Rack Mounted servers in data center
As Google can verify. According to the NYT piece: Google Details Electricity Usage, Google said its operations draw approximately 260 million watts continuously to run their online services and office buildings. That figure includes all of the e-mail applications, Youtube videos, Google searches, Google documents, etc. That works out to be about 6.24 million KWh per day or 21,292,752,000 BTU per day. Here are some of the amounts and costs for other fuels:
||Average cost $
||Cost per day
Those figures do not take into account the efficiency of the generation process. For example, the average coal fired power plant is 32% efficient, thus the actual tonnage of coal needed to produce 6.24 million KWh is 1,376 at a cost of $215,194. Other fuels have similar electrical conversion efficiency, with the internal combustion engine being about 19% efficiency for any given fuel.
Some other interesting tidbits from the article:
- Each Google search uses about 0.3 Watt-hours of electric
- The average user uses 180 Watt-hours per month
- Approximately 12.5 million Watts or 30,000 KWh per day are used by search engine traffic
- 25% of Google’s energy is supplied from renewables
- Google designs and builds it’s own data centers using energy efficient technology
One can assume that other data centers are not as efficient as Google’s. It would be interesting to do a comparison between the electrical use by AM and FM broadcast transmitter sites and the energy used by data centers that stream radio content. Right now the data center’s electrical costs are still relatively low because over the air radio listenership far out strips on line listenership. Eventually, those numbers will flip and I’d think the increased costs associated with greater streaming will be paid by somebody, likely the content generator.
All those webstreams, videos, search engine queries are not free.
Once a bastion of the AM dial, News and or News/Talk format radio stations seem to be springing up on the FM band more and more often. The original premise for creating talk radio on the AM band was the lower bandwidth and reduced (or perception of reduced) fidelity when compared to the FM band lent itself to non-music programming. The reality is that receiver manufactures never carried through on the NRSC-2 technical improvements, and AM receivers reproduced thin, low quality audio. I digress, the story goes, the FM band was great for music and the AM band did well with information and talk.
Of course, there were always a few exceptions to those general rules, but for the most part, that pattern held true until about 2009 or 10. That is when AM station’s programming began to be simulcast again (everything old is new again) on FM stations and HD-2 subchannels. It would be interesting to examine why this is so and what it means to the radio business as a whole.
The general trend in the music industry has also been down. This is important because record labels and the radio business used to go hand in hand. Record labels had the job of separating the wheat from the chaff. Those groups or artist that had the talent would be given recording contracts and airplay. With exposure, they would become more known, sell more recordings, record more songs, etc until they peaked and began to decline. Radio stations prospered under this arrangement because they took on none of the risk while getting huge vast quantities of program material to playback, and charge advertising fees for spaces within that programming.
So far so good.
Then, two things happened:
- The communications act of 1996
- The internet
The communications act of 1996 forever changed the way the radio business was run in this country. No longer were there several thousand individual stations, the most influential of which resided in markets #1 and #2. Instead there were conglomerations of stations run out of Atlanta, Fort Worth and a dozen or so other medium sized cities. No longer were stations competing head to head and trying to be the best and serve their respective audiences; rather, station A was positioned against station B to erode some of it’s audience so that station C could get better national buys from big ad agencies. No longer would possible controversial artists like the Indigo Girls get airplay on some groups. Songs were sanitized against possible FCC indecency sanctions, morning shows became bland and safe, and radio on the whole became a lot less edgy as big corporate attorneys put the clamps on anything that would invite unwanted exposure.
The last great musical genre was the Grunge/Seattle Sound of the early 1990’s. Those bands somehow mixed heavy metal, obscure mumbled lyrics, flannel shirts and ripped jeans into something that the dissatisfied Gen Xers could understand and appreciate. By 1996, this had morphed into “Modern Rock,” and carried on for several years after that, to fade out in the early 00’s. Since that time, there has been no great musical innovations, at least on the creative side, other than the ubiquitous Apple computer and Pro Sound Tools software.
