Home > ham-radio > Ham Radio Planning Future 2001
11 May

Ham Radio Planning Future 2001

Posted by Comments off

The future of radio is at stake. As we speedily move into the 21st Century, our buyers are altering their listening mediums and we must stay abreast of those listening needs and modes.

Traditional college radio broadcasts may be lost in translation if they cannot keep up with technical changes. Some radio broadcast owners are ignoring these trends, which may injure their ratings if listeners progressively move away from established college radio to college radio on the Internet. Still others perceive college radio on the Internet as a dead medium, notwithstanding it may be revived if colleges proceed to exploration listener audiences and trends.

Benefits of Having College Radio on the Internet

1. More formats are available than conventional FM college radio stations. Hundreds are available from jazz and blues to Broadway and opera, to Indie rock and adult substitute and a great deal of more.

2. Ability to listen while in multiple places such as home, work, college, library or wherever you have available broadband access.

3. With college radio on the Internet, there is no “dead air”. Some college and conventional radio stations have their last broadcast ending at midnight, and the next one starts amongst five and seven in the morning. However, utilizing college radio on the Internet and the growing demand from students and consumers, this has the potential to increase funding and the listening audience base.

4. Set and leave it on one station without having to do not forget station call letters or numbers. No longer do listeners have to do not forget where they heard their bestloved tunes on the dial. Having a college radio on the Internet may be without apparent effort bookmarked in your Favorites’ list or even set as your homepage.

5. Colleges are competent to increase their fan base among alumni and interchange students because with having college radio on the Internet, it may be accessed worldwide.

6. Many college radio stations on the Internet tout commercial-free listening or at least minimal interruptions. This is an important vantage for listeners who do not like all the interruptions amid songs or song sets with station breaks and commercials which may last two minutes or longer.

7. Allows more prospects for unsigned bands and musical talent to be heard on the radio. With further and added probabilities for more format types, bands of all styles will have a medium in which to play their music for a specific audience. As with MySpace, unsigned or lesser known musicians and bands are attempting to gain an audience base and oftentimes release a couple of their songs so members may upload them to their homepages. College radio on the Internet may increase that audience base by featuring the group or musician on it is station and have listeners send their remarks thru email, blog, online poll or phone call.

8. Unlike a established radio station, college radio on the Internet enables listeners to skip a song. If the listener does not care for the song, he or she may merely select “skip” and move onto the next song. Only college radio on the Internet and satellite stations have this advantage.

There are a great deal of gains to keeping college radio on the Internet. Although galore college stations have abandoned this medium because it did not reap the rewards as quickly as was expected, now it has listeners’ ears and they have more invested interest with this medium.

The top online radio networks include Shoutcast, Radio@AOL, and MSN Music as reported by MeasureCast, a company which provides next day audience size and demographic reports for online media networks. Only the top college radio stations online have made the top 10 list, which include a few Ohio college radio station programs too.

The top college radio broadcasts include KALX, Berkeley, CA; WNYU, New York, NY; and KTRU, Houston, TX, which was reported by Radio-Locator.com. Furthermore, a noteworthy Ohio college radio station has a list of eight college radio on the Internet stations that are broadcasted from respective locatings all over the U.S., exceptionally where a broadcasting school is located. Colleges and universities who have the capacity and interest to support college radio on the Internet stations are competent to employ it is own students to undertake all tasks and responsibilities of running the online radio station. Student listeners give rise to an instant audience base because their music interests vary and they are attracted by a assortment of formats.

Because Internet based college radio stations may in a literal sense reach listeners from all corners of the world, we would think radio station owners would want to proceed college radio on the Internet. Futhermore, college radio stations on the Internet, as well as conventional AM/FM formats, may run in tandem with one another without radio tower interference. However, a good deal of littler universities and community colleges are not competent to afford to keep such choices on the Internet due to failing sponsorship, decreased student population, or fees required to both license music and the radio station.

Check with your local broadcasting school to find out if they continually receive students to become professional radio DJs. If you are mesmerized in learning to become a radio DJ, video or audio producer, or in other radio and TV broadcast careers, then you will want a broadcasting school that is both creditable and credentialed. Technology proceeds to grow and expand, so to keep up with the industry they will have to have the latest instrumentation for those wanting to learn how to become a radio DJ on a college radio station on the Internet and other radio broadcast careers.

