They have a reputation for issuing multiple press releases announcing
some grand new product that takes for ever to appear. Unfortunately
the product was usually delayed and there was not always a followup
press release announcing the delay...only silence.

Is $500.00 less than the original estimated price?

Dear John,

$500.00 was the original announced price and that included an XM
antenna which is now evidently NOT included.

I was in a hurry when I made my original post and I forgot to mention
that apparently this radio STILL does not offer IBOC, the DAB's, or
DRM, thus making it, even before its release, a technological
"also-ran."

Best,

Joe

I had my first taste of XM radio reception via satellite this past
weekend and was less than impressed because it drops the signal around
tall buildings and tall trees. For the Grundig to not have xm
capability is no great loss based on my experience.

John S. wrote:
I had my first taste of XM radio reception via satellite this past
weekend and was less than impressed because it drops the signal around
tall buildings and tall trees. For the Grundig to not have xm
capability is no great loss based on my experience.


On a portable, you'd probably have less frequent dropouts than in a car
because odds are you'll put it down in one spot while you listen.

Of course if you pick a spot that can't see the satellite, you'll have
to move or listen to something else.

Mark S. Holden wrote:
John S. wrote:
I had my first taste of XM radio reception via satellite this past
weekend and was less than impressed because it drops the signal around
tall buildings and tall trees. For the Grundig to not have xm
capability is no great loss based on my experience.


On a portable, you'd probably have less frequent dropouts than in a car
because odds are you'll put it down in one spot while you listen.

Of course if you pick a spot that can't see the satellite, you'll have
to move or listen to something else.

In fact we were in a car. The lost signals were so frequent that we
switched to regular radio, and found the music we were looking for.
They will have to stabilize reception and improve the selections before
paid satellite radio is of any interest to me.

John S. wrote:

In fact we were in a car. The lost signals were so frequent that we
switched to regular radio, and found the music we were looking for.
They will have to stabilize reception and improve the selections before

paid satellite radio is of any interest to me.

You were not a "cooperative user" (to use a term coined during the
development
of early mobile satellite systems. Your experience would have been
radically different
if you had had a clear line of sight to the satellite(s).

RK

Good grief. I had no idea people have to worry about line of sight with
satellite radio. That is a *major* turn off.

Steve

"rkhalona" wrote in message
oups.com...
John S. wrote:

In fact we were in a car. The lost signals were so frequent that
we
switched to regular radio, and found the music we were looking for.
They will have to stabilize reception and improve the selections
before

paid satellite radio is of any interest to me.

You were not a "cooperative user" (to use a term coined during the
development
of early mobile satellite systems. Your experience would have been
radically different
if you had had a clear line of sight to the satellite(s).

Yes, but the clear line of sight becomes an issue
in the big cities and in areas with lots of trees. I
personally have DirecTV, and I'm lucky in that the
tree near to the dish is a honeylocust, so that the
signal from the birds can penetrate the dappled
shade of the honeylocust. Others I know who
wanted to make use of DirecTV had to forego it
because obtaining a clear view of the southern
sky meant they'd have to cut their trees down.
Satellite radio, it seems, looks like it might suffer
from similar (but different) limitations.

--Mike L.

rkhalona wrote:
John S. wrote:

In fact we were in a car. The lost signals were so frequent that we
switched to regular radio, and found the music we were looking for.
They will have to stabilize reception and improve the selections before

paid satellite radio is of any interest to me.

You were not a "cooperative user" (to use a term coined during the
development
of early mobile satellite systems. Your experience would have been
radically different
if you had had a clear line of sight to the satellite(s).

RK

Well, yes I can be "not cooperative" and even downright cranky when an
over-hyped improvement doesn't work as advertised. Satellite radio
seems to suffer from the same shortcomings that satellite phones
suffered. Once users actually have to work with the new radio (or
phone) then the shortcomings become clear. For those of us with access
to a reasonable number of FM & AM radio stations satellite radio is
largely a redundant and expensive toy. I suppose it could be useful
out on a flat and relatively treeless open road, but so would a folder
of good cd's.

On 28 Jun 2005 09:22:17 -0700, "John S." wrote:



Mark S. Holden wrote:
John S. wrote:
I had my first taste of XM radio reception via satellite this past
weekend and was less than impressed because it drops the signal around
tall buildings and tall trees. For the Grundig to not have xm
capability is no great loss based on my experience.


On a portable, you'd probably have less frequent dropouts than in a car
because odds are you'll put it down in one spot while you listen.

Of course if you pick a spot that can't see the satellite, you'll have
to move or listen to something else.

In fact we were in a car. The lost signals were so frequent that we
switched to regular radio, and found the music we were looking for.
They will have to stabilize reception and improve the selections before
paid satellite radio is of any interest to me.

Sirius generally works better than XM in cars away from repeaters.