HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

http://reviews.cnet.com/2300-33_7-10...s=0&o=10001201

HD radio was supposed to be the next great thing in "free" radio,
offering clear, digital "CD quality sound" and more listening choices.

Looks like the buying public voted with their wallets..

HD radio you're the biggest loser.. goody by!

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

HD so-called ''radio'', a BIGGG Tech Flop! izza GOOD! Now maybe those
Damn HD Tech FLOP so-called ''radio stations'' here in Mee See See Pee
Pee Eye will BITE THE DUST!
Ahh Damn Sho HOPES SO!
Know what I mean, Vern?
cuhulin

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

Commander Col. Klink wrote:
http://reviews.cnet.com/2300-33_7-10...s=0&o=10001201

HD radio was supposed to be the next great thing in "free" radio,
offering clear, digital "CD quality sound" and more listening choices.

It did. It just did it when no one cared.

What killed HD radio was the application of digital satellite TV technology
to home audio. Someone realized that you could take a "song" and make
a computer file out of it that contained the same data as a CD image in
one tenth the space.

This lead to CD players that played home burnt CD-ROMs with these files on
them, which lead to devices with hard drives that fit in your pocket.

Eventually hard disks became replaced with solid state (semiconductor)
memory, resulting in small cheap players.

The result of having small cheap players and availablity of programing material
is that people choose what they listen to and when. Except for talk and news
radio it does not matter when you listen to a program, which is why they
still exist on radio. Neither requires the high fidelity, etc of HD radio.

Note that the MP3 or as the enhanced ones are called "MP4" players sold here
mostly have FM radios, but not AM. The rapid adoption of these players here
led Israel radio to move their foreign language news (English, Russian,
Arabic, Ethiopian, French, etc) to an FM only channel.

Geoff.

--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM
New word I coined 12/13/09, "Sub-Wikipedia" adj, describing knowledge or
understanding, as in he has a sub-wikipedia understanding of the
situation. i.e possessing less facts or information than can be found in
the Wikipedia

HD radio makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:
Commander Col. Klink wrote:
http://reviews.cnet.com/2300-33_7-10...s=0&o=10001201

HD radio was supposed to be the next great thing in "free" radio,
offering clear, digital "CD quality sound" and more listening choices.

It did. It just did it when no one cared.

What killed HD radio was the application of digital satellite TV technology
to home audio. Someone realized that you could take a "song" and make
a computer file out of it that contained the same data as a CD image in
one tenth the space.
[...]



That was definitely a factor, but "HD radio" was not only doomed
from the start, it was such a serious blunder that it may well lead
to the death of thousands of radio stations and the permanent
stunting of the industry itself.

There is nothing wrong with the concept of digital radio.

Using modern firmware-upgradeable codecs, orthogonal FDM
transmission, and a network of community transmitters in a dedicated
digital band, great things could have been done:

1. In every community, all signals would have been full-quieting
with no noise or multipath distortion. There would have been no more
disparity in signal or noise levels between 50-kW powerhouses and
250-Watt locals or 10-Watt student stations -- all would have had
perfect, full-quieting signals within the community's coverage area.

2. There would have been no more need for any licensees to sign off
or go to absurdly low power at night as obtains presently among AM
stations. And former AM stations would no longer suffer from
crippling skywave interference at night.

3. Depending on how much spectrum was allocated and the ratio of
talk to music programming (with their different bit rates), at least
four to eight times as many stations could have been allocated to
each community as now exist, leaving open the possibility of free
and independent public access and non-profit "free radio" style
programming, greatly expanding listening choices (and points of view
in news programming) for everyone.

4. As stations migrated to the new band, _even more_ channels would
become open on the existing AM and FM bands, making them more
listenable and viable again and allowing even _more_ space for
non-profits and those who want to broadcast for the love of it
instead of just for monetary gain.

Digital community-transmitter-based radio in a dedicated digital
band thus could have been a tremendous success and a revolutionary
improvement.

But we didn't get real digital radio.

