[BC] Re: IBOC in Trouble?

[Phil Alexander]

On 27 Jul 2005 at 18:25, Clay Freinwald wrote:

> Sorry guys....i just can't sit here and ignor all of this - here are
> some points to ponder 
>  
> 1. MSFT going after Ibiquity over their secret 'sauce recipe' is a bit
> hard to take.  Is this the same software outfit that was in court
> protecting its own secrets?

I've never fond of Micro$oft and don't use many of their products.
That said, Micro$oft didn't ask the government for their virtual
monopoly in a public medium. The created a whole new industry and
proceeded to dominate it.
  
> 2. Please - STOP - Tossing the AM and FM IBOC formula in the same pot. 
> They are just as different as are the bands they operate on.   Shotgun
> or poorly aimed critical comments only tend to diminish your own
> credibilty.   FM HD has 'some' issues, AM HD has some 'major'
> issues....

They are inextricably linked. If Ibiquity goes bankrupt it will affect
FM as much as AM. Secondly, unless the bands are treated equally, some
AM owners are sure to cry foul all the way to the Supreme Court.
Third, IBOC solves one set of problems (processing and multipath) for
FM, but is equally as important IMHO for AM where is solves the problems
of power line interference, restricted b/w, processing, lack of stereo
capability and (in the full digital mode) adjacent interference.

I could easily say multipath is no big deal because it isn't in this
part of the country. I won't say that because I know the problems 
you have and appreciate what it does for you. However, consider at
the same time, I live in an area where some power line problems are
so bad you can't hear a 50 kW AM 20 miles away in some spots.

> 3. As a fellow thats been in this business for a while (44 years) I've
> been around just a few blocks.   I've watched Radio broadcasting come a
> long way and have waited for the time that I could actually drive down
> the road and listen to classical music...and I now can.    I wished I
> could replay all the comments I heard, back-when, when FM was just
> getting started.   Too bad many of you were not around then as History
> teaches us something very important....99% of the arguments are
> recycled.

VERY true. One part of that is what hasn't been mentioned. Remember
the old Pilot tuner for FM?  Tune your am to a spot on the dial,
turn on your Pilot tuner and FM came loud and clear from your AM
radio.  A few years later Sarkes-Tarzian started building a $19.95
(retail) table model FM only that made a great kitchen radio.
>  
> 4. Funny how humans are always PO'd at those that get there first with
> anything.....the same reasoning is behind the resentment of MSFT or
> Ibiquity or Boeing or RCA or Major Armstrong etc etc.   This is nothing
> new.  History is FULL of this kind of resentment.  

AFAIK RCA never got there first with anything, but like Caterpillar, they
always built the most, biggest and best in the end, and dominated the
market as a result. The history of our business is littered with names
like Armstrong, CBS and Sony. 

> 5. For many years we have been clammering for a Digital Radio
> system...now we have it, now we bitch...Hmmmm.   Are we like dogs that
> chase cars and can't figure out what to do with one when we catch it?

I wish everyone would acknowledge the fact that IBOC is a transitional
step on the way to full digital operation. The years go by quickly,
and the IBOC kid will grow up over night into a fully matured fully
digital service. Then, the problems will be resolved.

> 6. Here in Seattle we now have 13 HD FM's and more on the way (and a
> couple multicasting).  We also have terrible terrain (worse than San
> Francisco i'm told).  I invite anyone to come here and choose a few FM's
> without HD and those with....Drive around a while...and compare.   You
> too will become believers, just as I have.   I've been listening and
> comparing HD to Analog FM for a year now in my vehicle - Have you? 

I have to buy my own so I'm waiting for mass production and a reasonable
price.  

> 7. Could all of this have been done better?   Sure !   Tell me what
> could not have been improved upon.   Who would not like to do something
> over.   Folks its time to let the dust settle and move on.  Hind sight
> is great, but looking backward makes moving forward difficult.

On that point, Clay, I could not agree with you more. :)

I also believe that whatever was done, virtually the same controversy
would have arisen around it. Fighting change is human nature because
most people see a glass half EMPTY, especially in our business
because we are conditioned to prevent problems that are an inherent
part of change.


Phil Alexander, CSRE, AMD
Broadcast Engineering Services and Technology 
(a Div. of Advanced Parts Corporation) 
Ph. (317) 335-2065   FAX (317) 335-9037





-- 
No virus found in this outgoing message.
Checked by AVG Anti-Virus.
Version: 7.0.338 / Virus Database: 267.9.5/58 - Release Date: 7/25/05