FCC chairman urges Apple to activate FM radios in iPhones in light of recent disasters [u]...

123578

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 153

    zoetmb said:
    maestro64 said:

    That is why they still make battery operated radios and it is called the Emergency Broadcast Network.

    Even if the chip was activated, it assumes someone had an app loaded on the phone which could access radio stations. Why not just use the amber alert system. Oh is that because the cell tower were not working, if they were not working how does someone down load the app then.

    This is typical government solutions to a problems which is you can not fix stupid. Not to say everyone is stupid in this case, even my kids have no idea what the Emergency Broadcast Network is and know to tune into the radio.  The one and only time we heard the test on the radio my kids had no idea what it was about and why it was even needed. I hardly hear radio stations even testing it anymore.

    If people have no ideal they are suppose to listen to the radio during an emergency, what make the FCC think people would listen on their cell phones.

    During an emergence you want to keep it simple, a radio will work in most all weather conditions and a battery operated radio will work for days non-stop.

    Your logic is completely flawed.   People would download the app BEFORE an emergency or the app would be built into the phone, so the cell tower being down would be a moot point. 
    maestro's logic isn't nearly as flawed as yours.  If people prepared for disasters (by and large they don't) there would be no need for FM capable handsets.

    A few years back I went through an ice storm for the second time in 20 years.  I lost electric power (in a large city) for 5 - 6 days each time.  After the second event I installed a gas powered electric generator that produces 40 amps/hour, enough to run just about everything in my house if I'm careful about what I turn on.  Total cost was less than $3000.  The only thing about the system I don't like is that even with a stabilizer I must cycle out my reserve gasoline supply (two 5 gallon containers) every other year.

    My point is that I have prepared (belatedly) for 20 year events.  Along the Gulf and East coasts MULTIPLE hurricanes are an annual event.  When an emergency radio (with extra batteries) costs less than $20, just how stupid can you be to not prepare for that?
    tmay
  • Reply 82 of 153

    If you live in a hurricane prone area, you should have a hand crank emergency weather radio. How would people in Puerto Rico be powering their iPhones to use as radios when they are mostly without any power anyway? These little radios can be had for like $20 now and they have flashlights, radios, can even crank to charge your smart phone. I guess Apple should also make a crank accessory? Pai is such an idiot.
    So are those that think the government can fix stupid with regulations.  John Wayne may not have said it first, but he was spot on when he said, "Life is hard, it's even harder when you're stupid".
    maestro64
  • Reply 83 of 153
    I think people need to take a little more responsibility for themselves. You can’t legislate common sense. A cheap radio is nearly as much of a must have in a bad situation as water, food and shelter. And if you’re really into preparedness (certainly anyone prepared enough to have a generator) would probably want one of these... https://www.beartooth.com/, but when energy is in question ( including be able to find gas after a week to keep that fancy generator going) I would definitely keep those hand crank radios/ flashlights and a few candles around. Something like an iPhone, let alone with a beartooth like device seems like a pretty big luxury. 
  • Reply 84 of 153
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 1,610member
    gatorguy said:
    sog35 said:
    gatorguy said:
    Good enough reason for me
    What do you mean?

    Personally I'm fine with the FCC pointing out to Apple the public good benefits of Apple adding an FM feature to iPhones, but they should stop short of mandating it.  There are millions of things an iPhone could do based on the technology available that doesn't make it right for the government to mandate features.

    From Apple's perspective I'm pretty sure they have already weighed the costs and benefits of supporting FM radio use and decided against it.  I expect that the costs of supporting the feature would easily outweigh the costs of implementing the feature.
    One assumption, and I'll emphasize that, is Apple prefers their users rely on pay-for-play services like Apple Music instead of free OTA FM.
    wrong.

    The iPhone would also have to have a 2 foot antenna to receive the FM signal.
    Despite the fact that other smartphones already offer FM radio. Gotcha. Apple can't do it. /s 
    This could be just another Android feature to copy.
  • Reply 85 of 153
    Mike WuertheleMike Wuerthele Posts: 4,083administrator
    gatorguy said:
    gatorguy said:
    tmay said:
    tmay said:
    Apple would never do what the FCC Chairman Pai urge Apple to do!  It would take away some of Apple music streaming business revenue and cellular companies data usage revenue!  Apple is all about maximizing profit!  
    Which is why they included a mini-jack to lightning connector adapter for free. Sigh...

