Like any two rivals, XM and SIRIUS each want to be the leader in the satellite radio industry. The two are so similar however, that they can't afford to be petty in their subtle battle for satellite supremecy. Let's face it: if they each turn into bickering sissies, that will only turn off potential customers for both sides.

The Hartford Courant recently provided a Los Angeles Times review of the "kid glove" boxing match that continues between XM and SIRIUS.

It's amazing to see the fine line that the two companies have to walk in order to both keep their industry growing. Can the two providers reamain friendly while still ruthlessly executing their business strategies?

Ultimately, if there is only one successful company in this space, it will have focused on two key issues: customer service and content. Without quality service, subscribers are likely to migrate from one provider to another. A worst-case scenario would be for subscribers to leave the pay-for-radio-content model completely due to poor service.

Then there's the question of business viability. XM and SIRUIS have both spent large sums of money for content, which is a great step, but of course, you have to fund those bills somehow. Fighting with each other in bidding wars is only going to hurt both companies and ultimately, hurt their customers.

What do you think? Is there enough growth potential and quality service for each of these companies to co-exist semi-peacefully? Is it really the technology or price that will set one apart from another? Chime in with your thoughts.