×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

334 comments

Yawn... (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16450843)

Let me give that reaction a little more thought...

Nope. Yawn sums it up.

Maybe this works better for you.... (0, Troll)

wish bot (265150) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451063)

Howard Stern Killer Coming To the Net

Posted by kdawson on Monday October 16, @09:01PM
from the it's-a-killer! dept.

killer writes,

"To promote an Internet radio service killer Sirius is launching this week, a Howard Stern killer, 4+ hour program will be made available live online for free on October 25 and 26. The new killer Sirius service will offer 75+ channels of killer programming for $12.95/month with no need to buy a Sirius satellite receiver killer."

That sounds grand! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16450845)

I say! Good show old chaps. BFD.

Old new york? (-1, Flamebait)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16450857)

Howard Stern is over rated EHEHEHE

parent = futurama reference (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16451467)

And remember when Mayor Giuliani cracked down on jaywalking?

"CD quality programming" (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16450869)

But not CD quality audio. I think the net stream is 32kbps.

Re:"CD quality programming" (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16451213)

Regular satellite-based Sirius is 64k. So even their bird isn't "CD-quality". That's just a tick above your average warbly / lossy internet radio station (that sounds like complete garbage on a decent stereo). I'd be very curious to hear the true bitrate of their web site.

For now, it's Pandora.com for me. It's the best sounding internet radio / streaming music station I've heard.

Re:"CD quality programming" (1)

woody06967 (1014195) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451499)

The "basic" net stream for all programming is 32 kbps and is included with normal subscriptions. Sirius started offering a "premium" net stream add on subscription last month that for $2.95 extra per month allows you to stream 129 kbps for the music stations. Howard Stern is limited to 32 kbps for both subscription types. The normal Sirius bandwidth for the satellite broadcast is slightly less quality than the premium net stream.

$13 a month... (4, Funny)

Reverend99 (1009807) | more than 7 years ago | (#16450883)

... to listen to Howard Stern's talk about midget lesbians. That's so awesome because like there isn't any other access to midget lesbians and other assorted pervsions anywhere else on the Internet.

Re:$13 a month... (4, Insightful)

Iphtashu Fitz (263795) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451283)

Actually if you bothered to RTFA, it's $13 a month to access all of Sirius' music channels as well as select talk channels like Howard Stern. You get a lot more than just Howard, over 75 channels of stuff.

Frankly I'm surprised that Sirius isn't offering this subscription for less. $13/month is about what a regular radio subscription costs, and that includes access to the internet feeds. Since you can get Sirius radios for as low as $60 it'd make more sense to buy a radio and monthly subscription to get both radio & internet access instead of $13/month for just internet access.

CD quality? (4, Funny)

LordSnooty (853791) | more than 7 years ago | (#16450895)

What, are they streaming WAV files?

Re:CD quality? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16451135)

Mod up -- this is funny! (Because no, Virginia, lossy compression cannot possibly achieve "cd-quality", by the definition of lossy compression!)

Re:CD quality? (3, Interesting)

timeOday (582209) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451191)

CDDA is a very inefficient encoding. You could easily exceed CD quality with one quarter the bitrate using lossy compression if you started with a better-than-CD source. Is that what Howard Stern is planning to do? Almost certainly not. Does it even matter for his show? Absolutely not.

Check out Sirius' wrongdoing (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16450899)

It's here: http://malfy.org/ [malfy.org]

News for Nerds? (0, Troll)

bcmm (768152) | more than 7 years ago | (#16450905)

I don't get it... Can someone explain?

Re:News for Nerds? (1)

Rik Sweeney (471717) | more than 7 years ago | (#16450995)

I don't get it... Can someone explain?

I'll have a go.

The Sirius is on the internet, or they have a website at least which is on the internet (yeah, that'll do)

Nerds use the internet

This is news article about something on the internet

So this is News for Nerds... I did it!!!

That's Numberwang.

This will end up costing you money! (1)

spywhere (824072) | more than 7 years ago | (#16450917)

When you hear the show, you will want it enough to pay the Sirius subscription fee.

13 bucks a month? (5, Insightful)

saboola (655522) | more than 7 years ago | (#16450931)

For a glorified podcast? This is a bit expensive considering their regular real sat service is about the same price, and has the glorious side benefit of being able to be listened to in the car, where most people listen to music. Maybe if the cost was half this, but at 13 bucks I dont see this moving anywhere.

