5 ms·

Digital audio is also relatively expensive for some people. There are people who in my community who ride around on their bikes listening to fm radio. A monthly

Digital audio is also relatively expensive for some people. There are people who in my community who ride around on their bikes listening to fm radio. A monthly data fee could be hard for some.

dark-star 2y ago
I have never heard of DAB or DAB+ requiring monthly subscription fees? At least I don't pay any, and I have a DAB+ receiver in my car
- mikemitchelldev 2y ago
  Listening to DAB on a cellphone requires a monthly data plan.
  - arghwhat 2y ago
    You listen to DAB using a DAB radio like you listen to FM broadcasts with an FM radio. If you’re listening to something on your phone through a data plan, it’s not DAB, but an unrelated streaming service.
    - dylan604 2y ago
      Not having a radio receiver in a phone has always been one of those WTF things for me. There have been articles on why iOS doesn't have a radio tuner even those the receiver is there claiming because it would divert users from apple music or whatever. It's always felt like a missed opportunity to me though
      - devbent 2y ago
        Phones used to have fm receivers! It was common in the early 2010s. They used the headphone cord as an antenna.
        puetzk 2y ago
        Unihertz phones still do (even the tiny Jelly Star)
      - arghwhat 2y ago
        The main reason to not have it is that unless you’re out of cellular range or has no data quota left, it’s just worse than just streaming the same stations over the internet, which also offer more content as running FM stations is expensive. Even though older iPhone baseband chips had FM receivers, you’d still need break it out and deal with the antenna setup, with the approach taken by others requiring wired headset and shenanigans in the headphone port. That’s more BOM, and user resistance to wireless headphones or newer models whose baseband chips cut the feature. It used to be a somewhat common feature in phones (including smartphones from other brands), but it usually had quite “eh” reception. And with transitions to DAB, the feature becomes unusable without DAB decoders which I’m sure someone is claiming royalties for.
        vel0city 2y ago
        There's one place where I still bring my old cell phone to use the FM receiver part: sports events. It's nice getting the announcers live instead of on a broadcast delay + digital buffer. Through the internet it's usually several seconds behind the action but on the local low power FM broadcast it's practically zero latency.
  - throw0101b 2y ago
    > Listening to DAB on a cellphone requires a monthly data plan. Cellphones used to include AM/FM radios. Personally I think it might be useful to have them for public service uses: perhaps cell network are more robust than a few years ago, but there are still instances when they could be (are) overwhelmed, and a broadcast-only system could be useful in major emergency events.
    - conradfr 2y ago
      Hard to have an antenna with wireless headphones.
      - arghwhat 2y ago
        hard to have an efficient VHF antenna using traditional designs Smartphones a lot* of antennas, but most target 1/10th the wavelength of FM radio.
    - vel0city 2y ago
      Cell systems still have the ability to push out a message regardless of how "overwhelmed" the towers are. They'll just drop service to some customers while the higher priority emergency message is broadcasted out. A cell network doing a one-way broadcast text message to all clients is a solved problem. And honestly, I greatly prefer this way to push out an emergency message than assume I'm tuned to a radio station or broadcast TV, two things I'm rarely doing. I'm way more likely to be listening or watching local or streaming media instead of watching broadcast TV. Or even just not be doing any of that at all. Lots of people I know wouldn't even be able to tune into a broadcast TV or FM radio station outside of their cars.
mozman 2y ago
I wouldn’t mind if those people blasting FM radio used headphones. I don’t believe it’s because they can’t afford them.
- Y_Y 2y ago
  Not a good idea on a bike
  - recursive 2y ago
    I've heard this assertion many times. But after having ridden hundreds (thousands?) of hours wearing headphones, I must conclude that it's a perfectly fine idea. People believe headphones will obstruct your hearing. Some do. Some don't. Wear the ones that don't. It's also possible to set the volume to the same level that it would be from a set of handle-bar mounted speakers.
    - deleted 2y ago
      [deleted]

