Is There Any Future For Shortwave Radio : With or Without DRM . . .
RHF
The American AM & FM Broadcasters to some degree
feel they got burned by IBOC "HD" Radio Scheme.
The NASB is most likely looking at FCC and International
Pressure to start some Shortwave Broadcasting using DRM.
The NASB would like to know / what to know if the present
Shortwave Radio Listeners will follow and BUY New Shortwave
Radios that feature DRM ???
Me thinks that the average Age {Demographics} of Shortwave
Radio Listeners (SWLs) and those who are willing to spend
the Extra $150 for a new DRM Shortwave Radio are small
and getting smaller.
NOTE - Above the $150 Cost Range : Gets people to think
that a PC/Internet and Satellite is the better deal for the
Added Price; and gives better quality Audio plus Video too.
*IF* The Shortwave Radio Broadcasters of the World with
Government Backing could make and market a 'portable'
AM & FM Shortwave Radio like the Redsun RP2100 Radio
{C Crane SW} for under US$100 then there would be a
World-Wide Market for DRM Shortwave Broadcasters.
http://www.ccrane.com/images/large/ccradio-sw.jpg
http://www.universal-radio.com/catalog/portable/2100.html
http://www.radiointel.com/review-redsunrp2100.htm
NOTE - Not a 12 kHz IF-Output Jack to hook-up to a PC
to Decode the DRM Signal -but- Real Built-In DRM in the
Radio itself. {no extra techie required}
-aka- Just Turn It 'On' and Listen
-wrt- Free Over-the-Air Radio*
* AM/FM/SW Radio + AC/DC Power + You-the-Listener
IMHO - Without a low-cost 'Affordable' DRM 'portable' AM
& FM Shortwave Radio designed for the World Market
{Available in every Country} there is NO Future
for DRM Broadcasting.
IBOC has the 'possibility' of HD-Radio "Installs" in many/
most New American Cars & Trucks to act as a Decade
Long passive transitioning modus : While DRM Shortwave
has No Means To It's End of Gaining General SWL Acceptance
and becoming the Average Shortwave Radio Listener's
'normal' way of Receiving Shortwave Radio Broadcasts.
PLUS Real Time World-Wide "Audio Content" that was
Exclusive to Shortwave Radio Broadcasting is now available
via several other forms of Audio and Video Media Transmission :
Satellite, Internet, Cellphone, etc ::: The Combination of Audio
and Video Media is simply more compelling then Audio Along
and Shortwave Radio Broadcasting is simply Audio Along.
It's the old story of the Railroads seeing themselves as railroads
and not Transportation Companies : Therefore NOT Using their
Economic Might to Get Into the Airline Business and Dominate
It early-on.
Many/Most Government/National Shortwave Radio Broadcasters
are NOW! Government/National Media Distributors -via- Satellite
Radio & TV; Internet Radio & TV; Cellphone PodCast; and oh
yes... some still do some Shortwave Radio Broadcasting too...
Is There Any Future For Shortwave Radio :
With or Without DRM . . . ~ RHF©
*IF* AM & FM Radio are Slowly Dying . . .
{Dead But Don't Know It Yet}
What Then Can Be Said For Shortwave Radio ?
.
.
On Oct 22, 2:14 pm, RHF <rhf-newsgro...@pacbell.net> wrote:
Take : The NASB 2010 International Shortwave Survey
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/4c8b0d8a0294ae92
One gets the Idea . . . The NASB Survey was really a Survey
as to whether you would "Buy" a new DRM Shortwave Radio
Receiver . . .
http://www.worlddxclub.org.uk/WDXC_NASB-msg.html
-or- http://edxcnews.wordpress.com/
.
.
On Oct 23, 6:50 am, "Just Plan Burr" <pitz...@iwvisp.com> wrote:
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/057325d04343247c
Sounds like you're right Roy.
Read a lot of these "surveys" and they are all the same!
Burr
.
.
RHF
http://groups.google.com/group/shortwave-listener-qsl-reports/msg/ef2b6837d037eda8
-note- corrected a few typos and misspellings ~ RHF
.
.
On Oct 25, 4:30 am, RHF <rhf-newsgro...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> BURR,
>
> The American AM & FM Broadcasters to some degree
> feel they got burned by IBOC "HD" Radio Scheme.
