SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : The New Qualcomm - a S&P500 company
QCOM 163.32+2.3%Nov 21 9:30 AM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: DaveMG who wrote (3461)11/22/1999 11:45:00 AM
From: w molloy  Read Replies (3) of 13582
 
Dave, Clark et al : Technical lead and Useability

Two years lead is an educated guess. The pool of CDMA savvy engineers
is expanding (albeit slowly) and these guys are being snapped up by
QCOMS competition. This enhances the ability of LSI and INTC (via DSPC) to improve the technical quality of their respective chipsets.
Additional competition is likely from the likes of Philips (via VLSI), Mitsubishi and CNXT.

Regarding software.
Clark- I was reffering to the handset software, not the basestation.
Useability is the most important issue for 'phone manufacturers like Denso, Samsung and others. The time to market for enhanced feature 'phones is critical, and a bad API (stack interface) severely impacts the ability of the manufacturers to add their in-house MMI's (what the 'phone user sees) to the protocol stack.

LSI and INTC both use the ISOTEL protocol stack, which is significantly easier to interface to than the QCOM stack.

I presume on networks loaded at capacity the carriers would favor phones that utilize the spectrum most efficiently,
In theory - yes. But the Networks are not that sophisticated in
determining if a given 'phone is 'efficient'. Field trials are geared to ensuring that a manufacturers 'phone is useable in a reliable manner. i.e - the 'good enough' standard prevails.

w.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext