Mike:
A few points. You state, "If Qualcomm executes well", I will give you that the Q has good (but probably not exceptional) management. However, "executing well" won't matter much if the world economy is in a world of hurt, or if Korea blows up again, right?
Furthermore, including China in your markets is a little misconception. I think that TDMA/GSM has a bigger footprint than IS-95. I think the only place in the world where IS-95 has a bigger footprint than TDMA/GSM is in South Korea.
Additionally, to further clarify, when I mention CDMA, I really don't mean IS-95, but W-CDMA. You know, have to get specific. :^)
As people on the AMD thread used to argue, AMD has so much more potential. You know, you are arguing technological superiority. I view the Q as Apple. Yes it is superior, but it is more expensive and I can get something cheaper which serves the same functionality.
As for the "Nokia has won a battle.." I agree. W-CDMA, as proposed by the ETSI, gives the current TDMA/GSM infrastructure a clear upgrade path. Which means, companies which have invested 10s to 100s of millions of dollars won't have to throw away what they have. They can still use it.
dave |
