What difference does the time of the article have to do with it? Nothing, as far as Dave's request for information. Sorry, but I'm not into one sided propoganda. Nor do I follow the drumbeat of the masses. I've always caution in the past for each person to do his/her homework, which leads them to their conclusions, not mind.
As far as Cabi, QCOM derives profits from it's IPR, they sold the infrastucture biz that was unprofitable and are now looking to get rid of it's handset division because of the low margins. Gee, sounds to me that he hit 3 for 3, or am I flat out wrong?
I also state that it was a "primer of sorts", which it is. It details the methods and players that are involved in the 3G standards, and if you do a search using Ask Jeeves, Yahoo, Excite, Alta Vista you will get to places like the ITU, CDG, GSM MoU and others websites for more detailed information and facts. This is a good article for those that want a starting place to do that search and draw their own conclusions.
Frankly, I'm beginning to believe there will not be a 3G standard and that it will have to wait for 4G. The ITU will not, according to their webpage on IPR's, support a company's pursuit of creating a monopoly. Also, any standard issued by the ITU is non-binding, so Europe, US and Japan may not go along with it any how, especially if QCOM is unreasonable about licensing it's IPR's. This story is far from being settled and over, and by no means a slam dunk. |
