Leif - Tero's views pretty much reinforces my own beliefs
Pray tell why? What did you find so convincing?
Maybe it was this:
Of course, since W-CDMA is an upgrade to GSM it is deeply bizarre that a company not involved in GSM in any way wants to call the shots on how GSM networks will be upgraded.
But of course this could equally well be written: Of course since W-CDMA is an extension of Qualcomm's technology, it is deeply bizzare that a company with no practical experience in cell-system CDMA (Ericsson being the only major telecomm equipment supplier not to be building CDMAOne equipment) would want to call the shots on how WCDMA should be implemented.
Or maybe it was this:
Luckily they have managed to alienate and be sued by Ericsson, Motorola and some Korean collaborators. Moreover, they have pissed off NTT-Docomo without getting sued.
Of course he doesn't mention Phillips, which licensed the Qualcomm technology for WCDMA, or the 40 or 50 other companies that are paying Qualcomm royalties for CDMAOne - including Nokia. And he doesn't mention that the Motorola suit has nothing to do with CDMA per se - it is about handset design. Nor does he mention how many suits Ericsson is in - probably at least as many, including the countersuit by Qualcomm.
I could go on, but the bottom line is that I am very curious what you find compelling about Tero's given that it is, at best, weak.
Clark |
