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 171.63+0.4%3:28 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: IHUBDOWN who wrote (49691)1/19/2006 5:11:08 PM
From: Maurice Winn  Read Replies (1) of 196574
 
<As I remember you said it would not work...> You obviously didn't read with due diligence, or didn't understand, or simply can't remember. You could dig up some quotes to bolster your case.

It was actually L M Ericsson's Bill Frezza who was saying CDMA wouldn't work. Have you not heard of his name? You were a member way back then so you should have done. You haven't made many posts - you should have commented way back then rather than way for the next century and a decade later.

My assertions were that the dopey chip rate, and unsynchronized lack of turbo-coding, inter alia [fancy legal latin jargon for other stuff to affect an air of superiority], would mean that VW-40 wouldn't work as well as CDMA as designed by QUALCOMM. And guess what happened? Did you notice how long it took to get VW-40 moving, sluggishly. I also agreed with the general theme that VW-40 was mainly a GSM Guild attempt to muddy the waters with FUD, cut QUALCOMM out of the equation and introduce vaporware [spelled American style so you can more easily find definitions]. Now, instead of making things up, go and look up previous posts and check out a definition of vaporware.

Mqurice

PS: To other readers - I know Ramsey's instructions about debating certain posters. I will cease and desist.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext