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 177.78

-2.2%

Jan 9 9:30 AM EST

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: JohnG who wrote (31321)	5/31/1999 4:22:00 AM
From: w molloy	Read Replies (3) of 152472

Thin client == dumb terminal. Your idea is technically feasible but there are a couple of problems 1. Bandwidth A client server hosting expensive and elaborate software (as you put it) implies high data rates, quite a bit higher than that envisioned even in 3G systems (GSM EDGE for example is 384 kbps). It is unlikely that the data transactions in the system you envisage will be bursty. 2. Cost of use A cellular wireless link will always be a lot more expensive than copper (ethernet for example). High data rates are possible at the cost of voice capacity. The data user will have to pay these costs. 3. CPU I doubt that a minimal CPU would be adequate, The CPU's in 'phones today are fairly impressive. However, they are run at the slowest possible speed, to minimise power drain.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next