Ham Radio Planning Future 2001

The all-new Kindle has a new electronic-ink screen with 50 percent better contrast than any other e-reader, a new sleek design with a 21 percent littler body while still keeping the same 6-inch-size reading area, and a 17 percent lighter weight at just 8.5 ounces. The new Kindle likewise offers 20 percent rapidly and without delay page turns, up to one month of battery life, double the storage to 3,500 books, built-in Wi-Fi, a graphite color option and more—all for only $139.

Ham Radio Planning Future 2001

Ham Radio Planning Future 2001 Photo

Ham Radio Planning Future 2001

Ham Radio Planning Future 2001 Picture

Ham Radio Planning Future 2001

Ham Radio Planning Future 2001 Pic

Ham Radio Planning Future 2001

Ham Radio Planning Future 2001 Pic


Most helpful client reviews

25231 of 25467 persons found the following review helpful.
5Kindle vs. Nook (updated 1/2/2011)
By Ron Cronovich
If you’re attempting to choose among a Nook and a Kindle, perchance I may help. My wife and I have owned a Nook (the primary one, not the new Nook Color), a Kindle 2, and a Kindle DX. When Amazon declared the Kindle 3 this summer, we pre-ordered two Kindle 3′s: the wi-fi only model in graphite, and the wi-fi + 3G model in white. They arrived in late August and we have applied them very steadily since then. For us, Kindle is better than Nook, but Nook is a good device with it is own vantages that I will talk about below. I’ll end this review with a few words in regards to the Nook Color.

First, reasons why we prefer the Kindle:

* Speed

In our experience, the Kindle is very zippy equated to the Nook. Page refresh speed (the time it takes a new page to appear after you push the page-turn button) was WAY more immediate on Kindle 2 than on Nook, and it’s rapidly and without delay yet on Kindle 3. Yet, I read a whole book on the Nook and didn’t find the slower page refresh to be annoying – you get employed to it, and it’s not a problem.

For me, the more indispensable speed divergence worries navigation – moving the cursor around the screen, for example to pick a book from your library, or to jump to a chapter by selecting it in the table of contents. On Kindle, you do this by pushing a 5-way rocker button, and the cursor moves very quickly. On Nook, you do this by activating the color LCD touchscreen (which ordinarily shuts off when not in use, to conserve battery). A “virtual rocker button” appears on the screen, and you touch it to move the cursor. Unfortunately, the Nook cursor moves very sluggishly. This might not be a big deal to you, but it in truth got annoying to me, particularly since my wife’s Kindle was so quick and responsive.

In November 2010, Nook got a software upgrade that increments page refresh speed and makes navigation more responsive. I returned my Nook months ago, so I can not tell you if the Nook’s performance is now equivalent to the Kindle’s, but Nook owners in the remarks division have convinced me that the software update improves the experience of using the Nook. If performance is a huge factor in your decision, visit a Best Buy and compare Kindle and Nook side by side.

* Screen contrast

You’ve seen Amazon’s claims that the Kindle 3 e-ink has 50% better contrast than Kindle 2 or other e-ink devices. I have no way of incisively measuring the betterment in contrast, but I may tell you that the Kindle 3 display unquestionably has more contrast than Kindle 2 or Nook. The divergence is noticeable, and important: more screen contrast means less eyestrain when reading in poorly lit rooms.

In well-lit rooms, the Nook and Kindle 2 have sufficient contrast to grant for comfortable reading. But I ofttimes read in low-light conditions, like in bed at night, or in a poorly lit room. In these situations, reading on Nook or Kindle 2 was a bit uncomfortable and often gave me a mild headache. When I got the Kindle 3, the extra contrast was without delay noticeable, and made it more comfortable to read underneath less-than-ideal lighting conditions. (If you go with a Nook, just make sure you have a good reading lamp nearby.)