The internet greatly changed the way recording labels did business, mainly by eating into their bottom line. This had the effect of circling the wagons and throwing up a protective barrier against almost all innovation. The net result was fewer and fewer talented artists being able to record, which pushed those people into smaller, sometimes home based recording studios. While those studios can put out good or sometimes even excellent material, often the recordings lack the professional touches that a highly trained recording engineer can add. Add to this the mass input of the internet and no longer are bands or artists pre-screened. Some may point to that as a good development with more variety available for the average person. Perhaps, but the average person does not have time to go through and find good music to download from the iTunes store. Thus, a break developed in the method of getting good, talented artists needed exposure. Youtube has become one of the places to find new music, but it is still a chore to wade through all the selections.
Thus, when FM HD-2 channels came into being, there was little new programming to be put into play. HD radio was left to broadcast existing material with reduced coverage and quality than that of analog FM. That trend continues today where now analog FM channels are being used to broadcast the news/talk programming that used to reign on AM.
What will happen next? If Tim Westergren has any say, the internet (namely Pandora) will take over and terrestrial radio will cease to exist. Current trends point solidly in that direction, although I think Tim is a little ahead himself in his prediction.
News/Talk on the FM dial point not to an attempt to shift the wheezing, white, (C)onservative/(R)epublican programming to a younger demographic, who will, if I am any judge of history, remain unimpressed. No, rather, they are running out of other source material, simulcasting syndicated talk radio is cheap, lean and a good way to make money without having to pay actual salaries.
I have had my HTC Android phone for just about a year now, which is enough time to learn the device’s strengths and weaknesses. I have done a fair amount of listening to audio, watching youtube videos and playing .mp3’s to give me some idea of the technical quality and operational issues. Like anything else, these are general observations. Some radio station’s streams sound better than other due to the effort those stations put into audio quality.
The listening test was done with a set of Sony earbuds, which sound far better than the small speaker built into the phone. For ease in streaming audio, I used the TuneIn Radio application for Android by TuneIn Inc. For this test, I only listened to FM broadcast stations, both streaming and over the air.
The over the air tuner is the stock factory radio in my 1997 Jeep Cherokee. I would rate the radio average in every way. The actual tests were done driving around on interstate highways and other major roadways. There were a few instances where I had to give up on the Android phone due to traffic and driving considerations.
My Android phone has an FM tuner installed in it, however, it is really useless. I get only local stations, and then their audio is all hissy and for the most part unlistenable. The HTC FM tuner uses the headphone wire for an antenna, which may be a part of the problem.
Here is a chart of my observations:
||Analog FM radio
||Streaming via Android
|Overall Station Selection
||Only those stations that can be received
||Any station that is listed in TuneIn Radio App*
|Varity of interesting programming
||Only those receivable signals which limits it to a few well programmed stations, the rest being garbage
||Almost unlimited, world wide*
||Only those stations that can be received
||Any station that is listed in TuneIn Radio App*
|Ease of use
||Can press the preset or scan buttons on radio without taking eyes off the road*
||Requires squinting at a small screen and pressing several little boxes to get to the desired station
|Annoying commercial avoidance
||See above on preset and scan buttons*
||Very difficult to change stations quickly
|Quality of sound
||Good to excellent, depending on the station’s signal strength*
||Fair to good, depending on the bit rate and network congestion, some stations sound very good and some can sound very bad
||Occasional picket fencing with distant stations, otherwise, non-existent*
||Varies depending on location, can be quite annoying, especially in mobile environment. App also occasionally locks up and needs to be restarted
||Free, radio came with the vehicle, no paid data service needed*
||Requires data plan with smart phone, some plans cap data amounts, can be fairly expensive
I am having a difficult time assigning the overall enjoyment as well as an over all winner. One the one hand, it was very cool, driving down I-84 in Danbury, CT listening to Howlin’ Wolf on New Orleans’ non-commercial Jazz station, WWOZ. On the other hand, it was a right pain in the ass to get to that point, in rush hour traffic. By the way WWOZ’s web stream is excellent, audio wise.
