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 : Nokia (NOK)
NOK 6.580+1.5%Jan 12 3:59 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Nils Mork-Ulnes who started this subject3/28/2002 7:15:44 PM
From: 49thMIMOMander  Read Replies (1) of 34857
 
Ouch, that US-AMPS-30kHz-TDMA, still haunting even the later quacks

From: Tom Brush

Is it WSJ incompetence on CDMA or is it just too confusing for your average journalist no matter what journal?

Some bloopers are in bold. Makes it seem as if all "2.5g" will get same performance as CDMA1x. Also repeats the wail that US was so stupid in having competition for standards without reporting that "the holy grail of 3g" would not exist without the CDMA that emerged from that competition.

Message 17258444

snip
Write to Walter S. Mossberg at mossberg@wsj.com

----
Then for the quacking

- guys a complete moron, journalists are dumber then lawyers.IMHO
- wrote Mossberg. I suggest you do it as well,especially the engineers among us.
(not one still working DSP-RF-engineer would not agree with the quackiness of 30khz TDMA)

- To: mossberg@wsj.com

respectfully I think you need to do some more homework on cellular technologies. GSM is woefully inefficient when it comes to handling data because it is spectrally inefficient by at least 6X. I could not believe my ears listening to you support GSM. I know your newspaper has been against CDMA for some reason from the start. But I did not expect it from you.

His response:

I am not against any of these technologies, including CDMA, which I use daily. The Journal isn't against CDMA. That's an absurd claim. But, as an opinion columnist, I believe the US should have picked a standard. CDMA would have been fine with me.

My Response:

To: "Walt Mossberg" <mossberg@wsj.com>

Well, thats not what you said on CNBC!!!

About WSJ bias you should read the articles published in the WSJ on CDMA starting with "Jacobs Patter" written by Quentin Hardy. I will try and send you a link to it.
-----

CDMA in late 80s, ouch-ouch-ouch, compared to US-TDMA which at least was supposed to be
impossible to detect for the AMPS customer, although the phone said "digital" on the lousy
plastic cover, with long antenna.

Funny quacks in these egg-times
---
Sipping gently at a stained coffee cup that reads "It's Lonely at the Top,"

Besides, "my friends don't think I'm a liar."
--

where is that 40x???
(this is where I would need that wav-file of the really nervous, departing quacks)
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext