Mucho-Pretermitting the question of whether, by 2005 it won't (as Dr. J claims)matter to QCOM,would you at least agree that the foreordained ascendancy of WCDMA as the "world" standard is subject to some uncertainties itself?
For example, what if CDMA 2000 really is a technologically superior product, and stays that way because (another assumption) no one is Q's equal in CDMA science?
What if there really is a significant time lag between the time that Q can rollout CDMA 2000 and the rollout of WCDMA?
What if there really is no significant cost disadvantage to a GSM carrier in upgrading to CDMA 2000, only performance advantages?
What if the pervasiveness of GSM in 2g, and the consequent foreordained pervasiveness of WCDMA in 3g, loses its relevance because of the anticipated ability to freely roam between standards by 2002-03?
What if the collective royalty expense of a wcdma system really is greater than cdma 2000 because so many people claim a right to participate?
In the final analysis, I can well remember back in 1996 when the GSM crowd scoffed at CDMA, and challenged whether it would even work at all. Whatever uncertainties remain, I am still astounded that in such a short time we have come from that point to a point where the entire world seems to be moving to one form of CDMA or another.
The point is also made that handset use between humans is only the tip of the iceberg.A recent study predicted that by 2005 machines will access the internet with 5 times the frequency of humans. I wonder how may of these as yet unestablished communicative functions will be most efficiently handled over an air interface.I wonder whether QCOMs longstanding opponents will enjoy the political sway in these collateral markets that they are presently exercising in the field of human telecommunications.Or whether these markets will be more receptive to rationally choosing the best technology on its merits.
I don't know the answer to these questions.I simply pose them .I do note that one defining characteristic of the age in which we live is the decentralization of power away from bureaucracies toward people, whether in choice of content or technology.I think that augurs well for companies rich in intellectual capital, an asset I have perceived QCOM as having which is as, or more, valuable than its intellectual property.
Your thoughts would be sincerely appreciated. |
