Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Satellite Radio - XM vs. Sirius?

Posted by Cliff on Tue Jun 11, 2002 01:22 PM
from the decisions-decisions dept.
wizman asks: "I am getting a new car tonight and will be upgrading the audio system. Now that satellite radio is available in most markets and becoming more affordable, I am definitely planning to take the plunge. Unfortunately, the 2 providers -- XM and Sirius -- both seem to have just as many strengths as weaknesses. There is a three dollar price difference, which is really not a concern for me."

"So far I have gathered that XM seems to have better audio quality, and a larger selection of music channels. Sirius has less music channels, but more "commercial free" music channels and more talk channels. Also, it scares me that Clear Channel has a stake in XM -- does this mean XM will eventually turn to utter crap like every Clear Channel station seems to have? Does Clear Channel have enough ownership to have a say in programming?

I'm looking for more strengths and weaknesses from people who have used one (or better yet, both!) of the services. I'm leaning towards XM right now, with the Clear Channel issue being my main fright. Sirius streams their stations online, giving me a good sample. So far I have been fairly impressed. But, I like the fact that XM carries Art Bell, more than one 80's station, and VH1 content. It's a toss up, so I'm looking forward to some info from the Slashdot community."

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Satellite Radio - XM vs. Sirius? | Log In/Create an Account | Top | 498 comments (Spill at 50!) | Index Only | Search Discussion
Display Options Threshold:
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
(1) | 2
  • Ads by flyingwolenza (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:25PM
  • In Car MP3 Player Still seems like the best bet by hooded1 (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:25PM
  • also check by jglow (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:26PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • i've heard of XM by Karma Star (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:27PM
  • Local stations? by Reverend Raven (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:29PM
  • Sirius is going the way of the Dodo by Dr. Bent (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:30PM
  • Pirate Radio by LinuxCumShot (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:31PM
  • Sirius vs. XM (Score:5, Insightful)

    by peterdaly (123554) <petedaly@ix.netcom . c om> on Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:32PM (#3680828) Homepage
    I am not in the market for one of these right now, but if I were, it would be a hard decision. Based on the business models and actions of the two companies, I would prefer to be giving my monthly usage fee to Sirius. I don't like the XM's idea of almost no, if any commercial free stations. They seem too money hungry. For example, they only have two satalites up there. Sirius has three, which offers them some redundancy if one craps out on them.

    Sirius to me seems to be the more professional of the two, where XM seem to be the "Clear Channels version" of the two. That is how I have always thought of them, which is interesting since this is my first finding out Clear Channels is a part owner.

    I wouldn't give my money to XM if I have a viable choice. Remember, XM has had a head start as well, give Sirius a little time to get underway, then we can do a more fair comparison.

    -Pete
    • Re:Sirius vs. XM by Computer! (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:37PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Sirius vs. XM (Score:4, Informative)

      by iiii (541004) on Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:59PM (#3681070) Homepage
      The three to two satellite comparison is not a fair comparison. XM's satellites are in geo-stationary orbit, i.e. the stay over the same spot on the earth, whereas Sirius has three birds in lower orbits in a pattern that they say keeps N. America covered.

      The two approaches have different plusses and minuses. With the geo-stationary birds, if you get a good signal in your driveway right now, you will most likely always get the same good signal there, while with the lower orbit birds the signal strength may cycle with position of the satellite. On the other hand, the lower orbit sats are much closer, and so might be able to get a stronger signal to you.

      Neither approach has redundancy, as they need all their satellites for complete coverage. If one went down XM would have permanent dead zones, Sirius would have wandering dead zones. Take your pick.

      XM's satellite info page [xmradio.com]
      Sirius' fairly lame "how it works" (PDF) [onlinepresskits.com]

      [ Parent ]
    • About the satelites (Score:5, Informative)

      by nadador (3747) on Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:01PM (#3681085)
      XM's two satelites are in geostationary orbit, one towards the East coast, one towards the West. You have line of site to both of the all the time (well, probably). The only issue here is that since they're geostationary over the equator, that angle gets a little iffy in places like Seattle, where the satelites are always low on the horizon, and thus more easily blocked by buildings, CowboyNeal, etc. This, however, makes it easy to set up ground based repeaters because you can point the ground repeaters at a satelite and leave them alone.

      Sirius' three satelites are in elliptical orbits, and two of the three are over the continental US at all times. The orbits make the angles better (less likely to be blocked by building because the satelite is more likely to be overhead, even in Seattle), but makes doing ground based repeaters hella hard. Sirius rents bandwidth on K-band IIRC to beam signal to the ground based repeaters, which is more expensive and more complicated, but works nonetheless.