    I'm not an RF guy, but there's a hell of a lot of difference between a Lightning connection and a 3.5 mm headphone jack; I'm thinking that Lightning, a digital connection, won't pass an analog signal from an antenna.
    I'm buzzword compliant on RF matters -- and can confirm your suspicion that there is a giant difference.
    removed post, thanks for Apple statement update.
    Yes I appreciate it too. That's new information. I would be curious tho why the Qualcomm chips Apple receives don't include FM capabilities as they typically do. Note too that unlike the common belief held by some commenters a space consuming two foot built-in antenna is not necessary either. I remembered reading this some time back while researching a GPS antenna issue on another site. 
    http://www.infineon.com/dgdl/Infineon+-+Article+-+BGB719+Miniature+LNA+for+embedded+FM+radio+antenna.pdf?fileId=db3a30433a047ba0013a4aa7a03b64c2
    "requires power" is the issue with that. And, new hardware and not backwards-compatible, nor a switch to throw.
    It could be. Apple has done other things that we thought they couldn't. Tech certainly doesn't stand still and the Infineon solution I linked was from years ago. If it were mandated (which I don't see happening but possible) do you think Apple incapable of finding an amazing and innovative way of doing so? TBH I would fully expect that somewhere within the bowels of Apple some engineer has/had been tasked with just that. The FCC has been pushing this for several years now. 
    I have no doubt that they can, should they so choose. What they can't do is turn it on retroactively, which is what the FCC chair was asking for.
    stompy
  • Reply 86 of 153
    k2kwk2kw Posts: 1,610member
    gatorguy said:
    tmay said:
    gatorguy said:
    If you live in a hurricane prone area, you should have a hand crank emergency weather radio. How would people in Puerto Rico be powering their iPhones to use as radios when they are mostly without any power anyway? These little radios can be had for like $20 now and they have flashlights, radios, can even crank to charge your smart phone. I guess Apple should also make a crank accessory? Pai is such an idiot.
    Agreed. I live in a hurricane prone area and have gone thru some. Cell phone is useless when the power is out for days on end. Hand crank radio worked perfectly. I’d rather save the limited phone power for texts, assuming towers online. 
    I'm sure you figured out you can charge your phone from your vehicle. ;)
    Well, if your vehicle isn't under water, which I'm guessing was a significant problem in Houston.
    ROFTL. Yes, that would be an issue. 
    Or your car is outside while you are hunkered down as the hurricane goes through.
  • Reply 87 of 153
    Apple can state that current iPhones may not have to capability for FM bit it clearly isn't something expensive or hard to engineer into future phones and it should be done.

    Many instances where the access to services is restricted, it stinks of a pure power and money grab.

    So there is the emergency services area to consider but also the fact that many of our complaints are with regulated monopolies that control public property and make billions off it. This could be public right of way access for cable television and internet access, public airways for satellite television, public over the air television stations and radio stations.

    Apple showed their own wisdom here when the forced carriers to take the iPhone without controlling items on the iPhone. The carriers tried to use control of one area (cell networks) to control another area (cell phones). Phones should be to access FM radio rather than just streaming.

    You are talking to a guy that has a generator. Has several stand alone radios that can run 100 hours on two AA batteries.

    I'd love to see the government clean up our access to over the air television and force some better programming there. It would be so nice to have what is available in places like the U.K with DTT aka Freeview.

    Right now they keep locking away abilities behind payments. Stream your music if you have enough data. Stream your television if you have a service and home internet (which they are trying to cap in areas where there is no competition.) 

    VCR's didn't require permission to record a program off the television. We could have phones that stream and get FM. We could have televisions that have good programming over the air and via the internet.

    More is better and in this case safer. It is just mandating access to what you already own, the public airways.
    gatorguy
  • Reply 88 of 153
    Since the cars in flooded areas are trash anyway, compel auto companies to convert air bags to deploy to float your vehicle and install small small electric propeller to turn your car into a boat
    tallest skil
  • Reply 89 of 153
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,386member
    trumptman said:
    Apple can state that current iPhones may not have to capability for FM bit it clearly isn't something expensive or hard to engineer into future phones and it should be done.

    Many instances where the access to services is restricted, it stinks of a pure power and money grab.

    So there is the emergency services area to consider but also the fact that many of our complaints are with regulated monopolies that control public property and make billions off it. This could be public right of way access for cable television and internet access, public airways for satellite television, public over the air television stations and radio stations.

    Apple showed their own wisdom here when the forced carriers to take the iPhone without controlling items on the iPhone. The carriers tried to use control of one area (cell networks) to control another area (cell phones). Phones should be to access FM radio rather than just streaming.

    You are talking to a guy that has a generator. Has several stand alone radios that can run 100 hours on two AA batteries.

