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 : Nokia (NOK) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Eric L who wrote (2907)	12/4/1999 1:28:00 AM
From: Ruffian	Respond to of 34857

<cdma is a great air interface, CDG is a shallow organization. Perry is a farce. cdmaOne and cdma2000 specs are shallow. Q future relies on developing a much better relationship with ETSI.> Eric, the ericy capitulation made europe a "Non-Even Playing Field". if the cartel stuck together no one would have a future advantage. Thanks Ericy, Ruff

To: Eric L who wrote (2907)	12/4/1999 6:39:00 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 34857

Gidday Eric. The big problem GSM operators have is that they are up the creek without a paddle. This is not hype. CDMA is fantastic and GSM is doomed. GSM simply is TOAST. No hype. No bull. Plain facts only. Qualcomm is the most amazing organization that has ever prowled the planet. Ericky was to deny their customers CDMA if they requested it, but they realized the incredible success of CDMA would not be stopped so they capitulated ignominiously. No hype from me!! You wondered what problems GSM operators have. The problem they have is to deliver highly functional WWeb and voice to their customers without charging an arm and a leg. The GSM air interface is useless. They have realized they must buy CDMA technology from that creative genius enterprise, Mighty Q! They have to somehow make the transition an economically valid one with least inconvenience and cost to customers. That's quite a problem compared with cdmaOne operators who can cheaply upgrade to HDR and cdma2000. Here is an example. Vodafone GSM in New Zealand. They are slaying Telecom New Zealand's analogue network right now. Telecom simply can't compete. Telecom is so in trouble that they have had to ditch the idea of expanding their embryonic TDMA network and go to cdmaOne. When Telecom has gone to cdmaOne in the form of HDR, with a clear pathway to cdma2000 with a one to one overlay of their analogue network, GSM will be left high and dry. Sure, there will be some people still satisfied with the crusty old voice network. But unless an operator offers both data and voice, they'll be losing too much business. So they must change to WWeb too. That means overlaying their GSM network with a very expensive upgrade compared with the cheap CDMA upgrade. There will not be any GSM air interface! That is the problem for GSM. It will cease to exist other than in the switching stuff hooked up to the PSTN. That's quite a problem. An insuperably enormous problem even without any hype. Data since 1992? Well, in a way. But that's a bit like comparing a Model A with a Lexus. They both have wheels and go on roads, but the similarity stops there. GSM did NOT choose CDMA as an air interface. There was no other interface the GSM operators could use. Their choice was only to compete with CDMA or not. They had no choice or they'd simply go out of business. So they had to sign up to buy the technology from Q! Nokia had it figured out nearly a decade ago and signed up then. Now Nokia seems to be in the running for the handset division and I guess that as part of that deal, Qualcomm will get access to GSM technology for ASICs. But maybe that's not the deal which will happen. I don't know. The decision by Ericy to buy a licence and the infrastructure division is not what created the value in Q! stock. That just made people realize what value there was in Q! and that there was nothing to stop CDMA ruling the world and probably the whole solar system if not the universe. Not that I mean to exaggerate. If you get the inclination to throw any stock on the beach, please tell me which beach you are aiming at so I can see what you are chucking away! I like beachcombing. Some real jewels show up, abandoned and misunderstood. I'm not sure what you mean by cdmaOne being a shallow spec? 50 million subscribers seem to think it works okay. What do you mean by shallow? CDG shallow? What? Have you checked the membership? You are losing me here. Q! future doesn't depend at all on ETSI. The ETSI bureaucrats should all get real jobs - maybe selling HDR and cdma2000 phones in Ginza or Paris. [Call it VW40 if you like]. Q! can simply ignore ETSI's search for extra terrestrial intelligence. If ETSI and Europe don't want to buy Qualcomm's HDR and CDMA technology, then Europe will just have to stay in the 20th century for a decade or two. How's THAT for serious? That's what I have thunk! I also thunk that Globalstar should have got their damn system operating by now! No Hype, just the facts from, Mq

To: Eric L who wrote (2907)	12/4/1999 11:58:00 AM
From: slacker711	Respond to of 34857

cdmaOne and cdma2000 specs are shallow. Q future relies on developing a much better relationship with ETSI. This is the first time that I have seen something along these lines written....why do you believe that the specs are "shallow"? Slacker

To: Eric L who wrote (2907)	12/4/1999 3:28:00 PM
From: Caxton Rhodes	Respond to of 34857

Eric- In all due respect, please get serious Mq. In 1996 GSM led the world in defining 3G specs and chose cdma as an air interface. If not for that single decision we both could our throw Q stock on the beach. cdma is a great air interface, CDG is a shallow organization. Perry is a farce. cdmaOne and cdma2000 specs are shallow. Q future relies on developing a much better relationship with ETSI. CDMA is better faster and cheaper, and the world knows it. The ETSI tried to protect their interests but couldn't. ETSI is basically irrelevant, so are all these standards bodies. GSM is clearly on the run and will soon be the analog of today. Do you really think that wireless will not move to the technology that is clearly superior in everyway to GSM? Roaming between GSM and CDMA networks will be a commonplace within the next two years. Soon carriers will be "putting up with their existing GSM infrastructure" while building out and overlaying cdma. The argument that GSM is too well deployed to be surpassed by cdma is a "head in the sand" view. You think China will deploy greenfield GSM networks? No f*****g way. Would you if roaming is not a problem? Roaming is the only obstacle and soon won't be an issue. Nokia will be the lead handset manufacturer no matter what, HOWEVER, if they do the deal with Q, their position is way more dominant, and they too will not care what system wireless carriers use. Right now they want GSM because their cdma handsets have not been successful. I believe in smart engineers, and suggest you talk to more of them that are experts in GSM and CDMA. The future is clear. GSM is toast. Caxton

To: Eric L who wrote (2907)	12/4/1999 4:33:00 PM
From: Caxton Rhodes	Respond to of 34857

Hi Eric- While I'm beating up on you <ggg>: see this post and pay attention to: The convergence of the two CDMA 3G standards was discussed, including chip rates, and how sad it was that we have to have to different rates, different pilots(common vs. dedicated), and different synchronization--synchronous vs. asynchronous--for no reason other than politics. Further, one region is driven by IPR and innovation, and another is driven by politics and hidden agendas. Message 12188822 Caxton