>
> The NASB is most likely looking at FCC and International
> Pressure to start some Shortwave Broadcasting using DRM.
>
> The NASB would like to know / what to know if the present
> Shortwave Radio Listeners will follow and BUY New Shortwave
> Radios that feature DRM ???
>
> Me thinks that the average Age {Demographics} of Shortwave
> Radio Listeners (SWLs) and those who are willing to spend
> the Extra $150 for a new DRM Shortwave Radio are small
> and getting smaller.
>
> NOTE - Above the $150 Cost Range : Gets people to think
> that a PC/Internet and Satellite is the better deal for the
> Added Price; and gives better quality Audio plus Video too.
>
> *IF* The Shortwave Radio Broadcasters of the World with
> Government Backing could make and market a 'portable'
> AM & FM Shortwave Radio like the Redsun RP2100 Radio
> {C Crane SW} for under US$100 then there would be a
> World-Wide Market for DRM Shortwave Broadcasters.http://www.ccrane.com/images/large/ccradio-sw.jpghttp://www.universal-radio.com/catalog/portable/2100.htmlhttp://www.radiointel.com/review-redsunrp2100.htm
> Take : The NASB 2010 International Shortwave Surveyhttp://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/4c8b0d8a0294ae92
>
> One gets the Idea . . . The NASB Survey was really a Survey
> as to whether you would "Buy" a new DRM Shortwave Radio
> Receiver . . .http://www.worlddxclub.org.uk/WDXC_NASB-msg.html
> -or-http://edxcnews.wordpress.com/
> .
> .
> On Oct 23, 6:50 am, "Just Plan Burr" <pitz...@iwvisp.com> wrote:http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/057325d04343247c
>
> Sounds like you're right Roy.
>
> Read a lot of these "surveys" and they are all the same!
>
> Burr
> .
> .
Is There Any Future For Shortwave Radio : With or Without DRM . . .
Steve
> Is There Any Future For Shortwave Radio : With or Without DRM . . .
>
>
> -note- corrected a few typos and misspellings ~ RHF
> .
> .
> On Oct 25, 4:30 am, RHF <rhf-newsgro...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
>
>
> > BURR,
>
> > The American AM & FM Broadcasters to some degree
> > feel they got burned by IBOC "HD" Radio Scheme.
>
> > The NASB is most likely looking at FCC and International
> > Pressure to start some Shortwave Broadcasting using DRM.
>
> > The NASB would like to know / what to know if the present
> > Shortwave Radio Listeners will follow and BUY New Shortwave
> > Radios that feature DRM ???
>
> > Me thinks that the average Age {Demographics} of Shortwave
> > Radio Listeners (SWLs) and those who are willing to spend
> > the Extra $150 for a new DRM Shortwave Radio are small
> > and getting smaller.
>
> > NOTE - Above the $150 Cost Range : Gets people to think
> > that a PC/Internet and Satellite is the better deal for the
> > Added Price; and gives better quality Audio plus Video too.
>
> > *IF* The Shortwave Radio Broadcasters of the World with
> > Government Backing could make and market a 'portable'
> > AM & FM Shortwave Radio like the Redsun RP2100 Radio
> > {C Crane SW} for under US$100 then there would be a
I'd be willing to spend more money for a radio that lacks DRM
capability.
RHF
- that lacks DRM capability.
Steve,
*IF* Like XM/Sirius Satellite Radio DRM could come
up with a simple uniform Plug-and-Play Box.
Like the XM Receiver/Antenna for the Eton E1-XM
Radio that would be a good 'bridge' between an
old non-DRM Radio and an Integrated DRM Radio.
The Shortwave Radio Broadcasters have to see some
ROI coming out of DRM; or they simply will move on
to the Internet Radio & TV and Satellite Radio & TV
as their main Technical Means to Their End of Reaching
and Communicating with People All Around the World.
~ RHF
.
.
John Smith
>> ...
The wife and I have our flatscreens in storage, we have no plans of
getting them out. If our shows are not available on the net, we don't
watch them.
And, lately, I have been just listening to AM on the net, and those
stations which provide streams ... NPR is the FM that I grab, on the net
... point being, it is getting hard to not realize the fact we could do
without standalone radios ... with probably keep my USB software driven
radios, at least for a while longer.