    I'd love to see the government clean up our access to over the air television and force some better programming there. It would be so nice to have what is available in places like the U.K with DTT aka Freeview.

    Right now they keep locking away abilities behind payments. Stream your music if you have enough data. Stream your television if you have a service and home internet (which they are trying to cap in areas where there is no competition.) 

    VCR's didn't require permission to record a program off the television. We could have phones that stream and get FM. We could have televisions that have good programming over the air and via the internet.

    More is better and in this case safer. It is just mandating access to what you already own, the public airways.
    No iPhone has ever had FM capability. Apple has sold over a billion of them. I'm guessing that nobody missed it.

    Really would be stupid to add it now to solve a problem best solved in other ways. But if legislation is the answer, then how about something more useful than FM radio.
  • Reply 90 of 153
    gatorguy said:
    tmay said:
    tmay said:
    Apple would never do what the FCC Chairman Pai urge Apple to do!  It would take away some of Apple music streaming business revenue and cellular companies data usage revenue!  Apple is all about maximizing profit!  
    Which is why they included a mini-jack to lightning connector adapter for free. Sigh...

    I'm not an RF guy, but there's a hell of a lot of difference between a Lightning connection and a 3.5 mm headphone jack; I'm thinking that Lightning, a digital connection, won't pass an analog signal from an antenna.
    I'm buzzword compliant on RF matters -- and can confirm your suspicion that there is a giant difference.
    removed post, thanks for Apple statement update.
    Yes I appreciate it too. That's new information. I would be curious tho why the Qualcomm chips Apple receives don't include FM capabilities as they typically do. Note too that unlike the common belief held by some commenters a space consuming two foot built-in antenna is not necessary either. I remembered reading this some time back while researching a GPS antenna issue on another site. 
    http://www.infineon.com/dgdl/Infineon+-+Article+-+BGB719+Miniature+LNA+for+embedded+FM+radio+antenna.pdf?fileId=db3a30433a047ba0013a4aa7a03b64c2
    "requires power" is the issue with that. And, new hardware and not backwards-compatible, nor a switch to throw.
    Hmm… Anyone know how long a Qi induction receiver coil is? I wonder if it could be used as a suitable FM antenna with some clever switching to keep the FM receiver from being fried during battery charging. Obviously, this falls into the "future possibilities" department.
    edited September 2017
  • Reply 91 of 153
    tmay said:
    trumptman said:
    Apple can state that current iPhones may not have to capability for FM bit it clearly isn't something expensive or hard to engineer into future phones and it should be done.

    Many instances where the access to services is restricted, it stinks of a pure power and money grab.

    So there is the emergency services area to consider but also the fact that many of our complaints are with regulated monopolies that control public property and make billions off it. This could be public right of way access for cable television and internet access, public airways for satellite television, public over the air television stations and radio stations.

    Apple showed their own wisdom here when the forced carriers to take the iPhone without controlling items on the iPhone. The carriers tried to use control of one area (cell networks) to control another area (cell phones). Phones should be to access FM radio rather than just streaming.

    You are talking to a guy that has a generator. Has several stand alone radios that can run 100 hours on two AA batteries.

    I'd love to see the government clean up our access to over the air television and force some better programming there. It would be so nice to have what is available in places like the U.K with DTT aka Freeview.

    Right now they keep locking away abilities behind payments. Stream your music if you have enough data. Stream your television if you have a service and home internet (which they are trying to cap in areas where there is no competition.) 

    VCR's didn't require permission to record a program off the television. We could have phones that stream and get FM. We could have televisions that have good programming over the air and via the internet.

    More is better and in this case safer. It is just mandating access to what you already own, the public airways.
    No iPhone has ever had FM capability. Apple has sold over a billion of them. I'm guessing that nobody missed it.

    Really would be stupid to add it now to solve a problem best solved in other ways. But if legislation is the answer, then how about something more useful than FM radio.
    tmay said:
    trumptman said:
    Apple can state that current iPhones may not have to capability for FM bit it clearly isn't something expensive or hard to engineer into future phones and it should be done.

    Many instances where the access to services is restricted, it stinks of a pure power and money grab.

    So there is the emergency services area to consider but also the fact that many of our complaints are with regulated monopolies that control public property and make billions off it. This could be public right of way access for cable television and internet access, public airways for satellite television, public over the air television stations and radio stations.

    Apple showed their own wisdom here when the forced carriers to take the iPhone without controlling items on the iPhone. The carriers tried to use control of one area (cell networks) to control another area (cell phones). Phones should be to access FM radio rather than just streaming.

