- cross-posted to:
- android@lemmy.world
- cross-posted to:
- android@lemmy.world
You must log in or # to comment.
The 90s kid in me yearns for a phone with Fm radio, headphone jack, IR blaster, stylus, memory card slot, slide out keyboard and one of those click on projectors the Motorola phones used to have. I would call it the Donatello and it would be radical.
And a translucent purple case!
I've refused to buy these "flagship" phones that don't have a headphone jack. The 90s kid in me will live on, damnit!
Same I use wired earbuds everyday at work and I refuse to buy a phone without one
I recently bought Bluetooth large headphones and I feel like they're a massive improvement. However, when it comes to earbuds (which I still use a lot when big ones are inconvenient), I would never buy wireless ones. I am afraid that in a lot of them, battery is not easily replaceable (while in my big ones it can be accessed by unscrewing a cover), and the small things would get lost fairly easily.
Also you have to spend a lot more for good bluetooth ear buds compared to wired. Like, you can get a pair of KZ ZSN Pros for 20 bucks or so. They sound great, have nice material quality (they got metal bits on em!), good quality cable, great sounding mic… you get the idea. To get bluetooth ear buds that sound just as good you'd probably have to spend like 80 bucks? And they'd be made of plastic and not have the mic quality anywhere near the KZs. It's just so much easier to get good audio quality with a wire.
I do have a pair of Bluetooth headphones and I use them from time to time. I tend to revert to my wired m50x pretty often just out of personal preference
I have some wired headphones for when I am gaming on the computer, but anything else I use Bluetooth earbuds, and I can't imagine going back to wired ones, never getting the cable caught on things is so freeing. They also have active noise canceling and hear thru which both come in real handy on work sites.
If there was a decent phone with FM radio and an IR blaster, I might pick it over a lot of other ones.
I miss having an IR blaster so much, I was always finding new uses for it. Now I've got little remotes everywhere again
Same, including an IR led is such a simple thing, why did this ever go away. Though I'm pretty sure most Chinese phones still have them, Xiaomi phones do for sure
Basically all the phones with headphone jacks now have abysmal long-term support. Even the fair phone got rid of the headphone jack so they could sell their bullshit wireless headphones
This is why I love Sony phones.
There’s a lot more capability with USB-C audio though. Even entirely discounting Bluetooth, there are plenty of high quality USB-C headphones out there that blow the pants off of what you could do with a 3.5mm jack.
No lol. It all gets converted to an analog signal to drive the headphones. There's no difference in fidelity between 1/8" and USB-C. It's literally the exact same signal.
Except you’re not limited to the phones hardware and space constraints with USB. You can put the DAC, you know the thing that does that conversion, in the headphone end now, whereas you couldn’t with 3.5mm because you can push power over USB. Meaning you have the ability to get headphones with a much better DAC, which will provide better audio quality.
It also frees up space in the phone for more battery, different radios, and other things.
It's a tradeoff of convenience. I want the jack because it's a universal standard that doesn't require external batteries or the right alignment of the stars for proper functionality. Quality has been fine since the dawn of the smartphone, IMO, at least for earbuds. You're still free to use a USB DAC if there's a jack!
Where's our different radios and other things? They just keep adding more camera lenses, and MORE MEGAPIXELS.
Nothing innovative or useful, and now we're forced to buy more shit (adapters) to make other things we already have, work with our phones.
I'll stick with my "mid grade" phone that does all of the same things, but also connects to 3.5mm
PS. This mid grade phone also has USB C if I really wanted a custom DAC, and alternatively I can also charge and listen to things at the same time, with no extra cost
Uh, since Apple removed it they’ve added the mmWave antenna, the ultrawideband chip, the satellite antenna, and a thread radio.
Fair point about Apple. They did also remove the home button and optimized their display further to accommodate that though.
If only it wasn't so proprietary, I could get on the apple train. Still mad about my headphones jacks though.
DACs in phones these days are totally fine these days. There really isn't any need for an external one unless you need to drive higher impedance cans. Quality-wise, they're totally fine.
Just use Bluetooth
Why? You can just hire a dude to sing to you as you walk around. Just use a bard, bro.
…Is that a serious offer?
I'm sure that you can find one on craigslist or whatever hell site people use for that these days.
Worse quality audio, vastly more expensive, easier to lose pieces, yet another device I need to think about charging, will need replaced after a while as the batteries swell/die, extra e-waste, occasional pairing problems (especially on PC), etc.
And guess what, if all of that sounds good or doesn't matter to you, you can still use Bluetooth on phones with 3.5mm ports!
As a solution for me, I grabbed a fiio brt3k. Supports the highres Bluetooth codecs and can totally be used as a usbc dac. I got a pair of the samsung beans with my last phone and just hate them, this lets me use any pair of wired headphones I want.
I still want a proper on board dac and a headphone jack but it's what I have to work with
How pray tell would Bluetooth help with having FM radio? The headphone cable is used as the antenna for phones.
Cables doesn't consume battery not get affected by radio interference.
Cables doesn’t consume battery
When you plug earbuds into your phone, your phone is literally powering the earbuds. The cables transmit an electrical signal; they consume battery. The consumption is fairly negligible, of course, but so is modern Bluetooth.
I believe they meant that bluetooth headphones need to be charged, while wired ones just run off the phone's battery. Sure, the amount of power consumed might not be that different (though bluetooth will still be more), but its easier for the user to just charge one device.
The consumption is fairly negligible, of course, but so is modern Bluetooth.
Sure, that should be why using BT my phone headphones, battery lasts 30-40% less 🤦🏻
Either your phone is straight up broken or your anecdotal measurements are way off. There is effectively no difference in battery life on a phone between using wired headphones and Bluetooth.
I used to swear by wired headphones.
The audio quality, not needing batteries, the simplicity.
But then I got a decent pair of Bluetooth headphones and I discovered how much wires got in my way. I discovered that the audio quality coming out of phones were garbage regardless of connection type, and the headphones I got would last weeks of daily use on one charge.
Plus I would get a more water proof phone, and I would never have to worry about the headphone jack breaking inside of the port, or my headphones going flying off because I walked past a knob of whatever at just the right height to ruin my day.
I still want phones to have the ports, but on mobile devices I'll never use them. I just want others to be happy too.
I have inside pockets added so that I can deal with the wire issue. Makes for a better place to carry the phone anyway.
My old Moto G3 was the only real waterproof phone, whatever you have I bet you take it out of your pocket to swim, and guess what, it had a headphone jack.
deleted by creator
I've an Armor 21, it has the radio, headphone jack, IR blaster and the memory card slot, plus a loud and clear speaker, actual night vision and is rugged as fuck. Base price sub-$250, upcharge for an attachable endoscope.
Just checked it out, this thing looks sick. But it also looks ugly as shit. Is it as ugly as it looks in person? Specifically not a fan of the RGB LED ring thing on the back?
Honest criticisms: It's a bit of a brick for sure. I turned the RGB ring off. The multi-function button isn't as usable as I'd hoped, mostly just a flashlight/screenshot button. The headphone jack and USB port are behind a protected rubber flap, so I keep opening/closing it frequently, but that's to help with being waterproof. While the optional case functions as a good stand for horizontal viewing and for holding, it is inadequate for vertical, and it just would've needed a small internal brace to fix that. The case also blocks their wireless charging connectors, if you were planning to use a dock for that. Attaching the endoscope requires removing a tiny screw. The lack of a bottom button bar has taken some getting used to but I'm fine with it now, the side fingerprint scanner is similar.
Overall I am happy with it. The battery lasts a whole day with high use, it has decent internals for games, the screen and included protector are appropriately unobtrusive, it isn't running a very outdated version of Android. Perhaps most importantly, it should survive my child who likes to throw my phone and my dumbass who left it in my pocket getting in a pool.
Hell yes, just jumped on the ulefone train myself!
You'll be happy to know that I bribed my kids into watching the 1990 TMNT live action movie this weekend. The younger one loved it, but the preteen was full of critical commentary the whole time. Go figure. But hey, I won one of them over to the TMNT side.
how do you know someone was born in the 80s? they'll fucking tell you. you can just like stuff without referencing your stupid metal lunchbox all the time.
I was born in the early 70s. We didn't have anything cool.
I hate this idea. FM channels have more advertisements than they have music. And there's no technical way (yet) that I know of to automatically block said advertisements. Advertisements have driven the world into madness, as now anything that requires them to stay profitable either jams them into everything, or has a huge focus on rage-bait in order to get people to listen/watch/click. This rage-bait has made our world more angry, more divisive, and more chaotic than ever. Fuck advertisers.
The point of the article is to have them there for emergencies since we already have systems in place to broadcast emergency info over radio, and it's a lot simpler to implement than satellite for when cell signal is down.
And it's way better than the xitter.
I don't see the necessity for FM Radio to be used for this. They've removed them from most of today's phones, and adding them back would be just as complex as adding something like LoRa for emergency messages.
LoRa could also be used for mesh-messaging, and bring some added privacy features that people genuinely would have a use for.
I guarantee this article has FM Radio station money behind it.
I'm a qualified amateur radio operator and I work in IT as my day job, if you can't see how bad it would be to continue to put all our eggs into one basket for datacom, primarily in the hands of poorly regulated private cellphone companies, then I can't really help you.
Fact is, 80-110 MHz FM requires less infrastructure (aka fewer broadcast points) to more completely cover an area, and it's almost impossible to have it blocked by buildings/walls/vehicles, etc. Sure, the signal might go to shit, but it's at least able to be heard even in very challenging conditions. It also takes nearly no power to run. Receiver chips can be made so small that it would be a trivial addition to make for most cellular manufacturers. There's no licensing fees or service fees so the entire process is free from top to bottom.
Add that to the fact that it's already deployed, regulated and configured for emergencies, and you have a very low implementation cost for a very reliable and robust service.
The idea here isn't to add it so we can listen to FM commercials all day. Anyone I know who had FM on their cellphone, didn't use it; and I won't suggest that anyone will use it now… but if there's a major catastrophe and the cellular networks go down, having a recieve-only way of getting emergency information to those who are otherwise disconnected from everything is a big deal. A lot of households are going digital only for their entertainment and getting rid of old stereos and hi-fi units with radio built in for all HDMI systems that make their Netflix work nicely. Many also have zero land line service so once the internet stops functioning and the cell towers go out, the only method of communication these people will have is standing on their porch and screaming into the void.
I've monitored communications during major outages, like sitting hurricane hits on the contental US and heard the radio traffic stating that there's people at x location and all consumer/commercial communication systems are inoperable. The only thing working was an amateur owned and operated repeater network to relay the communication across the region; I was listening to an internet relay on the outskirts of the coverage area and it was clear that they would have had no outbound communication if they didn't have those repeater nets. Inbound, I'm sure FM and AM radio was still operable, so anyone with an FM set could hear news and alerts as they happened.
Radio is also nearly instant, while LoRA mesh networks rely on people having nodes to relay the messages and the messages may be interrupted while a node is down. The first isn't a thing yet, the second is difficult to do at best. Amateur FM cells can transmit over many miles potentially several dozen, meanwhile most LoRA can't reach a fraction of that far, requiring a massively larger number of them, and each one is a potential point of failure.
With regulation, commercial broadcast FM sites are required by law to participate in the emergency broadcast system, no such regulation exists for LoRA.
Under normal operating conditions, FM is fairly useless, unless you feel like listening to ads, but in an emergency, it can be the only way for you to be told that, though the weather seems to have gotten better, it's temporary and you should stay where you are.
All my handheld radio transceivers have commercial FM recievers built in, so either way, I'm covered. I also have several dedicated FM and shortwave receiving radios around. I have adequate communication capability for an emergency. I'm not perfectly set up, even remotely, but I'll be able to reach out to someone if I'm without power, internet, cellphone coverage, etc, during a major event. I can call for help, get information about the situation and it's duration, I can reach out over 10 miles or more to communicate with others, all with my handheld.
And you want to take all this infrastructure and preparedness that we as a society have developed over more than a century, and flush it all away… because why? You have a hard-on for LoRA? You think old tech is useless in today's day and age? Because you have a problem with broadcast radio trying to survive, a service that's free to you, by playing ads?
Do you realize how stupid you sound?
Most people won't read until that last paragraph, ha ha.
Thanks for writing this up. I have always been concerned that my car is the nearest FM radio. I always kept a clock radio stashed in my basement "workshop" area but it was thrown out at some point along with the old rotary phone I had with it.
My son has a beginner electronics kit that can build a very low powered transmitter so I got him a cheap usb chargeable AM/FM receiver with an aux in, speaker, and headphone jack for next to nothing. The antenna is actually extendable and doesn't suck. Going to stash it when he's done with it. Could come in handy.
Man, we have maybe 5 radios all around the house so battery operated or rechargeable.
I always did but we moved across country as a lot of stuff just got tossed. You know that old radio in the garage covered in paint, and the clock radios no one uses anymore, etc. My mother's house has one in every room, I think (except bathrooms and maybe the living room, ironically).
Well this was a fun read and makes me want to be better prepared for a potential real emergency.
I would like to be the first to encourage you on that journey.
For me, I've mainly focused on skills, more than stuff. IMO, preppers are a bit short sighted most of the time, they'll pack a month's worth of supplies in an airtight drum and leave it in their garage. It's 50+ lbs of stuff. You're telling me that when you get an evacuation order, you're going to haul that thing into you Ford Explorer before you evacuate, when there may be a flood or wildfire just minutes from you? Okay.
I have my first aid certificate. Standard first aid, level c CPR and AED training. I also know some basic self defense (though it's been years since I practiced anything), and I know enough about radio that if I'm presented with a walkie or ham radio, or something, I know what I'm doing without being told (maybe if I find one and the previous owner of the radio is incapacitated or something).
I've put a first aid kit everywhere I practically can, we have two in the house, plus one in my car (soon to be all cars). I also want to look into some MRE's and a safe way to store a moderate amount of water long term in my car (winters here are kind of a shit show)… plus maybe some basic survival supplies, enough to make a fire and a crude shelter, which can be repurposed for other things as well. Maybe a water filter for turning Creek water into drinkable/potable water… I want to keep it fairly trim. For shelter supplies, a good multipurpose knife, a couple of tarps and some good rope… you get the idea. Though, that stuff sounds like things you would carry to kidnap and murder someone. Not my intent, but it's funny how much overlap there is between survival gear and gear for more nefarious activities…
I'm also very well learned on how to fix just about any common thing, like cars or something, so I should be pretty useful in a pinch. I have a ham radio in my car with more range than the walkies I have, and I have a small collection of walkies all with extra batteries charged and ready to fly (usually already attached to my backpack which is my usual daily carry). I need to make some tweaks and round out my setup (as previously mentioned), but I feel like I'm in a good spot for now.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
I think FM Broadcast is great, but with regard to phones aren't we missing something here? For a phone to even receive FM broadcast headphones have to be plugged in, it's been a requirement for any FM RX capable phone I've ever had, for antenna purposes. So with regard to the argument for mobiles to have FMrx if such functionality were to become common place we'd need to see the return of headphone jacks and people would need to be carrying corded headphones for it to function.
I think this capability is a great idea, but the limitations forced on us by losing the headphones socket as well as societys fascination with making everything wireless at any cost is a little concerning.
I've always considered average to good quality wired buds to be great, but it seems they really are on their way out.
You have an excellent point, and historically, yes, you did need something plugged into a headphone jack to facilitate the rx of the transmission, however, this isn't strictly required. Broadcast FM is in the 2-3m range, meaning a full-wavelength antenna would be aproximately 3m in length, we don't even see this on vehicles; most are limited to less than 1m. Even with aerial whip antennas for home-based hifi/stereo systems, often the antenna is not any longer than 1m/3ft, which is about 1/3rd as long as it should be for optimal signal.
The issue here isn't one of having the space for the antenna, since smaller antennas are used in all sorts of applications, such as with FM and vehicles/stereos etc. The issue is having enough antenna to produce a signal strong enough to differentiate from background noise. The signal to noise ratio is key here. Historically, the only good way to get more signal is to use a better tuned, larger antenna, or an array of the same, this isn't so much the case anymore. There's plenty of antenna designs that are still fairly omnidirectional, that can enhance signals. Combine that with more advanced filtering and pre-amplification, a large antenna is not generally a requirement anymore; even the 1m/3ft whips used on cars are often overkill for what we can do with signal processing and modern design. Look at any modern vehicle, and with few exceptions, there's no longer a visible antenna. That's not because there isn't an antenna for FM, it's because the technology has progressed enough to be able to use much smaller antennas to accomplish the same task. The antennas are still there, they're just so small and well placed that you don't need a flagpole on your hood or trunk lid to have it work as-well-as any other FMrx antenna.
Given that the proposal requires a minor redesign of the cellphones to incorporate the broadcast receiving radio, adding a small antenna, or simply using the chassis of the phone as an antenna, would not only be possible but it should be fairly trivial to accommodate for. by no means am I saying it would be the worlds greatest FM antenna system, most certainly it would not be, but it should be sufficient to differentiate the signal from the noise; with relatively trivial signal processing, it should be more than adequate for the purpose.
The technology surrounding FM broadcast radio didn't just cease and we get what we get; vehicles, among other specific technologies still utilize FM radios and development has continued on them even though very few people have been watching. The technology is far improved from what you can build with a battery, coil of wire, a speaker, and a handful of resistors/capacitors/etc. and similarly it's far improved from what vehicles had even 15 years ago. Add that to the fact that radio technology is all pretty much the same across the board (from what we use for broadcast FM, to WiFi, 4G/5G/LTE cellular, and GPS included), and a lot of the developments made in any area of radio can be almost directly translated to another radio on a different band, and there's a lot of technology that, unsurprisingly, will blow most of what most of us have in our houses on our hi-fi stereos, out of the water.
