FM, HD. Consumers aren't rushing to do anything with radio. the technology is flawed Debatable. and the implementation is poor. Implementation is pretty good! Consumers in most places can pick up an HD radio and start enjoying it immediately. (Unlike the AM Stereo "marketplace solution".) But the investment has been spectacular. In the scheme of things, not really. As Mrs Iacocca said: Nice Dodge. |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "D. Peter Maus" wrote in message ... On 12/16/09 14:26 , fdgdfgfdg wrote: "D. Peter wrote in message ... On 12/16/09 13:48 , fdgdfgfdg wrote: "D. Peter wrote in message ... On 12/15/09 17:35 , Brenda Ann wrote: "Bob wrote in message news:4b2a08da.2108125@chupacabra... If HD is really the loser some would have us believe, it will still linger because the stations that already have it won't have any incentive to ditch the gear they've acquired, because it wouldn't bring much beyond scrap metal value in the used market. Of course whenever I listen to the table radio in the other room it'll probably be an HD station. ...and any listener feedback from me will likely reflect my satisfaction with the improvements that technology brings. So what's a station GM to do, keep what some listeners (the ones that respond) say they like, or listen to a few querulous snivelers on usenet which is known as a forum for whiners? Neither. They'll look at the dismal sales curve for the receivers and the near zero Arbitron ratings for their IBOC streams and eventually conclude that it isn't worth the extra electricity to keep the IBOC running. There's still the matter of investment. With well into 6 figures for a single station, manglement, investors, and corporate interests will not simply let it die and go away. Like AM stereo, which actually worked, it took nearly 20 years to go away. But, UNlike AM stereo, which had a "marketplace based" approach and competing standards all on the air at once....HD Radio standard has been chosen. There is no battle among the formats on the air. Listeners can enjoy it from the get go. With AM Stereo, one had to decide which system to buy...and then could only listen to certain stations. HD learned from that fiasco...and is avoinding the pitfalls. The uptake is slow... So? It's not in a race? Apathy is everywhere in radio, satelite, SW, AM, FM, HD. Consumers aren't rushing to do anything with radio. the technology is flawed Debatable. and the implementation is poor. Implementation is pretty good! Consumers in most places can pick up an HD radio and start enjoying it immediately. (Unlike the AM Stereo "marketplace solution".) But the investment has been spectacular. In the scheme of things, not really. As Mrs Iacocca said: Nice Dodge. Not a dodge, it was an answer to your points. |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 12/16/09 14:38 , fdgdfgfdg wrote:
"D. Peter wrote in message ... On 12/16/09 14:26 , fdgdfgfdg wrote: "D. Peter wrote in message ... On 12/16/09 13:48 , fdgdfgfdg wrote: "D. Peter wrote in message ... On 12/15/09 17:35 , Brenda Ann wrote: "Bob wrote in message news:4b2a08da.2108125@chupacabra... If HD is really the loser some would have us believe, it will still linger because the stations that already have it won't have any incentive to ditch the gear they've acquired, because it wouldn't bring much beyond scrap metal value in the used market. Of course whenever I listen to the table radio in the other room it'll probably be an HD station. ...and any listener feedback from me will likely reflect my satisfaction with the improvements that technology brings. So what's a station GM to do, keep what some listeners (the ones that respond) say they like, or listen to a few querulous snivelers on usenet which is known as a forum for whiners? Neither. They'll look at the dismal sales curve for the receivers and the near zero Arbitron ratings for their IBOC streams and eventually conclude that it isn't worth the extra electricity to keep the IBOC running. There's still the matter of investment. With well into 6 figures for a single station, manglement, investors, and corporate interests will not simply let it die and go away. Like AM stereo, which actually worked, it took nearly 20 years to go away. But, UNlike AM stereo, which had a "marketplace based" approach and competing standards all on the air at once....HD Radio standard has been chosen. There is no battle among the formats on the air. Listeners can enjoy it from the get go. With AM Stereo, one had to decide which system to buy...and then could only listen to certain stations. HD learned from that fiasco...and is avoinding the pitfalls. The uptake is slow... So? It's not in a race? Apathy is everywhere in radio, satelite, SW, AM, FM, HD. Consumers aren't rushing to do anything with radio. the technology is flawed Debatable. and the implementation is poor. Implementation