Re: FM HD in its current form will likely survive it's unlikely AM HD will fail.

In article <w2bJi.51369$Um6.30534@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"David Eduardo" <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"Telamon" <telamon_spamshield@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:telamon_spamshield-A1C7CF.16584121092007@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
In article <CxEIi.54563$YL5.19277@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>,
"David Eduardo" <david@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

"Frank Dresser" <analogdial@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:2szIi.114743$ax1.33153@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


Ibiquity sets the price of their chipsets. If radio sales remain dead
in
the water, they might decide they need a new game plan. Selling the
chips
cheap might encourage most of the rest of the broadcasters to buy and
license broadcast equipment from ibiquity.

Several fabs will be selling chipsets in Q1, starting with Samsung, at
low
prices and in power saving designs capable of making competitive
protables
possible... iBiquity is in the development, not the chip business. The
license fees are not as high as people think for the third party fabs.


You do not understand the semiconductor business.

You are making illusions to "low power" designs that are false.

Radio World ran some "battery life" comparisons of a first generation HD
chip to the design spec consumption of the Samsung chip.... 10 times more
"on time" than the early chip, and acceptable comparisons to consumption for
analog signal reception. To the consumer, it's about how long the batteries
will last, not formulae.

I don't know what you mean by "on time" in relation to power
consumption. If you meant that the new chip set consumes 1/10 the power
that I could understand, but regardless the comparison should be the new
chip set to a comparable analog radio and cost by the way.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California
.

Relevant Pages