The wonderful thing is that a lot of it is tied to miniaturization and modernization of the technology, meaning a lot of this is tied into integrated circuits that are being mass produced already. IC designs that can be embedded into other ICs to decrease the overall number of chips in a device, fairly easily.
The point I'm dancing around is software-defined radios. SDR is becoming a huge player in all aspects of radio technology, and can replace far more advanced/complex systems with something less complex than a raspberry pi, and often less costly. The big cost of SDRs is mainly regarding transmission, since they don't put out a very strong signal, and need some significant and high-quality amplification to be useful; but we've seen SDR chipsets starting to dominate the lower-cost market within the HAM/Amateur radio space. Extremely capable, very small and power efficient radios, for significantly less cost than more traditional methods of doing the same. The issue is that first word: Software. With great software comes great responsibility… or something. Fact is there's a lot of SDR radios out there with garbage software interfaces… at least there are right now. Things are improving all the time. The wonderful thing about SDR, is that they're generally compatible with whatever you want to use them for… meaning AM/FM, or even something more elaborate like OFDM, or other modulation techniques. This means these radios can essentially be re-programmed on the fly to adapt to a new standard with little more than a software update.
I apologize for the long discussion on this, but the technology is so interesting to me the more you look at it. Yes, antennas are important, but not nearly as important as they were even 10-15 years ago.
s; most are limited to less than 1m. Even with aerial whip antennas
Wavelength varies from 2.7 to 3.4 metres. Just because that is the size of the wave doesn’t meant that a good antenna has to be that size. A very good basic antenna is a 1/4 wave vertical, and we see them pretty often as telescopic antennas on radios and cars. A 1/4 wave FM broadcast antenna will perform excellently, and will be 68cm to 85cm in length. More modern cars have antennas printed into a window similar to a demister strip. They are actually NOT smaller, some can be quite larve, but also very stealth. But the point remains is that they are NOT small as you suggest. Much shorter antennas exist, but there is a gain penalty, and that penalty gets more extreme the smaller the antenna gets. I have such a small antenna on my car and it IS an issue. In physics nothing is free, yes, you can make an antenna small and still have it be resonant, but you’ll pay a price on effective gain.
This is a problem that technology has not solved. Sure, clever designs have helped a little, but there is always a price to pay if you try to cheat the physics.
A compromised antenna can work in a very very stong signal area, but it will easily be the difference between a clear solid recieve and no recieve at all in a fringe area.
AM Broadcast is an example of this, with antennas sometimes 2 inches / 50mm long or even less and hidden inside the radio. Buy as a ham myself with a HF setup, even my HF setup, which is a poor compromise on MF broadcast gets me stations from all over Australia. That isn’t going to happen with a regular AM receiver.
Ultimately, sure you can have a mobile with no external antenna receive FM broadcast… but only in a VERY VERY strong signal area, within a few miles of the transmitter, while a propper antenna will work at 10x the distance.
Given that the proposal requires a minor redesign of the cellphones to incorporate the broadcast receiving radio, adding a small antenna, or simply using the chassis of the phone as an antenna, would not only be possible but it should be fairly trivial to accommodate for. by no means am I saying it would be the worlds greatest FM antenna system, most certainly it would not be, but it should be sufficient to differentiate the signal from the noise
This would work at very short distance only, it really would be that limited. Would it be useful for the people in those short distances? Maybe. Buy while a regular ordinary transistor radio with a telescopic antenna would work 10-30x further away, comparing those 2 really shows how much of a compromise is going on.
The point I’m dancing around is software-defined radios. The big cost of SDRs is mainly regarding transmission, since they don’t put out a very strong signal This is true for any radio type ever, it’s not an SDR specific thing. EVERY radio that puts out more than a few dbm needs some level of amplification. This is NOT and SDR specific thing. It might appear that way because fo how many affordable SDRs just come with a low output. This is just a normal Monday for any radio system from a $50 CB to a broadcast station, SDR or not.
SDR’s are not magic. In fact they actually have some drawbacks compared to conventional designs with regards dynamic rage, over loading etc… Pulling the ‘SDR’ card and not knowing this i think shows your lack of understanding of the topic (not trying to diss, just an observation). SDR’s are a great tool, i have 4 of them in front of me as i type this, so I’m no stranger. Icom IC-705, Icom IC-7300, HackRF and an RTL-SDR. You could also maybe count the University of Twente webSDR i have open in another tab, and an MMDVM at a stretch to make it 6. http://websdr.ewi.utwente.nl:8901/
This is all exciting stuff… but none of it has revolutionised RF physics for human portable commodity radios, nor even come close to an adjacent technology that could be adopted / adapted.
My ~ AUD$1900 IC-705 can go from picking up stations all over the state of Victoria, Australia with it’s non optimal antenna tuned for 146MHz, to picking up literally nothing if i hook up a few hundred mm of wire to it’s antenna socket on the bench here. And I can engage pass band filtering, up to 2 pre-amp stages, and a variety of Digital Signal Processing features and sill get… nothing.
I appreciate your passiona nd interest, but… physics.
We can look at other technologies that are great… WiFi… it’s great, but the transmitter location is in your home and still struggles to cover some larger homes… from inside your home itself. Cellular… again, great, but again, as the name implies it;s made up of ‘cells’, physics is a massive issue with cellular, each individual cell tower consists of tens or sometimes hundreds of transceivers, each connected to phased arrays of hundreds to thousands of antenna elements… and that’s just a single site, many towns will need multiple of these for coverage. Cell is not immune to the limitations of physics, and it has to brute force the situation from the tower end so as we can have small devices in out pockets… and even with all that i get no coverage int he middle of my local supermarket. Do an image search for ‘cell panel antenna inside’ and see if you can find a picture fo the actual antenna elements, my results mostly got the rear so you might have to scroll a bit.
A lot of the modernisation you refer to is just that given the value we place on connectivity while remaining portable the effort has shifted to needing to bring the signals closer to the user. Looking at that broadly, while some gains have been made what’s really happened is that the signal has been bought closer to you, making you think magic has happened.