* Battery life

The Nook’s color LCD touch screen drains it is battery quickly – I could never get more than 5 days out of a charge. The Kindle 2 had longer battery life than the Nook, and Kindle 3 has even longer life: in the 3 months since we received our Kindle 3′s, we distinctively get 3 weeks of battery life among charges. (We keep wireless off regarding half the time to save battery power.)

* Weight

Nook weighs in regards to 3 ounces more than the new Kindle, and you may actually feel the difference. Without a case, Nook is still light sufficient to hold in one hand for long reading sessions without fatigue. But in a case, Nook is a heavy sucker. The new Kindle 3 is so light, even in a case, we find it comfortable keeping in one hand for long reading sessions.

Reasons a lot of people might prefer the Nook:

* In-store experience

If you need help with your nook, you may take it to any barnes and noble and get a real humane to help. You may take your nook into the coffee shop section of your local B&N store and read any book for free for up to one hour per day. When you take your nook to B&N, a good deal of in-store special deals and the occasional free book pop up on your screen.

* User-replaceable battery

Rechargeable batteries at long last lose their capacity to hold a charge. Nook’s battery is user-replaceable and comparatively inexpensive. To replace Kindle’s battery, Amazon wants you to ship your Kindle to Amazon, and they will ship you back a DIFFERENT Kindle than the one you sent (it’s the same model, for example if you send a white Kindle 3, you get a white Kindle 3 back, but you get a “refurbished” one, NOT the precise one you sent them). I don’t like this at all.

However, various people have posted remarks here that have eased my concerns. Someone looked up stats on the Kindle’s battery and did a lot of simple calculations to show that it must last for 3 or more years. Before that happens, I will surely have upgraded to a newer Kindle model by then. Also, somebody found galore companies that trade Kindle batteries at reasonable cost and have how-to videos that demonstrate how we may replace the battery ourselves. Doing this would void the Kindle’s warranty, but the battery will probably not fail until long after the warranty expires.

* ePub

Nook uses the ePub format, a widely used open format. Amazon uses a proprietary ebook format. Many libraries will “lend” ebooks in the ePub format, which works with nook but not kindle. However, a free and reputable program called Calibre allows you to translate ebooks from one format to another – it supports a good deal of formats, including ePub and Kindle. The only catch is that it doesn’t work with copy-protected ebooks, so you can’t, for example, buy a Kindle book (which is copy protected) and translate it to ePub so you may read it on a Nook.

* Nook’s color LCD touchscreen

The original Nook has a little color LCD screen on the bottom for navigation. This could be a pro or con, depending on your preferences. It makes the Nook hipper and less drab than Kindle. Some people receive pleasure from using the color LCD to view their library or navigate. I did, at first. But after two weeks of use, and comparings with my wife’s Kindle, I found the devoted buttons of the Kindle having little impact and far quicker to use than the Nook’s color touchscreen. I likewise found the bright light from the color screen distracting when I was attempting to read a book or newspaper (though when not in use, it shuts off after a minute or so to conserve battery).

* expandable capacity

Nook comes with 2GB of internal memory. If you need more capacity, you may insert a microSD card to add up to 16GB more memory. Kindle comes with 4GB of internal memory – twice as much as Nook – but there’s no way to exaggerate that. Kindle doesn’t receive memory cards of any type. If you principally use your device to read ebooks and newspapers, this shouldn’t be an issue. I have over 100 books on my Kindle, and I’ve used only a tiny fraction of the memory. Once Kindle’s memory fills up, just delete books you don’t need prompt access to; you may always restore them later, in seconds, for free.

A few other notes:

Kindle and Nook have other features, such as an MP3 player and a web browser, but I caution you to have low expected values for these features. The MP3 player on the Kindle is like the first-generation iPod shuffle – you can’t see what song is playing, and you can’t navigate to other songs on your device. I don’t like the browser on either device; e-ink is just not a good technology for surfing the web; it’s slower and clunkier than LCD screen technology, so even the browser on an Android phone or iPod touch is more pleasurable to use. However, some commenters have more favorable views of either device’s browser, and you might, too.

* ebook lending

If you have a Nook or a Kindle, you may “lend” an ebook you purchased to somebody else with the same device for up to two weeks. The Nook has always had this feature. The Kindle just got this feature as of December 2010. Most but not all purchased ebooks are lendable, due to publisher restrictions.

* PDF support

Kindle and Nook both handle PDF files, but in dissimilar ways. When you put a PDF file on your nook, nook converts it into an ebook-like file, then you may adjust the font size, and the text and pagination will adjust just like with any ebook. But you cannot see the firstborn PDF file in the native format in which it was created. Kindle 3 and Kindle DX have native aid for PDF files. You may see PDF files just as they would appear on your computer. You may also convert PDF files to an ebook-like format, and then Kindle handles them just the way the Nook handles them – text and pagination adjust when you alter the font size. Unfortunately, some symbols, equations, and graphics get lost or mangled in the translation – even when looking at PDF files in their native format on the Kindle. Moreover, the little screen size of the Kindle 3 and the Nook is not outstanding for PDF files, most of which are designed for a more prominent page size. You may zoom and pan, but this is cumbersome and tiresome. Thanks to commenters who suggested watching PDF files in landscape mode on the Kindle (I don’t know if you may do this on Nook); this way, you may see the entire top half of the page without panning, and then scroll down to the bottom half. This works a little better.

SUMMARY:

Nook and Kindle each offer their own advantages. We like the nook’s user-replaceable battery, compatibility with ePub format, and in-store experience. But we strongly prefer Kindle 3 because it is performance is zippier, it is higher-contrast screen is requiring little effort to read, and it’s littler and lighter so it is more portable and more comfortable to hold in one hand for long reading sessions.

* Nook Color

Everything I wrote with regards to the Nook in this review applies to the firstborn Nook (which proceeds to be available), not the new Nook Color. To me, the Nook Color is in a dissimilar product category than the Kindle or basi Nook. Nook Color has an LCD screen, like an iPad or most computer monitors. That’s a huge disfavor for persons like me, who get headaches from reading a computer screen for long periods of time. Amazon’s Kindle product page has an informative division on e-ink vs. LCD displays.

But galore persons don’t have difficulties reading from computer screens, and the Nook Color is getting glowing reviews in the press and by owners. For the money, it offers a lot of functionality such as a good web browser and the capacity to play games and watch movies. But keep in mind: it costs a lot more than the Kindle, it weighs almost twice as much, it doesn’t come in a 3G version, and (unlike the introductory Nook) the Nook Color doesn’t have a user replaceable battery.

7942 of 8110 persons found the following review helpful.
3Worth the money. Not perfect, but very very good for start out to finish novels in good light
By Jeffrey Stanley
The Kindle is my basi e-ink reader. I own an iPad, an iPhone, and have owned a Windows-based phone in the past that I used as an ereader.

My overall impression of the device is good.

The good:
I’d frankly rather read linear (read from page one to the end, one page at a time) fiction from it than a book, because I can’t always get comfortable with a book. Hardcovers are most times a bit heavy, and paperbacks don’t always lie open easily. The Kindle is fantastically light and thin. I may hold it in one hand easily. The page turn buttons are conveniently located. Page-turns aren’t instant, but they’re probably quicker than turning a physical page in a printed book (there are just a lot more page-turns unless you choose a little font). The contrast is better than other ereaders I’ve seen. There is zero eye strain in good light. My eyesight isn’t the greatest and I like being competent to increase the font size and read without glasses. I love being capable to browse the Kindle store and read samples before resolving to purchase. The “experimental” browser is astoundingly usable, but isn’t great. It is utile for browsing wikipedia and blogs. The biggest drawback to the browser is the awkward pointer navigation, using the 5-way pad. It syncs your furthest read page over the internet so you may pick up where you left off using your iPhone or iPad.

The so-so:
The kindle store could use more categories and sorting options. You can’t sort by “top rated,” and there is no category for “alternate histories,” for example. Finding a very-specific type of fiction relies on keyword searches, which don’t do a great job. The wifi once in a while doesn’t connect before it times-out. You seldom need the wifi, but it is annoying if you change a setting, answer “OK” to the prompt to connect, and the thing tells you it failed to connect two seconds later (the precise moment it suggests that it did in the end connect, then you need to go back to update the setting again). Most settings don’t require a connection, but it is a minor annoyance. Most of your time will be expended reading, and of course your books are stored on the device and a connection is not required. Part of me wishes I’d purchased the 3G model, because the browser is good sufficient that having lifetime free 3G wireless would be worth the extra money. Magazines don’t look very good and are not very easy to navigate. There is minor glare in numerous lighting conditions, largely when a lamp is positioned behind the reader’s head.

The bad:
The contrast is reasonable to poor in dim light. It is much having little impact to read a printed page in dim light. In good light, contrast is on par with a pulp paperback. In dim light it feels almost like reading from an old Palm Pilot (resolution is better than an old Palm, but contrast is bad in dim light). The screen is little sufficient that the frequency of page turns is pretty high. Even in good light, the light gray background is less pleasant than the eggshell background of a printed page. You ought to tell it to sync before you switch it off, if you suppose the feature permitting you to pick up where you left off using other gadgets to work correctly. The copy shelter prevents you from using the files on anything other than Kindle software or devices.

Vs iPad:
IPad is a lot better for magazines, reference materials, and illustrated materials. Kindle is worlds better for reading novels. IPad is beauteous heavy, making it more difficult to hold in your hand or carry with you everywhere. Kindle is much more portable and requiring little effort to hold. IPad has a lot of awful children’s books and magazines, which take vantage of it is multimedia features. IPad is unreadable in sunlight and glare is bad in bright light. Kindle is as good as a printed page in bright light. Ipad serves as a originative tool, a computing tool, a gaming tool, and a communicating tool. Kindle is only a novel machine. I don’t regret buying either one of them. An iPad won’t replace books, but a Kindle can, if the book is text-only.

I highly commend this device at it is new low price if you are a standard reader of novels. I love my kindle. Just don’t suppose it to be more than it is. Leave the magazines and such to the tablet computers.

1029 of 1046 persons found the following review helpful.
5A hesistant buyer rejoices on his choice
By Mr Goodwrench
I researched the buy of a Kindle for a long time. I couldn’t determine whether or not it was worth buying a committed e-reader. Boy am I glad I made this purchase. The downside to Amazon’s online selling of Kindle 3 is that the clients don’t get to see it in person. It is much better in person. This may sound stupid, but when I got my new Kindle, I thought there was a stuck-on overlay on the screen containing a diagram of the unit’s buttons, etc. I actually tried to peel it off. Doh! The e-ink on this unit is THAT good. I didn’t realize that I was staring at the actual display. I likewise didn’t realize that no power is required until the display changes. (thus the outstanding battery life) I do a lot of reading, but was facing the chance of reading less or buying big type books because of my variable and deteriorating eyesight. The new Kindle has been a godsend. Now, I may determine the size of type I need depending on my level of fatigue amongst other things. The weight and ergonomics are very good. For someone, like me, with neuropathy in his hands, it is exceedingly easy to manage and pleasurable to own. To me, it is having little impact to read than print books. The ease of navigation is great as is the speed. The battery life, so far, has been extraordinary. It without apparent effort connected to our home Wi-Fi, which by design does not broadcast an SSID. It downloads books so fast that I closely thought they were not totally received. I did not buy the 3G version because of the price divergence and the fact that there is no coverage where I live. If you are not perpetually traveling, I don’t see the need to spend the extra bucks, but that is a matter of personal choice. For those who have no Wi-Fi at home, do not forget that you may always download the material to your computer and transfer it by way of USB. Just today I was looking at an consultation with Tony Blair on TV. He was talking with regards to his new book, which sounded interesting. I picked up the Kindle and downloaded a free sample before the consultation was over. I have only read the preface so far, but will in all probability buy the book. Now THAT is a great way to buy a book! I haven’t used online browsing spacious yet, but find it reasonable for what the device is. This is primarily a book reader, not a laptop or notebook. They are great for what they do, but can’t match the e-ink display, or the light weight. For those of you worrying when it comes to the wait for the new Kindle, let me end with, “It is worth the wait” This new Kindle is all in regards to the quality of experience. There are a good deal of format selections for electronic reading. If you want the best experience, go with the Kindle.

See all 22937 client reviews…

Comments are closed.