Just wondering...
When do you think Sirius / XM was better? Before the merger or after the merger?
When do you think Sirius / XM was better? Before the merger or after the merger?
Yep. Sirius ruined XM. Since the merger ground repeaters have been removed making for worse reception, the music library has greatly diminished, the old XM rock stations were replaced by the worst Sirius Rock stations, the on-line station began to charge (used to be free with XM subscription), the on-line UI went from OK to darn right awful, they added DJs to the stations (no DJs on the XM stations), and the quality of the radios have gone downhill. The only thing keeping me with them is baseballI would say Sirius is about the same but XM was much better(pre merger)..better play lists,better stations,better personalities ( The MTV crowd is WAY overblown)
I have no idea why anyone would think Sirius was better than XM unless they had specific things they liked that XM did not offer (some sports, a few stations that the other did not offer, and Stern). Other than that, the music stations with XM always had a larger library, no DJs, better reception, and more variety, and they gave you more for less (Sirius always charged for their on-line access where it was always free with XM for XM subs)From the perspective of an XM sub XM was better pre merger. after the merger they made Xm more Sirius like with smaller playlists, DJs etc.(I wouldn't say we had BETTER personalities as much as I would say we had fewer).
but I remember the polls we had here a few years back and most voted for Sirius down the line even for things like Classic radio that were essentially the same on the two services ("SIRI is just better" was the common reply) I assume that the Sirius crowd is less upset because the channels that survived are much more like what Sirisu had.
NASCAR radioI have no idea why anyone would think Sirius was better than XM unless they had specific things they liked that XM did not offer
(Sirius always charged for their on-line access where it was always free with XM for XM subs)
Yep, good example of why I stated, "...unless they had specific things they liked that XM did not offer."NASCAR radio
Wasn't aware of that. They must have started charging before the merger though.Sirius didnt charge at one time
I have no idea why anyone would think Sirius was better than XM unless they had specific things they liked that XM did not offer (some sports, a few stations that the other did not offer, and Stern). Other than that, the music stations with XM always had a larger library, no DJs, better reception, and more variety, and they gave you more for less (Sirius always charged for their on-line access where it was always free with XM for XM subs)
Geronimo said:Just about every poll resulted in a lopsided Sirius win. I think we could ahve asked which service had better picture quality and several of the Sirius fan boys would have voted for their service.
Even though XM had many more subs
Sent from my iPhone using SatelliteGuys
I got the Sirius Lifetime sub @ $299 (pre Stern) mainly for football.. XM (at that time) carried "limited" commercials on the "decade channels" and maybe a few more..Sirius (pre MTV Crowd) had some "classic NYC DJ's" on many of its stations. XM had a better music selection,deeper playlists and much better variety of channels. XM was owned (at one time) by GM which is why the had the sub lead..When GM cars stopped selling XM profits (and subs) dropped. Before the merger their was competition which led to better service on both systems. I had XM in my truck and Sirius at home
For some reason I had better reception here in Maine before the merger. My new Corolla has terrible reception. They have changed the receiver and antenna, but reception still is not good. My truck with an Onyx has prroblems also. A buffer should be built in for this issue.