Ramsey,
you are wrong on both counts.
Then, please, by all means; correct me.
We all know how they delivered on their GPRS promise
First off, I am in the US and have not had the opportunity to use GPRS. Secondly, my point is: who cares?
As I have repeated, ad nauseam, people utilize their cell phone, regardless of air interface, for the primary purpose of making phone calls.
Eventually, data services will be demanded. The key word is: eventually and will. Both implying: future; not the present.
Personally, anyone invested in Qualcomm should stop crying over their spilled milk. Remember, the longer it takes to implement this migration, the longer it will take for Qualcomm to receive its money.
The longer it takes, the greater the chances that at least some of the "building block" patents will expire.
That is the issue, isn't it? The longer the delays in implementing a CDMA network, the greater the chance at least a portion of Qualcomm's CDMA patent portfolio will expire. Perhaps, with the expiration of at least some of that CDMA patent portfolio, Qualcomm will not be able to charge their "customary" royalty.
Therefore, in the very end, Qualcomm will receive less raw dollars....
Just like the computer industry, the average subscriber does not care which air interface their provider uses. Consumers want the most, for the very least (on average).
On average, consumers are looking for the "biggest" bang for their buck on wireless phones. Nokia has established themselves as the de facto standard in wireless phones. |
