Im hoping it will!!

TIA

"Tony" wrote in message
...
Im hoping it will!!

TIA



No they went with XM.

Lucky

The XM capability is probably via a USB style port. The XM receiver
is actually built into the antenna and the E1 just provides control
and display (and audio, of course). The XM scheme is called Connect &
Play. There is no reason Sirius can't produce a smart antenna that
could use the same interface.

On Fri, 4 Feb 2005 05:37:29 -0500, "Lucky"
wrote:


"Tony" wrote in message
m...
Im hoping it will!!

TIA



No they went with XM.

Lucky

It's called a licensing agreement. XM would never allow a manufacturer
to make a radio that would support both XM and Sirius. I don't
understand why people can't figure that out.

There is at least one Kenwood car radio that can handle both. But who
cares? Have you checked Universal's site? The et=F3n E1-XM, which was
ORIGINALLY announced in 1997(!) as the Grundig Satellit 900, has been
pushed back AGAIN - this time "expected in Spring 2005." What a sick
joke!

Frankly, as I have stated in other posts, this radio is OBSOLETE even
before it is officially introduced, at least in its present form. NO
ONE needs another AM/FM/SW radio that also picks up (for a price, of
course) XM radio.

If ANY new radio is introduced without IBOC, the DABs, or DRM (which
apparently is proving to be not so good on SW, but not too bad for MW
transmissions), there is really no reason to buy it. Perhaps et=F3n
realizes this and is redesigning this receiver again (though I don't
really believe they are) or are just going to abandon it (which,
frankly, would be the best thing for them to do) and design something
more practical and desirable.

Have you seen the post about the proposed new Degen DE1108? Check it
out on this group. If et=F3n has any sense, they will also look at this
post to see what SWLs (the ones who spend their money) REALLY want.

If I buy a new SW receiver, it is going to have to be better than
anything I already have and will have to have the latest reception
modes offered (and I do NOT mean satellite "pay" radio with its trashy
"music" and soon-to-come trashy "talk shows," not even to mention the
coming "advertisements" for which the listener will pay!).

As always, my opinions.

Best,

Joe

P=2ES. Also regarding satellite "pay" radio: who the h**l wants to drive
under a bridge and lose the signal, just like your old AM car radio in
1948!?! And PAY for the privilege! NUTS!!!

I couldn't agree more, Joe. I wish Eton would spend its R & D dollars
on the development of a real receiver, not an overpriced portable with
a bunch of tabletop bells and whistles tacked on. And XM? Give me a
break.... I suggest they postpone the E1-XM indefinitely...

Steve

Joe Analssandrini wrote:

There is at least one Kenwood car radio that can handle both. But who
cares? Have you checked Universal's site? The etón E1-XM, which was
ORIGINALLY announced in 1997(!) as the Grundig Satellit 900, has been
pushed back AGAIN - this time "expected in Spring 2005." What a sick
joke!

Frankly, as I have stated in other posts, this radio is OBSOLETE even
before it is officially introduced, at least in its present form. NO
ONE needs another AM/FM/SW radio that also picks up (for a price, of
course) XM radio.

If ANY new radio is introduced without IBOC, the DABs, or DRM (which
apparently is proving to be not so good on SW, but not too bad for MW
transmissions), there is really no reason to buy it. Perhaps etón
realizes this and is redesigning this receiver again (though I don't
really believe they are) or are just going to abandon it (which,
frankly, would be the best thing for them to do) and design something
more practical and desirable.

Have you seen the post about the proposed new Degen DE1108? Check it
out on this group. If etón has any sense, they will also look at this
post to see what SWLs (the ones who spend their money) REALLY want.

If I buy a new SW receiver, it is going to have to be better than
anything I already have and will have to have the latest reception
modes offered (and I do NOT mean satellite "pay" radio with its trashy
"music" and soon-to-come trashy "talk shows," not even to mention the
coming "advertisements" for which the listener will pay!).

As always, my opinions.

Best,

Joe

P.S. Also regarding satellite "pay" radio: who the h**l wants to drive
under a bridge and lose the signal, just like your old AM car radio in
1948!?! And PAY for the privilege! NUTS!!!


The ONLY reason that free, over the air TV and radio is being phased out
for pay services is that subscription TV/radio is more profitable for
the NAB, which runs the FCC. Once again, the regulators get caught in
bed with the people they're supposed to be regulating. Of course,
conspiracists will note that subscription services are easier to control
for government propaganda purposes, but I still suspect that the main
factor is MONEY. Who WOULDN'T want to force one's customers to subscribe
(BIG $$$) to a service which could previously be picked up free with an
inexpensive receiver? Apparently advertising dollars aren't enough for
the media services, they want hefty subscription fees too.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

XM and Sirius have already agreed to share technology toward the end
of total interoperability and are in fact required to do so by the
FCC. That's why.

On 4 Feb 2005 11:24:06 -0800, "Invader3K"
wrote:

It's called a licensing agreement. XM would never allow a manufacturer
to make a radio that would support both XM and Sirius. I don't
understand why people can't figure that out.

Eton is ready. XM is not.

On 4 Feb 2005 13:41:19 -0800, "Joe Analssandrini"
wrote:

There is at least one Kenwood car radio that can handle both. But who
cares? Have you checked Universal's site? The etón E1-XM, which was
ORIGINALLY announced in 1997(!) as the Grundig Satellit 900, has been
pushed back AGAIN - this time "expected in Spring 2005." What a sick
joke!

The NAB hates satellite radio. Your post is not logical, Captain.

On Sat, 05 Feb 2005 18:27:21 -0800, running dogg wrote:


The ONLY reason that free, over the air TV and radio is being phased out
for pay services is that subscription TV/radio is more profitable for
the NAB, which runs the FCC. Once again, the regulators get caught in
bed with the people they're supposed to be regulating. Of course,
conspiracists will note that subscription services are easier to control
for government propaganda purposes, but I still suspect that the main
factor is MONEY. Who WOULDN'T want to force one's customers to subscribe
(BIG $$$) to a service which could previously be picked up free with an
inexpensive receiver? Apparently advertising dollars aren't enough for
the media services, they want hefty subscription fees too.



----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----