Yes, antennas are important, but not nearly as important as they were even 10-15 years ago. I couldn’t disagree more. The antenna is the single most significant component of any system. I think the best demonstration of this is modern cellular as it shows what has been needed to be done to bring connectivity top the masses and proves there is no way around.
Whats a good emergency radio with a hand crank that you would recommend?
That class of emergency radio is usually shortwave/am/FM. I have a shortwave/am/FM unit but it's not hand cranked. The one we have is a ccrane, and honestly I'm not sure if that's all that good. It seems to function, from the few times we've turned it on. I've never had to replace the batteries yet so that's a plus.
Not sure on this. I'm prepared for disaster but I'm not what someone would call a prepper. I mostly have VHF/UHF ham radios and the knowledge on how to make use of them. I'm still pretty new, so I hope someone can comment further.
The ccrane was my late father's. He insisted on buying that brand and I'm not sure why. It's probably about 10 years old right now. It's only a reciever, so anyone should be able to buy one.
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
ad hominem
reddit moment
A lot of people still have am/FM gear, and they're so invested into their primary communications which is so reliable they don't think about secondary communications. I have, which is why I'm a ham operator.
Most people at least have FM in their car, the broadcast range is in the lower VHF airspace, not much higher than HF. Most of the HF and LF bands are so tightly allocated that there's no room to just Willy nilly add another frequency for emergency use for civvies… which would require everyone to buy new radios, which they won't. Meanwhile, there's still shortwave, which people also don't buy that's already there and lower on the frequency range than broadcast FM… people need to be saved from themselves. Allocating something new and building a bunch of new infrastructure for it is idiotic. The structure is already there with broadcast FM, we just need to save people from themselves and ensure that they have access to it.
I'd be in favour of there being a dedicated broadcast FM frequency for emergencies only. It would become trivial to have a radio station change frequencies to the emergency broadcast frequency when something happens. We could even make the frequency digital instead of FM, and have it encode information by text, and turn it into a recieve-only text-based emergency channel… but making it a whole new band and new radio type on a different frequency that's not already set up for such a thing is insane to me. So much infrastructure cost for something we literally already have.
Any government that green lights such a program has lost the plot. Use what works.
73
73 to all on frequency.
in most cases radio is supported by SoC but disabled by software + headlhone jack is no longer wired up as anthenna (some phones don't have headphone jacks at all nowadays)
In addition to all that @MystikIncarnate@lemmy.ca said, implementing an am or fm receiver on an existing device is as easy as plopping down one of the existing bga chips that has an antenna input and an audio output. here’s one of the bigger ones that needs a killer 3mm x 3mm land pattern. It’s also only $1.79 or so, which is expensive for an ic, but in the context of a phone wouldn’t contribute significantly to the cost of the device.
The need for an 1/8” out would be the worst part because ironically, phone jacks suck for uhh… phones.
Thanks for the support gayhitler.
The broadcasters lobbied to have it mandated. Thats the only reason it was ever included.
It's not like you have to use it. My phone has it, I've used it to listen to local football games while camping. Worked great. Some people like to have the option to use it though.
There are some channels that aren't like this if you're lucky enough to live in an area with something like NPR stations, college/highschool stations, or donation funded music radio.
I just built a website that makes it easy to find and stream community radio stations (which you refer to as 'donation funded') There are over 100 stations listed. Just choose from a drop-down and hit 'play'. Looking for more beta testers https://AlternateAirwaves.com
Oh that's awesome, thanks for doing that!
If you live near a University, tune in to the local student radio.
It's usually run by the University without ads.
I rock out to WPTS radio in Pittsburgh and both WUOG and WPPP in Athens, GA.
I love our local university radio. They actually play jazz sometimes. It's basically mindless pop, frozen in time 90s, or you can pick between new country and even newer country where I live.
Our local college has an alternative rock station that radio students come on air. Minimal ads with great music and personalities.
Imma just leave this here: https://www.campus-fm.com/
There is also WSOU in northern New Jersey. Seton Hall's Pirate Radio.
The emergency channel has no ads…
Oh no! Imagine being forced to have the option to listen to another form of communication!
I hate it when this hypothetical radio app downloads itself and turns itself on every time there's a radio ad break!
What, you don't like watching two 15 second advertisements before each youtube video, which has a minute+ dedicated time to talk about today's sponsor?
Ublock Origin and SponsorBlock makes youtube bearable.
Forget all that. Just use LibreTube (with Piped API disabled) and FreeTube
I could use public radio.
That's not all radios for sure. For example the Bulgarian Radio 1 seems to be almost exclusively music. Sometimes there are advertisement blocks that are long, but usually it's just music. Then there may be local stuff like college radios (e.g.: KGRG) that won't have as many advertisements, if any. In Slovakia there used to be Rádio Anténa Rock that was also mostly music as well, but they shut down as it wasn't profitable. They are now owned by Bauermedia and operate as "Rádio Rock" with only 3 low-power FM transmitters which barely cover 2 cities. At least they're in DAB+.
Anyway, there are some radios that do not have as many advertisements.
The reason they had FM in the past was because broadcasters lobbied for it to be a requirement.
I’d like to listen to my local NPR station. It’s not an advertising nightmare.
There are gaming phones, phones with crazy cameras, and iPhones where the lack of features is a feature. What I wish to have is a phone with as many features and functionality as possible.
That includes (but not limited to): IR blaster Headphone jack MicroSD card slot FM Radio RGB Notification/Status LED
Rather than a slim phone with a glossy finish that will pick up scratches right away unless wrapped in a phone case, the outer cover of the phone should be rugged and replaceable. Like with old Nokia phones. I don't care about few extra grams, or another millimeter of thickness. And I'm sure I'm not the only one.
I was hopeful about the Fairphone at first, but they started removing features as well.
When I changed in my iPhone 3g for an original Galaxy S, with barometer, I thought that by the iPhone/Galaxy 10 we would all be rocking tricorders. What kind of crazy sensors would they jam in by then? Zero. Here we are at generation 15 with no additional cool sensors.
FOUR cameras, however!
My guess is that eventually the back of the phone will be completely covered by cameras.