      That third satelite doesn't do much for reliability. If you lose it, you're going to have areas of the country not getting signal for a good portion of the day, which isn't much better than having portions of the country not getting signal most of the day in the case of XM.

      And as far as being money hungry, IIRC these are both publicly traded companies with corporate partners. They both want to make money, and neither of them has your best interests at heart no matter how good their marketspeak is. There is no good guy here. You can morally oppose Clear Channel, and XM by extension. Go ahead. Just remember that its your opinion, and you'll be fine.
      [ Parent ]
    • Re:Sirius vs. XM by Kajota (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:08PM
    • Re:Sirius vs. XM by limboman (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:15PM
    • Re:Sirius vs. XM by putzin (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:32PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Sirius vs. XM by Jethro (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:59PM
    • Going with Sirius, Myself by ackthpt (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @03:27PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Sirius vs. XM by piecewise (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @03:45PM
    • Re:Sirius vs. XM by damiam (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @05:27PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Sirius vs. XM by mosch (Score:3) Tuesday June 11 2002, @10:26PM
    • 3 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • Happy with XM (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Wyatt Earp (1029) on Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:35PM (#3680849) Homepage
    I've had XM in my Chevy C/K-1500 for about three months now and I've been very happy with it. If you listen to the radio a lot, or travel a lot in the car, or live in the boondocks, I would recommend XM Radio. Here are the basics; you need a deck that is XM ready, or a system that has an adapter, an antenna, and a receiver. The receiver is a boring box that goes somewhere out of sight in my case, the antenna is small and went on the roof, and the deck replaced my old crappy Delco built in 1987. The quality of the programming can't be beat, and it is very high quality sound. What I have preset on my deck. 10 [xmradio.com] 40 [xmradio.com] 41 [xmradio.com] 42 [xmradio.com] 44 [xmradio.com] 65 [xmradio.com] The guts of the system My CD Player [pioneerelectronics.com] My Satellite Receiver [pioneerelectronics.com] My Antenna [terk.com] XM Radio [xmradio.com] Rock and Roll [hughespace.com] Very happy with the service and the programming.
  • Err, how bout a real upgrade. by diablo6683 (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:35PM
  • I have a question... by taliver (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:36PM
  • I use XM (Score:5, Interesting)

    by isa-kuruption (317695) <kuruptionNO@SPAMkuruption.net> on Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:37PM (#3680862) Homepage
    I didn't like Sirius... for whatever reason I don't remember.

    The stake of Clear Channel in XM has very little to do with it. XM is mostly managed by GM and subsidiaries (like Hughes, aka DirecTV). The reason Clear Channel is involved is provide some of their local stations (like LA Kiss FM) onto the XM radio waves, however there are only 4-5 of these out of 100 channels.

    There are also about 30 different "talk", but not your normal talk. You can get CNN, MSNBC, Weather channel, ESPN, CNN-SI, and various other "news" stations and the such. Basically, CNN Is just a stream of CNN Headline News, but it's nice to keep up on the news if need be.

    Heck, XM even has Bluegrass if yer into it ;)

    And to be honest, XM does cut out like if you get stopped under a bridge, it takes a second to find it's way around or if you pass in between a couple big trucks. Basically, if your antenna gets blocked by any metal objects, it'll go out for a couple seconds until it switches to the other satelite.

  • Only room for one (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Skyshadow (508) on Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:38PM (#3680868) Homepage
    This is like VHS vs. Betamax -- there's probably only room for one company in the market. Like the aforementioned VCR competition, this also probably won't be won on technical merits.

    Consider the following: Which does more advertising? Who has more unit production? Basically, which has greater (cringe) mindshare? Of course, if you're willing to deal with a failing company and face buying a new head unit in a couple of years, be my guest.

    Also, don't forget the rest of your sound system. Decide what you need and buy accordingly -- you almost certainly need a decent pair of componant speakers for the front and probably new, high-quality speakers in the back, not to mentioned the amps to drive them. You should also seriously consider a sub if you listen to hard rock, heavy metal or rap (among others). I have a pair of 10" subs in my trunk (largest that will easily fit in a tiny Mustang trunk) that are set up to be easily removed -- unplug the power and signal and pull 'em out if you need space for luggage or cargo.

    Anyhow, don't just upgrade the head unit and go with your crappy stock sound system.
  • why why why why why? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Schlemphfer (556732) on Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:38PM (#3680874) Homepage

    It seems to me that before you take the plunge and get one of these things, your first priority should be figuring out, not the feature set, but if either company is likely to survive. Both XM [yahoo.com] and Sirius [yahoo.com] are gushing money (both lost over five bucks per share last quarter.)

    What a drag it would be to spend 500+ dollars to install a system into your car's dashboard, and then have to rip it out in a couple years if the company goes belly up. At their current burn rate, I'd be willing to bet that at least one of the two companies will fail.

    Plus, keep in mind that once you install one of these systems, you are going to be held hostage to any rate increases down the road (pun not intended.)

    I personally think these companies took off during the go-go optimism of two years ago. For the money you'd spend on one of these things, you could get one of those hundred-CD units that goes into your trunk, and never worry about the company going belly-up.

  • Business health (Score:5, Insightful)

    by pos (59949) on Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:38PM (#3680875)
    Rather than looking at the technology or costs, why not look into the business health of each company. I think if you are going to be making an investment, youwant to be picking the one that is going to have staying power.

    The Motly Fool recently shorted sirius [fool.com] believing their company to be overvalued. (That is not to say that their company will fail, stock price doesn't necessarily equate business health) The fool has quite a bit of discussion on each company.

    It's a an important perspective.

    -pos
  • how about quality music? by joe_bruin (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:39PM
  • I'd go with XM (Score:3, Interesting)

    by brogdon (65526) on Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:39PM (#3680889) Homepage
    I've looked at both, as I really want to get one of their services in my next car. I'll be going with XM when I do. The main reason is the programming differences between them. For one, XM has a person in charge of each "channel". That's a lot of individual attention to the quality of the music they put on the air. For another, there are two channels on XM that are aprticularly interesting to me a) Deep Tracks [xmradio.com], which goes back to classic albums and picks out songs from them that were never released as singles (so you get to hear a ton of good stuff you'd ordinarily never know about) and b) Unsigned [xmradio.com], which is made up entirely of bands that have not yet signed with a label. YMMV, but those reasons make XM a better choice for me
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • programlists by fredan (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:40PM
  • XM user by mknapp905 (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:40PM
  • Sat radio is dumb! by Rantastic (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:40PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:41PM (#3680911)
    Doesn't it bother you that you are considering giving *money* to a service to provide you with music and radio programs--services which have been provided free of charge under the advertisement funded system in the United States since very early on in radio technological history?

    Sure, you get more channels, but how many do you really listen to? How many of the channels are really worthwhile--and how many are the audio equivalent of the "Knitting" channel on cable?

    Yet another "Low Low Monthly Fee" to keep you chained to your position in the U.S. Economy. God forbid you have freedom.

    Yet another free resource you now pay for. What's next, charge-per-page to read at the local public library?

    Save your dollars, put them into retirement investments or CD's (the bank kind, not Limp Bizkit). Try making your self rich instead of the media giants for a change.
  • costing by paradesign (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:41PM
    • Re:costing by geekoid (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:34PM
  • Strength of Network (Score:3, Informative)

    by TibbonZero (571809) <Tibbon@@@gmail...com> on Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:41PM (#3680915) Homepage Journal
    We have ALL seen how quickly networks that aren't at the top can fall over. The network is only as strong as its customer base.

    XM has a strong ad campaign, has been out longer, is cheaper (10 a month vs 12.99? I think..), more people have heard of XM, and if I am going to as a production company go with one of the Satilite Radio networks, I am going to go with XM, because more people are going to use it.

    In addition, I believe that XM has deals with some major car companies, to install XM radios on many of their cars, and some are prepaying to subscription fee (which in the scope of a car purchase isn't that much really). XM has better numbers (their stock that is). They only needed 60,000 users to break even i think, but they will have over a half million i think by the end of the year.

    I might be wrong on a few of those facts, but I think I am right on most of them. Overall XM seems to be better (and my XM stock has performed alot better, I wouldn't touch Sirus at all, except to short it!)

    Overall, check their stock news, etc.... its got some great info. You don't want a receiver that in one a year will be nothing more than a Busted Tech company reminder (think of BS Zelda on Nintendo, 300 dollars, and it didn't last more than 3 weeks...)

  • Clear Channel by frovingslosh (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:42PM
  • Satellite radio is cool, but has problems by tuxlove (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:43PM
  • Insensitive Ask'er (Score:5, Funny)

    by rjamestaylor (117847) <rjamestaylor@gmail.com> on Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:43PM (#3680933) Homepage Journal
    How DARE you ask such an insensitive question in a time when the tech industry is in a slump and quality software engineers are begging in the streets after valiantly struggling in the dotCom wars of the late 1990's. You taunt us with the news of buying a new car and then insult us by needing help with your "delimma" as to which paid audio delivery service to choose to upgrade a perfectly fine AM/FM/Cassette player.

    This is a News for Nerds site, and Nerds everywhere are hurting, ravaged by the downturn in tech stocks and reduced spending by speculative investors everywhere. Instead we need articles on the proper techniques for dumpster diving and living on the "Second Harvest." That's the Stuff that Matters right now.

    (jj)

  • Commercial by fsterman (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:44PM
    • Re:Commercial by rjamestaylor (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:59PM
      • Re:Commercial by realgone (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:38PM
        • Re:Commercial by rjamestaylor (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @05:05PM
          • Re:Commercial by realgone (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @07:40PM
      • Re:Commercial by bluGill (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @04:51PM
      • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
    • Re:Commercial by Paul Neubauer (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @03:42PM
    • 5 replies beneath your current threshold.
  • XM Audio is BAD news by Anonymous Coward (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:44PM
  • One of many informative articles on the subject by DocJohn (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:44PM
  • I've had XM since November by GutenTag (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:48PM
  • I've had XM for a couple of months... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by nadador (3747) on Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:48PM (#3680981)
    and I love it. I still use the minidisc player in my car, but I'd say at least 75% of the time I listen to XM. I can't really talk about Sirius because I don't have it in my car, but I am very pleased with my XM service.

    A couple of things to think about:

    1. Commercial free - not as important as I would have thought. Yes, lots of channels have commericials. I thought that breaking up the music like that would have annoyed me, but it didn't. I either listen to the commercial, or change the channel, just like TV. Don't be afraid of XM because it has more commercials.

    2. If you're afraid of Clear Channel, don't listen to "20 on 20" or KISS-FM from LA. I doubt that Clear Channel is going to mandate a Britney Spears quota on XMU, Liquid Metal, or Unsigned, for example. And some of the corporate content is worth listening to. CNN en Espanol, ESPN Radio, Fox Sports Radio, Sporting News Network, and NASCAR Radio are all on my rotation. How can you not want 24 hour coverage of NASCAR? (Wait, don't answer that. I know I'm a redneck. Get over it.)

    3. Don't worry too much about audio quality. Just as high bit rate MP3s still sound like MP3s, satelite radio is going to sound like satelite radio. I would say that the sound quality is generally more consistent than the FM stations around here, and richer than the AM stations, but its not like a CD or MD. I don't notice many digital artifacts on the music stations, and even less on the talk stations (although the bumper music for ESPN Radio's Sportcenter sounds pretty nasty, but that's not a deal breaker for me), but I do notice them. And music that was recorded with too much bass then mixed with too much bass will never sound bass-y enough, no matter how much I play with my equalizer. But the variety of options available makes up for any percieved shortcomings in the audio quality.

    4. XM Comedy is worth 10 bucks a month all by itself.

    Just my two cents.

  • or DAB? by gregbaker (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:49PM
    • Re:or DAB? by Andy Dodd (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @03:28PM
  • They both kinda suck by billcopc (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:49PM
  • User Interface Issues by Alien54 (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:49PM
  • Read this (Score:3, Interesting)

    by techstar25 (556988) <techstar25&cfl,rr,com> on Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:50PM (#3680997) Homepage Journal
    Here on slashdot a while back there was an interview [slashdot.org] posted with the founder of fightcloud.com, who had some interesting things to say about XM vs Sirius. Sure, it's just one's guys opinion, but he seems to have done his homework. Here were his quotes from the interview: [lot49.com]

    Q: Is the Net going to change radio at all do you think?

    A: No, not yet. Not for a long time [because of the legal issues]. Greed is choking the Internet right now. It's definitely territorial. . . . The artists are greedy, they want their cut off the Internet, the record labels are greedy . . . . Everybody is so greedy that nobody can work on the Internet so there is going to be no radio on the Net, not even Internet radio stations. They all are going to start playing more independent. It's going to favor the independent artist; the unsigned artist really is who people are turning to because the unsigned artist isn't going to sue anybody.

    They want the exposure, so is the Internet going to change anything for a while? No. There are so many court battles that need to be fought that haven't even been thought of yet. The only Internet radio I like listening to is Christian pirate radio. It's aggressive, it's all new bands that nobody ever heard of. Its great rock, great pop.

    Another prediction is the success of satellite radio. The satellite radio companies that I invested in like two years ago are going to come sneaking up and they're just going to level local radio. Local radio will go under. . . . I'll pay $10 for commercial-free guaranteed. You start doing that and what is your local sponsors going to be saying? Why should I advertise on your radio when they're not even listening to you? They're listening to satellites, commercial-free; they're paying $10. When those numbers go up, so [does] XM Satellite Radio stock value, which Clear Channel has its fingers in. They own a big chunk of XM because they know better.

    Q: Is that something that you're invested in as well?

    A: Oh yes. Yes, I invested in it as soon as I heard about it. . . . When satellite radio kicks . . . there's going to be no more syndication. You put a talent like Howard Stern in the XM building and boom, he's syndicated instantly. All satellite shows are considered instant syndication. It's going to be like having cable TV in your car.

    You're going to have so many selections. A&E has its own channel; Home Shopping Network probably has its own channel. There are 50 channels of music and 50 channels of news and entertainment. They're going to be able to fine-tune exactly what you want. If I want to listen to Hollywood gossip there's going to be one channel just for Hollywood news. If I want to just hear about the planet, there might be a Nova channel. Local radio is nowhere near that level. I don't know if you spend much time in Los Angeles, but we have some of the worst radio in the United States. . . . XM and Sirius are going to be really good if they play their cards right and Clear Channel is very smart for being apart of that.

    Q: Do you see XM as the winner, as opposed to Sirius?

    A: Yes and two reasons. Sirius had a lead when they first started with Cosby backing them and they were at the top of Rockefeller Center and they had three satellites instead of XM's two. The tables turned when Sirius wasn't ready to launch on schedule. The car dealers weren't ready for them and Sirius announced they had to up their rates past $10 before they even launched. XM launched before them and XM now is running commercials full time and XM has the lead. If you look at their stock, Sirius is at $5 a share and XM is at twice that. There's an interesting battle going on; XM would love to beat out Sirius before they can even get off the ground. You always see the David Bowie falling through the roof or B.B. King falling through the roof, those commercials. They're going hard. I see it being a huge thing; I see it being in every car and every radio in the next three years.
  • Satellite? Pheh! by Rob Parkhill (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:50PM
  • LOS concerns by SanLouBlues (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:50PM
  • hmmm by Nept (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:51PM
  • The real problem by rabtech (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:53PM
  • Using XM in the NH/MA area by ahrenritter (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:54PM
  • Whatever you do.. by coronaride (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:55PM
  • by coloradorange (580344) on Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:56PM (#3681045) Homepage
    I've been watching the Satellite Radio market for the past 5 years business-wise, and I've chosen Sirius Radio.

    Top 5 Reasons:

    1) No commercials.
    2) 3 Satellites
    3) Just released the PAC v4 Audio Codec; derived from a series of unique technologies that include the latest generation of psychoacoustic modeling, based on a deeper understanding of hearing physiology. This new coded beats XM's previous audio comparison hands-down. (http://biz.yahoo.com/prnews/020610/nym024_1.html)
    4) NPR.
    5) Sirius has the business advantage of being the second on the market. They can learn from XM's mistakes without making a fool out of themselves.
    5a) The cool little dog logo.
  • I chose XM by cborn (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:57PM
    • Re:I chose XM by demi (Score:1) Wednesday June 12 2002, @02:38AM
      • Re:"hills" by RicR (Score:1) Friday June 21 2002, @12:35PM
  • I own an XM Radio (Score:3, Informative)

    by Trajan's Horse (543334) <(moc.liamtoh) (ta) (oedsual)> on Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:59PM (#3681068)
    and I haven't bought a new CD or touched MP3s in three months.

    It's that good. Where to start....

    1. Content: Excellent. The 6 or 7 rock channels are superb and all are commercial free. I start my day out with Fred, Channel 44, and listen to a little alternative music. Move over to Unsigned, channel 51 and listen to the new bands that are up and coming. Some really good stuff there. Decide I want to make the commute a little better, so I flip over to CHannel 160, Comedy XL and enjoy some of the stand up bits they play constantly from people like Margaret Cho, Chris Rock, Denis Leary, and a whole bunch of other talented, dirty comedians. Next switch is to BBC World Service, then onto Discovery Radio News where I listen to a bit about the Endeavour Mission to the Space shuttle.

    Memorial Day Weekend: XM Special channel 30 plays surf music all weekend long to kick off the start of the summer. Excellent!