    You are talking to a guy that has a generator. Has several stand alone radios that can run 100 hours on two AA batteries.

    I'd love to see the government clean up our access to over the air television and force some better programming there. It would be so nice to have what is available in places like the U.K with DTT aka Freeview.

    Right now they keep locking away abilities behind payments. Stream your music if you have enough data. Stream your television if you have a service and home internet (which they are trying to cap in areas where there is no competition.) 

    VCR's didn't require permission to record a program off the television. We could have phones that stream and get FM. We could have televisions that have good programming over the air and via the internet.

    More is better and in this case safer. It is just mandating access to what you already own, the public airways.
    No iPhone has ever had FM capability. Apple has sold over a billion of them. I'm guessing that nobody missed it.

    Really would be stupid to add it now to solve a problem best solved in other ways. But if legislation is the answer, then how about something more useful than FM radio.
    No iPhone had facial recognition until Apple added it. No iPhone had fingerprint recognition until Apple added it. That reasoning is a bit inane. Plus this isn't some expensive or cutting edge feature. 

    Also it isn't that legislation is the answer in THIS particular case. The FCC already controls every radio frequency the phone receives for cellular service, for wifi, etc. The iPhone is required to be certified in order to even be sold. This isn't some area where the control is 99% private and the government is encroaching. All the airwaves are 100% public controlled. Mandating FM reception is no different than every other way the phone is mandated to work with regard to radio frequencies. 
    beowulfschmidt
  • Reply 92 of 153
    tmaytmay Posts: 3,386member
    trumptman said:
    tmay said:
    trumptman said:
    Apple can state that current iPhones may not have to capability for FM bit it clearly isn't something expensive or hard to engineer into future phones and it should be done.

    Many instances where the access to services is restricted, it stinks of a pure power and money grab.

    So there is the emergency services area to consider but also the fact that many of our complaints are with regulated monopolies that control public property and make billions off it. This could be public right of way access for cable television and internet access, public airways for satellite television, public over the air television stations and radio stations.

    Apple showed their own wisdom here when the forced carriers to take the iPhone without controlling items on the iPhone. The carriers tried to use control of one area (cell networks) to control another area (cell phones). Phones should be to access FM radio rather than just streaming.

    You are talking to a guy that has a generator. Has several stand alone radios that can run 100 hours on two AA batteries.

    I'd love to see the government clean up our access to over the air television and force some better programming there. It would be so nice to have what is available in places like the U.K with DTT aka Freeview.

    Right now they keep locking away abilities behind payments. Stream your music if you have enough data. Stream your television if you have a service and home internet (which they are trying to cap in areas where there is no competition.) 

    VCR's didn't require permission to record a program off the television. We could have phones that stream and get FM. We could have televisions that have good programming over the air and via the internet.

    More is better and in this case safer. It is just mandating access to what you already own, the public airways.
    No iPhone has ever had FM capability. Apple has sold over a billion of them. I'm guessing that nobody missed it.

    Really would be stupid to add it now to solve a problem best solved in other ways. But if legislation is the answer, then how about something more useful than FM radio.
    tmay said:
    trumptman said:
    Apple can state that current iPhones may not have to capability for FM bit it clearly isn't something expensive or hard to engineer into future phones and it should be done.

    Many instances where the access to services is restricted, it stinks of a pure power and money grab.

    So there is the emergency services area to consider but also the fact that many of our complaints are with regulated monopolies that control public property and make billions off it. This could be public right of way access for cable television and internet access, public airways for satellite television, public over the air television stations and radio stations.

    Apple showed their own wisdom here when the forced carriers to take the iPhone without controlling items on the iPhone. The carriers tried to use control of one area (cell networks) to control another area (cell phones). Phones should be to access FM radio rather than just streaming.

    You are talking to a guy that has a generator. Has several stand alone radios that can run 100 hours on two AA batteries.

    I'd love to see the government clean up our access to over the air television and force some better programming there. It would be so nice to have what is available in places like the U.K with DTT aka Freeview.

    Right now they keep locking away abilities behind payments. Stream your music if you have enough data. Stream your television if you have a service and home internet (which they are trying to cap in areas where there is no competition.) 

    VCR's didn't require permission to record a program off the television. We could have phones that stream and get FM. We could have televisions that have good programming over the air and via the internet.

    More is better and in this case safer. It is just mandating access to what you already own, the public airways.
    No iPhone has ever had FM capability. Apple has sold over a billion of them. I'm guessing that nobody missed it.