It's intentional. They'd like to drop features to cut on design and manufacture costs, while taking out features most of the target audience doesn't really care about. Some of these are just greedy. Phones used to rely on microSD expansion, but once you drop this option you could charge for additional space much more than what the equivalent microSD card would cost. You can also stop shipping phones with chargers because most people have them anyway. This is pure profit as the customer is paying the same price, but doesn't get a charger.
As for other features, they probably dropped them because people just didn't care enough.
It seems to be incredibly difficult to design a phone from scratch, and that's why we only see a handful of manufacturers, with the small endeavors being able to make something that looks obsolete by the time it rolls out and even then it takes a few months to overcome all the bugs and glitches. Fairphone is the closest we've got, but it's still far off and strays further with each generation.
"You don't need practical capabilities, you need to be an obedient consumer."
—OEMs
Disappointed Moto Mods didn't catch on. The obvious approach of "skinny phone with minimal features but you can slap whatever you like onto the back (radios, projectors, beefy batteries, gamepad, etc)" - just makes sense for me. I loved my old Moto Z.
Still have my force 2 with the click on battery, loved that phone.
I actually meant to reply to your comment but replied to the main thread by mistake, I had the same frustrations with modern phones losing features, and even fairphone dropping the 3.5mm jack was a wtf decision to me. See my comment on the ulephone 18t, it had virutally everything I wanted in a phone.
That includes (but not limited to): IR blaster Headphone jack MicroSD card slot FM Radio RGB Notification/Status LED
My Poco F2 Pro has all of those but microSD slot (none of my recent phones have had it, and I'm starting to miss it right now with 128 gb of base storage) and the IR blaster has saved my ass more than once!
I still have my LG v20 because of this. I'd love to upgrade but nothing that's come out since even comes close.
I still have my V10 and v20. My v60 is better though. Definitely some trade-offs but I will argue that v60 is better
Yea, I wasn't ready to upgrade yet when the v60 came out. I guess I should have said "nothing I looked at to upgrade has come close" looking at it now though the non removable battery is a deal breaker.
Still have stacks of batteries for my V10 and v20. I thought it would be a deal-breaker too but it's not as bad as I thought. The huge battery they put in the v60s really been lasting. I do admit I prefer to wirelessly charge slowly which possibly helps.
V60 was the best phone ever, represent!
The v60 is the best phone ever.
All the features, very fast, 2 screens.
My v35 was on par and had the back fingerprint, but otherwise the v60 was the ultimate phone.
Non removable battery is a pretty big deal breaker IMO especially in an era where every subsequent phone is more and more stripped down.
No, the v60 was truly incredible, and the battery especially.
I upgraded to a zfold 3 and the battery life is garbage now.
But when the battery wears out you're fucked if you can't find an upgrade. I'm on my 3rd battery on my V20 because I can always just pick up a new one (or at least as long as someone makes them). I'm not saying the v60 wasn't a nice phone. Just I don't want one that's lifespan is limited by the battery. That is a big deal to me.
I've been saying this for a while now. FM radios and such are invaluable in emergency situations.
There have been times in the past where I've lost power to my house. No internet, no electricity etc in the middle of an emergency weather situation. I had to rely on battery powered radios to learn about what the situation was elsewhere and how long we'd be stuck etc. There is basically no reason why this can't be incorporated into phones, aside from the fact that phone makers would rather you use Apple Music etc. It should be legislated for I believe.
One reason is that every implementation I've ever tried relies on using the wired earphones as an aerial and Apple magically convinced everyone that having a 3.5mm port is somehow a bad thing.
Exactly. The real plea here is "bring back 3.5mm ports." I'm afraid of the day my old phone dies because I have this fear that even cheap-ass phones are going to abandon 3.5mm headphones for cheap, unreliable, garbage bluetooth trash.
Just double-checked. My current smartphone that I partially picked for it's 3.5mm socket does have built in FM radio that works great and only functions with earphones plugged in.
Just buy a $15 FM radio. Especially since you can't charge your phone when you have no power, but a small radio takes AA batteries which can sit in a drawer for 10 years until you need them.
You'd think so but every device around my house that I "put batteries in it and forget it" when I need it I find the batteries have exploded and the device is ruined (regardless of the decade on the expiry-date label of the battery). So my plan now is to keep the device separate from the batteries like it's a freaking handgun and make sure my phone is charged so I can use its light to make my way to the drawer where we keep the batteries.
Alkaline batteries are the crappy ones that leak. Get the more expensive lithium batteries, or go full on rechargeable ones, and you can leave them in without worrying about your device getting ruined.
Lkline leaks, lithium explodes
Yeah but at least you'll know exactly when the lithium ones go bad…
Rechargeable batteries self-discharge and get damaged if left unplugged for too long, and explode if left plugged in. They are not ideal for something you want to pack away in an emergency kit.
Almost everything in an emergency kit expires. But many name brand alkaline and non rechargeable lithiums are now rated for ten years shelf life. In addition there are rechargeable eneloop branded batteries rated for slower discharge rate.
Yes, but there's a difference between "expires" and "leaks all over the inside of my emergency radio". And they don't make it to half their stated lifespans once put into a flashlight and the flashlight goes into storage.
In addition to being able to take AAs, my FM radio has a solar panel and a hand crank to recharge the included rechargeable battery, which can charge a phone in a pinch. Win all around!
It probably also picks up the NOAA frequencies for weather forecasts and will have a standby feature for severe weather alerts. Emergency weather radios are pretty cool, and good to have on hand.
It absolutely does!
A weather radio is even more useful. It usually has FM as well, but getting National Weather Service alerts can be vital.
one of those windy radios you crank for a bit would be better for emergencies
You can make your battery phone last a lot when you are not using the display and disconnect from any networks. You can also have some powerbank around. Emergencies won't necessarily find you in home or wherever your radio is stored in. You keep your phone with you most of the time, chances are, if an earthquake happens, for example, you'll have your phone with you. Been there.
Yes… but… this becomes one of those things that everyone should buy to be prepared but few actually do or they forget.
I keep a little crank-chargeable radio in our emergency kit but most people don't. If the cell networks go down (and they usually do in severe weather and most other big emergency situations) most people will lose all of their access to information.
