RUsirius.com appreciates all comments from our site visitors.
Here are some of the more germane communications we have received.
A site visitor with a comment about the National Association of Broadcasters' assault on satellite radio says (posted 12 September 2006):
"If N.A.B. is dreaming of localism, then trouble in 2008 may come. There will be screaming and yelling in Congress,
and what bad for consumers, is if any legislation exist, satrad be not on cloud 9, but doomed. I wish I can have my DNS,
but I can't because of N.A.B. National Association of Broadcaster."
RUsirius.com's response:
We disagree. The NAB's primary concern is with the delivery of local traffic and weather information by Sirius and XM. The NAB
believes that this should be the exclusive right of local broadcasters. Satellite radio will do just fine regardless of what
Congress or the Federal Communications Commission decides to do with this issue.
Someone who is sitting on the fence about satellite radio asks (posted
13 December 2004):
"I have not signed up for Satellite Radio yet. I was wondering if
there were any plans to put certain TV News talk programs on the air?
Shows like 'Meet the Press' would be great. Let me know."
RUsirius.com's response:
We know of no plans by either Sirius or XM to put the audio portion of TV
News talk programs on the air. Both satellite broadcasters currently
carry audio feeds from traditionally television organizations. TV audio,
however, often doesn't translate readily to a strictly audio broadcast. We
suspect that this is why shows like "Meet the Press" haven't yet made it to
satellite radio. We invite all site visitors to comment on this subject
or correct any information thought to be in error.
A curious site visitor from England who may wan to get Sirius says
(posted 16 July 2004):
"Hi there from England where currently the satellite radio we have beamed
to us comes from Worldspace and the AfriStar satellite. Like Sirius and
XM, Worldspace feature 'premium' coded stations and some free public and
Worldspace channels also. Sirius is also a satellite beaming into Scandinavia
on set top box receivers. I have read that Sirius car radios will be
featured soon on cars sold in Germany, Switzerland, Austria etc.. where
it is very difficult to stay tuned into an FM station when a mountain
blocks your signal. I am interested to know about any Sirius Digital Transistor
Radios which are manufactured and which will beam across Europe because
I have a feeling (based on the Sirius satellites) that they will feature
more of the European stations that people want to hear on a digital radio
unit. If anyone has news about developments, radio sets, prices and signals
- please e-mail me. (Meanwhile I think you are very fortunate to have good
digital satellite right now)."
RUsirius.com's response:
Both Sirius and XM are primarily intended for reception in the United States.
The orbits of the Sirius satellites, however, allow them to be received
in other regions of the globe. We encourage any interested site visitors
with additional information to contact us in response to this posting.
A subscriber both to XM and Sirius says (posted 19 January 2004)
:
"I have Sirius in one vehicle and XM in another. I live in Ohio
where a satellite tax has been imposed on satellite TV. But I believe
it has also effected satellite radio, because my fee for Sirius has risen
from $12.95 to $13.73 per month and now to $13.86. However, the interesting
point in all this is that XM has not charged any increase. It remains
at $9.99. How they have managed this is beyond me, but I am not complaining.
If anyone has any insight about this development I would welcome hearing
it.
"P.S. As a listener to both services in my experience XM does have too
much repetition--at least on the one stream I listen all the time, Luna
75. I cannot comment on the other streams. I listen to Sirius less than
XM, simply because I do not have their new boombox at my office--yet.
But their classic jazz channel does not seem to have much repetition. Granted
this is a limited sampling. Lastly, I see that XM is now commercial
-free on their music channels. We did not expect that to happen!"
RUsirius.com's response:
We would appreciate any insight about the Ohio tax issue, too. As
to the issue of commercials on music channels, we think the presence of
ads will likely become more prevalent as both services compete to keep their
subscription rates down and their profits up. Frankly, we did not expect
commercial-free music channels to happen either.
A baseball fan asks (posted 16 July 2003):
"What are the chances of major league baseball coming to Sirius or
XM? I notice that Sirius has an arrangement with the NBA. Do you know
if MLB is talking to either company? Since you can sign up for MLB games
via the internet, it should be possible to add it to the satellite radio
programming.....? "
RUsirius.com's response:
There is no sport more suited to radio broadcasting than baseball.