From a safety and ease of use, the FM radio in the Jeep wins hands down, I just don’t know how many more times I can listen to the same Led Zeppelin song on i95 (that used to be I-95, frankly I thought Steve Jobs copyrighted the lower case i).
The drop outs were also a concern, mostly taking place in on the section of I-84 going through Putnam County, NY. I don’t know if my cell carrier needs to beef up it’s data coverage in that area, or if there were just a great many users on the network checking their e-mail, etc.
If they could sort out the ease of operation problem and get rid of the drop outs, streaming audio over HTC Android would win hands down.
A while ago, I was extolling the virtues of my Android smartphone. I have to say, I am still pleased with the unit, having a mini-computer/camera/phone/calculator etc is handy. It makes life easy to find a needed part on Mouser.com, order it and get it the next day. I can snap a picture of something and send to somebody in less than a minute. When trouble shooting a transmitter, sending a picture to the factory rep cuts down on the back and forth and brings the effort directly to the point.
I have also blogged about my mediocre Pandora experience. Now, it seems there is another reason to be weary of the mighty Pandora machine.
The Wall Street Journal has a good article about what these companies are doing with your data.
Both the Android and iPhone versions of Pandora, a popular music app, sent age, gender, location and phone identifiers to various ad networks.
Read the whole thing, it is enlightening.
Is my Smartphone spying on me? Apparently so. Frankly, I’ve had enough of this. There is nothing compelling or even terribly unique about Pandora. I’ve found the Pandora listening experience to be adequate, but certainly not worth all the hoopla it gets. Being constantly bombarded by advertisers selling all sorts of garbage is becoming annoying. I’ve gone through and deleted all apps that access personal data of any kind, including Pandora. There are a few which are hard rooted in the phone such as Skype mobile and Facebook which can’t be deleted. Skype mobile can’t even be deactivated, as soon as the program is ended, it restarts on it’s own.
So, is Skype mobile recording everything I do and sending to some black hole somewhere? I don’t know. If it is, it is likely boring somebody half to death as most of my life is pretty mundane.
Update: I rooted my phone, which was far easier than I thought it would be, and deleted all the programs I didn’t like.
I posted previously about how to listen to radio station streams on an Android phone. In the time between then and now, somebody has come up with a much better way to do it. TuneIn Radio is both a website for streaming and a mobile application for Android and iPhone users alike.
I have found that every local radio station that has a web stream is listed. The major overseas broadcasters like the BBC, CBC, Radio Netherlands, and so on as well as all of the non-government US owned shortwave stations are listed. As their website states:
With over 30,000 FM and AM radio stations from across the globe, TuneIn Radio makes radio local, no matter how far from home you might be.
Far easier than what I posted before. Further, this is exactly the type of service that terrestrial broadcasters needed the most; a concise consolidated listing broken down by genre and locality, to compete with Pandora, Slacker, Last.fm, et. al.
In order to download TuneIn Radio, point your mobile web browser to http://tunein.com and it will automatically direct you to the proper download source. Or one could search through the Apple store or Android Market to find the app.
The NAB (National Association of Broadcasters), in trying to reach a settlement with the music industry, has decided that cellphones are part of the problem. No kidding, the fact that smart phones like the iPhone and Android do not have FM tuners seems to be a part of the negotiations, even though the cellphone industry has nothing to do with music royalties. The argument is, more people will listen to, and more importantly, buy music if they have an FM tuner in their smartphone.
I don’t know about that.
My HTC Android phone does have an FM tuner, it also has a metal detector. I have found both the be novel applications. Even though I work in radio, I have used the FM tuner twice. Technically speaking, I find it to be adequate. In order to receive anything, a pair of headphones or earbuds has to be used, because the headphone wire acts as the antenna.
That being said, I cannot count the number of times I have used Pandora or other online audio applications. Several times a day at least. Why? Because the content it better.
If consumers want FM tuners in their cellphones, they will ask for them. Cellphone manufacture’s will gladly comply, and make them. The real problem is, most people don’t care about radio because most radio programming is boring and uninspired these days. Let me paraphrase that:
HELLO, BROADCASTERS! ARE YOU LISTENING? YOUR PROGRAMMING SUCKS!
