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 : Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting
QCOM 145.13-4.9%3:13 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: mightylakers who wrote (11016)5/29/2001 3:22:29 PM
From: Eric L  Read Replies (2) of 197494
 
Lakers,

re: MSM5000 / MSM5105 / MSM5100 in Korea

This is same story line you reported, but it is written in much clearer fashion than the Digital Chosun article, taking some of the mystery out of the tale.

Qualcomm's explanation makes more sense in this article, and in fact perfectly reasonable:

"Qualcomm said that the supply rejection is not because of defects in the 5105 chips themselves but because they lack the functions required under the unique circumstances of Korean telecom services."

I am reminded about Dr. Jacobs remarks at his presentation at Analysts Day, where he referenced the increased buffering of the MSM5100 that would enable better AOD/VOD capabilities.

>> Domestic Mobile Carriers Reject Qualcomm's 5105 chips

Shin Hye-son
The Korea Herald
05/30/2001

koreaherald.co.kr

Domestic handset manufacturers have been forced to cancel plans to produce IS-95C cell phones adopting Qualcomm's MSM5105 chips after the chips were rejected by mobile-phone operators, industry sources said yesterday.
According to the sources, domestic mobile-phone operators including SK Telecom (SKT), the nation's largest wireless carrier, informed handset manufacturers in the middle of this month that they do not wish to be supplied with handsets adopting Qualcomm's 5105 chips.

Mobile-phone operators said that 5105 chips had problems because they do not support the convolution code, which is essential for high-speed data communications.

"We conducted tests on 5105 chips from last February and finally judged them unfit at the end of April after they failed to provide the speed of up to 144Kbps that we need," an SKT official said.

Korea Telecom Freetel (KTF) and LG Telecom (LGT) also recognized this problem and made an internal decision not to accept handsets with the chips.

So far there have been some cases in which mobile-phone operators found fault with chip functions and demanded minor adjustments in software, but this is the first time that they have rejected them outright.

Consequently, manufacturers who have planned or have already completed product designs using MSM 5105 chips have been forced to start over.

Reports have it that LG Electronics, Motorola and other middle and small-sized cell-phone manufacturers adopted the chips or have been planning to do so.

But Samsung Electronics, the nation's largest handset manufacturer, discovered problems with the chips and switched its 5105 chip production lines for 5100 chips to go into mass production from this October.

"We had no choice but to cancel the plan to adopt 5105 chips. For the time being we will rely on color cell phones adopting the existing MSM5000," said an LGE official.

An official for a small handset manufacturer said that it will also drop plans to make products using 5105 chips.

He predicted that his company would sustain losses from the subsequent delay in the development of handsets and incur additional costs for R&D.

As a result, handsets for domestic distribution will go over directly from the existing MSM5000 chips to 5100 chips without going through 5105 chips.

Meanwhile, Qualcomm said that the supply rejection is not because of defects in the 5105 chips themselves but because they lack the functions required under the unique circumstances of Korean telecom services. <<

- Eric -
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext