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



David Frackelton Gleason, still posing as the faux Hispanic, 'Eduardo', wrote:

"Telamon" <telamon_spamshield@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:telamon_spamshield-7E608F.11144622092007@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

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.

The consumer does not by a chipset, they buy a radio. "On time" is very
important in a portable... the longer the "on time" the greater the battery
life.

Consumers don't do the kind of comparisons you suggest. The reference point
today is to how long an iPod lasts between charges... or how long a cell
phone stays charged or its talk time. Consumers do not compare with old
technology. They compare new technology with other manifestations of new
technology.

Personally, I compare real Hispanics with manifestations of faux Hispanics, such
as yourself.

dxAce
Michigan
USA






.

Relevant Pages