    I can literally listen to more music than I could possibly have in my car in the form of $15 CDs with 12 songs on them. Bluegrass, country, the best of the 70s, Classic rock,Opera, Broadway shows, they even had a John Williams special on the Show-Tunes channel and I was driving down the road listening to the Vader Theme from Star Wars. They also had Blues Traveller perform live, interviewed Mic Jagger once, and many others.

    Talk- Great selection. Phil Hendrie, the funniest man in radio is on in the afternoon on 166, The Buzz.

    2. Audio Quality and clarity- Excellent for the most part. I'd say the sound quality is just below that of a CD, but I have the Sony plug and play unit that interfaces into my cassette player in my car. I didn't want to get a new head unit. It sounds excellent at home plugged into my receiver. The sony unit also has a USB connection on the back for future connectivity with a PC, I assume.

    I live in Los Angeles, and in some parts of the City, the signal will go uninterrupted even under bridges. I was under the impression they didn't have the audio repeaters up yet (due to fights with the Cell phone companies and the NAB), but in some areas of LA you can be in a deep dark tunnel and still hear your radio. In the suburbs, however, a bridge will temporarily knock out your reception.

    Sirius isn't even nation-wide yet. They don't anticipate a full launch until August. As far as Clear Channel investing in XM, it's not a worry. XM is selling a service. XM is the new HBO of Radio and they are not going to screw it up. It's their business model to say they are different from FM, Clear Channel is just providing content, especially the talk shows. And BTW, Sirius is also being invested in by Infinity/CBS, another major radio player.

    As far as advertising, on the talk channels you may have up to 20 minutes per hour, but on XM content music channels, you won't find more than 6 minutes per hour, and there are 30 commercial free channels.

    GO with XM. You will not regret it, I promise you. The variety of the content is just remarkable, you will want to drive around more or bring the unit into your house just to explore. This is the future fellas, I was skeptical at first, but now I don't want to be without it.
  • XM vs. Sirius by Kaldon (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:00PM
  • Careful! by envisionary (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:00PM
  • Content is the key by ethaz (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:01PM
  • Go commercial free !! by matsh (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:02PM
  • From a marketing standpoint by Seawolf359 (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:05PM
  • watch what you buy. (Score:4, Informative)

    by Lumpy (12016) on Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:05PM (#3681122) Homepage
    Unless you want to lose the use of the integration features on most new cars (My Aztek has the radio that integrates with the HUD, the speedometer to adjust volume the faster you go, alarm integration, user integration (radio presets and all other settings including EQ along with seat position and mirror position change depending what key is used to start the vehilce/keyfob used to open the doors) or my steering wheel controls.

    There is nothing on the market that has XM capability (or any aftermarket for that matter) that can integrate with today's advanced vehicular computer systems. getting XM and losing all that is not a worthwile trade off. and the XM tuner is a pure joke.. the reason for XM radio is for CD quality, not to listen to really crappily modulated FM (as the modulators are of the crappiest quality.)

    Pay really close attention, if you buy a cheapie car that has no systems integration then you are set, but most any modern car with luxury options cannot have the radio replaced without losing a ton of features.
  • Which one gets Bob & Tom first? by swfranklin (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:16PM
  • A credible opinion by Adam9 (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:17PM
  • XM Radio (Score:3, Informative)

    by Tadrith (557354) on Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:17PM (#3681202) Homepage
    I'm seeing a lot of people concerned with the head units in regards to XM radio, and this is somewhat baffling. I have XM radio installed, and some of the questions here seem irrelevant.

    The XM radio has three separate components. You have the antenna, which attaches to the top of the vehicle, then you have the decoder which decodes the satellite signal. Finally, you need some sort of receiver, like an XM compatible head unit. XM radio can also be installed by putting an FM modulator in, requiring no replacement of the head unit. You also have the option of purchasing an XM compatible head unit, however. This is nice because everything is all in one unit, but if this isn't possible, you get a small square control device for it.

    It's also important to remember that if you have a Pioneer head unit that's XM compatible, you *have* to have a Pioneer decoder. A friend of mine has a Sony XM compatible head unit, and he's still waiting for Sony's decoder to come out. As far as I know, Pioneer is the only one that has a complete decoder/modulator combination in place.

    As far as Sirius goes, I've never heard of it, and I've never seen any head units supporting it. Sounds like a bad idea, to me. Overall, I spent about 300 for the install/setup, and it's 10 bucks a month.
  • by Dr. Ion (169741) on Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:20PM (#3681218)
    I went with XM Radio, and a Sony XM01 receiver. Most audio comparisons between the two favor XM's sound quality over Sirius. I haven't listened to Sirius, so I can't comment on the channel lineup, but they seemed pretty similar in terms of no-commercial channels and breadth.

    Choose your receiver carefully. Don't let them sell you an "FM Modulator" -- hardwire your receiver to get all that sound quality you pay for. After all, an FM Modulator can only sound as good as FM.

    The Sony receiver is nice, and I like that it is removable. However, it has some drawbacks. The blue-backlit screen is terribly blurry and hard to read, especially at a quick you-should-be-driving glance. It only has five presets, which is fewer than I would like on a lineup of 100 channels.

    The XM programming so far has been terrific. No complaints there. Ethel rocks.

    For all those hosers and thread-crappers saying "Get an MP3 player", "Get a CD Changer", you miss the point! I'm tired of listening to the same CDs I've heard before. Where do you go to hear something new? Your own CD collection? Your own MP3s? I go to the radio, and XM Radio beats FM.
  • XM vs Sirius by Anonymous Coward (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:27PM
  • Another Option... by huckda (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:27PM
  • Motorweek has an story about this subject at... by 8127972 (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:29PM
  • Most people already pay to have commercials... by pnutjam (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:30PM
  • C-SPAN Radio by kriston (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:33PM
  • Same problem with satellite radio as terrestrial.. by sterno (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:35PM
  • This is no toss-up. by j1mmy (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:43PM
  • XM has satellite problems (Score:5, Informative)

    by mikethegeek (257172) <blair AT NOwcmifm DOT comSPAM> on Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:46PM (#3681377) Homepage
    Don't forget that XM has defective Boeing satellites, ones that have rapid degeneration of the solar array.

    http://dc.internet.com/news/article.php/2101_893 71 1

    I've read that in as little as 2-3 years they will have to start shutting down channels. And I can't see them being able to replace the satellites so soon.

    Cash wise, Sirius has more money available, while XM has been close to going broke for the past year.

    XM's ties to Clear Channel also bother me. CC has ruined local radio in many a market, mine included.

    For $2 more a month, Sirius has NO commercials at all on ANY of the music channels. THAT, to me, is worth it, and the ONLY reason why I'd go with one of these.

    Isn't the whole point of getting one of these things to get greater diversity of programming, and get away from having penis enhancment and hair restoration snake oil, plus annoying car dealer ads blasted at you for 6-10 minutes at a time between song sets?

    I don't like the idea of paying for music radio, that I can get for "free", when it's also going to have ads. And given XM's financial condition (and ties to Clear Channel) there is no guarantee that the length of the stopsets won't increase to resemble typical commercial FM radio.
  • National Public Radio (Score:3, Insightful)

    by rwa2 (4391) on Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:47PM (#3681384) Homepage Journal
    NPR is only available on Sirius as far as I know (I could be wrong... check the XM listing!). I would rather go for XM since the $3/mo. /is/ significant to me, and I work for Boeing, which built the XM sats (or at least acquired them from Hughes), and I live near DC where the XM studios are. But I really don't think I would be able to get by without Car Talk and Prarie Home Companion and My Word and even the annoying Peter Chichle (sp!) is endearing.
  • Jon Katz response to this is ... by shawnmelliott (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:53PM
  • More channels, more disappointments by evilninja (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:56PM
  • I'd say hold off by SethJohnson (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:58PM
  • Streams unavailable by jmorris42 (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @03:06PM
  • 100 channels and nothing is on by Daetrin (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @03:10PM
  • Sirius is excellent (Score:3, Informative)

    by SmackDown (246562) on Tuesday June 11 2002, @03:14PM (#3681574)
    I have Sirius through my Kenwood head unit. The sound quality on the talk and news channels was somewhat strange to begin with, but either Sirius has upped the data rate on some of their stations, or I'm just getting used to it, because I can't tell the difference in sonic quality between Sirius and a good FM station any more. The only channels that seemed to have weird artifacts were the talk channels, anyways. I'd assume they had those set to low data rates to begin with, because they thought they could get away with it, but people complained so they upped the bandwidth. I have also had excellent reception in my area (Iowa) with interstate overpasses hardly ever interrupting the signal. Since the satellites actually move, and there is more than one over head most of the time, I usually get signals from a good angle even if something is obscuring the view directly over the car. I mostly use Sirius for NPR, PRI and BBC reception, because most american radio stations play nothing but mindless pap (Clear Channel being the worst offender, IMHO)
  • What's that USB port on the back of my XM Radio? by Dr. Ion (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @03:15PM
  • Commerical Radio by fdawg (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @03:22PM
  • Compression by roofingfelt (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @03:28PM
  • That would be a tough one. by /dev/trash (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @03:30PM
  • I have XM - here's my take by xjosh (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @03:30PM
  • by chrysrobyn (106763) on Tuesday June 11 2002, @03:41PM (#3681746)

    I'm not an audiophile.

    The little lady and I were recently in the market for trying something new out with our tax refund. So, the option of satellite radio came up. We spend enough time commuting that it was going to be a respectable thing to do for entertainment. What do you do? Well, you go to a store, listen to the samples, and make the best decision you can.

    So, we went to websites, read all the selections possible, restricions on buildings, costs, etc. Then, to Best Buy, Circuit City, all the brick and mortar places that would have a sample. Each and every one sounded like VBR MP3s at 96kbps. Sure, some of it was better than FM, but most of it was just different bad quality. I figured, despite any technical hurdles, the stores would have these things put together in the best possible configuration they could to show the gadgets off and drive some sales. Now, if none of their "demos" could get it right, my money is not going anywhere.

    I realize, they were in a building, but this was their opportunity to shine! Stick the frickin antenna outside! Or did they? Salespeople didn't know the difference.

    Know what you're buying. Make sure that you listen. Don't assume "CD quality" when it says "digital quality". You'd just be telling the digital cable and satellite people their marketting was right. Us Nerds/Geeks have to prove that someone understands.

    And remember, you can't spell "geek" without double-e.

  • XM is way to go by brybigs (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @03:42PM
  • Sirius runs off of Clear Channel software by johnboyfree (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @03:42PM
  • Whichever choice you make... by dlb (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @03:46PM
  • Sirius by womanfiend (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @04:01PM
  • Sirius? Who's that? by hether (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @04:13PM
  • Internet Radio by s10god (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @04:23PM
  • Three dollar price difference by GPS Pilot (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @04:43PM
  • XM actually delivers what xmradio.com promises by RicR (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @04:50PM
  • Overall Price by Kallahar (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @05:12PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • Sirius Orbit by BuggyBoyWA (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @05:21PM
  • Tape recorder (Score:3, Interesting)

    by rwa2 (4391) on Tuesday June 11 2002, @05:22PM (#3682377) Homepage Journal
    What I've started doing is recording internet music streams ( such as d-i [digitallyimported.com] etc. ) to tape overnight and playing them during my commute the next day. I'm sure you could do the same with CDR if you need the extra audio quality (I don't). That way, you get any channel you'd like. I've been pretty happy with this arrangement so far. Don't underestimate low-tech :)
  • Sirius is on "Molniya" orbit - much better one.. by Axe (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @05:31PM
  • What matters: Content and Install Application by Tugrik (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @05:34PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • July/Aug Sound & Vision magazine compares them by aabernathy (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @07:10PM
  • Remember a while back.... by masteroveride (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @07:51PM
  • XM is the way to go... by DavittJPotter (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @09:44PM
  • What do Truckers and Outer Space have in common? by Cryptnotic (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @10:38PM
  • "Commercial Free"? by albeit unknown (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @10:52PM
  • XM all the way by ballsmccoy (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @11:43PM
  • XM vs. Sirius by Mordanthanus (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @11:56PM
  • Some words on XM by kah13 (Score:1) Wednesday June 12 2002, @12:04AM
  • xm vs sirius by azjoe1 (Score:1) Wednesday June 12 2002, @01:05AM
  • Too bad the current satellite radio solutions.... by Cinematique (Score:1) Wednesday June 12 2002, @01:52AM
  • Just wanted to clarify... by Justen (Score:1) Wednesday June 12 2002, @08:57AM
  • Re:Get a bike by itronix (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @01:40PM
    • 1 reply beneath your current threshold.
  • ATTENTION Anonymous Coward by Zen Mastuh (Score:2) Tuesday June 11 2002, @02:01PM
  • RE: Say goodbye to the drinking fountain... by Fig, formerly A.C. (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @03:09PM
  • Re:Forget XM. Get SW. by s10god (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @04:33PM
  • Re:why not both by NDPTAL85 (Score:1) Tuesday June 11 2002, @06:08PM
  • Re:In defense of Clear Channel by RicR (Score:1) Friday June 21 2002, @11:42AM
  • 49 replies beneath your current threshold.
(1) | 2