DRM is just too silly to be bothered with. I don't think the wife and I
will ever want to be bothered with it ... if obama shuts down the
internet, I guess we will all have to go back to BBS's.
Regards,
JS
Steve
In that case I think they'd better forget about DRM. A smarter move
would be for broadcasters to move to single sideband operations. This
might not give them a larger audience, but it would sure allow them to
cut a lot of their expenses. All they'd really need is a stock ham
transceiver and a dipole. And I'll bet that at this moment there are
more small receivers capable of receiving SSB than DRM.
Geoffrey S. Mendelson
> In that case I think they'd better forget about DRM. A smarter move
> would be for broadcasters to move to single sideband operations. This
> might not give them a larger audience, but it would sure allow them to
> cut a lot of their expenses. All they'd really need is a stock ham
> transceiver and a dipole. And I'll bet that at this moment there are
> more small receivers capable of receiving SSB than DRM.
Even better would be double-sideband-reduce-carrier. It's easy to generate
with DSP and sort of in between SSB and AM. It's basicly USB and LSB at the
same time. Twice the cost of SSB in terms of power and bandwidth, but far less
in power than AM.
It has the advantage that a standard AM receiver has no trouble with it.
The Sony IFC-2010 (ICF-2001D) was born because Sony had a warehouse of AM
stereo decoder chips and no market for them.
At this point it would not cost a lot of money to make a dedicated DSP
chip that would decode AM, DSBRC, and SSB at an IF of 445kHz. Possibly
a brodcasters or radio manufacturer's association could get together and
bankroll it.
Geoff.
--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson N3OWJ/4X1GM
To help restaurants, as part of the "stimulus package", everyone must order
dessert. As part of the socialized health plan, you are forbidden to eat it. :-)
Steve
wrote:
Indeed. Yes, I think an approach like this would make much more sense
for broadcasters given the business realities they currently face.
RHF
- would be for broadcasters to move to single sideband operations.
This
- might not give them a larger audience, but it would sure allow them
to
- cut a lot of their expenses. All they'd really need is a stock ham
- transceiver and a dipole. And I'll bet that at this moment there are
- more small receivers capable of receiving SSB than DRM.
Yes sometimes the better "Idea" is the simpler 'idea' :
DRM requires a more complex Radio Transmission process.
Plus DRM requires a more complex Radio Receiver
adding a higher initial cost to the Radio Listener to
Buy the Radio to hear the Broadcast.
~ RHF
.
RHF
wrote:
- - Steve wrote:
- - In that case I think they'd better forget about DRM. A smarter
move
- - would be for broadcasters to move to single sideband operations.
This
- - might not give them a larger audience, but it would sure allow
them to
- - cut a lot of their expenses. All they'd really need is a stock ham
- - transceiver and a dipole. And I'll bet that at this moment there
are
- - more small receivers capable of receiving SSB than DRM.
- Even better would be double-sideband-reduce-carrier.
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/1460d4ae9e1f1be4
The Better "Idea" Gets Better !
DSB and Suppress {Reduced} Carrier has many of the
Advantages of SSB : Plus the better Sound Quality of
AM Radio.
- It's easy to generate with DSP and sort of in between
- SSB and AM.
YES - PLus any current AM Radio or SSB Receiver can
also receive DSB Transmissions. Backward compatible
with AM Radios and SSB Receivers.
- It's basicly USB and LSB at the same time.
YES - WWV/WWVH uses DSB while CHU uses USB.
- Twice the cost of SSB in terms of power and bandwidth,
- but far less in power than AM.
Redirect the Wasted AM Power to the Side-Bands
100KW AM = 50KW Carrier + 25KW LSB + 25 KW USB
100KW DSB = + 40 KW LSB + 40 KW USB & 20 KW SRAMC*
* Suppressed {Reduced} AM Carrier
-result- Same Total Power Level :
But More Power To The Content :
And A More Powerful Audio Stream.
- It has the advantage that a standard AM receiver
- has no trouble with it.
Yes Yes Yes - Backward compatible with AM Radios
and SSB Receivers.
Plus DSB has the better Sound Quality of AM Radio
and even the potential of Stereo or at least 'enhanced'
Mono.
- The Sony IFC-2010 (ICF-2001D) was born because
- Sony had a warehouse of AM stereo decoder chips
- and no market for them.
Yes that brings up the 2nd Point the AM Stereo Decoder
Chip Designs can be used to Detect and Receive DSB
and Use it as with an AM-SYNC Function; and even the
potential of Stereo or at least 'enhanced' Mono.
- At this point it would not cost a lot of money to make
- a dedicated DSP chip that would decode AM, DSBRC,
- and SSB at an IF of 445kHz.
As you have point-out SONY already has the design.
Plus Drake/Eton/Grundig also has the Designs; along
with several others...
It's just a matter of starting-up production and producing
a Million Chips a Month for a Year and Warehousing them
and then Distributing them as they sell to meet the need...
- a brodcasters or radio manufacturer's association could
- get together and bankroll it.
Better a Consortium of Governments could simply
Mandate DSB Braodcasting and Create-The-Need :
Then the Capital would Flow to It Naturally.
OBTW-IMHO : Versus IBOC for the AM/MW Radio Band
DSB is the Better Idea !
-cause- Once you have the DSB Chips in the 'portable'
AM/FM Shortwave Radios* : Using DSB in AM/MW
Radio function is a No Cost No Brainer !
* +90% of the Sales of all Shortwave Radio World Wide.
Geoff.
- --
- Geoffrey S. Mendelson N3OWJ/4X1GM
- To help restaurants, as part of the "stimulus package", everyone
must order
- dessert. As part of the socialized health plan, you are forbidden to
eat it. :-)
the better idea gets better ~ RHF
.
.
RHF
> On Oct 30, 1:44 pm, "Geoffrey S. Mendelson" <g...@mendelson.com>
> wrote:- - Steve wrote:
>
> - - In that case I think they'd better forget about DRM. A smarter
> move
> - - would be for broadcasters to move to single sideband operations.
> This
> - - might not give them a larger audience, but it would sure allow
> them to
> - - cut a lot of their expenses. All they'd really need is a stock ham
> - - transceiver and a dipole. And I'll bet that at this moment there
> are
> - - more small receivers capable of receiving SSB than DRM.
>
>
> The Better "Idea" Gets Better !
>
> DSB and Suppress {Reduced} Carrier has many of the
> Advantages of SSB : Plus the better Sound Quality of
> AM Radio.
>
> - It's easy to generate with DSP and sort of in between
> - SSB and AM.
>
> YES - PLus any current AM Radio or SSB Receiver can
> also receive DSB Transmissions. Backward compatible
> with AM Radios and SSB Receivers.
>
> - It's basicly USB and LSB at the same time.
- YES - WWV/WWVH uses DSB while CHU uses USB.
WWV/WWVH uses DSB* on 2.5 MHz; 5&10&15&20 MHz
http://www.nist.gov/pml/div688/grp40/wwv.cfm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/WWV_%28radio_station%29#Broadcast_format
* Double Side-Band Amplitude Modulation [DSB-AM]
Most times the AM-SYNC function on my GS800-M
Radio enhances the WWV Signal's Audio and does
improve it's Listenability.
CHU uses USB* on 3330 kHz; 7850 kHz & 14670 kHz
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CHU_%28radio_station%29
* Upper-Side-Band [USB] The CHU Time Signal is AM;
with the LSB suppressed (Transmission Type H3E)
~ RHF
WWV "The Tick !" : All 'The Time' : All The Time !
? A Clear Channel Station ?
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.radio.shortwave/msg/3fe125277ed24955
.
RHF
> On 10/25/2010 4:30 AM, RHF wrote:
>
> >> ...
>
- getting them out. If our shows are not available on the net, we
don't
- watch them.
-
- And, lately, I have been just listening to AM on the net, and those
- stations which provide streams ... NPR is the FM that I grab, on the
net
- ... point being, it is getting hard to not realize the fact we could
do
- without standalone radios ... with probably keep my USB software
driven
- radios, at least for a while longer.
-
- DRM is just too silly to be bothered with. I don't think the wife
and I
- will ever want to be bothered with it ... if obama shuts down the
- internet, I guess we will all have to go back to BBS's.
