To: SKIP PAUL who wrote (2462 ) 10/18/1999 12:20:00 PM From: Jimmyjohn Respond to of 13582
Skip, found a couple of quotes from Gregg Powers that address the WCDMA questions written April 15th. It always helps me to go back and read some of these old posts, as you suggest, when these questions are recycled: "You are missing the point. W-CDMA was designed first as an obstructionist standard (IMO) and second to require 5mhz of spectrum. IS-95 is a 1.25mhz standard. Some markets around the world will allocate spectrum in a fashion that may favor 5mhz networks, but little markets like the U.S. and Japan have already adopted 1.25mhz systems. Since interoperability can, and will, be achieved through ASIC design, I suspect that this is exactly what will occur, i.e. ASICs will be designed to support both modes in all geographies. Once such ASICs are available, the operator can enable or disable whatever functionality it requires." "We ended up with a single standard, with three modes, that is backward compatible with IS-95. Ericsson acquired IS-95 and W-CDMA licenses from Qualcomm AND MUST PAY ROYALTIES AT THE SAME RATE REGARDLESS OF WHATEVER TECHNOLOGY IT SELLS. Moreover, the royalty rate is substantially equivalent to the baseline rate for IS-95. Do you get it? Ericsson capitulated completely. It is basically paying the same royalty as the Koreans and the Japanese, regardless of whether or not it sells IS-95 equipment or W-CDMA equipment. Even better, Qualcomm did NOT have to reduce its overall royalty rate (to Ericsson or anyone else) in order to achieve convergence. Simply put, Ericsson has agreed to converge 3G around CDMA and Qualcomm will receive royalties from EVERYONE who deploys equipment to the converged standard, regardless of the mode selected."