I wholeheartedly agree, but I don't think there's any saving it at this point. Car manufacturers are dropping it from new models and that's the only actual AM/FM radio most people actually buy these days.
Same thing happened to the phone network. It used to actually be possible to call 911 when the power was out. The central stations all had battery banks and diesel generators. Unless the lines were cut, you had service.
I'm glad battery backup can keep the internet going for a long time but I also have data to use and never get close to making a dent in it. If service providers went down though I do have several radios around the house. I don't go anywhere but I'd I did i would carry a little radio lol. That being said, I miss my smart phone and flip phone that had radio on it. I don't care about headphone jacks but I definitely would love radio.
The components to make the phone able to decode FM radio take place. Which, in such small device, is valuable. If you really need FM radio for emergency situations, why not take a dedicated miniaturized FM radio receiver?
Not sure if this is still the case, but in the past the FM radio functionality essentially came "free" as part of either the SoC or modem. Since it used headphone wires as the antenna, the death of the headphone jack pretty much killed any purpose for including it.
There is no such thing as "free" functionality in hardware. Old SoC may have had this functionality, but it was at the cost of some die space, that has since been reclaimed by other function more useful to most users.
The functionality is, in fact, still there, and basically every phone with a headphone jack turns it on.
Old SoC may have had this functionality
Modern SoCs still have it…
Further we've moved to Software Defined Radios in general… So it's all programmable.
Hence the quotations around "free". Qualcomm isn'tgoing to tape out a custom chip without it for you just because you don't want that block.
that has since been reclaimed by other function more useful to most users.
This was my uncertainty, do you know for certain that they don't include FM functionality on their chips anymore or are you just guessing? The public facing documentation is not exactly detailed enough to tell for sure.
No, but it's so immaterial it hasn't really been worth the effort to exclude it yet
FM radio was integrated in even smaller phones 20 years ago. And the tech to "decode the signal" is already present in today's phones. FM are radio signals, just like NFC, Wifi, Bluetooth and cellular.
Not the same radio frequencies, not the sames technologies (analog vs digital). Those radio hardware are very specialized, and won't work on frequencies or technologie they are not meant to.
Correct, not the same technologies. It's a much simpler circuitry. Very specialized doesn't mean very complex. A hammer is very specialized too.
I read somewhere that SoC boards on today's phones still have FM tuning capabilities, but they just don't use them.
I'll try to verify that, though.
Edit: this link seems promising: https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/how-to-unlock-fm-radio-hidden-smartphone/
I've come to the realization that the phone I want is a Nokia 3310 "brick".
- Infinite battery life
- compact size
- headphone jack
- indestructible
- no spyware
- no social media
- T9 texting
- no software updates
- Snake
- Brick Breaker
Why? Have you heard radio? Every station is just a glorified shitty playlist that they cycle through a dozen times a day
Maybe if you live somewhere with good radio stations… the radio is pretty much dead here. Nothing but Christian talk and static.
Then you'd need to include a headphone jack since the headphones acted as the antenna.
Good.
It's funny how the few who're totally sold on Bluetooth go "ugh, but then you'd need a headphone jack" as if it isn't an upgrade for others which wouldn't affect their ability to use Bluetooth at all.
deleted by creator
But what's the problem with having an analog component?
Also, your last claim is weird, because the headphones will ultimately require an analog signal, so, it just changes the place where the conversion is made, either in the user device, or in a digital circuit inside the headphones, and the cable diatance is small enough for adding interference. Your better sound experience is probably due to manufacturers making better sound actuators, not due to the digital data transmission. Try some really cheap bt headphones, and you will see what bad quality is.
Not an expert on this but, but AFAIK having the analog component inside the device is exactly the problem, as all the components in there cause electrical interference that you can't really shield against inside such a tiny device. It's similar to how the built-in PC audio is often quite bad compared to even the cheapest external DAC.
I'm not an expert either, but the DAC on my Galaxy S10 sounds amazing. It's just a question of whether manufacturers bother implementing it properly.
Not to mention it’s a form factor that requires a considerable amount of space. That for the majority of users is doing nothing but taking up that space for no reason. Every phone without a headphone jack is capable of getting a jack with a simple dongle. What I love are the people who have absolute no problem with a dangly cord around their neck but lose their shit if you have to connect a 1 inch piece of wire first. They act like it’s a bag phone you attach to your side. And as far as audio fidelity goes the DAC inside a cell phone is nearly always garbage and you’ll need your own DAC anyway which is easy to obtain when it can be powered by your phone.
Yup. What I'd actually like to see is a secondary USB-C port becoming much more common. USB-C is just much more universal and if both ports support charging it also helps device longevity since you can still charge if one breaks. My handheld emulation device has two and it's been handy several times already.
Indeed, interference is the greatest enemy of analog signals. It's not impossible to shield, though. Other parts are already shielded, but I can see how it could have become more challenging.
Btw, I thought it was more related to frequency than components size, but now I'm confused, I will look more into it when I have more time. Thanks for bringing this into the topic.
It doesn't make it at all harder to waterproof the devices. Sony has been making them for a decade now (IP57 in 2013 on the Xperia Z), Samsung didn't have any issues with the S10 line either. This is just a lie manufacturers tell you to sell bluetooth crap.
I see myself wanting to listen to music in situations where the data signal is bad more often than I want to use my phone underwater or something.
get radio.garden or another app
This requires an expensive (in my country) data plan and cell tower service.
Then get a $10 transistor radio instead of a cell phone
Digital headphones have better sound quality than analog headphones, too.
There's no such thing as digital headphones.
You say that like it’s a bad thing. You can still use Bluetooth even when your phone has a headphone jack, and headphone jacks can be IP67 rated so it’s not a concern for waterproofing.
How did I say that like it's a bad thing?
Why is it limited to 67? It should be easier than the USB port right?
I mean, the only other rating above that is IP68, and that would require them to specify the depth and time that the phone can be submerged. Most manufacturers only go for IP67 because it’s much cheaper to test.
