Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Eric L who wrote (8353)	10/16/1999 12:16:00 AM
From: Sommers	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 54805

Eric, thanks for responding and pointing out the PC World piece of 10/14/99. The author (Rob Guth) wrote, "...Qualcomm, continue to focus mainly on the much smaller CDMA market..." and quoted Mr. Ellison saying, "...the U.S. will be dead last with this (wireless data) technology...." This all may be true. However, my point was the fact that CDMA has the lead by at least 18 months in rolling out hi-speed wireless data (CDMA2000). According to Nortel, trials begin in six months. CDMA2000 will have wireless data speeds up to 157Kbps, while doubling the voice channels per cell site. OTOH, from what I heard, Mr. Armstrong's EDGE isn't expected to match or come close to outperforming CDMA 2.5 until 2003. (You seem to agree.) And while the TDMA and GSM crowd rushes to offer higher speed wireless data, they will do so by slowing their voice capacity per cell site. My position is that GSM and TDMA (AMPS) - sorry for using both technologies in the same context - are moving towards 3G, but at a slower pace than CDMA. Someone on this thread said GSM already offers 14.4 Kbps. Is that a fact? Through which carrier (T?) and at what cost to their voice capability? Remember CDMA DOUBLES a site's voice capacity when adding hi-speed data channels. The upshot is I believe CDMA is at least 18 months or more ahead of the TDMA (AMPS)/GSM crowd in offering compelling hi-speed wireless data technology model. Personally, I don't care if Mr. Armstrong faces hi-switching costs (TDMA to CDMA), so long as the customer doesn't. MCI/Sprint and others want T's wireless customers. Isn't it the customers who will drive the demand for CDMA? Who will ultimately sign-on more new customers? What will the demand, among the masses, for wireless data be? Who knows? <<EDGE stands for Enhanced Data for GSM Evolution. Outsiders refer to it as Enhanced Data-rates for Global Evolution.>> BTW, thanks for the clarification on the EDGE acronym. I believed it to stand for "Enhanced Data Rates for Global Evolution." Now you know I'm a Klingon... Thanks again for helping me understand this fascinating technical area. I agree with all of your reasons to keep Q my core holding. However, I also add the above reason(s) to that list. Count me among the many lurkers waiting for Dancelot to join Uncle Frank on Gemstar. Warm regards, --Ruth Sommers