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.

Technology Stocks : The New Qualcomm - a S&P500 company -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DaveMG who wrote (3507)	11/23/1999 12:51:00 PM
From: quidditch	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13582

Dave, Re China: Don't forget that the Chinese have to weigh GSM momentum against CDMA spectral efficiency. I suspect that when you consider the 2-4x spectral advantage and easy/evolutionary upgrade path, that all political considerations aside, it STILL makes economic sense to move to CDMA. I don't have enough knowledge of the airspace and spectrum conditions in PRC; I guess I assumed that, in the article Brian posted, when Shanghai authorities and MII added the additional digit for wireless numbers, available spectrum did not seem to be an issue, bwdik? As to upgrade path: i) no one knows when 3G adoption becomes real object of market demand, in China or anywhere else; ii) 2002-2003 in Europe or US, farther out in China=a long time out: maybe MII and political/budgetary types in China figure they'll be better able to afford CDMA infrastructure in five years in order to accommodate spectral and data issues, rather than investing now when money is tight and GSM is working and addressing all needs of the present wireless market. That is, the "easy/evolutionary upgrade path" has to be weighed against current and future costs vs. easy path of doing nothing now to change legacy GSM base. Not so different from T's dilemma. Steve

To: DaveMG who wrote (3507)	11/23/1999 9:23:00 PM
From: LLCF	Respond to of 13582

<Re China: Don't forget that the Chinese have to weigh GSM momentum against CDMA spectral efficiency. > Maybe they'd be just as happy if their system wasn't compatible with the west. <1/2 G> DAK

To: DaveMG who wrote (3507)	11/23/1999 10:57:00 PM
From: A.J. Mullen	Respond to of 13582

Spectral Capacity may be less important to the Chinese than security. CDMA is great for the govt. They can ensure that their own phones are untappable while arranging that they, the govt, know the psuedo-random sequence whereby spectrum is allocated to each call. Thus, they will be able to tap anyone they want. It's rather uncomfortable that Qcom's greatest selling point to China may be the transparency that can be arranged to and for the govt. This may generate some naysaying, but think about it. Our phones need to know how to recompile voices from the spectrum overwhich they have been spread. It needs to know how the original message was spread. I believe it uses a psuedo-random sequence that is seeded by some function of time. At anytime each phone is using a different section the same sequence. If you know the generating function and the seed, then you know all. I am not engineer. I am paraphrasing the system as described to me by an engineer. The details may be shakey, but I am confident of the general outline. Any engineers care to comment?