Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) 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 : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM)

QCOM 162.38

-1.6%

9:46 AM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: Gregg Powers who wrote (20172)	12/21/1998 12:21:00 PM
From: JMD	Read Replies (1) of 152472

Gregg, can't vouch for this 100% but. . . I have struck up a relationship with a guy in one of Sprint's major Bay Area PCS stores [location withheld to protect the innocent]. He is the head technical dude vis a vis a salesperson. Seems very, very well informed to me. His comments on the antenna-less phone: people were/are afraid to buy them because they think that they won't get a good signal. Purely psychological because, according to this guy, the internal antenna is every bit as capable of pulling in as good a signal as the external kind, but a lot of folks just can't deal with it. Regarding relative signal strength of the little Q phone vs. the 2700 the story is different. Q phone definitely not as robust as the 2700 in fringe areas. The guy talks about a smaller 'receptor' in the Q whatever the hell that means. Me not knowing but based on continued day to day comparisons I'd agree: little Q works like a champ when the little bars next to the antenna icon on the screen show at least one and preferably two bars whereas 2700 will keep on trucking even when no bars are showing. Respectfully submitted, SSM (Scientist Surfer Mike)

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next