Digital audio is also relatively expensive for some people. There are people who in my community who ride around on their bikes listening to fm radio. A monthly data fee could be hard for some.

dark-star 2y ago

I have never heard of DAB or DAB+ requiring monthly subscription fees? At least I don't pay any, and I have a DAB+ receiver in my car

mikemitchelldev 2y ago
Listening to DAB on a cellphone requires a monthly data plan.
- arghwhat 2y ago
  You listen to DAB using a DAB radio like you listen to FM broadcasts with an FM radio. If you’re listening to something on your phone through a data plan, it’s not DAB, but an unrelated streaming service.
  - dylan604 2y ago
    Not having a radio receiver in a phone has always been one of those WTF things for me. There have been articles on why iOS doesn't have a radio tuner even those the receiver is there claiming because it would divert users from apple music or whatever. It's always felt like a missed opportunity to me though
    - devbent 2y ago
      Phones used to have fm receivers! It was common in the early 2010s. They used the headphone cord as an antenna.
      - puetzk 2y ago
        Unihertz phones still do (even the tiny Jelly Star)
    - arghwhat 2y ago
      The main reason to not have it is that unless you’re out of cellular range or has no data quota left, it’s just worse than just streaming the same stations over the internet, which also offer more content as running FM stations is expensive. Even though older iPhone baseband chips had FM receivers, you’d still need break it out and deal with the antenna setup, with the approach taken by others requiring wired headset and shenanigans in the headphone port. That’s more BOM, and user resistance to wireless headphones or newer models whose baseband chips cut the feature. It used to be a somewhat common feature in phones (including smartphones from other brands), but it usually had quite “eh” reception. And with transitions to DAB, the feature becomes unusable without DAB decoders which I’m sure someone is claiming royalties for.
      - vel0city 2y ago
        There's one place where I still bring my old cell phone to use the FM receiver part: sports events. It's nice getting the announcers live instead of on a broadcast delay + digital buffer. Through the internet it's usually several seconds behind the action but on the local low power FM broadcast it's practically zero latency.
- throw0101b 2y ago
  > Listening to DAB on a cellphone requires a monthly data plan. Cellphones used to include AM/FM radios. Personally I think it might be useful to have them for public service uses: perhaps cell network are more robust than a few years ago, but there are still instances when they could be (are) overwhelmed, and a broadcast-only system could be useful in major emergency events.
  - conradfr 2y ago
    Hard to have an antenna with wireless headphones.
    - arghwhat 2y ago
      hard to have an efficient VHF antenna using traditional designs Smartphones a lot* of antennas, but most target 1/10th the wavelength of FM radio.
  - vel0city 2y ago
    Cell systems still have the ability to push out a message regardless of how "overwhelmed" the towers are. They'll just drop service to some customers while the higher priority emergency message is broadcasted out. A cell network doing a one-way broadcast text message to all clients is a solved problem. And honestly, I greatly prefer this way to push out an emergency message than assume I'm tuned to a radio station or broadcast TV, two things I'm rarely doing. I'm way more likely to be listening or watching local or streaming media instead of watching broadcast TV. Or even just not be doing any of that at all. Lots of people I know wouldn't even be able to tune into a broadcast TV or FM radio station outside of their cars.

mozman 2y ago

I wouldn’t mind if those people blasting FM radio used headphones. I don’t believe it’s because they can’t afford them.

Y_Y 2y ago
Not a good idea on a bike
- recursive 2y ago
  I've heard this assertion many times. But after having ridden hundreds (thousands?) of hours wearing headphones, I must conclude that it's a perfectly fine idea. People believe headphones will obstruct your hearing. Some do. Some don't. Wear the ones that don't. It's also possible to set the volume to the same level that it would be from a set of handle-bar mounted speakers.
  - deleted 2y ago
    [deleted]