-
- Regards,
- JS
"JS" - Don't BBS's rely on Land-Lines and doesn't
Prez Obama also have potential control over them
too . . .
Matter of fact Free Over-the-Air Radio {Uncontrolable}
may be Shut-Down and Only Web-Based "internet"
Radio may be available to hear the 'official' Gov-Speak
News and Inform-Obama-ation.
A so-called Web-Radio "Internet' Radio may be an
'option' that you should consider; and Even though
Prez Obama might shut-down-the-web . . .
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_radio
* WiFi Internet Radios
http://www.ccrane.com/radios/wifi-radios/
* * Welcome to Country Mile WiFi ! -expanded-wifi-
http://www.countrymilewifi.com/
* * * Sangean RCR-8WF WiFi Internet Radio
http://www.ccrane.com/radios/wifi-radios/sangean-rcr-8wf-wifi-internet-radio.aspx
Alarm Clock Radio featuring FM and WiFi
Note - I am sure that Prez Obama will keep NPR
-aka- National Propaganda Radio
{Featuring Pro+Government Liberal Speak Radio}
On-the-Air as your last and only Voice to Listen To.
. . . Hold On . . . It's the Top-of-the-Hour and it's time
for our NPR One-Minute of Prez Obama Speaks !
-message- Obey Your Prez-A-Duntz
* Trust Your Government
* Work Hard & Pay Taxes
* Volunteer To Work For 'The Cause'
* Report All Anti-Obama Elements : at Work and
in Business; in Schools and Colleges; at Church
and Social Gathering, and even at Home.
Note - TOH Obama PodCasts to every Cellphone too.
praise be the technology that brings us
the voice of prez obama - jftfoi ;;-}} ~RHF
.
.
m...@privacy.net
>- The wife and I have our flatscreens in storage, we have no plans of
>- getting them out. If our shows are not available on the net, we
>don't
>- watch them.
I'm getting to that point as well..
In fact I do not have ANY TV right now and was kind of
shopping for a new flatscreen model
BUT.... I am thinking it might be best to buy a bigger
PC monitor for my desktop instead and watch THAT! That
is.... move desktop and big monitor in the living
room...
What you say?
RHF
The Sony "PlayStation 3" has a Web Browser feature
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/PlayStation_3
The Nintendo "Wii" also has some Internet functionality
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wii
Web Browser feature
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Web_browser
So... If you have an existing ISP and an 32" HDTVs...
A Flat Screen PC Monitor around 24" would be
good for Viewing Internet provided Video Content
at a Desk-Top PC. [a 2~3 Foot Viewing Distance]
But most likely a 32" HDTV connected to PC that
is Connected to the Internet would be better for
setting down in a room and viewing from across
the room. [a 7~12 Foot Viewing Distance]
The HP TouchSmart Monitors might be nice...
http://www.hp.com/united-states/campaigns/touchsmart/
The Bigger Samsung 320TSN-2 : 32" LCD TV/Monitor
http://www.samsung.com/us/business/commercial-display-solutions/LH32TCUMBC/ZA
We had some in-house Care Providers who were
keen to Watch Video Content on their iPhone size
and type Video Players -that-was-just-not-for-me-
But then I don't like Listening to 'Tunes' on an iPod
with Ear-Buds either : Give me two Loud Speakers
across the Room and an Easy-Chair to set-in and
relax to the Music too...
mostly depends on the-how and the-where of
you wanting to 'view' the "video content" ~ RHF
.
.
Krypsis
> On 10/25/2010 4:30 AM, RHF wrote:
>
> >> ...
>
> The wife and I have our flatscreens in storage, we have no plans of
> getting them out. If our shows are not available on the net, we don't
> watch them.
>
> And, lately, I have been just listening to AM on the net, and those
> stations which provide streams ... NPR is the FM that I grab, on the net
> without standalone radios ... with probably keep my USB software driven
> radios, at least for a while longer.
>
> DRM is just too silly to be bothered with. I don't think the wife and I
> will ever want to be bothered with it ... if obama shuts down the
> internet, I guess we will all have to go back to BBS's.