is pretty good! Consumers in most places can pick up an HD radio and start enjoying it immediately. (Unlike the AM Stereo "marketplace solution".) But the investment has been spectacular. In the scheme of things, not really. As Mrs Iacocca said: Nice Dodge. Not a dodge, it was an answer to your points. No, it wasn't. You answered nothing. You simply dismissed the ancillary AM Stereo comparisons. And then, deleted the point. Like I said. Nice dodge. |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "D. Peter Maus" wrote in message ... On 12/16/09 14:38 , fdgdfgfdg wrote: "D. Peter wrote in message ... On 12/16/09 14:26 , fdgdfgfdg wrote: "D. Peter wrote in message ... On 12/16/09 13:48 , fdgdfgfdg wrote: "D. Peter wrote in message ... On 12/15/09 17:35 , Brenda Ann wrote: "Bob wrote in message news:4b2a08da.2108125@chupacabra... If HD is really the loser some would have us believe, it will still linger because the stations that already have it won't have any incentive to ditch the gear they've acquired, because it wouldn't bring much beyond scrap metal value in the used market. Of course whenever I listen to the table radio in the other room it'll probably be an HD station. ...and any listener feedback from me will likely reflect my satisfaction with the improvements that technology brings. So what's a station GM to do, keep what some listeners (the ones that respond) say they like, or listen to a few querulous snivelers on usenet which is known as a forum for whiners? Neither. They'll look at the dismal sales curve for the receivers and the near zero Arbitron ratings for their IBOC streams and eventually conclude that it isn't worth the extra electricity to keep the IBOC running. There's still the matter of investment. With well into 6 figures for a single station, manglement, investors, and corporate interests will not simply let it die and go away. Like AM stereo, which actually worked, it took nearly 20 years to go away. But, UNlike AM stereo, which had a "marketplace based" approach and competing standards all on the air at once....HD Radio standard has been chosen. There is no battle among the formats on the air. Listeners can enjoy it from the get go. With AM Stereo, one had to decide which system to buy...and then could only listen to certain stations. HD learned from that fiasco...and is avoinding the pitfalls. The uptake is slow... So? It's not in a race? Apathy is everywhere in radio, satelite, SW, AM, FM, HD. Consumers aren't rushing to do anything with radio. the technology is flawed Debatable. and the implementation is poor. Implementation is pretty good! Consumers in most places can pick up an HD radio and start enjoying it immediately. (Unlike the AM Stereo "marketplace solution".) But the investment has been spectacular. In the scheme of things, not really. As Mrs Iacocca said: Nice Dodge. Not a dodge, it was an answer to your points. No, it wasn't. You answered nothing. You simply dismissed the ancillary AM Stereo comparisons. And then, deleted the point. Like I said. Nice dodge. Not at all...if you open your mind and think a bit. But then again, your reputation is to always want the last word and argue meaningless points endlessly, so I should expect it. |
#6
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 12/17/09 24:15 , fdgdfgfdg wrote:
"D. Peter wrote in message ... On 12/16/09 14:38 , fdgdfgfdg wrote: "D. Peter wrote in message ... On 12/16/09 14:26 , fdgdfgfdg wrote: "D. Peter wrote in message ... On 12/16/09 13:48 , fdgdfgfdg wrote: "D. Peter wrote in message ... On 12/15/09 17:35 , Brenda Ann wrote: "Bob wrote in message news:4b2a08da.2108125@chupacabra... If HD is really the loser some would have us believe, it will still linger because the stations that already have it won't have any incentive to ditch the gear they've acquired, because it wouldn't bring much beyond scrap metal value in the used market. Of course whenever I listen to the table radio in the other room it'll probably be an HD station. ...and any listener feedback from me will likely reflect my satisfaction with the improvements that technology brings. So what's a station GM to do, keep what some listeners (the ones that respond) say they like, or listen to a few querulous snivelers on usenet which is known as a forum for whiners? Neither. They'll look at the dismal sales curve for the receivers and the near zero Arbitron ratings for their IBOC streams and eventually conclude that it isn't worth the extra electricity to keep the IBOC running. There's still the matter of investment. With well into 6 figures for a single station, manglement, investors, and corporate interests will not simply let it die and go away. Like AM stereo, which actually worked, it took nearly 20 years to go away. But, UNlike AM stereo, which had a "marketplace based" approach and competing standards all on the air