*** This post is copyrighted and may ONLY be downloaded on a computer in California and may not be copied anywhere else *** CLICK AWAY NOW IF THAT DOES NOT APPLY TO YOU. You have been warned...
<"We scrambled a helicopter from RAF Valley in Anglesey but after about ten minutes were unable to find the guy," said Gleeson, who is based at RAF Kinloss in north east Scotland.
"He had gone behind a rock and the helicopter crew could not see him. His mobile phone signal was weak and we couldn't ring him, so we sent him a text message with our telephone number, asking him to move.>
If he had a Globalstar phone with SnapTrack and a fuel-cell battery, he could be found anywhere [well, anywhere in a lot of countries and on a lot of ocean].
Meanwhile, Drews' comments were an example of 'restrained opinion'.
Drew should have written, "Nokia is a pack of lying scum who should rot for 1000 years for destroying the financial viability of all those wireless companies which hung their hopes on VW40 [W-CDMA = 3GSM], GPRS, EDGE and the pack of lies told by them and Ericy about who owns what intellectual property, what royalty rates would or should be and the prospects for those imaginary technologies. They should be sued for $400 billion. I don't believe they have ever had any great concern about VW40 other than as a way to prolong the agony of GSM, which they have a huge market share in and huge profit margins. Every month delay in VW40 is worth a fortune to Nokia. Of course they want to spin it out. In CDMA, they have a small market share and it will get smaller. Blaming QUALCOMM was of course their approach. Sony is more customer-oriented." Actually, that's not quite what Drew wrote, so read his comments. Of course Drew's opinion is meaningful:
<To:slacker711 who wrote (10831)
From: Drew Williams Tuesday, May 22, 2001 2:25 PM
View Replies (1) | Respond to of 10849
re: Sony's reaction to glitch vs. Nokia's.
Not being qualified technically, I have no meaningful opinion as to whose fault these really are, which is not to say I have no opinion.
(Since more than one handset manufacturer has had problems, however, I have to admit the possibility that Qualcomm may be partially responsible.)
Bugs happen, however, in any significant software project. The bigger the project, the greater the odds of bugs. The difference here is how the companies responded.
It seems to me that Sony has reacted much differently than Nokia did when they found they had a problem.
Sony appears to be saying, "We have a problem. It is our problem, because we failed to notice or anticipate the implications of the newer CDMA hardware standards until after our handsets were already in the hands of consumers. We have fortunately identified it in time to fix it before any of our customers have been affected. Therefore, we are recalling all affected handsets. We can load new software that fixes the problem in about ten minutes while you wait. There will be no cost to our customers other than the inconvenience of bringing their handsets to our store. If our customers prefer, we'll give them a special deal on a new handset."
Nokia appears to have said, "Qualcomm screwed up and wrote an imprecise standard. When our engineers wrote the software that operates our handsets, we followed the CDMA IS95 standard as written by Qualcomm. We are not recalling our handsets because it is not our fault. Qualcomm will have to fix it at the carrier's infrastructure level instead."
More simply, Sony said, "Sorry, but we'll fix it right away." Nokia said, "Not my problem, man." >
Nokia also was saying "Look, CDMA is useless, buy GSM!"
Mqurice |
