Reader Comments (rss)

(Flattened / Threaded)

1.  

   Well...

   

   Michael Armstrong, Jan 7th, 2002 @ 3:13am

   
   

   the last 30 years have proven that people are willing to pay $30 or more to make the selection on their TV dial "better."

   In a way, this isn't much different.

   -- That is all.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

2.  

   I'll Probably Pay

   

   Brian, Jan 7th, 2002 @ 4:51am

   
   

   Radio sucks so much in the Detroit market now that I am strongly considering satellite radio.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

3.  

   No Subject Given

   

   Anonymous Coward, Jan 7th, 2002 @ 6:00am

   
   

   I am going to buy one in the next few days.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

4.  

   the FCC created terrestrial retrograde radio...

   

   Anonymous Coward, Jan 7th, 2002 @ 8:09am

   
   

   ...now let the skank media mogel whores learn their lesson.
   
   It's simply too bad that satellite radio isn't global and free.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

5.  

   Yes! It's worth it!

   

   bm, Jan 7th, 2002 @ 8:11am

   
   

   To finally get rid of the idiots 'in the morning' and ditch the commercials. I'd gladly pay $10/mo.
   
   bm

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

6.  

   but that's not all....

   

   mhh5, Jan 7th, 2002 @ 8:45am

   
   

   you also have to buy somewhat expensive hardware, and the subscription only goes for exactly one receiver...
   
   I'd rather just become a KQED member....

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

7.  

   Re: Well...

   

   Mike (profile), Jan 7th, 2002 @ 8:58am

   
   

   I actually think this is quite different than cable TV. TV is something that people plan their lives around... and it's something they do in their homes and sit around. Radio isn't like that any more. Most people listen to radio in the car on their way to and from work. It's something they do to pass the time while they're driving... they don't (generally) plan their lives around what's on the radio. However, people will get cable TV so they don't miss a certain show. So, I'm not sure the comparison is valid.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

8.  

   Re: Yes! It's worth it!

   

   bubba, Jan 7th, 2002 @ 11:24am

   
   

   > get rid of the idiots 'in the morning' and ditch the commercials. I'd pay $10/mo.< /B>
   Ditto that. As for becoming a KQED member, how the hell are you going to listen to KQED in Bozeman, MT or Bumfuck, AR? Satellite isn't for you punks in the Bay Area, it's for the poor schmoes out in the boonies and those cities who have 9 Clear Channel stations to "choose" from.
   Sirius is the one if you don't want commercials, but I don't know if they can oout-hype XM.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

9.  

   events on the near horizon...

   

   Anonymous Coward, Jan 7th, 2002 @ 2:03pm

   
   

   ...anyone want to netcast one of the "channels" so we can get a feel for what the "programming" is like?
   
   Also, how long before someone hacks the hardware and/or encryption?
   
   ...as for terresterial radio and all those bullshit "morning zoo" personalities (including HS) that are cooked up in a corporate script factory and sound room only to be uploaded to a lights-out repeater miniutes before broadcast... fsckem' hard, with a stick... they deserve to die a slow, protracted, highly painfull death only to be occasionally brought back to life with blood transfusions and a defiburlator for more punishment.

   [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]

10.  

    Re: events on the near horizon...

    

    ScooterBoy, Jan 7th, 2002 @ 6:07pm

    
    

    You can listen to Sirius Radio on their website.. they just launched this today..

    [ reply to this | link to this | view in thread ]