Unlike football, basketball, or hockey, pictures aren't important.
A familiar voice, some colorful comments, and a little crowd noise
are all that's required. We encourage Sirius and XM to consider
adding a full lineup of Major League Baseball to next year's schedule.
A potential listener dissatisfied with satellite radio tells
us (posted 1 July 2003):
"'Sirius (or XM)-ready' ought to mean the radio is ready to receive
the service as soon as I start paying or it. Instead it means the
unit is ready to start receiving the service as soon as I buy a separate
receiver and have it installed in my car. I would have thought
that after all this time there would at least be a car radio that was
ready to have a Sirius module plugged into it without any additional car
wiring."
RUsirius.com's response:
To all those out there in Sirius- and XM-land, please pay attention
to complaints such as the one above. There is a world out there
ready to tune in to satellite radio that is finding itself frustrated
by the current state of the technology -- and maybe just a little cynical
about the hype.
Someone who decided to stop being so Sirius says (posted
23 October 2002):
"After waiting for almost 2 years for Sirius to release a
decent plug and play receiver such as the Sony for XM and now the Delphi
SkyFi for XM, I finally decided to stop waiting and bought a Delphi SkyFi.
I truly wish Sirius the best and hope they make it. I believe if Sirius
does go bankrupt it would only be bad for XM and XM programming. However
I just cannot wait any longer for Sirius to get their act together. First
they blundered their product launch, releasing their service almost a year
after XM despite having their satellites up first. Then snubbing their
biggest market (California) by turning them up last. And the cost of their
service and their receivers are still higher than XM despite reported
inferior sound quality. For the company that invented Satellite radio,
and pushed so hard to bring it to market I really expected better.
So here I am, a former Sirius shareholder, now listening to an XM radio.
The Delphi works and sounds great. Now if I can only find a decent spot
to mount it in my new Beetle...."
RUsirius.com's response:
There are probably numerous former Sirius enthusiasts who
feel the way you do about their actions, their policies, and their
company. Nevertheless, we feel that Sirius has the better technology
even though it has been badly mismanaged. We hope that they will
"get their act together" but we Siriusly doubt that they will. Indeed,
what can one expect from a company managed by a former Global Crossing
exec?
A potentially Sirius (or XM) listener from New London has
these questions and concerns (posted 14 October 2002):
"I have been following satellite radio and local radio stations
have forced me to 'invest' in the latest and greatest. After
reading your comments from current users, it seems like it would work
for me. Have you heard from anyone in the Connecticut (New London County)
area? I anticipate the tunnel,overhang,etc. limitations and can
live with it. Just would like to know what else I can expect. What
is the absolute latest on both XM and Sirius and their financial situations?
They both offer the type of music (smooth/contemporary jazz) that
I require and I already have digital cable at home (w/ 45 music channels).
It will be money well spent."
RUsirius.com's response:
There are various parts of this site that should help visitors
like the one above find the information required. To summarize,
Sirius seems to offer the better signal characteristics for getting
around overhangs and other obstacles. Their three-satellite configuration
requires less support from ground repeaters and better opportunities
for direct propagation from satellite to receiver. Sirius, unfortunately,
appears to be in much worse financial shape than XM. They have
far fewer subscribers, are having difficulties raising additional capital,
and seem to be losing "mindshare" to XM.
A satellite radio enthusiast tells us (posted 15 July
2002) :
"I have been following the development of the satellite
radios for about three years. At the time, I worked for Chrysler
and did a lot of work with bringing new accessories to market. At that
time, Sirius also was going to be $10 dollars a month. I think a lot
of the problems in getting the auto dealers to offer these things to
their customers is that they are NOT EXPENSIVE ENOUGH. That is, the car
salesmen won't have enough incentive (spelled: c-o-m-m-i-s-s-i-o-n) to
push the products. One suggestion we made was to package a year or two
of service into the unit pricing which would have brought the ticket price
and commission up while not significantly affecting the financing on the
vehicle. I guess the 'experts' thought better of the idea - at least for
now."
RUsirius.com's response:
We agree. The people at Sirius and XM have tailored
their product to a driving audience and they're having apparent
problems getting their units installed in automobiles. Packaging
several years of service with the receiver probably would give dealers
a little more incentive to "suggest" satellite radio to their customers.
