SI
SI
discoversearch

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) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: qdog who wrote (42886)9/30/1999 6:00:00 PM
From: Bill Wolf  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 152472
 
Qdog,

Please xplain in lay terms why T will not find it necessary to convert from TDMA to CDMA - long term.What am i missing ?? Are we - those long on Q - so naive as to belive (and wishful) that T has NO alternative but to migrate ?

Appreciate your insight and objective opinion.

Long on Q... but



To: qdog who wrote (42886)10/1/1999 12:19:00 AM
From: cfoe  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 152472
 
<<you mean the same Ebbers that doesn't know how to response to a major outage>>

I am in no position to justify or defend WCOM's handling of the outage, or to compare it to the one that hit T in terms of complexity, etc.

I just happen to think that as an entrepreneurial force, Ebbers has it over Armstrong. Paying huge sums for the cable companies which you acknowledge have historically lousy customer service and require huge sums to upgrade equipment looks to me like a mistake. Time will tell.

Maybe GSM/TDMA will be sufficient for them to compete with the CDMA-based carriers for a number of years. And maybe not. I would have to rely on those on the thread with more technical expertise to argue the point.

However, if CDMA is the better technology (for future wireless appliances, etc.), then not making the move because of the investment tied up in their existing system, or because they need that money to upgrade their cable investments, looks very shortsighted.