< TI has a lower cost structure for GSM chipsets than Qualcomm. Their chips wouldnt include a CDMA component so it would require lower processing power. They also have a substantially higher volumes and they have their own fabs (no 10% margin for TSMC).” >
Irwin Jacobs said that the the phones operate in one or the other so the power consumption isn't less. If there is a difference, the impression I have is that it's trivial. Multi-mode, multi-band isn't a drain on battery, or more expensive, or space-taking. If they cost more, then it's because of supply and demand issues and marketing ideas, not because they cost more to produce [other than on a unit cost basis initially, for amortization purposes I suppose].
My guess is that the phones will be highly attractive to subscribers, they'll cost more from the wholesalers, QUALCOMM will collect a bigger royalty [though at 2% in China, the increase will be tiny], they'll be considered high-end phones [I'd like to have one].
Because of the integration of the CDMA and GSM technology, Texas Instruments would lose any advantage they have over QUALCOMM in the chip production. GSM must be easy to do.
The more complex things get, the better it is for QUALCOMM, because they have the financial size, market share, people and skills and all that's needed to manage the political, technological, marketing and economic things that determine success.
Mqurice |