Instead we got IBOC (In-Band On-Channel, now deceptively labeled "HD
radio"), a technical turkey which delivers almost none of the
benefits above and increases interference to boot.

Why did this happen?

Because the money-men didn't _want_ the benefits of item (1) above.
They already owned the 50-kW powerhouses. They didn't want the
10-Watt student station to suddenly have an equal signal to theirs.
They didn't want the mono AM daytimer to suddenly have 20-kHz
digital stereo with no audible noise and be on 24 hours a day as in
item (2).

And the money-men didn't _want_ dozens of new independent channels
to be available to listeners as in item (3) above.

So they chose IBOC, where the digital signal piggybacks on top of
the existing analogue signal, right on the same frequency. IBOC
gives distinctly inferior results. IBOC causes significant
interference. IBOC on AM is unlistenable and very nearly useless.

But IBOC gave the money-men the one thing they wanted most of all:
It preserves the inferiority of the smaller broadcasters. In fact,
amid a sea of IBOC hash from the big boys, it _accentuates_ their
inferiority.

The end result of this shortsightedness will be bankruptcy for many
stations, fewer and poorer choices for the listeners as
conglomerates gobble up the remains, and a huge migration away from
AM and FM broadcasts and to audio delivery via satellite and the
Internet.


With all good wishes,



Kevin Alfred Strom.
--
http://kevinalfredstrom.com/

HD radio makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

Only a few HD so-called ''radio stations'' in Mississippi? How much/how
many are a few, three, four, five?

www.devilfinder.com
Radio Stations in Mississippi

If there is ony one, that is wayyyyyyyy too many, Mr.L

I am Glad the weather here has warmed up for a while.
cuhulin

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:


The result of having small cheap players and availablity of programing material
is that people choose what they listen to and when. Except for talk and news
radio it does not matter when you listen to a program, which is why they
still exist on radio. Neither requires the high fidelity, etc of HD radio.

So you never heard a DJ put together a set of songs that together says
something?

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

www.devilfinder.com
HD radio stations in Mississippi

10 stations in Mississippi broadcasting 18 hd channels.Recently, I read
an article at www.clarionledger.com (a lot of us folks [[including
meself]] call the Clarion Ledger, the Clarion LIAR! just ask JT and Dave
at www.supertalkms.com if y'all don't believe me) whereby
that dude was bragging about hd radio.No doubt that dude at Clarion LIAR
is an ObamaButtKisser!
cuhulin

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

"Commander Col. Klink" wrote in message
...
http://reviews.cnet.com/2300-33_7-10...s=0&o=10001201

HD radio was supposed to be the next great thing in "free" radio,
offering clear, digital "CD quality sound" and more listening choices.


HD Radio is good in that it adds some extra functionality to a radio.
Brings added choices to the radio dial.

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

Watching 6:00 PM WAPT channel 16 tv news. www.WAPT.com

www.devilfinder.com
Missing Show Dog WAPT

A woman who owns the dog (his name is Joker) flew all the way from
Denver to Jackson as soon as she learned the dog is missing.

Here Joker, come here Joker,,, whar you at boy???
cuhulin

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

On Dec 13, 7:53�pm, "Commander Col. Klink"
wrote:
http://reviews.cnet.com/2300-33_7-10...s=0&o=10001201

HD radio was supposed to be the next great thing in "free" radio,
offering clear, digital "CD quality sound" and more listening choices.

Looks like the buying public voted with their wallets..

HD radio you're the biggest loser.. goody by!

Big surprise - LOL!

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

On Dec 14, 3:47�pm, "HD Radio Farce" wrote:
"Commander Col. Klink" wrote in ...

http://reviews.cnet.com/2300-33_7-10...s=0&o=10001201

HD radio was supposed to be the next great thing in "free" radio,
offering clear, digital "CD quality sound" and more listening choices.

