Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
Search

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

Howard Stern Coming To the Net

Posted by kdawson on Mon Oct 16, 2006 06:01 AM
from the shock-and-aww dept.
The Internet Entertainment
theodp writes, "To promote an Internet radio service Sirius is launching this week, Howard Stern's 4+ hour program will be made available live online for free on October 25 and 26. The new Sirius service will offer 75+ channels of CD-quality programming for $12.95/month with no need to buy a Sirius satellite receiver."
+ -
story
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.

Howard Stern Coming To the Net 50 Comments More /

 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More
Loading... please wait.

  • Yawn... (Score:3, Funny)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 16 2006, @06:05AM (#16450843)
    Let me give that reaction a little more thought...

    Nope. Yawn sums it up.

      • It always has...just getting worse lately.

        Ask yourself the same question the next time a Nintendo (proprietary gaming platform) or Google (proprietary search engine) blurb shows up. Many, if not most of Slashdot's stories are cheap, positive PR pieces for corporations open-source Slashdotters normally wouldn't support.

  • "CD quality programming" (Score:2, Informative)

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

    • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

      by achacha (139424)
      I listen to Sirius radio on the web daily (because I work in a valley between 2 mountains and no reception is possible). Honestly, the quality is great, better than FM radio. I also have a Sirius unit that unfortunately broadcasts via FM (since my car doesn't have a direct input and I am too lazy to rewire it) and the internet stream sounds better than FM I get in my car.

      As far as Howard, his show is quite amusing for the guests he has and the non-standard questions he asks them. Even though on satellite

      • Re: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by a_nonamiss (743253)
        I was on the bandwagon and all reared up ready to get Sirius at the beginning of the year for the sole purpose of listening to Stern. Sadly, Sirius (and probably Howard in particular) was unwilling at the time to embrace Internet broadcasts. Rumor has it, Stern was paranoid that people would steal his show and rebroadcast it so that he wouldn't get as much money. My commute into work is 7 minutes long, and I wasn't willing to pay for a subscription to listen to 7 minutes a day. Sure, I could've probably pur

        • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

          by Babbster (107076)

          Rumor has it, Stern was paranoid that people would steal his show and rebroadcast it so that he wouldn't get as much money.

          Wow. Talk about bullshit. No, Stern wasn't "paranoid" about internet broadcasts (as long as they're paid for - this is a subscription-based business). He was talking about how they needed an Internet stream from virtually the day he arrived on the air.

          Stern and Sirius are no more "paranoid" that people will steal their shit than anyone else who has a service they're trying to tell

      • Re: (Score:3, Informative)

        by CastrTroy (595695)
        129? WTF is that. Why not just use 128? Does extra 1000 bits really make that much of a difference. And besides, we all know 128 isn't really CD quality. They used to pretend it was back in 1998 when Napster was cool, but we know that you get a lot better sound out of 192 Kbps encoding, and probably a lot closer to actual CD quality.

  • $13 a month... (Score:4, Funny)

    by Reverend99 (1009807) on Monday October 16 2006, @06:12AM (#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... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Iphtashu Fitz (263795) on Monday October 16 2006, @07:22AM (#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? (Score:5, Funny)

    by LordSnooty (853791) on Monday October 16 2006, @06:15AM (#16450895)
    What, are they streaming WAV files?

    • Re:CD quality? (Score:4, Interesting)

      by timeOday (582209) on Monday October 16 2006, @07:08AM (#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.
  • I guess they wont be playing much music on all those channels.

  • 13 bucks a month? (Score:5, Insightful)

    by saboola (655522) on Monday October 16 2006, @06:22AM (#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: (Score:3, Informative)

        by thc69 (98798)
        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.

  • Mobile Clients? (Score:5, Interesting)

    by Erwos (553607) on Monday October 16 2006, @06:29AM (#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? (Score:4, Funny)

      by Bloke down the pub (861787) on Monday October 16 2006, @06:32AM (#16450981)
      While I could honestly care less about Howard Stern
      You could? I couldn't. Really.
      • Mod parent informative/insightful. Or +1 grammer nazi, if it's available.
        • 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? (Score:5, Funny)

        by Stalyn (662) on Monday October 16 2006, @08:31AM (#16451783) Homepage Journal
        Saying "I could care less" means "there is no limit on how less I care but rather a limit on the effort I put into not caring". For us Americans we don't challenge each other on the limit of not caring (which is a bottomless pit) but on how much effort is put into not caring (because we are so lazy, effort is more valuable).

        You couldn't care less? Well I surely could but it's not worth the effort.
          • "Have you ever heard of sarcasm?"
            Nope, don't think I have, but it sounds like a LOT of fun...

  • CD-quality programming . . .Yeah right (Score:5, Informative)

    by StateOfTheUnion (762194) on Monday October 16 2006, @06:30AM (#16450967) Homepage
    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 (Score:5, Informative)

      by Enry (630) <enry.wayga@net> on Monday October 16 2006, @07:21AM (#16451277) Journal
      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: (Score:3, Insightful)

        by Mike Hicks (244) *
        I have XM rather than Sirius, but a lot of people have said that both services definitely don't reach the level of 128k MP3 quality. XM is 96kbps at best, which puts it more on par with FM, though I personally find the digital artifacts to be more annoying than FM static. Well, maybe Sirius is better -- I haven't had a chance to listen to it with a proper speaker setup (as in, something other than being piped in through the overhead speakers at a store).

        Oh, and that cable TV analogy doesn't work for me.

    • Re:CD-quality programming . . .Yeah right (Score:4, Interesting)

      by suv4x4 (956391) on Monday October 16 2006, @07:29AM (#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.

      • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

        by NEW22 (137070)
        The point is, why call it CD quality when its not? Why not call it FM quality, which would at least be somewhat closer to accurate, and somewhat farther from a lie? Also, a lot of people like you seem to dismiss people who actually care about the quality of the sound coming out of their XM/Sirius radios as marginal and somehow being jerks about all of this. Well, whatever you may think about their desire to have an actual quality signal, the fact is that advertising hype such as "CD Quality" exactly amou

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

    by edwardpickman (965122) on Monday October 16 2006, @06:31AM (#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? (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Lummoxx (736834) on Monday October 16 2006, @07:17AM (#16451251) Homepage

      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.

  • I had no idea Howard Stern was still relevant.

  • Satellite radio in the car, great. At home, ??? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Hamster Lover (558288) * on Monday October 16 2006, @06:39AM (#16451027) Journal
    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.

  • Who cares? (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Monday October 16 2006, @06:43AM (#16451049)
    Maybe if I was still in my adolescence (or stuck in it) I'd really dig Howard Stern.
  • 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 (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Infernon (460398) * <[infernon] [at] [gmail.com]> on Monday October 16 2006, @06:46AM (#16451075)
    How is this pertinent to the geek community at all? It looks like an advertisement to me...

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

    by Lordleppard (913427) on Monday October 16 2006, @07:02AM (#16451161) Homepage
    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.

  • 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

  • Just tune your FM radio to 87.9! (Score:5, Interesting)

    by dpbsmith (263124) on Monday October 16 2006, @07:40AM (#16451419) Homepage
    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?

  • Free Stern? (Score:3, Funny)

    by catdevnull (531283) on Monday October 16 2006, @08:52AM (#16451989)
    You mean I can get 4+ hours of infantile poopy jokes and lesbian fetish fantasies for free?

    I already get that with Slashdot and Fark!
    • 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.
    • 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: (Score:2, Insightful)

      by viriiman (957358)
      Hoo-hoo Robin, I invented streaming my show on the internet, it was all me. Sirius, they're rippin me off.

    • Re:stern = hack radio (Score:4, Insightful)

      by patrixmyth (167599) on Monday October 16 2006, @08:44AM (#16451917)
      I think it's a mistake to equate the Howard Stern Show with Howard Stern. The show is dreck and appeals to the lowest common denominator in our society. If you lisen/watch for a bit, however, you'll realize that Howard Stern the person is a pretty smart guy who just happens to realize that appealing to the lowest common common denominator of society is pretty good for your paycheck. He doesn't respect his listeners and he knows that the second they have an opportunity to giggle and point at his misfortunes and kick him to the curb, they will do so. Meanwhile, he's getting a hell of a ride. He's a modern day P.T. Barnum barking for the freakshow. I never thought I'd use this term, but in this case it's true "Don't hate the player. Hate the game."
    • Yes, but he's EXTREME . Being EXTREME is cool. You want to be cool, don't you? Then listen to Howard Stern. Because he's EXTREME , and EXTREME is cool. By listening to Howard Stern, you then become EXTREME -- and therefore cool -- by extension.

      • Re: (Score:3, Funny)

        by jcr (53032)
        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 (Score:4, Insightful)

        by elrous0 (869638) * on Monday October 16 2006, @08:27AM (#16451745)
        Yeah, and Britney Spears sells a lot of CD's too. That doesn't make her a musical genius.

        Howard is WAY past his prime, anyway. He's an interesting guy, and is even capable of the occasional intelligent insight. But the daily grind of listening to him go on...and on...and on...and on...and on about strippers/lesbians/his dick/porn stars/etc. tends to get VERY old, very fast.

        When he was in his heyday, I listened to him. He had some interesting stuff to say and his interviews were truly unique (who else could have gotten away with asking Julia Roberts how big Liam Neeson's dick was?). But it was, at best, one good segment for every 15 lame ones. And that was in his HEYDAY (10-15 years ago).

        Besides, without the FCC or his wife to mock anymore, what's really left for him to do? He's like an aging knight in a world where all the dragons have already been slain.

        -Eric

        • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

          by Iphtashu Fitz (263795)
          Howard is WAY past his prime, anyway. He's an interesting guy, and is even capable of the occasional intelligent insight. But the daily grind of listening to him go on...and on...and on...and on...and on about strippers/lesbians/his dick/porn stars/etc. tends to get VERY old, very fast.

          Keep in mind that for the past 5 years or so on terrestrial radio he was really holding back because of more draconian FCC regulations as well as his own bosses being afraid of lawsuits, loss of their FCC licenses, etc. Sinc

    • Re: (Score:3, Interesting)

      by jamesoutlaw (87295)
      I agree. After thinking about it for several months, I picked up a Sirius receiver on sale at Target. I have not listened to terrestrial radio since that day. There were three stations that I used to listen to here in memphis and over the years, they all seemed to converge on the exact same playlist. I could switch from one station to the other and within 15 minutes hear the same song the previos station played. Also, I got really tired of listenting to the local DJs as well as the 15 minute commercial

All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.