>
> Regards,
> JS
>
device around just to listen to the radio does not thrill me in the
least. Whenever I am working out in the backyard, my Sangean 505 is with
me and tuned in. Whenever I travel, my Sony 7600 is with me and also
tuned in. Right now I am sitting at my computer and my Sangean is beside
me tuned to BC AM, the cricket in fact. The only time I really listen to
internet radio is when I want to listen to something too distant for
broadcast but unavailable on shortwave.
I will continue to use broadcast radios for the foreseeable future!
Krypsis
RHF
So far the limit to Internet Radio {web-based-radio}
is just how 'Wide' {Coverage Area} is your WiFi :
at Home; at Work in your Car/Truck; at the Hotel
you are staying at . . . and the location of your next
Hot-Spot !
Cellphone and iPod type G3 down-loads with subsequent
Play-Back would seem to give more 'mobility' like a
Pocket {portable} AM/FM/SW Radio. But mostly that
is not Real-Time and for the most part AM/FM/SW
Radio does offer Real-Time where you are / anywhere.
it's 'free' over-the-air am & fm shortwave radio
and it is as easy as . . . just listening ~ RHF
.
.
dave
Get a proper TV with web capabilities. I have a $150 Insignia Bluray
player that streams Netflix. There are standalone streamer boxes for as
low as $60. Build a Linux media server for next to nothing. (They even
have remote controls). My 50" DLP also has 7 inputs, 4 of which are
hi-def.
John Smith
> ...
> "JS" - Don't BBS's rely on Land-Lines and doesn't
> Prez Obama also have potential control over them
> too . . .
>> ...
Any fascist/dictator government can become a real pain. Just look at
the old SW jammers you used to find dotting the band spreads. And,
yeah, you have to use phone to run a bbs, either landline, cell or
satellite. Perhaps we will have to go real retro and use the old CB
bands with data encryption schemes; My crystal ball stopped working,
all it shows is gray clouds.
I kinda liked the old BBS's, now-a-days, it would be like waiting for
the pony express though!
Anyway, shutting down all communication would just be suicidal--I am not
saying these fool criminals and treasonous-individuals we have allowed
into public servant offices aren't VERY severe
psycho-death-suicide-freaks--the insanity they have demonstrated is
truly amazing ... but, if no one steps up to remove them and restore
sanity, soon, it might be awhile before enough, get enough nerve to, do
the right thing.
Regards,
JS
John Smith
> ...
> BUT.... I am thinking it might be best to buy a bigger
> PC monitor for my desktop instead and watch THAT! That
> is.... move desktop and big monitor in the living
> room...
>
> What you say?
Actually, that is what the wife has. A digital USB tuner and
large-screen laptop ... she says it is for emergencies. But, I have
caught here with the modern day soaps on it ... lol
Regards,
JS
John Smith
>> ...
> I will continue to use broadcast radios for the foreseeable future!
>
> Krypsis
>
The types of situations you name, camping in the High Sierra, having to
live in a survival situation eating food off the land, etc. leaves one
little choice but for an old am/fm/sw/??? type radio. Of course one
will remain with ones gold, food, blankets, tents, go-bags, etc.
However, with the coverage of some cell suppliers, I have been in some
pretty remote areas and still have net access ... it has surprised me
and I expect it to get only get better technology and hardware ...
although, by then, we may not have the money, resources, infrastructure,
etc. to implement the upgrades ...
Regards,
JS
John Smith
> ...
> At this point it would not cost a lot of money to make a dedicated DSP
> chip that would decode AM, DSBRC, and SSB at an IF of 445kHz. Possibly
> a brodcasters or radio manufacturer's association could get together and
> bankroll it.
>
> Geoff.
>
>
Might just be better to a "dual system." AM would have to go, but you
could run, say, USB analog and use the LSB for a digital carrier ...
people would yell, scream, pull their hair out, etc. ... but we did go
all digital TV and just ram it down the oppose'rs throats ... just look
at the tons of old analog TV's sitting around that you can't even get a
digital box to slap on now ... never say never, to anything ...
Regards,
JS
RHF
Hard to "Track" you with an old AM/FM/SW Radio
but they could easily 'ping' your location when
you use your Cellphone.
.
David Barts
> Hard to "Track" you with an old AM/FM/SW Radio
> but they could easily 'ping' your location when
> you use your Cellphone.
