Any comments on this post from Mr. Fun in the NOK thread?
- gue
----------------------------------------------------------
Message 11842163
I had to jump in here to give Tero some support.
1. QCOM's IPR rights vis a vis W-CDMA - This is the crux of the issue, and the answer is unknowable until it goes to court. QCOM steadfastly maintains that its patents over such things as soft handoff and its rake receiver are unassailable. TI, MOT, NOK, DSP, LSI etc. insist that QCOM's patents do not cover W-CDMA and that no license is necessary. Obviously, one (or both) of these positions is wrong, and I fear the answer will be determined by legal processes. I have not seen any analyst who can even frame the questions adequately. We need a top-notch patent lawyer and an unbiased RF engineer to give us some insight. Until then, "QCOM is unstoppable because Dr. J says so" and "NOK will never pay for 3G licenses" is just talk.
2. Do not think that Ericsson is QCOMs friend just because they bought the infrastructure business and agreed to cross license patents. ERIC maintains that its patents on W-CDMA are just as important as QCOMs and that it believes the IPR dollar flow will be essentially even. A contact at ERIC insists that the W-CDMA standard was set specifically to minimize the exposure to QCOMs patents and that there are ways around them. Now before anyone jumps down my throat on this one, see point #1 which applies to this as well.
3. At the end, NOK will be pragmatic and if there is business advantage to capitulating on the QCOM IPR issue, they will. Note the agreement to license PalmOS after being a vocal champion of EPOCH. Indeed, if it were an advantage, and I don't think it will be, NOK would even buy chipsets from QCOM.
4. CDMA is a better 2G technology than GSM, but it doesn't matter. The facts are clear that GSM is four times the size of CDM and growing faster now (largely because US technology confusion and cheap wireline rates have retarded penetration - the US blew it almost as badly as the Japanese). I'm sure Tero can write more eloquently than I of the penetration growth in Europe and China. However, it is not out of the question that CDMA can put on a growth spurt and out grow GSM. It really depends on the carriers to execute, and has little to do with the relative merits of the two different 2G technologies.
5. Handset vendors who think 3G is a clean slate for them to get back in the game are sorely mistaken. 3G networks will not have the coverage of 2G for many, many years - so 3G phones will have to support 2G technology. This means: Multi-band, multi-mode phones for the foreseeable future. Japanese manufacturers, with their incompatible PDC technology will be screwed again. Nokia wins. |
