We didn't have much of a discussion, actually. We'd talked off and on about what our Q investment represented, then she decided she needed a new phone and went out and bought one--which turned out to be the att/ericcson/tdma phone and service. My point is pretty close to yours, I think. People don't know from the phone's specs. They want the service and a small phone that works well. As much as the technical details are discussed in SI, they're unrecognized by about everyone walking into a store.
On ATT/tdma: Does there have to be a world standard? Can ATT support tdma long enough, and retain/gain over 50% share of the US wireless market long enough, that it can improve its bargaining position or cdma patents start to expire, or they develop some of their own key patents?
Also agree that Q seems the winner. But, that's different from the battle being over. Ericcson is thrashing around, like a fish in a pail, trying to find an alternative to paying big bucks to Q. But are you sure they are committed worldwide to a cdma variant? For instance, ericcson is currently accelerating activities in China, I understand. They're not doing that with GSM, are they? (Yikes! They're worse than I thought if they are!)
js |
