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 147.19-3.6%Feb 3 3:59 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
From: ohohyodafarted3/27/2007 11:03:28 PM
  Read Replies (2) of 197504
 
There has been a lot of talk on this board speculating about QCOM having a "work around" for the power management infringement issue, in the event that an injunction is issued to prevent importation of our chips.

I pose the following question to all of you....

If in fact QCOM does have a work around, what is the reason that Qcom has been silent on this issue. Why haven't they been boasting of not needing the crappy BRCM IP that is in dispute. Why not declare that we aren't going to use the BRCM Ip any more and be done with it.

I realize that there was a passing comment on one of the quarterly conference calls by someone inferring that we were working on a technical solution to the issue, but since then we have not heard a peep from QCOM on this so called work around.

So if we really have a work around, then why has QCOM been so hush hush about it??? I see no reason to keep it a secret if we really have a work around. My only guess is that we have not found a solution. Although for the life of me, I can't possibly see how that could be with all the fine engineers we have working for us.

QCOM's silence on this matter is most distressing, and leads one to believe that we are between a rock and a hard place if an injunction is issued.

Please tell me why Q has not said anything more about a work around.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext