Tero,
I'm curious where the venom towards QCOM comes from. Isn't it a little early to claim that their existence is merely parasitic? I'm not techie and have only been a follower of this discussion for a cuople of years but it does seem fairly clear that they did pioneer the commercialization of CDMA and that WCDMA uses a lot of their ideas.Leech is a rather strong verb. If ERICY had been smarter about it at the beginning, QC might never have sold any infrastructure at all. Nobody's claiming they invented the wheel. Neither did Nokia or ERICY for that matter. You sound like you're parroting ERICY. Nokia, as befits the habitual understatement of the Fins, is taking a much lower profile.It would be nice to know whether this chip rate issue is real or not. Given ERICY's record re the feasability of CDMA, it seems to me that there's no reason to take their word at face value.It's also true that at this point that CDMA has failed to live up to the capacity claims that its proponants made for it, although I dare say everyone now seems to believe some form of it to be the superior air interface. I do find it a bit odd that QCOM stands alone defending IS95,. although the CDG is echoing them. It's unclear to me whether QC dominates the CDG, although given the size of the other members I doubt it.
I've been thinking a little more about whether this industry will be reduced to several players in the next few years and am wondering if the mkt isn't so huge that it will support more than one might think for quite a while....I think the reason many of us are interested in QC is because it is such a small co and does not need to capture the same mkt share as its larger brethren to be wildly successful...Looks like you got your MOT warning...I still say it's too early to count them out, but I am extremely skeptical of Iridium. 3,000dollar handsets?Unfortunately fo those who might like to buy, Nokia stock price probably won't be affected..
Dave |