    Really would be stupid to add it now to solve a problem best solved in other ways. But if legislation is the answer, then how about something more useful than FM radio.
    No iPhone had facial recognition until Apple added it. No iPhone had fingerprint recognition until Apple added it. That reasoning is a bit inane. Plus this isn't some expensive or cutting edge feature. 

    Also it isn't that legislation is the answer in THIS particular case. The FCC already controls every radio frequency the phone receives for cellular service, for wifi, etc. The iPhone is required to be certified in order to even be sold. This isn't some area where the control is 99% private and the government is encroaching. All the airwaves are 100% public controlled. Mandating FM reception is no different than every other way the phone is mandated to work with regard to radio frequencies. 
    The FCC hasn't mandated it.

    Maybe they will, but FM doesn't look like that great a solution for emergencies anyway as it isn't two way communication.
  • Reply 94 of 153
    Simple:

    No 1/8” headphone jack = no external antenna capability for FM.

    Even non smartphone “Walkman” style radios require your wired headphones to also serve as an FM antenna.

    Lightning port probably can’t serve the same purpose due to it being a “digital” port at all times. Also explains the 2016 cut off...
  • Reply 95 of 153
    Having an AM radio built in would be nice for listening to baseball games.
  • Reply 96 of 153
    Simple:

    No 1/8” headphone jack = no external antenna capability for FM.

    Even non smartphone “Walkman” style radios require your wired headphones to also serve as an FM antenna.

    Lightning port probably can’t serve the same purpose due to it being a “digital” port at all times. Also explains the 2016 cut off...
    They could sell a Lightning connected wire / antenna.
  • Reply 97 of 153
    SoliSoli Posts: 8,461member
    Simple:

    No 1/8” headphone jack = no external antenna capability for FM.

    Even non smartphone “Walkman” style radios require your wired headphones to also serve as an FM antenna.

    Lightning port probably can’t serve the same purpose due to it being a “digital” port at all times. Also explains the 2016 cut off…
    But doesn't the headphone adapter and the included headphones have to convert digital to analog at some point along the cable which would then allow for a minimal FM antenna? I really don't see how a 1/8" headphone jack is somehow required for the physics to work when we're still talking about an analog antenna.
    edited September 2017 gatorguy
  • Reply 98 of 153
    macxpress said:
    I'd like to see Apple's reasoning for not enabling the FM radio. I'm sure there's a reason why other than just we don't feel like it. 
    FM needs a decent size antenna.  Most phones with FM use an extra wire in the headphones as an antenna or have a telescoping antenna that can attach.  Doesn’t really make sense for an iPhone without a headphone jack and external antennas are pretty ugly.  If you live in an area that can flood, just buy a cheap crank radio.

    You would think an FCC chairman would realize you need a long antenna for FM...
    edited September 2017
  • Reply 99 of 153
    esummers said:
    macxpress said:
    I'd like to see Apple's reasoning for not enabling the FM radio. I'm sure there's a reason why other than just we don't feel like it. 
    FM needs a decent size antenna.  Most phones with FM use an extra wire in the headphones as an antenna or have a telescoping antenna that can attach.  Doesn’t really make sense for an iPhone without a headphone jack and external antennas are pretty ugly.  If you live in an area that can flood, just buy a cheap crank radio.

    You would think an FCC chairman would realize you need a long antenna for FM...
    A bonehead like Pai.. Well, you knew that ;-).
  • Reply 100 of 153
    Soli said:
    Simple:

    No 1/8” headphone jack = no external antenna capability for FM.

    Even non smartphone “Walkman” style radios require your wired headphones to also serve as an FM antenna.

    Lightning port probably can’t serve the same purpose due to it being a “digital” port at all times. Also explains the 2016 cut off…
    But doesn't the headphone adapter and the included headphones have to convert digital to analog at some point along the cable which would then allow for a minimal FM antenna? I really don't see how a 1/8" headphone jack is somehow required for the physics to work when we're still talking about an analog antenna.
    The antenna signal needs to get to the receiver to be of use. The current discontinuity means it isn't going to work.
    The current A/D I think occurs in the earpods, that's a pretty short antenna...

    Good grief, a FM receiver can be bought for what $2-3...Then you can string cables for there to your roof if you want reception. This will never happen with the Iphone the way it is now and doing it would be senseless. Pai is a MORON.

    I could build my own radio from a radio shack kit at 10 in the 1970s. It's so ridiculously cheap and works on little power. the Speakers are what takes the most power but you can forgo that and plug and earphone straight on the board. A good 9volt could then last many days. Buy a few and last many weeks.
    The goal here is not high fidelity, but info after all hey BOZO Pai.
    edited September 2017 tmay
Sign In or Register to comment.