Quite so. It's why spy agencies still use numbers stations to
disseminate messages to their agents. It is also why this scenario:
> The Shortwave Radio Broadcasters have to see some
> ROI coming out of DRM; or they simply will move on
> to the Internet Radio & TV and Satellite Radio & TV
> as their main Technical Means to Their End of Reaching
> and Communicating with People All Around the World.
... probably won't come to pass in the immediate future (if at all).
It's too easy to track people using the Internet (or simply cut them
off). Satellites aren't there yet (who wants to pack a 60cm dish in
their luggage). When there is a good choice** of free to air* direct
broadcast satellites that are as easy and simple to receive as Sirius
currently is, then MAYBE shortwave will truly be obsolete. (Maybe. It
is technologically feasible to shoot missiles at satellites, after
all.)
Until then, a message that can be received on shortwave with poor
audio quality beats a message that cannot be received at all via
Internet or a satellite. Anyone who has bought into the DRM hype and
is ready to leave shortwave in a huff will eventually and to their
regret end up realizing this.
* Pay to view won't work; the same governments that don't want "their"
citizens listening to certain messages will threaten to cut off
payments from within their borders to foreign pay DBS satellite
services that fail to muzzle the messages they (such governments) find
offensive. The only way you can broadcast messages to areas where
governments don't want them heard is to give them away.
** Several dozen providers, both publicly and privately owned, with
ownership based in a wide range of nations, not all of who
ideologically see eye to eye. If the USA wants to cut off a certain
message, that message has to be able to go to a Venezuelan (or
Russian, or Chinese, or wherever) DBS satellite serving the same
target area. (Swap nation names as you see fit here; all examples are
equally valid.) Anything less than that standard means shortwave still
has a role to play.
--
David Barts
Portland, OR
RHF
wrote:
IIRC - SAT-PHONES CAN BE TRACKED TOO !
Most every Digital Communications Technology that
has a Receiver ID Chip can be Pinged and Tracked.
~ RHF
.
David Barts
> IIRC - SAT-PHONES CAN BE TRACKED TOO !
Satellite phones... yes. Direct-broadcast satellite radio... not so
easy.
> Most every Digital Communications Technology that
> has a Receiver ID Chip can be Pinged and Tracked.
It has to be more than just a receiver. It has to have transmit
capability as well. (Else it cannot transmit that ID.)
RHF
> On Oct 30, 6:53 pm, m...@privacy.net wrote:
>
>
>
> >RHF<rhf-newsgro...@pacbell.net> wrote:
> > >- The wife and I have our flatscreens in storage, we have no plans of
> > >- getting them out. If our shows are not available on the net, we
> > >don't
> > >- watch them.
>
> > I'm getting to that point as well..
>
> > shopping for a new flatscreen model
>
> > BUT.... I am thinking it might be best to buy a bigger
> > PC monitor for my desktop instead and watch THAT! That
> > is.... move desktop and big monitor in the living
> > room...
>
> > What you say?
>
>
> So... If you have an existing ISP and an 32" HDTVs...
>
> A Flat Screen PC Monitor around 24" would be
> at a Desk-Top PC. [a 2~3 Foot Viewing Distance]
>
> But most likely a 32" HDTV connected to PC that
> setting down in a room and viewing from across
> the room. [a 7~12 Foot Viewing Distance]
>
>
> The Bigger Samsung 320TSN-2 : 32" LCDTV/Monitorhttp://www.samsung.com/us/business/commercial-display-solutions/LH32T...
>
> We had some in-house Care Providers who were
> keen to Watch Video Content on their iPhone size
> and type Video Players -that-was-just-not-for-me-
> But then I don't like Listening to 'Tunes' on an iPod
> with Ear-Buds either : Give me two Loud Speakers
> across the Room and an Easy-Chair to set-in and
> relax to the Music too...
>
> mostly depends on the-how and the-where of
> you wanting to 'view' the "video content" ~RHF
> .
> .
What about the New Intel Smart TV ?
http://intelconsumerelectronics.com/Smart-TV/
Is it pretty much like the old MSN Web TV ?
http://www.techradar.com/news/world-of-tech/how-intel-plans-to-get-inside-your-tv-638742
.