I don't understand the concerns over DAB broadcasting as I am unable to discern any noticeable difference in aural quality between the major programme providers using FM or DAB.
It seems to me that FM is more reliable as there are places where some of my DAB channels lose the signal for what may be any of a number of reasons but work fine on FM. I can see that the channel screen may have a little more information on DAB than FM but if I'm driving a vehicle, I shouldn't really be looking at the infotainment screen.
To be honest the big benefits of DAB are in the main for the broadcasters.
The DAB multiplexers can carry many stations and require significantly less power to operate than FM transmitters. The implementation of DAB in the UK is pretty poor in terms of audio quality, some stations don't even run stereo to limit the bandwidth they get charged for.
While DAB can convey audio quality approaching CD quality it's rarely, if ever, done because it uses multiplexer bandwidth that can be sold to the 'popular' music stations.
The apparent benefit of DAB is that it is 'noise free' - it achieves that by using error correction (further reducing quality when triggered) but should the signal drop below a particular threshold - as when a car is moving through weak signal areas - it just cuts the audio whereas FM in those conditions tends to raise the noise level or cause a few crackles. There are a few systemic benefits like auto moving between differing multiplexers for the same station allowing continued listening across the county, and enhanced programme information. but the main benefit for the consumer is multiple choice of stations that are not available on FM.
Incidentally the DAB specifications include a comprehensive Traffic Alert capability - which the UK broadcasters have chosen not to implement - one reason being that, when they developed the networks, there were not enough DAB equipped cars for it to be considered worthwhile 🤣