Broadcastify vs. Real Scanners

Does the existence of broadcastify threaten the entire existence of physical scanners?

I have a relative who knows nothing about scanners who mentioned that you could listen to police scanners online. I didn't really have a quick answer as to why scanners are superior to broadcastify. (I like real scanners-not online streaming).

Why are real scanners better?

If you have the RF bug then receiving via a scanner is much more fun than online. We RF junkies like our monitoring to be over the air , not through wires. Plus a scanner is much more versatile and dynamic than online monitoring websites where you don't have much control.

And not ever station, public service agency is one. Line

Remember for every feed there is a scanner providing that audio in most cases.

The benefit of a scanner is you can listen to whatever you want (including the prohibited stuff not permitted on the feeds), listen to agencies without an existing feed, hold on a channel, search, change channels to follow an incident, such as switching to tactical, firegrounds, etc. and you are not at the mercy of the feed provider.

The benefits to the feeds are you can listen to agencies outside of your reception area.

And don't forget that your grandpa probably told you one way or another to
"Not put all your eggs in one basket!"

rs16 said:

Does the existence of broadcastify threaten the entire existence of physical scanners?

I have a relative who knows nothing about scanners who mentioned that you could listen to police scanners online. I didn't really have a quick answer as to why scanners are superior to broadcastify. (I like real scanners-not online streaming).

Why are real scanners better?

Click to expand...

Q: Why are real scanners better?

A: Scanners are better in my opinion, due to the fact that a scanner can be programmable to certain frequencies that a feed may not be programmed to receive a certain law enforcement agency, or fire/EMS, may not be broadcast on the feed, but is available via RF using a scanner.

The only downside to scanners is that if you want to listen to a feed outside the receive area, the online feed is an upside because you can listen to any feed online, from anywhere.

My old Motorola HT1000 is so much better than my local department feed here on RR. And I can change channels when needed to follow tac stuff.

cmdrwill said:

My old Motorola HT1000 is so much better than my local department feed here on RR. And I can change channels when needed to follow tac stuff.

Click to expand...

Another great reason for listening via RF. The online feeds do not allow the broadcast of TAC and car-to-car channels.

rs16 said:

Does the existence of broadcastify threaten the entire existence of physical scanners?

Click to expand...

Personally, I think everyone should be required to sign into broadcastify with a username and password even to monitor the live feeds. We have made listening online so easy people no longer have to own a scanner. Plus, the ease of listening without the need for even a sign in has made it easy for criminals and others to quickly monitor police and potentially escape capture. Requiring a username and password to monitor live feeds would help to gently nudge people toward a scanner purchase and potentially help to curb criminals from misusing the feeds to their advantage simply because they do not want to hassle with the extra step required to obtain a username/password and actually use it to login.

Shawn

ScannerSK said:

Personally, I think everyone should be required to sign into broadcastify with a username and password even to monitor the live feeds. We have made listening online so easy people no longer have to own a scanner. Plus, the ease of listening without the need for even a sign in has made it easy for criminals and others to quickly monitor police and potentially escape capture. Requiring a username and password to monitor live feeds would help to gently nudge people toward a scanner purchase and potentially help to curb criminals from misusing the feeds to their advantage simply because they do not want to hassle with the extra step required to obtain a username/password and actually use it to login.

Shawn

Click to expand...

I agree with you Shawn. There needs to be some type of "quality control" so to speak, to ensure the feeds are not being used for illegal purposes.

rs16 said:

Does the existence of broadcastify threaten the entire existence of physical scanners?

I have a relative who knows nothing about scanners who mentioned that you could listen to police scanners online. I didn't really have a quick answer as to why scanners are superior to broadcastify. (I like real scanners-not online streaming).

Why are real scanners better?

Click to expand...

Real scanners are "real-time", as it's happening. With most feeds, there is a delay from when it's actually broadcast until heard on a feed.

Sent from my SM-S820L using Tapatalk

Can listen to stuff not allowed on broadcastify like Taxis, Construction, GMRS. Plus the reliability, no worries of the feed going off.

Also the big thing for me that no one has mentioned yet is loads better audio quality not the Broadcastify is bad it's decent but it's better and much clearer on my scanner.

