An operators, like elephants, have huge, long term
investments and memories for those who mainly
disrupt the process without contributing and
delivering constructively, because the operators
pay the bill.
Are you saying that operators will commit hara kiri rather than use spectrally efficient technology which is available now? If that's the case, thank God for evolution and the survival of the fittest!
What good is a bankrupt operator who can point to his unbroken pride and his "prinicipled" refusal to kow-tow to a company with better technology who wants to get paid its fair share for its creativity? Tell its shareholders: "We destroyed your company, your shares are worthless, but our pride is intact". What good will that do?
Ask Verizon, Sprint, KDDI, the Chinese, the Indians, the Koreans and the Latins whether Q is making a contribution. Ask Nokia how it got its buggy 1x phones fixed. Tell me how Q has no basis for WCDMA royalties (despite 50 global companies who disagree with you) because WCDMA is not based on Q's work.
Then come talk to me about contributions.
The contributions you talk about are the middling, non-groundbreaking piss-ant elaborations that any half-assed technician with a bureaucratic turn of mind can concoct. They are gumming up the UMTS works in a serious way. But all those serfs do enjoy the trips, the conferences, the long lunches and month-long vacations. Why get rid of a good thing?
Never so blind as those who refuse to see. |