HD Radio is good in that it adds some extra functionality to a radio.
Brings added choices to the radio dial.

imposter - check his email. Should be

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

On Dec 13, 7:53*pm, "Commander Col. Klink"
wrote:
http://reviews.cnet.com/2300-33_7-10...s=0&o=10001201

HD radio was supposed to be the next great thing in "free" radio,
offering clear, digital "CD quality sound" and more listening choices.

Looks like the buying public voted with their wallets..

HD radio you're the biggest loser.. goody by!

HD radio IS a big loser. The problem is it's still here and will
probably linger for years to come.

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

hd radio,,, The Weakest Link!
cuhulin

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

"Bob Dobbs" 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.

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

hd radio,,, A BIG FLOP!
Heh, That's the way the Mop Flops.
You ever did KP before and you wring out the mop in the mop bucket and
then you twirl the mop up and down on the floor? That's called dry
mopping. I learned that at Fort Gordon,Georgia boot camp, KP.
Company D52.
cuhulin

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

On Dec 15, 6:35*pm, "Brenda Ann"
wrote:
"Bob Dobbs" 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.

It's already taking place. Clear Channel and Citadel are pulling the
plug on HD transmitters in some markets, just to save on electricity.
And nobody is complaining..

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

3-D TV is the big news nowadays, according to some articles in my latest
snail mail magazines.

Why don't I add an hd radio to my dust collectors, you say?

I say, WHY should I? hd radio is a FLOP!
cuhulin

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

On Dec 16, 8:51*am, Toxic wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:15:53 -0600, cuhulin wrote:
hd radio,,, A BIG FLOP!

I bet you haven't ever listenned to one, much less own one.
With all the dust collector radios you've got,
why not add an HD to the pile before they get hard to find?
Then your noises won't sound so much like sour grapes.

I own one and it's practically worthless. Fortunately, I didn't pay
anywhere near list price for the thing. What a waste.

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

"NX211" wrote in message
...
On Dec 16, 8:51 am, Toxic wrote:
On Tue, 15 Dec 2009 18:15:53 -0600, cuhulin wrote:
hd radio,,, A BIG FLOP!

I bet you haven't ever listenned to one, much less own one.
With all the dust collector radios you've got,
why not add an HD to the pile before they get hard to find?
Then your noises won't sound so much like sour grapes.

I own one and it's practically worthless. Fortunately, I didn't pay
anywhere near list price for the thing. What a waste.

Well, you are not telling us too much.....except for whining.

Where do you live? Are you actually in the vicinity of any worthwhile HD2
channels?

What model radio do you have?

(If you have one of the original radios, they have gotten better since the
arrival of the first sets.)

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

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.

In the case of IBOC, there's the huge pressures iBiquity is
bringing to stations which have begun to back away from HD radio.

There are contractual issues.

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

"D. Peter Maus" 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.

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

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.

Which pitfalls aren't even on the radar, here. The uptake is
slow, the technology is flawed, and the implementation is poor. But
the investment has been spectacular.

The point being made that even a system like AM stereo which was
a simple and far less costly implementation took 20 years to go awaty.

IBOC, UNlike AM Stereo, with its enormous capital investment per
station, contractual obligations, and corporate support, will not
simply be allowed to die quickly. There's just too much money involved.

It will be around for quite a while.

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

"Toxic" wrote in message
...
Does it really require a significant amount of extra electricity to run
the HD encoders and modulators, or is it like turning off the illuminated
station callsign on the front of the building to save a couple pennies?
If dwindling listenership in broadcast media is any predictor, then it
may all be moot as more stations do major cost cutting and go dark.

From what I have been able to discern, the IBOC sidebands are actually
generated by a separate transmitter, then combined with the AM signal (much
as the AM video and FM audio were on analog television). Digital
transmission is fairly energy intensive.

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

"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.

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...

"Toxic" wrote in message
...
Does it really require a significant amount of extra electricity to run
the HD encoders and modulators, or is it like turning off the illuminated
station callsign on the front of the building to save a couple pennies?
If dwindling listenership in broadcast media is any predictor, then it
may all be moot as more stations do major cost cutting and go dark.

