is there any benefit with xm besides radio and traffic???

 

Besides no commercials, and every type of programming you can think of, NO

 

lol

I used to wonder the same. I never listen to OTA stations anymore.

 

Being able to hear the same programming anywhere you go... some of the best programming anywhere... commercial free music.... I have it is both cars and home - wouldn't be without it.

 

Huge benefits!

 

A subscription to XM also gives you unlimited access to XM Online. I like to listen to streaming music at work.

 

Sirius is superior. Better music & talk & if you live in an area that is not covered by the traffic, I would get the new xm to sirius interface converter. Sirius has the dead, jam on & radio margaritaville that simulcasts every buffett concert. The NFL & Nascar.

 

I agree. I had Sirius before getting the RL and I have to agree. Actually we still have it in the Land Cruiser. Taking NavTraffic out of the equation, I think Sirius offers a better variety.

 

I finally do understand what Neuron Bob describes as XM's compression leading to poor quality music. Bases and highs just don't finish. Does Sirius sound any better?

 

It's hard to say. The Land Cruiser has a 7 speaker JBL audio system. Not nearly as good as the RL, but better than most. Since I haven't compared the two services back-to-back through the same audio system, I guess you could say that I am not making a completely informed decision, but my opinion is that Sirius is no better with respect to sound quality. No discernible difference.

Sirius just offers deeper content.

 

Frankly, from what I've heard with my own ears, no, from my apprentice audiophile ears. Compressed sound does not sound good, even in a car. The only reason one can get away with this in a car is because the car is such an acoustically hostile environment that you don't notice it as much as in a quiet room.

The variety does seem better, though, on Sirius. It almost makes me wish the XM-Sirius merger would go through, except that would extinguish competition in the field...but that's a topic for another forum.

 

I spoke with a highly respected audiophile who has both in a Lexus with ML and he states that the XM is superior in quality. My opinion is that both are not up to par with a CD and that should be the minimum standard.
As both satellite providers are losing money and the lawyers will never allow the proposed monopoly we should enjoy it while we can. It cannot sustain itself in its present format. HD radio will extinguish both and we will end up with the higher quality of HD but with all of the commercials. Satellite cannot afford to compete even though they too will be saturated in commercials before they go off the air.

 

Everybody I have spoken to states that Sirius has a better variety and we all know that Navtraffic is only to make the screen look pretty. Relying on Navteq, XM and the authorities to get it right could takes years. Right now, your local TV station, radio station and internet are way ahead of where Navtraffic is.

 

interestingly, I spoke to a guy from NavTeq at a conference a couple weeks ago. I complained about the accuracy and time latency issues with Navtraffic compared to Google Maps and news station websites. He claims that there are only 3 providers of traffic flow info and that they use a similar source of data augmented by their own "probes". He further stated that NavTeq flow is updated every 2 minutes to Navtraffic. I told him Navtraffic was often 30 minutes out of date. I suspect the main problem is in the interface between XM and Navtraffic, not Navteq.

 

i dont like XM...i have not renewed...that hasn't stopped them from calling...over & over again....if i could get sirius, i would pay...i am an NFL fan and it would be worth it to me.

 

A couple of years ago I did a lot of reseach and the conclusion is that we are suffering from 3 large corporations: Authorities reporting, Navteq data collection and XM expediency. The problem is that they all tell you to contact Acura in the hope that you will go away.
The concept is great and if it was as good as the web or your local news then it would quickly expand to a lot more cars.
Traffic flow is only a portion of the service. I see road closures that are not even on the map and traffic accidents that put me in a mile of back-up and they don't show up in the car until I've reached my destination.
Numerous people are to blame, even the person that called it "Real Time" traffic was lying or his idea of real-time is way different to mine.

 

I'm with you db - great concept, poor execution. Yes, flow is not the only problem. There was a huge problem on the San Mateo bridge several months ago that did not show up as an incident or a flow problem until 1 hour after it happened. I had the "priviledge" of monitoring the situation first hand.

 

You know, I actually disagree. Since moving to SE Michigan, I drive the highways almost exclusively on my way to and from work. I have come to rely and trust NavTraffic much more in the last few months. I feel it's pretty accurate in the Detroit Metro areal.

 

YAY! I am not the only 'fanboi'. Navtraffic usability is very dependent upon the market area you are located. As I have said before, it is very usable here in Tampa Bay. For those in market areas not as highly supported, I can understand the questionable reviews...but for me, it is my copilot.

Also, XM supports much of the AcuraLink messaging capability. However some features require a datalink capable phone & service. I have read, however, some messages may be sent to the RL from the Acura server even without an XM subscription. Good luck finding anyone at Acura that seems to actually know what that is.

 

Is this to say that if you do not renew your XM subscription then you have disabled AcuraLink messaging capabiltiy?

 

You do not need an XM subscription for AcuraLink to be enabled. FYI Honda owns a good chunk of XM.

 

IMHO...Honda rode the wrong horse on this one.