That I know but I was wondering why you specifically mentioned 67. I guess I misread that as a limit.
Nah, not a limit. It’s just a cost/benefit trade off. Manufacturers don’t typically push for IP68 unless they’re specifically marketing the device for underwater use, and believe users will be willing to accept the higher resulting cost.
I wonder if wired USB-C Headphones could work the same?
Yes. But it would also drain more power.
i remember old ipods could listen to the radio using the headphones as an antenna and i thought it was the coolest thing in the world. listening to a live feed like that is so much more…viscerally satisfying than just streaming a song or even listening to internet radio, where it could easily be just a computer. it's nice knowing someone is actually creating a show for you in real time
Sadly 95% of the shows are just computers with a pre-loaded playlist. Still fun to know though that you are listening with a lot of other people together.
The shows don't really exist anymore. At least not in my area. Well over a decade ago they were all replaced by playlists and commercials.
You could check out NTS Radio - so many shows from a very wide variety of genres, and they have an archive of every episode
Only a couple of the final pod nanos had built-in radio, the other iPods all required additional hardware to be plugged in. I found that the hard way with an iPod classic… Even my shitty flip phone had built-in radio with an earpiece connected lol.
deleted by creator
Uh, no. It entirely depends on the station. My wife has radio stations in her car that sound almost 100% prerecorded and edited together - I can never tell if someone is actually talking now or if it's just a snippet from a previous recording. However, if I listen to a very specific radio station from my home country, which I can only get via internet stream, it still feels like listening to the radio. The way of listening has nothing to do with it, it's all in the station's programming.
I'm going to chime in here to plug the ulefone power armor 18t I just got. I was pretty nervous to get a chinese phone as I've only had samsung and lg phones before, but this thing legit blows me away. Not only does it fully support every band that my carrier uses (rare even for phones made for the US market), but it has:
-
Replaceable battery that lasts 3+ days between recharges
-
Extremely rugged, IP69 waterproof and designed for underwater photography (physical shutter button and diving camera app)
-
3.5mm jack, sd card slot, FM radio (with built in antenna - no headphones need to be plugged in), and an RGB notification led
-
Dimensity 900 chipset that beats a lot of the snapdragon chips on the market.
-
12 fucking GB of RAM… yes, 12…
-
Wifi 6(ax)
-
Wireless charging and reverse charging
-
A fucking 60x magnification microscope? (Why???)
-
A FLIR thermal camera (Just because, why the fuck not)
-
Runs mostly bloat free stock android
All that for under $600 (on aliexpress)
The only thing it's missing is an IR blaster, otherwise this is the best phone I've ever had, bar none. It is a chonky beast though, be warned.
This has really changed my view on Chinese electronics, especially at a time when phones for the western world are losing features and functionality all the time (including stuff from South Korean). Turns out capitalism isn't that great for innovation!
As a former fan of ulefones:
They're great as long as they work, but I already had two ulefones where something broke internally physically and the IR-blaster blasted non-stop, even after the phone was off. Never had other significant problems, tho.
Damn, this seems like exactly what I've been looking for… Shame I'm finding it a year late.
One last really important point you didn't mention is how long do they serve security updates for?
Yeah I'm not looking for Chinese spyware on my phone's from a company that will no longer exist in 3 months.
Removed by mod
Honestly this is amazing. If only it wasn't so big…
-
Wait, you guys don't have FM radio on your phones?
Why? ClearChannel has all but ruined it.
high end ones dont even have headphone jacks for starters
For emergency purposes, mandate cell tower batteries with solar supplement.
And generators for bigger hubs.
Cellular internet is critical infrastructure now.
Same for ISPs. My internet wifi has battery backup, so as long as the ISP stays up we are good.
Cell towers nearby all went down during the last big power failure. I could hit one distant tower that still had power, but the signal was weak, and the tower was swamped. It could barely push data.
Next big earthquake will be a total shitshow if that's not fixed.
Imagine if every American had a shortwave radio transmitter in their pocket. Endless September for hams
As a ham, ugh.
I dream of it being more common to have radios in everyone's pocket, but it needs to be accompanied by some level of education on how to use it.
Maybe the price of the transceivers would go down, at least, lol. I have a general license and I just mess around with a Baofeng for the most part because I cannot justify buying a better radio. Tempted to get a QCX-mini or Pixie kit for a project… Unfortunately the like… $1000+ transceivers are just way out of budget for me, and I'm not sure I'd get enough use out of it to warrant the expense.
I hear you. I have a handful of HT's, all are 2m/70cm, same as the baofeng's… I have an alinco and an ailunce, plus two baofeng's. I picked up a small 20W mobile unit for my car, around $100 or so, all told, plus an antenna. Maybe $150 for everything? A little less?
I've been looking at the software defined radios on Ali Express for HF stuff, all low power. I think less than 10W, but you can go global on 10W on the right band with the right conditions. They're usually up for around $350 USD? They're small too. Good for POTA. I think they can go from 6m up to 40m. Something from the big brands that can do that is usually in the 1200+ range. I think that's similar to what you're talking about. Someone local here that I've met has one and he's been lighting up parks constantly with it.
I want to experiment with DMR more. My next project is to build a hot spot, since the closest DMR repeater tower is a bit too far to pick up. I can sometimes get it at the lakefront (it's across Lake Ontario from me, in Toronto VE3WOO if I recall correctly), and I'm in the Niagara area.
I would like to get a DMR repeater in the area and I've been talking to a local club about it. So it may just be a matter of time. In any case I'm weird. I use FM a lot still since that's what all the VHF and UHF stuff around here uses. There's some fusion/dstar stuff but no DMR.
I'd imagine no phone would have transmission ability, or at most transmit like a Walkie talkie
There are some ham radio call phones that can transmit. They're pretty specialized and not cheap, but they exist… around $1200 for what is essentially 3+ year old phone hardware (with software to match … Android 9-ish) with a built in transceiver… I like the idea, but I'm not paying that much for a very old phone because it happens to have a ham radio built in.
The current ideas with adding radios to phones is almost entirely to pick up broadcast radio, like am/FM. Nothing fancy.