From what I have been able to discern, the IBOC sidebands are actually
generated by a separate transmitter, then combined with the AM signal
(much as the AM video and FM audio were on analog television). Digital
transmission is fairly energy intensive.

In the scheme of things...not really.

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

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.

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

"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.

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

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.

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

On Dec 15, 5:21�pm, Bob Dobbs wrote:
NX211 wrote:
On Dec 13, 7:53 pm, "Commander Col. Klink"
wrote:
http://reviews.cnet.com/2300-33_7-10...s=0&o=10001201

HD radio was supposed to be the next great thing in "free" radio,
offering clear, digital "CD quality sound" and more listening choices.

Looks like the buying public voted with their wallets..

HD radio you're the biggest loser.. goody by!

HD radio IS a big loser. �The problem is it's still here and will
probably linger for years to come.

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?

--

Operator Bob
Echo Charlie 42

But, HD Radio at least doubles their power bills, requires on-going
troubleshooting, and there are on-going fees to iBiquity. i would
think stations, as radio groups declare bankruptcy, will eventually
pull the plug.

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

I bought a nice Sony radio for two dollars at the Goodwill store
today,,, and also a leather belt for two dollars, belt is just like
brand new.

www.devilfinder.com
Sony TV Weather AM FM ICF-34 Radio

I am trying the radio out right now, it does Good at night time AM
DXing.Much, Much Better than Anything hd has.
cuhulin

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

"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.

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

But, HD Radio at least doubles their power bills,

No it doesn't.

requires on-going troubleshooting,

We have been running it trouble free for the last few years. Haven't had to
make a change or adjustment since the sign on.

and there are on-going fees to iBiquity.

Just like there are to ASCAP, BMI, Microsoft, etc., etc.

It's part of the cost of running a business.

i would think stations, as radio groups declare bankruptcy, will
eventually pull the plug.

You would be wrong. ;-)

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

About two something months ago, I saw an hd radio for sale at the
Walmart store.Next time I go over there, if I think about it (I probally
won't think about it) I might see if it is still sitting on the shelf.I
don't want an hd radio anyway.
cuhulin

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

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.

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

www.devilfinder.com
Norway UFO Hyperdimensional Portal

Sheeeeeeeeit,,, How far is Hessdalen,Norway from Bognor Regis,England?
I am too Lazy to map it.
cuhulin

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

"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. ;-)

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

On 12/17/09 13:03 , fdgdfgfdg wrote:
"D. Peter 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. ;-)


No, that's your specialty.

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

"D. Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
On 12/17/09 13:03 , fdgdfgfdg wrote:
"D. Peter 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. ;-)


No, that's your specialty.

Here we go! Your repurtation preceeds you maus.

Run along and go find Telemon to play with.

Either that or find a meaninless thread you canextend in perpetuity.

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

On 12/17/09 14:41 , fdgdfgfdg wrote:
"D. Peter wrote in message
...
On 12/17/09 13:03 , fdgdfgfdg wrote:
"D. Peter 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. ;-)


No, that's your specialty.

Here we go! Your repurtation preceeds you maus.

Run along and go find Telemon to play with.

Either that or find a meaninless thread you canextend in perpetuity.



Whatever happened to Telamon? He disappeared a few days after
Eduardo vanished.

And I thought I was in a meaningless thread.

HD makes the list. The decade's 30 biggest tech flops
 

"D. Peter Maus" wrote in message
...
On 12/17/09 14:41 , fdgdfgfdg wrote:
"D. Peter wrote in message
...
On 12/17/09 13:03 , fdgdfgfdg wrote:
"D. Peter 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. ;-)


No, that's your specialty.

Here we go! Your repurtation preceeds you maus.

Run along and go find Telemon to play with.

Either that or find a meaninless thread you canextend in perpetuity.



Whatever happened to Telamon? He disappeared a few days after Eduardo
vanished.

And I thought I was in a meaningless thread.

You are....and looking forward to you extending it's life forever.....and
ever...