[SBE] Fwd: NAB FM chip proposal

[k7cr]

 Edwin - 

I had to comment on something you posted - 

The FCC has already stated their intent to bypass broadcast in emergencies.   The CMAS (eta 2010) requirements already will do for cellular what this proposes.

I don't agree with this one.

The goal for the distribution of public warning messages is to - not - bypass anyone!   The goal is to get that message into and on to every form of electronic communications possible.NOAA Weather Radio, AM Radio, FM Radio, HD-Radio, Sat-Radio Cable TV, Satellite TV, Broadcast TV, Cellular, PDA, Highway sign, Lotto Machine etc etc.  

The point is that no one system can reach everyone and the more communications vehicles you can use, the higher the number of recipients.

The goal is to get a life-saving message to - everyone.   This - does not - rule out Broadcasting - It augments it!

Clay Freinwald
  ----- Original Message ----



  - 
  From: Edwin Bukont 
  To: sbe 
  Sent: Wednesday, April 01, 2009 2:34 AM
  Subject: Re: [SBE] Fwd: NAB FM chip proposal


  This idea pretty much confirms what the White House already said.  In the view of this adminstration, radio is a ancient technology of no value to either government or those governed.    Nothing quite says 'hoping for a Hail Mary pass into the pockets of consumers" like this idea.  The FCC has already stated their intent to bypass broadcast in emergencies.   The CMAS (eta 2010) requirments already will do for cellular what this proposes. This is a poor attempt to somehow keep a portable radio hanging from a lanyard or in the pocket of every person, and a legal reason (mandated need) to use it.  When you have to force people to use your technology, when you have to ask the government to mandate its acceptance and use, it pretty much means you are a dinosaur.  This idea is embarrasing.

  Edwin Bukont CSRE, DRB, CBNT 
  Comm-Struction and Services LLC 
  Baltimore/Washington DC
  V- 410.879.5567 F- 240.368.1265 C- 240.417.2475 

  A Harris Broadcast Channel Partner 
   




   

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  From: k7cr at blarg.net
  To: sbe at sbe.org; sbe-governmentrelations at sbe.org
  Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 21:04:10 -0700
  CC: bfitpc at aol.com; JPoray at Sbe.org
  Subject: Re: [SBE] Fwd: NAB FM chip proposal


  All - 

  I was involved in a conference-call-group a while back on this topic.   They were pretty well convinced, going in, that EAS was the killer-app that would create a rationale for having FM receivers in cell phones.   I told this group that I had considerable reservation.   Frankly I have no problem with having an FM receiver in a cell phone, however I still don't see/understand just how this will enhance the viability of EAS.

  Here are some of my thoughts on the subject - 

  First - Lets look at the technology - 

  1 - The capture area afforded an antenna for an FM receiver within a cell phone is very little.  Remember that 1/4 wavelength is about 2.5 feet.

  >  I do know that tests have been run on this and have verified this issue.   However, if the phone has a - wired- headset attached, it can work quite well.

  2 - The capture area for an AM antenna is only a fraction of that for an AM receiver and therefore putting a viable AM receiver within a cell phone is likely a non-starter.  Even the most compact AM antennas (ferrite rods etc) are too big to fit the form factor of today's cell phones.

  3- Battery life is a critical aspect of cell phone performance.   The makers of these devices have made great strides in improving and extending battery life.   These efforts would be cut dramatically should the device also have to power a broadcast band receiver...To the point that either the phone would have to be larger or it would become a non-competitor with those phones that don't have this feature in terms of size and battery life etc.

  Second - Lets look at this proposal in terms of how it would work with EAS - 

  Lets say that you (regardless of who you are) come to Seattle with your cell phone that has the embedded FM Receiver.

  1 - How would this phone be 'told' to turn on it's FM receiver?   

  2- Would the wireless carrier transmit a command that would tell the FM receiver to turn on?

  3 - How would the receiver 'know' which FM station to tune to for the EAS message?

  4 - If we were talking about using this technology for the national EAS Mission (Presidential Message) it would be easier to understand for in that case, all FM stations remaining on the air would all be transmitting the same message.

  5-  If the device were only designed for National EAS Messages, this would be a very poor use of this technology as we have - never - had a national EAS activation.

  6- The fact is the practical uses of EAS are going to be at the State and Local level, thereby complicating this technology

  7 - Traditionally the participation level of FM stations with EAS is fairly low (When compared to AM's).  Therefore the number of FM's that are likely to participate in EAS (by transmitting the majority of EAS messages they receive) is going to be quite low.

  8 - Those FM stations that do broadcast EAS messages, generally, do so without transmission of header codes.

  9 - What about the delay in transmitting EAS messages, as permitted by Part 11?.   It would do little good for this device to signal it's user that there is a message on FM when it may be delayed by a considerable period of time.

  10 - How would the introduction of this technology convince a broadcaster that they should increase their participation level in EAS?

  11 - If the goal is to enhance the mission of EAS, would it not make more sense to include a NOAA Weather Radio in cell phones?

  12 - Using some text protocol, other than the one used today by wireless carriers, RDS etc, is likely to be wasteful for a number of technical reasons.

  The above are just a few thoughts that popped into my mine on this topic - I have no argument, nor comment, about the other benefit that such a proposal might bring broadcasters.

  Kudo's to Richard Rudman for sharing this topic from the recently completed EAS Summit.

  Clay Freinwald
  Chair, SBE EAS Committee
  Chair, Washington State SECC




    ----- Original Message ----- 
    From: Richard Rudman 
    To: GRC GRC ; EAS Committee SBE 
    Cc: Chris Imlay ; Poray John 
    Sent: Tuesday, March 31, 2009 2:31 PM
    Subject: [SBE] Fwd: NAB FM chip proposal


    Greetings from Washington:


    NAB has launched a major initiative to mandate FM radio chips in all cellphones.


    Attached is an Adobe Reader presentation given by NAB at the EAS Summit yesterday. 


    They are marketing this idea as an enhancement to EAS.  Obviously there are other benefits that would accrue to FM broadcasters. The EAS benefits may not be as clear cut as they think at this point.


    Obviously NAB is looking for other industry entities to back their proposal. I recommend talking to NAB about this if the Board thinks the idea has SBE member benefits. One could say that anything that gets more radios in the hands of audience is a good thing for SBE members. I think SBE could make some constructive suggestions to NAB to make it more likely their proposal would have merit for emergency public information and EAS.


    Here's my take on what they presented. Clay and Gary and Art were there and can chime in with their takes. 


    Advantages:
    1. Users can tune to an FM station after getting a CMAS warning (coming to you cellphone no sooner than 2010-2012 by some accounts)
    2. FM is added universally to cellphones as an option
    3. FM/RDS can display warning messages
    4. Value added for cell phone users
    5. Cost to add the chip is low - some phones already have them


    Disadvantages:
    1. AM is left out in the cold
    2. No recognition in existing cell FM chipsets for either SAME or CAP.
    3. Not as many FM stations have news departments as AM stations and/or have prepared for severe emergency operations.
    4. RDS data rate is only 1187.5 bit per second and has other uses now at RDS-capable stations.
    5. Cellphone displays of RDS date would be restricted so EAS CAP messages would require a lot of scrolling to read.




    FYI, the CTIA representative on the panel, Brian Joseph, Dir. of Public Affairs for CTIA,  was cool to the idea -- possibly icy.


    Regards,


    Richard



----------------------------------------------------------------------------







----------------------------------------------------------------------------


    Greetings from Washington:

    NAB has launched a major initiative to mandate FM radio chips in all  
    cellphones.

    Attached is an Adobe Reader presentation given by NAB at the EAS  
    Summit yesterday.

    They are marketing this idea as an enhancement to EAS.  Obviously  
    there are other benefits that would accrue to FM broadcasters. The EAS  
    benefits may not be as clear cut as they think at this point.

    Obviously NAB is looking for other industry entities to back their  
    proposal. I recommend talking to NAB about this if the Board thinks  
    the idea has SBE member benefits. One could say that anything that  
    gets more radios in the hands of audience is a good thing for SBE  
    members. I think SBE could make some constructive suggestions to NAB  
    to make it more likely their proposal would have merit for emergency  
    public information and EAS.

    Here's my take on what they presented. Clay and Gary and Art were  
    there and can chime in with their takes.

    Advantages:
    1. Users can tune to an FM station after getting a CMAS warning  
    (coming to you cellphone no sooner than 2010-2012 by some accounts)
    2. FM is added universally to cellphones as an option
    3. FM/RDS can display warning messages
    4. Value added for cell phone users
    5. Cost to add the chip is low - some phones already have them

    Disadvantages:
    1. AM is left out in the cold
    2. No recognition in existing cell FM chipsets for either SAME or CAP.
    3. Not as many FM stations have news departments as AM stations and/or  
    have prepared for severe emergency operations.
    4. RDS data rate is only 1187.5 bit per second and has other uses now  
    at RDS-capable stations.
    5. Cellphone displays of RDS date would be restricted so EAS CAP  
    messages would require a lot of scrolling to read.


    FYI, the CTIA representative on the panel, Brian Joseph, Dir. of  
    Public Affairs for CTIA,  was cool to the idea -- possibly icy.

    Regards,

    Richard
    >




----------------------------------------------------------------------------


    _______________________________________________
    The SBE Roundtable, SBE at sbe.org
    To unsubscribe, go to http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/options/sbe

    http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe



------------------------------------------------------------------------------


  _______________________________________________
  The SBE Roundtable, SBE at sbe.org
  To unsubscribe, go to http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/options/sbe

  http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/sbe/attachments/20090401/3c999c5a/attachment.html>