Re:13 bucks a month? (2, Interesting)

frazell (990151) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451089)

I think they are launching this with Stern, because the intent is to draw in as many of his fans as possible. Not really the average listener. Else they would make the whole service available as a trial no?

It would also seem logical to me that they could expand their web service by making it a cheap add on for their current subscribers. Otherwise, as you said, who is going to pay almost twice as much as XM or Yahoo!'s Launcast for the same type of service (although Yahoo!'s service offers personalization). Not to mention it would turn current subscribers off since they will be paying the same fee twice just to get the right to blast it on their computers.

Mobile Device support would also be another area they could offer to really expand their coverage (if they aren't already offering this). As with more and more multimedia phones and higher speed wireless (cell-phone wireless) connections it can be seen as a way to offer their service without the hardware investment.

If those two things are not really met I don't seeing the service going too far. I haven't looked at XM's offering in a long time, but when i trialled it about a year ago those were the reasons it wasn't useful to me.

Re:13 bucks a month? (2, Informative)

thc69 (98798) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451187)

It would also seem logical to me that they could expand their web service by making it a cheap add on for their current subscribers.
It is free for current subscribers -- whose subscription rate is the same as this new rate. The only benefit this offers is that you don't need to buy a Sirius receiver.

Re:13 bucks a month? (1)

JLennox (942693) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451381)

Let me know of a podcast'er with a multi-decade broadcast career and makes 500m$ on a 5 year contract.

stern = hack radio (-1, Troll)

duomaxwell516 (1014185) | more than 7 years ago | (#16450943)

howard stern is a no talent hack and has been for years. sirius is a good service with out him. they have great rock stations and good amount of other ones.

Re:stern = hack radio (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16451077)

jealous fag! Fa Fa Foey to you!

Re:stern = hack radio (1)

Iphtashu Fitz (263795) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451259)

howard stern is a no talent hack and has been for years

Care to explain how a "no talent hack" regularly had a highly rated syndicated radio show, multiple best-seller books, a movie that did reasonably well, and also highly rated television shows before being offered $500 million to go to satellite? How can a no-talent hack like me get a paycheck like that?

Re:stern = hack radio (2, Funny)

jcr (53032) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451327)

How can a no-talent hack like me get a paycheck like that? Do you seriously believe that what Stern does shows a talent? If you want to do what Stern did, just get a radio show, and be an asshole. It worked for Stern, it worked for Limbaugh, and it could work for you, too. -jcr

Re:stern = hack radio (1)

saridder (103936) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451417)

Nowadays it is impossible to be the next Stern with the FCC's overzealous regulations and right-wing overlords.

Ba Ba Booey to you all.

Re:stern = hack radio (1)

(A)*(B)!0_- (888552) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451439)

How much radio do you listen to? Stern is an important figure in the history of radio - this is accepted by most in the industry and it is not because of fart jokes.

Re:stern = hack radio (0, Flamebait)

dpiven (518007) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451489)

Stern is an important figure in the history of radio like Nero was an important figure in the history of Rome.

Re:stern = hack radio (1)

EastCoastSurfer (310758) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451519)

All depends on how you define talent. If talent means that you have the ability to entertain a lot of people then Stern has tons of it. So, in the entertainment industry Stern is one of the top talents.

Mobile Clients? (4, Interesting)

Erwos (553607) | more than 7 years ago | (#16450961)

While I could honestly care less about Howard Stern, I am interested in this Internet streaming service of theirs. Does it have support for mobile clients, like PalmOS 5 and Windows Mobile 5?

Re:Mobile Clients? (4, Funny)

Bloke down the pub (861787) | more than 7 years ago | (#16450981)

While I could honestly care less about Howard Stern
You could? I couldn't. Really.

Re:Mobile Clients? (1)

MMC Monster (602931) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451047)

Mod parent informative/insightful. Or +1 grammer nazi, if it's available.

Re:Mobile Clients? (1)

Erwos (553607) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451069)

You assume that I meant "I hate Howard Stern". I meant what I said: I _could_ care less about him. I'm more or less neutral as to his presence on the service. Thanks for playing!

Re:Mobile Clients? (1)

limpfish32 (856097) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451103)

I think he means 'couldn't care less'. "The idiom "couldn't care less", meaning "doesn't care at all" (the meaning in full is "cares so little that he couldn't possibly care less"), originated in Britain around 1940. "Could care less", which is used with the same meaning, developed in the U.S. around 1960. " How confusing.

Re:Mobile Clients? (1)

thc69 (98798) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451207)

I suspect that "Could care less" developed as a sarcastic version. "Yeah, like I could care less?". Etc.

Re:Mobile Clients? (1)

knightsnavi (1002468) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451147)

Yes, it's called siriuce. Found at www.emulamer.com/siriuce. Its free, and runs on Windows Mobile. It's not the CD quality stream, at least not yet; radio subscribers (and 3 day trial users) can use SiriUCE to stream it at 32kbps, and you can subscribe to their SIR (Sirius Internet Radio) for an additional 6 bucks per month. It's a great alternative to buying a boombox type set for my office (that and the fact that I don't have a windows in sight).

CD-quality programming . . .Yeah right (4, Informative)

StateOfTheUnion (762194) | more than 7 years ago | (#16450967)

So many places say "CD-quality programming" and offer compressed audio . . . like CD-Quality MP3's etc. Typically this kind of audio isn't CD quality by definition of lossy compression and streaming rate. In fact last I checked the compression algorthim and bitstream rate for satellite talk radio is different from that of the same service's music stations (the talk radio stream has a lower bitrate and more compression) . . . because the audio frequency band and dynamic range are typically narrower in talk radio.

CD-quality should imply a real and quantifiable level of quality . . . not "it sounds like a CD to the casual listener (that doesn't know that analog FM radio music is typically compressed in dynamic range and frequency and that radio broadcasts are already equalized for cheap car stereos and boomboxes)."

Re:CD-quality programming . . .Yeah right (4, Informative)

Enry (630) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451277)

CD quality is generally 128kbps, regardless of the codec. That's what's used by just about all MP3 hardware vendors when they tell you how many songs you can put on their device, so that statement has been around for a while.

Stern's broadcasts on Sirius as received by the hardware satellite receivers isn't at talk quality (~32kbps), but at the same quality as their music channels (~128kbps).

The Internet service you get with Sirius that's standard is ~32kbps for all channels, which makes it sounds a little off. Doesn't matter to me all that much, but some people notice the difference. The new service that is being offered gives the channels at the higher quality bitrate.

For those of you that think that now Stern is just 4-hours of 4-letter words, it's not. They're in there, and the discussions get a bit more frank than before, but it's like the terrestrial broadcast without the bleeps for the most part. At one point early on, Stern yelled at someone (Ronnie?) and told him to quit swearing all the time because it wasn't funny.

Don't like Stern? That's fine. My dad hates him with a passion. A few months ago he asked me about my Sirius and a few weeks later he had his own radio in the car. He loves it. It's like cable TV - listen to what you want, there's a lot of variety. An unexpected gem is radio classics, playing radio shows from way back when. Jack Benny's humor still stands the test of time.

Re:CD-quality programming . . .Yeah right (3, Interesting)

suv4x4 (956391) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451337)


CD-quality should imply a real and quantifiable level of quality . . . not "it sounds like a CD to the casual listener (that doesn't know that analog FM radio music is typically compressed in dynamic range and frequency and that radio broadcasts are already equalized for cheap car stereos and boomboxes)."


You know, I'm getting deadly tired of people bragging about they mp3 compression kung-fu knowledge.

YES, WE REALIZE IT'S COMPRESSED.

Geez.. and yea, it's CD quality to the casual listener and in fact just THAT is what it's supposed to mean. If you wanna see how much people care about marginal improvements in quality, see where DVD-Audio went, and you can witness where HD DVD and Blue Ray will go (hint: nowhere... I know, I know).

People whining about professionally encoded (encoder matters a lot) mp3 streams of 128kbps and more having terrible quality really amaze me. It'd a damn radio after all. It's not like you recover critical encrypted messages hidden in the audio and you need 1:1 correspondence of each sample, or your kidnapped wife is dead in 24 hours.

In a nutshell, you can take your mp3 l33t skills and your 64-bit audio 256kHz 15+1 surround system and shove it up your audio output socket.

How much for the service without Howard? (3, Insightful)

edwardpickman (965122) | more than 7 years ago | (#16450975)

I'll happily pay more if they have a service without Howard. I'm getting ready to pick up a system and Howard Stern being on Sirius was the deciding factor not to go with them. It's personal tastes but I graduated high school a lot of years ago and hearing him takes me back to high school in all the bad ways. I can listen to obnoxious jerks for free, why would I pay for the priveledge. Yes I know I don't have to listen but I don't care to patronize a service that promotes that kind of programming. I was thrilled when he left the airwaves why would I want to chase the guy to satelite? Too many people these days are thrilled to tell you what to think. I grew up back at a time when the general belief was we should think for ourselves. Now we are all but taught that's dangerous. I guess it's easier for a lot of people to let the government, religous leaders or Howard Stern tell them what to think. If I want an opinion I'd rather go to one of the great minds of our time and Howard just isn't one of them. I don't need him to tell me who's cool or "in". I really don't care. It's childish and pointless.

Re:How much for the service without Howard? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16451073)

I'll happily pay more if they have a service without Howard.

You're in luck. It's $25.90/month without Howard Stern.

Re:How much for the service without Howard? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16451119)

I've happily had XM for years now.
XM offers free listening online to is subscribers.

No Stern.

Re:How much for the service without Howard? (0, Flamebait)

dtanderson (1012279) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451133)

edwardpickman said "Yes I know I don't have to listen but I don't care to patronize a service that promotes that kind of programming. " Talk about hypocritical, you are not choosing Sirius because they have Howard but you will go with XM when they have Opie and Andy which are just as bad as Howard. They were kicked of the airwaves after airing a couple having sex in a Catholic chapel in NY. Their show is just as bad as Howard's show if not worse. So, if you go with XM you are still patronizing a service that has "that kind of programming". I guess O&A are some of "the great minds of our time" that you would like to listen to and of course they are not "childish or pointless". I think is so funny that people choose XM because of "Howard's filth" but they will subsribe when XM has "Opie and Andy' Filth" which is just as bad. Sirius' music selection is much better than XM and all commercial free unlike XM. If I wanted to listen to commercials then I could listen to FM instead of paying for XM. I read about people swithing from XM to Sirius all the time because the music on Sirius is better. Just admit it you are just jealous of Howard and decided to choose XM not because of filth on his filth on Sirius because XM has filth also just for different personality (Opie and Andy).

Re:How much for the service without Howard? (2, Funny)

p4ul13 (560810) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451197)

Calm-o fan-boy, calm.

Re:How much for the service without Howard? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16451289)

"Take your XM Radio, flush it down the toilet, buy Sirius and fuck your mother" - Lil Jimmy Norton, Opie and Anthony Show

Re:How much for the service without Howard? (1)

1stpreacher (848239) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451501)

I'm a Sirius fan (not a howard fan), but for the record... XM too has gone the commercial free route.

Re:How much for the service without Howard? (1)

El Torico (732160) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451215)

Howard Stern was amusing when he was the only "Village Idiot" in the Media. Unfortunately, the Media now has a plethora of Village Idiots, so he is just another inane babbling voice. I agree that we should think for ourselves, but I don't agree that we are being told that thinking for ourselves is dangerous; rather I think that we are finding it increasingly difficult to find (relatively) unbiased information or have the time to listen to multiple biased sources and form our own synthesis of contradictory views. Of course, thinking for oneself takes time and effort, and it is much more convenient to absorb and regurgitate the views of whichever "Talking Head" one happens to agree with in the first one minute of listening.

Re:How much for the service without Howard? (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451285)

> we are finding it increasingly difficult to find (relatively) unbiased information or have the time
> to listen to multiple biased sources and form our own synthesis of contradictory views

It's not hard to find. A few seconds on Google News exposes you to newspapers from around the world, and a few minutes on Google finds you loads of independant sources of information.

If you don't want to spend the time, then fine, but people shouldn't kid themselves that they're too busy unless they spend absolutely every last waking minute working or looking after their families. (How many hours a week are most people wasting watching increasingly tedious tv shows, for example? Why isn't the superior word processors, special effects hard/software, cameras, editing tools etc equating into better films than those of the last 100 years?)

Re:How much for the service without Howard? (5, Insightful)

Lummoxx (736834) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451251)

Yes I know I don't have to listen but I don't care to patronize a service that promotes that kind of programming. I was thrilled when he left the airwaves why would I want to chase the guy to satelite? Too many people these days are thrilled to tell you what to think.

I was with you at first, but the quoted bit above is where you lost me. You don't like him, you don't want to listen, you were glad when he left regular radio...man, that's cool.

The whole "they tell you what to think" rap...eh, not so much. I've listened to Howard for years, and point blank, it's entertainment. Nothing more, nothing less. Actually, Howard and the crew are really smart people. Sure, you tend to get a liberal slant on the occassions they delve into truly important topics, but at the same time, they tend to call things what they are.

Who? (1, Insightful)

just_forget_it (947275) | more than 7 years ago | (#16450985)

I had no idea Howard Stern was still relevant.

Re:Who? (0, Redundant)

dtanderson (1012279) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451205)

Some people use that as an excuse to chose XM even though XM has Opie and Andy which are just as bad as Howard. You hear them whining "I won't buy Sirius because of that filthy Howard" but yet they subscribe to XM with that filthy Opie and Andy. Talk about a bunch of hypocrites. The only reason they chose XM is because they are jealous of Howard's success, that and they like the fact that XM has commercials on some of the music channels and they know that they would miss listening to the the commercials. Some people are scared of change and they are more familiar with hearing commercials when they listen to the radio and don't know what they would do it they had real commercial free music.

Satellite radio in the car, great. At home, ??? (3, Interesting)

Hamster Lover (558288) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451027)

I have Sirius in my car as well as a home kit for use with my home stereo. I travel fairly often all over Western Canada so having satellite radio is sort of a must as I don't like to take scads of CDs with me. Sirus fits the bill perfectly and I have access to programs that I wouldn't normally on terrestrial radio, like Fox and CNN radio as well as the World Radio Network.

Now, satellite radio in the car is one thing, but PAYING for the same content strictly for use in the home makes no sense. If you have the Internet you already have access to free, high quality radio stations playing a wide variety of music, never mind that all the cable and satellite companies include commercial free music stations as part of their basic digital service.

I understand the need for Sirius to broaden their income base as they have yet to make money, but even the most novice Internet user is aware of free alternatives that offer essentially the same or better content.

Re:Satellite radio in the car, great. At home, ??? (1, Flamebait)

autophile (640621) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451507)

Sirus fits the bill perfectly and I have access to programs that I wouldn't normally on terrestrial radio, like Fox and CNN radio...

Thanks for turning me off to Sirius!

--Rob

Nothing new here, move on (1)

PAjamian (679137) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451033)

ok, so Howard Stern is syndicated across what, 50-odd radio stations? What's the bet that at least 10 of them stream to the internet?

Re:Nothing new here, move on (1)

MrP-(at work) (839979) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451055)

howard isn't on any radio stations.. he's only on sirius, where he belongs, with his 10 listeners

O&A! O&A! O&A! O&A! O&A!

Re:Nothing new here, move on (1)

pyster (670298) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451235)

heh. 5.1 million subs... o/p are no bodies :)

Re:Nothing new here, move on (1)

MrP-(at work) (839979) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451371)

yes because every single sirius user listens to stern and only stern.. every other sirius channel has 0 listeners

howie math is funny

o&a have way more listeners, especially on terrestrial radio

howard is irrelevant and delusional, as are his fans who actually believe howie math

Re:Nothing new here, move on (1)

saridder (103936) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451453)

As soon as he joined, the Sirius subscriber numbers skyrocked while XM has slowed way down. He must have had something to do with that. Given this rate, Sirius should surpass XM in less than 2 years.

Re:Nothing new here, move on (2, Insightful)

viriiman (957358) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451141)

Hoo-hoo Robin, I invented streaming my show on the internet, it was all me. Sirius, they're rippin me off.

howard sucks (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16451041)

RAAAAAAMOOOOOOOONEEEEEE

Pod Casting ... not streaming radio (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16451045)

Sirius needs to work on a pod-casting model with Howard Stern in the line up. Just about every podcast i've listened too is absolutely horrible. "Escape Pod" and "Ask a Ninja" set themselves apart from the likes of "TWiT", "Buzz Out Lood", etc ...

I'd be more than willing to pay for quality shows put into a pod-casting format that I can use on my iPod. New, original, fiction that is produced with the quality of the old-time radio shows is what i'm really after, but talking heads that actually keep me entertained would be a nice switch as well.

Who cares? (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16451049)

Maybe if I was still in my adolescence (or stuck in it) I'd really dig Howard Stern.

Waited too long (1)

twistedcubic (577194) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451059)

I'll ignore that this story is spam, but I wonder why it took him so long to put a teaser on the net. I used to listen to him everyday, and Adam Corolla is no replacement. Now I don't, but $12.95/month might be reasonable when I strike it rich.

Advertisement (4, Insightful)

Infernon (460398) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451075)

How is this pertinent to the geek community at all? It looks like an advertisement to me...

Re:Advertisement (2, Funny)

tenaciousdRules (518041) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451385)

Indeed! The slashdot coffers must be full of Karmazin payola! (I lost money on Sirius stock, who didn't? Makes me bitter.)

come again? (1, Insightful)

deviceb (958415) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451139)

Well Howard Stern is already on the net. He is not on any radio stations FYI because the Feds stomped on his free speach. The fact that he can say whatever he wants [(even lez-miget wrestling in crisco) -waiting for that] makes satellite radio worth the $13 when traveling in yoru car. -That is of course if you listen to the radio at all.
No commercials is worth it to me. (howard stern has commercials)

Now offering 75 channels streaming online... i'm listening to sirus ATM in a cafe.. and it SUX compared to good old Shoutcast. Winamp has what.... 200+ stations that you can tweak the audio output of. Plus you do not need a browser window to keep the stream up. I like the freedom that satellite brings to the sheep, but i would never pay to listen online.. that is just absurd.

Behind the ball.... (1)

jacks smirking reven (909048) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451153)

XM has offered streaming radio for almost a year now. I know for sure it's included in the monthly standard plan price (12.95) but i do believe they have a cheaper streaming only price as well.

XM also has the far funnier Opie and Anthony as well.

Re:Behind the ball.... (1)

thc69 (98798) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451223)

Sirius began including streaming in it's standard price at the same time as XM did.

Re:Behind the ball.... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16451261)

Sirius has had a streaming client for a while as well- but you had to have a receiver befor you could sign up for it. This new service does not require you to have a receiver.

Also ... when XM had Opie and Anthony as a "Premium" channel ... they pulled in a whopping 35,000 listeners.

People said the same thing about Cable TV. (3, Insightful)

Lordleppard (913427) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451161)

People said the same thing about Cable TV. They'd never pay for something they could get for free... Guess what? Most of you nay sayers now pay for cable. In fact I'd wager ALL of you do.

I never listened to Howard when he was on terrestrial radio but now I do on Sirius. He's funny and there are some interesting interviews. Not all the time mind you but a fair amount of time.

To the prudes out there that can't stand to hear what he has to say, don't listen. Turn the dial.

$13 bucks a month is worth having something to listen to on the way to work. There are more then just Howards 2 stations to listen to.

Re:People said the same thing about Cable TV. (0, Troll)

mgabrys_sf (951552) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451313)

re:"To the prudes out there that can't stand to hear what he has to say, don't listen. Turn the dial."

The thing is - they have - to XM which has more than double the marketshare of Sirius. Sterns' listenership used to be above 10 million (which is kind of low when you think about it) but he brought in 100 million a year in revenue. This is why he got a fat contract at 100 million a year to jump ship. It didn't impact his operations for the next 5 years. Oh - but wait - his marginal audience doesn't move with him and now the radio stations are making more revenue with cheaper talent. His current numbers are a PORTION of Sirius' current subscribership which is around 5 million. So even if he got every listener on the Surius dial, he'd have only half what he previously had.

Oh yes - people will pay for satelite radio - pitty XM has more than double the numbers (over 10 million) right now. That split marketshare has marginalized him, and exposed the deal for what it was. A desperate grab to attempt ratings and subscriber boost (at a cost of nearly one satelite launch per year) against a much stronger competitor - XM radio. Less than 1 year into it and they're trying to expand his near-dead ratings.

I expected this to either be a minor win for Stern and Sirius when the deal went down - or a total train wreck for Stern. At this point, it's the later of the two. I expect lawsuits around February as both parties sue the bejeezus out of one another, withhold payments, or attempt to break contract - which he'll have to do since pop-culture doesn't weather hiatuses of 5 years very well. Such celebs turn into the has-been pile very quickly, and we've got an odds-on-favor here. The fun is just starting!