From what we can tell, however, the folks who run the
satellite radio business are about as responsive to the public as
the airlines.
A
potential Sirius subscriber who happens to be just a little upset with
their pricing policy (posted 8 July 2002) says:
"I have listened to Sirius on the net and like what
I hear. To that end I decided to take a look at subscribing.
That is when I discovered they charge the full price per month per
receiver. With a car, camper, and the desire to listen in my
home the cost would be $38.85 a month. You've got to be kidding!
I wrote them asking about a package deal. No
way, no how! They suggest a plug and move system that would require
a head-end unit in all three places. I could then just unplug
and move the receiving unit. Ya, that's what I want to do.
Cable TV and the small dish folks long ago finally figured out
that people will not pay for the service over and over again just to
have it when and where they want it. Until Sirius gets Serious about
getting listeners I'm not spending my dollars for three receivers and
then their programming. When they offer a one price per listener
and not receiver I will be standing in line."
RUsirius.com's response:
We had been hoping that Sirius would be making package
deals available to anyone with multiple receivers. We're
so sorry they apparently are not.
In case anyone thinks that there's no enthusiasm
for satellite radio outside the United States, here are some comments
from down under:
"I can vouch for satellite radio - I had a receiver
in Africa (Nigeria) receiving World radio. It was a heaven
send! The digital channels were clear and I put it through
my hi-fi. I like classical music and in Nigeria there is no
classical music. I could also keep up with news and pop. Yes,
I think that satellite radio definitely has a part to play. Unfortunately
here in Australia there isn't any coverage - except the few channels
that come over the broadcast TV satellites - but these are simply
rebroadcasts and don't have the multiple channels arranged just to
a satellite audience."
RUsirius.com's response:
It's good to know that someone in Australia is interested
in satellite radio. There are probably numerous markets throughout
the world that are ripe for an infusion of an exciting new technology
that is taking America by storm.
The
sirius pundit with a complaint about XM's apparent policy of
cutting off service after 60 hours of non-use (see below) says this
in response:
"I am the originator of the 60 hour comment. The
source was the switch board person at XM when I called to activate.
I asked questions formulated to uncover hidden inconveniences
or expense. The 60 hour shut off comment was volunteered.
I questioned this repeatedly. I asked if the cut-off
was optional. They said there was no way around it, and that's
how their system worked. I said I would not have considered
XM had I known this in advance. I reluctantly signed up. I
cancelled XM the next day. The final straw: You can't patch
to AUX-in on non-XM head units without going through a modulator. I
hope this rather thin evidence about the cut-off proves untrue. Both
XM and Sirius are wonderful additions to our musical infrastructure."
RUsirius.com's response:
We encourage additional comments on this issue,
especially from XM.
Someone
at sirius odds with the commercial radio business says:
"I'm very annoyed with terrestrial radio, and
can't wait for Sirius to arrive in Los Angeles. As I write
this note, I'm listening to Sirius I-70 over the Internet. Something
for your website: You'll notice a lot of people expressing annoyance
at the radio available in their area. Likewise, I think Los Angeles
has some of the worst radio stations, but I found out why. Go
to Clear
Channel Communication's
web site, click on 'Radio', click on 'Station
Locator.' Type in your area, and see what stations they
own. I found out that CCU owns eight stations in my area.
They own all the interesting formats, and destroy them with
banter and commercials. CCU is heavily invested in XM radio.
This is why I'm waiting for Sirius, and not in the least bit
surprised when I hear people gripe about the programming on XM."
RUsirius.com's response:
We agree that the programming standard commercial
radio is pretty deficient. Their attempt to constrain both
Sirius and XM via the IB 95-91
proceedings is an inappropriate action that relies
on the legal system rather than better programming to make their
products more competitive. Nevertheless, we think that either
XM or Sirius is superior to terrestrial broadcasts and encourage our
site visitors to consider either service.
