Nokia (NOK) Message Board

STOCKTALK

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 6.730

-0.7%

Nov 14 9:30 AM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Dave who wrote (891)	8/17/1998 11:37:00 PM
From: Quincy	Read Replies (1) of 34857

www3.techstocks.com He and his firm commissioned the IPR research by patent attorneys. I apologize for the semantics. You aren't the first person to doubt and check into Qualcomm's IPR position and won't be the last. "Bunch of cheerleaders"? I don't see a big US market for UMTS handsets since IS95 handsets enjoys AMPS fallback and already have enviable US market share. I guess I should be a little disappointed the US didn't let GSM take over North America. There are obvious advantages to worldwide standards. But, would providers have chosen GSM OR its evil twin: IS136/TDMA? Existing providers were choosing IS136 despite its sound quality problems compared to AMPS because it didn't require starting over on underlying infastructure. There were big cost savings realized by providers when reusing and co-existing with existing 800Mhz cellular. I don't know how well existing GSM providers are doing for attracting new subscribers. But, I go to the nearest electronics superstore (fry's) and find the CDMAOne booths packed while the GSM booth is deserted. Same thing with those kiosks in shopping malls. I guess I am not alone in demanding analog roaming. Despite GSM MOU claiming 80% coverage of the US, they still don't have commercial systems up in Chicago or Dallas. Even though my local GSM provider claims 100% coverage of California, I know from their website maps and personal experience that if I go too far east, I will not have GSM coverage. My travels are focused on my home state of Illinois (with expanding IS136 and IS95 coverage) with ZERO GSM coverage to date. 80% GSM coverage in North America seems implausable. I invest in Qualcomm and Lucent with a clear conscious knowing CDMA2000 will enjoy full access to the Q IPR it needs to work as advertised. As a bonus, IS95C/CDMA2000 does not mothball existing air-air interfaces for the 96% of existing voice users. There is no additional capacity to be gained. Since IS41 and GSM/MAP are two underlying protocols for call connection and billing, isn't this just software? Why isn't UMTS not IS41 compatible? No "smart card/chip"? I don't forsee a giant market for 3G wireless overshadowing existing voice-only markets. I don't forsee UMTS competing with IS95 on cost anytime soon. Nor do I understand labeling the liberal application of logic and economic sense "cheerleading". Good luck with your investments.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next