The delay is the security feature.

scannersk said:

personally, i think everyone should be required to sign into broadcastify with a username and password even to monitor the live feeds. We have made listening online so easy people no longer have to own a scanner. Plus, the ease of listening without the need for even a sign in has made it easy for criminals and others to quickly monitor police and potentially escape capture. Requiring a username and password to monitor live feeds would help to gently nudge people toward a scanner purchase and potentially help to curb criminals from misusing the feeds to their advantage simply because they do not want to hassle with the extra step required to obtain a username/password and actually use it to login.

Shawn

Click to expand...

i disagree with ever line of this statement.

"we" have not made listening easy, some have provided feeds
at their pleasure. Whom ever clicks and monitors is irrelevant.
Nudging...more like nagging, seems like the method of a control
freak. you can listen as long as you do it my way...

criminals...with that thought train,the only solution is full
encryption,scanners/receivers outlawed. If we are making policy
on what might happen,then the bottom line is none of us should be
sanctioned to possess radios capable of receiving p/s transmissions.
For safety of course..

What will a password and user name do to protect?..spoof acct's are
made in seconds,fake email,user accounts...pointless...like putting a
lock on a door that dose not exist.

How about this,

if you like monitoring, enjoy the feeds, if you really find you want more
access and selectivity..buy a scanner..

Feeds will never compete with the sales of hardware. Most that tap the
feeds only hit play when there is an incident they see pop on a cable news alert.
They dont have base or handhelds near by...just the cool app to launch..
And that is totally ok..

ScannerSK said:

Personally, I think everyone should be required to sign into broadcastify with a username and password even to monitor the live feeds. We have made listening online so easy people no longer have to own a scanner. Plus, the ease of listening without the need for even a sign in has made it easy for criminals and others to quickly monitor police and potentially escape capture. Requiring a username and password to monitor live feeds would help to gently nudge people toward a scanner purchase and potentially help to curb criminals from misusing the feeds to their advantage simply because they do not want to hassle with the extra step required to obtain a username/password and actually use it to login.

Shawn

Click to expand...

Yeah, that's what separates the good guys from the bad guys - the bad guys can't be arsed to pick a username and password. Yeah... :roll:

Thanks for the great replies. I would never consider broadcastify over scanners, but couldn't quickly retort when my relative mentioned it in conversation.

I have over 40 scanners and 13 private feeds and a Broadcastify feed.

When I'm home, I listen to both.

When I'm away, I listen to my Broadcastify feed and several of my private feeds.

I have four scanners set up to be controlled remotely via the RemoteFS Android app.

Best of all worlds.

Rich

Broadcastify vs Real Scanners

To the Original Poster. Looks like lots of good replies here. I can give you ONE example why I tend to carry a scanner instead of relying on apps and phones. My nieces High School Graduation 3 years ago. Humid/Hot day and Severe weather predicted but only the counties north of us just over the Wisconsin border. Later in the night at dinner we all had a great time. We went to leave about 9:30pm and got 2 steps outside the door to see a WALL of wind/rain coming. Lightning and hail and 85mph winds were on the way. 3 of us got to the Truck with 2 others from our party left in the restaurant. My scanner was in the truck and the owner had NOAA going too. Nothing but Severe Thunderstorms so far. Then, my sister is screaming at us from the front door of the restaurant. She couldn't keep the door open due to the wind.. We couldn't hear her for the wind/rain... "To...?...what? TORNADO!!! she's yelling. The TV had announced locally that a Tornado was sighted. Ok. We made it back into the place and the staff wanted all patrons to get to the kitchen. Some guy had a phone APP listening to the police. His app QUIT because the power went off on the scanner of the guy who was supplying it locally. Not everyone uses a non-interrupted power supply. Either that or his cell coverage crapped out due to the lighting/weather. I had my scanner and while everyone was panicking on where to hide, I remembered I had the entire County and SKYWARN on bank 7 of my Pro96. Our party and a bunch of scared patrons listened to the Skywarn Ham reports in the lobby. It was then announced on SKYWARN that there was NO Tornado anywhere, just scud clouds before the Storm front came through. Television jumped the gun and just gave the Tornado call after a viewer called the station to report it but the sirens never blew. The area had a rare November Tornado a few years earlier and Television stations were slow to act that year, this time they jumped the gun as the Weather station at the Airport never issued a Tornado warning of any kind. Only thanks to the Pro96 Scanner I had were we all reassured there was no Tornado. The guy with the phone app was still fumbling for a signal to the internet at TUNE-IN where he was listening to a local feed. People stopped crowding around him and sat by us listening to the calls. We drove home listening to the Skywarn reports knowing the worst had passed. Can't beat a real scanner