A pundit with some comments on the XM and Sirius
web sites has this to say:
"The XM website is only OK, but is better than
the Sirius site. Sirius needs a prominent phone number to
pop up, not buried under many functions. It makes it appear
that they don't want to hear from you if there is trouble. FAQ's
and other dead ends are disconcerting. The ergonomic feel
of the Sirius site is underdone and needs a redesign. This is
not place to save a buck, especially considering the techno nature of
this endeavor. Sirius should take advantage ASAP of their perceived
upscale position. Please don't squander this advantage. Having
a larger classical and jazz selection could help promote this image."
RUsirius.com's response:
We agree that Sirius' web site leaves much to
be desired, but then again, so does ours. We invite Sirius
to comment on the above observation.
Here's some "tech
talk" from someone who seems to know:
"The RCA's on the Alpine XM receivers are inputs.
You need outputs to go to Aux In on so equipped non-Sirius
ready head units. Since this is no possible, you are stuck
with modulating through the antenna. This is contrary to claims
in some advertising. Pioneer does not claim they can patch
to Aux In, although Blitzsafe says they are working on a cable. I
haven't looked into the Sony XM unit, which struck me as too bulky.
The Clarion and Jensen Sirius receivers do have RCA outputs that
do patch nicely to the Aux In on head units, making such units full
digital signal all the way to the DAC (no antenna FM modulator) and Sirius
ready with the addition of the control unit. The separate control
unit appears to be friendlier to use than the function cluttered satellite
ready head units. It may also be safer to operate by Braille in your
lap instead of dash mounted buttonettes. Terk says you can hide their
antennas in a plastic spoiler more successfully than under the rear glass.
Try both to avoid the pizza delivery look. Clarion fails to
include instructions to wire the 4-pin power connector (needed with non-Clarion
head units) on their Sirius receiver. Crutchfield confirms: Black,
ground; Yellow (with the 3-amp fuse), battery; Red, ignition on; Blue (with
factory installed terminal), remote on. Best to star ground with head
unit. Long control cable best left uncut and spliced. No problems
with length (or inductance I presume) all balled up and concealed. Don't
forget to flip the slide switch (on the bottom of the receiver in a slot
in the metal case) from the factory setting to 'stand alone' mode if you're
not using a Clarion head unit. Clarion doesn't say much about the antenna
adapter box that plugs between the Terk antenna and the receiver. Was
this something they could have included on the receiver board? Terks
are purposely built for both systems. Why the adapter?"
RUsirius.com's response.
We hope these comments prove useful to anyone
contemplating purchasing and installing a satellite radio receiver.
Here's more "tech
talk" about the robustness of each satellite provider's service:
"Both Sirius and XM have two satellites transmitting
to the United States at all times. XM does this with two
satellites. Sirius uses three. Each Sirius satellite
is on-line for 2/3 of the time, each satellite taking a 'break' every
third time interval. A satellite radio needs line of site to
only one satellite to receive a signal. Therefore if one satellite
is blocked by, say, a building, the radio can still play the signal
from the other one. In the event of a satellite failure, both
companies would suffer a degradation of service, XM more so than Sirius.
In the XM example, the remaining satellite would continue to
broadcast its signal, but buildings and hills would cast large 'shadows'
where the signal would be lost. In the same scenario, Sirius would
suffer the same trouble, but only for 2 of the 3 intervals mentioned above.
During the time when the broken satellite is scheduled to take
a 'break' the service would be completely normal. Further, it is
theoretically possible for Sirius to keep each working satellite in service
until they completely disappear below the horizon. (Currently
the satellites 'hand off' when one is rising above 60 degrees and
the other is below 60 degrees.) Even while only one satellite
is in service, the 'shadows' cast by that satellite will be smaller,
however they move the satellite. Neither company would suffer
even a partial blackout even with the failure of one satellite, and
Sirius would be able to offer better service under that scenario. If
there was a failure of two satellites, XM would be dead in the water
and Sirius would still be transmitting 2/3 of the time. Their repeaters
would still work all the time."
RUsirius.com's response:
The above comment reinforces our perception that
Sirius, technically, is the better of the two services since it
is naturally more robust and relies less on terrestrial repeaters.
We also point out that while Sirius had three satellites in
elliptical orbits, XM has two in geostationary ones. This further
reduces the likelihood of signal drop out because the satellites are
always in motion relative to the ground. Unfortunately, it also
very likely contributes to the complexity of their chipsets -- the main
reason that XM was the first service to begin broadcasting.