To: Clarksterh who wrote (213 ) 7/26/1999 12:43:00 PM From: quidditch Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 13582
Clark: two questions re your reply: (1)I agree but the apparent change in guard via a scapegoat allows him to change his position without losing face. Should it be inferred, then, that you subsribe to the notion, or have seen evidence to the effect, that E will be pushing European carriers to overlay GSM air interface with a CDMA One or 2000 interface in order to begin upgrading and migration toward 3G? (2) On that completely different topic, to which w molloy responded earlier to the same general conclusion: you asked a while ago about the possibility of putting several processors on one ASIC and the ramifications of that....it was pointed out that while a user can tollerate local computer crashes and other errors, a wireless system cannot tollerate a subscriber going nuts on the system....can wipe out all the other users in the cell....you want the processor and software running the PDA apps to be to be very very independent of the processor running the wireless protocol stack and DSP functions. This does not, per se, mean that the two processors must be on different chips, but they will probably always be very separate even when on the same chip. In practice, what does the bolded language mean. Is the implication that, even though the processor handling the PDA apps is doing so separately from the CDMA processor and DSP, the first microprocessor will be transmitting its PDA apps signals across the interface; if the PDA transmission is "going nuts" because of software glitches or inability of the Yahoo or WK to receive/process/reply over the air interface, does this hold the possibility of crashing the system and wiping out users in the cell? Cheers and best regards. Steven