Offer a better product and listeners will return. If there were a compelling reason to build FM tuners into cellphones, it would already be done. Forcing the cellphone manufactures to do something they don’t want to do will simply drive up prices.
The NAB has led the radio industry astray for years now, we really should stop listening to them.
Update:There is a better way: www.engineeringradio.us/blog/2011/03/tunein-radio/
Ahh, since I posted about my android, a few readers have emailed me and would like to know. If you have tried to stream audio using a smartphone web browser, you have found out that it simply doesn’t work. The web browser is unable to decode the radio station stream because most of them are in AAC, AAC+, HeAACv1 or some other codec. At this point, most people give up on the idea and move on. I, on the other hand, determined that it should be doable.
First, I attempted to down load a few apps, but they either crashed or didn’t do what I wanted or weren’t in the right language, or something.
Clear Channel has something called iHeartRadio, which is a clearing house for mobile users that want to listen to Clear Channel radio streams on their iPhones. I don’t know, once you have heard one Kiss-FM station, you’ve heard them all as far as I am concerned. Most other Clear Channel programming is boring and uninspired.
What I finally ended up doing was going to Moodio and reading up on a few things. Here is a good step by step way to use Moodio to listen to radio station web streams on any mobile device.
- Be aware that not all data plans are the same. ATT, Sprint, and others now cap data transfer and charge extra if a subscriber goes over. Know your plan.
- On a regular computer, go to Moodio (http://www.yourmuze.fm/)
- Set up a user account
- Select from there list, the stations you want to listen to. They have many US stations as well as many from Europe. If the station you are looking for is not there, you can request that it be added.
- Select the default data rate. Since I have unlimited data, I chose the highest rate for the best sounding audio. Others may want lower data rates so as not to exceed data caps.
- Point your mobile device web browser to www.m.yourmuze.fm
- Log into your account
- The stations on your listen list will be displayed.
That is a lot of steps to take. Somebody has to be very into radio or a radio station to do something like that. A forward thinking radio station or group will be writing or paying somebody to write mobile streaming apps for their stream(s). A forward thinking radio station or group would then feature links to these apps prominently on their web pages. Very prominently if they are in a PPM market. Ahem, very prominently if they are in a PPM market.
That is what a forward thinking radio station would be doing…
I read a very good and interesting post on James Critland’s blog. He is somewhat concerned about the trend for mobile wireless providers to no longer offer unlimited data service for a flat fee. I find it interesting that all of these companies seemed to have reached the same conclusions at the same time. But anyway…
The general surmise of James’ post is that the average person will not be able to afford online radio through a 3 or 4G device because of the limited minutes available and the additional charges incurred. (35 quid is about $50.00) To make that meaningful to a US audience, I decided to redo some of James’ math.
Iphones are primarily serviced through ATT. ATT has two different data plans that are coupled with voice plans in a bundle. For example, a 450 minute voice plan and a 200 Mb data plan will cost $55.00. At 900 minute voice plan with a 2 Gb data plan will run $85.00.
Here are a few interesting tid bits and some good math:
- A 64 kbps stream runs 7.68 kb per second, or 460 kb per minute (1 kilo bit per second = 0.12 kilo bytes)
- 1 hour of online listening equals 27,640 k bytes of data transfered
- The 200 Mb plan cost $15.00 with voice plan, the 2 Gb plan cost $25.00 with voice plan
- The 200 Mb plan would allow for 7 hours of listen time if no other data use occurred
- The 2 Gb plan would allow for 72 hours of listen time if no other data use occurred
- Beyond those data transfer amounts, extra charges are incurred
Almost 50% of the time spent listening to all radio source (terrestrial, satellite, online) is in the car. The average person in the US listens to radio about 3 hours per day, or 90 hours per month. Half of that time would be 45 hours or so.
Clearly, anyone who is more than a casual listener of online radio will need the 2 Gb plan. However, given the paucity of entertainment available from traditional radio sources, this is not an outlandish amount to pay. I remember in the 70’s when folks were saying cable TV would never catch on.