Re:People said the same thing about Cable TV. (3, Informative)

Lordleppard (913427) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451379)

Actually, you didn't post facts. The facts are Sirius has 5.1 Million subscribers, XM 7 Million. When Stern joined Sirius had 700,000.

http://www.mediabuyerplanner.com/2006/10/04/sirius _subscribers_surpass_5/index.php [mediabuyerplanner.com]

Seems you got it wrong bub.

Re:People said the same thing about Cable TV. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16451425)

bull.. when stern started on sirius they had 2.7 million subscribers.

stop with the fucking howie math, all of sirius subsribers != stern fans, sure he has some listeners but not as many as he says that's just silly howie math

and according to howie math all the subscribers that were there before he joined subscribed because of him, and all of those radios in unsold cars are also howie fans, as are about 700,000 people that actually exceed the subscription count of sirus

hoo hoo

Re:People said the same thing about Cable TV. (1)

danpsmith (922127) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451391)

People said the same thing about Cable TV. They'd never pay for something they could get for free... Guess what? Most of you nay sayers now pay for cable. In fact I'd wager ALL of you do. I never listened to Howard when he was on terrestrial radio but now I do on Sirius. He's funny and there are some interesting interviews. Not all the time mind you but a fair amount of time.

Yep, people said the same thing and so cable did the same thing: promised commercial free television except on networks already broadcast via air. What happened? We ended up with just as many if not more commercials on basic cable stations than we had on the network ones, along with around the same level of censorship and bullshit.

If everyone moved to satellite, I'd be willing to bet that the same thing will happen. Howard Stern already has some commercials, it's only a matter of time before channels would be split up into pay packages, they'd censor the rest and have commercials on near all of the stations. That is, if we actually subscribe. Until they can actually get all the subscribers they want, they'll treat everyone nicely. Just wait until they are satisfied or feel like they've penetrated the market as much as possible. That's when satellite radio becomes just like every other ad-infested censored crud that's already available.

Stern == Boring (2, Insightful)

JuT333 (828001) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451225)

Bought Sirius for Stern and the music channels just to find out that Stern takes off every Friday and the regular music channels is flooded with DJ's who talk to just hear themselves talk. I fixed this problem by buying XMradio

He's coming to the Internet! Cool - (1)

Progman3K (515744) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451229)

I can ignore him there too!
Seriously, he was broadcasting in Montreal for a while and he couldn't cut it there because no one found him interesting.
There are plenty of places where his humour just doesn't cut it and he comes across as rather boring and unimaginative.
I imagine alot of people also find him shocking, but I just find him lame.

When Howard Stern announces... (1)

Reverend99 (1009807) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451309)

... that he's developed a unified string theory that explains the totality of the universe... THEN it should be on Slashdot.

If you dont like it, then dont listen (4, Insightful)

192939495969798999 (58312) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451401)

Again, look at how many people are angry. If you don't want to listen, just dont! It's not like you HAVE to listen to satellite radio. I enjoy the program, so please dont go bitching to the FCC now just because you happened to: log on, click the link, and enjoy it until it got to something that offended you.

Thanks,
the 5+ million Sirius subscribers

mod parent through the roof (1)

krell (896769) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451461)

I don't like Howard Stern, nor do I like to listen to or watch his programs. However, I realize the power of the dial or channel/changer is enough. I merely change the station, and don't go into a hissy fit because someone somewhere likes Howard Stern, and I don't try to get legislatures and government bodies to force my personal listening preferences on others.

How much??? (1)

dlc3007 (570880) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451403)

They're joking, right?
I actually pay for one internet radio service that has thousands of stations w/out commercials. Even if one gets redundant, I can probably find a dozen others that play a similar format -- plus formats that aren't even on Serius. It costs me around 1/3 of what Serius wants to charge.
Now add in all the free audio on Shoutcast, all the broadcast stations that stream over the internet and the free XM stations that are available on Winamp and I think Serius is fooling themselves.
Of course, there are probably enough idiots out there who will think it is a good deal that they'll see a profit -- especially since there's basically no additional cost for them.

Just tune your FM radio to 87.9! (4, Interesting)

dpbsmith (263124) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451419)

I listen to Howard Stern all the time, commuting on route 128. All I do is tune my FM radio to 87.9.

Apparently many Sirius satellite radio receivers must be add-on units that work through FM modulators with the car's FM radio. And 87.9 is apparently the default FM conversion setting.

Based on my unscientific poll, during drive time something like 2/3 of Boston-area Sirius subscribers are tuned to Stern.

OK, to tell the truth, no, I don't get continuous, uninterrupted Stern that way, but, yes, I do keep one of my presets at 87.9 and I do check from time to time to see if anything is on there... and I get enough Stern to feel like I'm still "in touch" with him and his gang.

So, the question I have is, which is it? are jackbooted Sirius thugs going to sue me for theft of services? Or are jackbooted FCC thugs going to toss the converter operators in jail for operating pirate radio stations?

This will ruin "regular" radio for you (1)

Critical Facilities (850111) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451471)

First off, I'll say that I'm absolutely a Stern fan, and for those that don't find him funny, I'd just say that there are MANY more stations on Sirius that play all kinds of great music, so tune it to those and shut up already about this "Stern will lower decency of the net" and all that horseshit, gimme a break and stop being so dramatic, no one cares!

As far as the significance of this for "nerds", I'd say that it has more to do with the likelihood that this is the direction that radio is going much in the way television went from broadcast signals to cable in the late 70's and early 80's. I got Sirius last March (mostly to hear Stern again, since he's been out of our market for a few years). I admit, I was thinking at the time that the music stations would be a nice "extra" but my real motivation was to be able to hear Howard uncensored.

I was astonished at how good some of the music stations are. I bought a $16 receiver off of Ebay and stuck it in my car. I listen to the Internet Streams on my PC at home and at work and I find the selection of music MUCH better than other internet streams. Additionally, I ended up liking the Sirius in my car a lot more than I expected. OK, I'll concede that it's definitely not CD quality, but it's as good as FM. The main differences, of course, are no commercials on music stations, stations don't fade out once you get out of town (great for road trips), and a MUCH larger selection of music. I can't tell you the last time I listened to conventional radio, and I wouldn't mind a bit if I never did again.

Before you put my off as a Stern/Sirius "fan-boy", consider this: when broadband first came out, a lot of people (ok, maybe not geeks) didn't see where it would make a big difference, and stuck with dial-up because they didn't want the added expense and didn't see it as being worth it. No problem, good for them, until the internet evolved and made itself basically unuseable to anything but a broadband connection. I'd contend that this is a real possibility with satellite radio, and if a big radio personality is using his name to start it off, I can see its relevance. Just as a person cannot bring him/herself to go back to dial-up once they're experienced the net on high speed, the same ends up being true with satellite radio...regular radio really sounds crappy afterward. Just my opinion.

Stern's Mentality (1)

FudRucker (866063) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451481)

Howard Stern is perpetually stuck with the mind & maturity of a poorly disclipined teenager with a one track mind...

Surprise (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 7 years ago | (#16451511)

Leave it to a bunch of douchebags to trash talk Howard Stern in a geek forum. No talent hack? glorified podcast? I suppose the industry just hands half a billion dollars over to people who fit that profile.

More relevant to the topic, I hope they don't take away net access to the people who already have subscriptions, or make them pay extra for it.

As usual, ignorance prevails... (1)

lantastik (877247) | more than 7 years ago | (#16451515)

If you think his show is nothing but sex and midget strippers, you are sorely mistaken. That says to me that you have never even listened to the show, or your head is so far up the religious right's ass, you can't think for yourself and everything must be censored. He invented the talk radio entertainment genre and everyone else is just an imitator. Almost 5 million people didn't sign up in less than a year because Stern has no clout or nothing interesting to say like the guy from Montreal commented. But hey, he's a French Canadian, so we know how that goes. As a previous subscriber to XM and a current subscriber to Sirius, XM has a slightly better music offering, but the all-around package for sports, news, political discussion, music and entertainment, goes to Sirius. The only thing XM does better is music. There is a reason that they have had to lower their subscriber forecasts twice this year. The internet stream is not CD quality. It is a 128kbps, but it's above average for an internet stream. Before everyone bashes the service and Stern, try it out. His show is hilarious, Artie Lange is an amazing addition to the show and I gladly listen to the whole show every day.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...