at once....HD Radio standard has been chosen. There is no battle among the formats on the air. Listeners can enjoy it from the get go. With AM Stereo, one had to decide which system to buy...and then could only listen to certain stations. HD learned from that fiasco...and is avoinding the pitfalls. The uptake is slow... So? It's not in a race? Apathy is everywhere in radio, satelite, SW, AM, FM, HD. Consumers aren't rushing to do anything with radio. the technology is flawed Debatable. and the implementation is poor. Implementation is pretty good! Consumers in most places can pick up an HD radio and start enjoying it immediately. (Unlike the AM Stereo "marketplace solution".) But the investment has been spectacular. In the scheme of things, not really. As Mrs Iacocca said: Nice Dodge. Not a dodge, it was an answer to your points. No, it wasn't. You answered nothing. You simply dismissed the ancillary AM Stereo comparisons. And then, deleted the point. Like I said. Nice dodge. Not at all...if you open your mind and think a bit. Oh, yeah,...you're right. I'll get some fox entrails so I can divine your meaning. Since you deleted the actual point of my message, But then again, your reputation is to always want the last word and argue meaningless points endlessly, so I should expect it. When you delete the point and argue the trivia, you should expect to get called on it, yes. |
#7
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "D. Peter Maus" wrote in message ... On 12/17/09 24:15 , fdgdfgfdg wrote: "D. Peter wrote in message ... On 12/16/09 14:38 , fdgdfgfdg wrote: "D. Peter wrote in message ... On 12/16/09 14:26 , fdgdfgfdg wrote: "D. Peter wrote in message ... On 12/16/09 13:48 , fdgdfgfdg wrote: "D. Peter wrote in message ... On 12/15/09 17:35 , Brenda Ann wrote: "Bob wrote in message news:4b2a08da.2108125@chupacabra... If HD is really the loser some would have us believe, it will still linger because the stations that already have it won't have any incentive to ditch the gear they've acquired, because it wouldn't bring much beyond scrap metal value in the used market. Of course whenever I listen to the table radio in the other room it'll probably be an HD station. ...and any listener feedback from me will likely reflect my satisfaction with the improvements that technology brings. So what's a station GM to do, keep what some listeners (the ones that respond) say they like, or listen to a few querulous snivelers on usenet which is known as a forum for whiners? Neither. They'll look at the dismal sales curve for the receivers and the near zero Arbitron ratings for their IBOC streams and eventually conclude that it isn't worth the extra electricity to keep the IBOC running. There's still the matter of investment. With well into 6 figures for a single station, manglement, investors, and corporate interests will not simply let it die and go away. Like AM stereo, which actually worked, it took nearly 20 years to go away. But, UNlike AM stereo, which had a "marketplace based" approach and competing standards all on the air at once....HD Radio standard has been chosen. There is no battle among the formats on the air. Listeners can enjoy it from the get go. With AM Stereo, one had to decide which system to buy...and then could only listen to certain stations. HD learned from that fiasco...and is avoinding the pitfalls. The uptake is slow... So? It's not in a race? Apathy is everywhere in radio, satelite, SW, AM, FM, HD. Consumers aren't rushing to do anything with radio. the technology is flawed Debatable. and the implementation is poor. Implementation is pretty good! Consumers in most places can pick up an HD radio and start enjoying it immediately. (Unlike the AM Stereo "marketplace solution".) But the investment has been spectacular. In the scheme of things, not really. As Mrs Iacocca said: Nice Dodge. Not a dodge, it was an answer to your points. No, it wasn't. You answered nothing. You simply dismissed the ancillary AM Stereo comparisons. And then, deleted the point. Like I said. Nice dodge. Not at all...if you open your mind and think a bit. Oh, yeah,...you're right. I'll get some fox entrails so I can divine your meaning. Since you deleted the actual point of my message, But then again, your reputation is to always want the last word and argue meaningless points endlessly, so I should expect it. When you delete the point and argue the trivia, you should expect to get called on it, yes. When there is no point, and people ignore the diatribe....you should expect to get called on it. But feel free to try to get in the last word, and argue meaningless points endlessly. ;-) |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Top 10 technology flops | Shortwave | |||
Top 10 technology flops | Shortwave | |||
Wiseman makes Oprah's reading list. | General | |||
antenna expirement flops | Shortwave |