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.

Pastimes : The New Qualcomm - write what you like thread. -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Clarksterh who wrote (1190)	12/7/1999 4:35:00 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12231

Thanks for the patent detail Clark. Klein Gilhousen was a founding member of Qualcomm and a primary inventor of Qualcomm's CDMA technology. Irwin Jacobs has received an important USA honour for technological achievement. Andrew Viterbi, Klein Gilhousen and our very own 'engineer' and many others have shared in creating an amazing technology which everyone [more or less] on earth will benefit from. It seems a shame that Andrew Viterbi, whose name is used to describe various facets of the telecommunications revolution, is not also recognized as Irwin Jacobs was with the Medal for Technology, as his achievements are more important than those of people such as the one who noticed that milkmaids didn't get smallpox and that moulds killed bacteria and other 'great' scientists. Serendipity and 'discovery' is fine, important and great to have. But Andrew Viterbi and co's intellectual achievements are another realm. The 20th century has such a vast array of technological achievements that it is sometimes easy to overlook truly important and extraordinary achievement. Of course Irwin Jacobs as the leader and co-inventor who drew together the whole messy business of ensuring success where the sand meets the orthogonal wave functions deserved the special award he received. Just in passing, [and correcting spelling of Gihousen], Mqurice

To: Clarksterh who wrote (1190)	12/7/1999 9:53:00 AM
From: Jim Lurgio	Respond to of 12231

Clark, Thanks for your professional views. Gillhousen(sp?). Guess where he works? Yes I do know where he works and I remember years back when he commented in the Interdigital thread. Wish I had copy because it was a LULU. I was suprised they didn't fire him but I guess he was to valuable.

To: Clarksterh who wrote (1190)	12/7/1999 11:59:00 AM
From: D.J.Smyth	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 12231

Clark your comment on 538: "First, 538 is a compendium of different, virtually unrelated, items. The only thing they all have in common is that they mention CDMA. And of the three disparate things in the patent, two are worthless. I practically guarantee it. On a scale with the GTE patent at 0 and the Qualcomm Power Control patent at 10, the two items are at 1 with an uncertainty of 1. (The two items are: 1-general discussion of the merits and trades involved in different methods of power control, 2-a completely obvious multiple banks approach to a multipath correlator)" okay. it's a compendium, but doesn't appear unrelated. he's defining an entire system. I believe what you mean is the despread technique, adaptive power control and varying bandwidth require different functions to achieve the end means, therefore are unrelated. But, it has been IDC's practice now to patent entire systems; in this case a method of, as Lomp states in the summary: A general object of the invention is high capacity communications, due to lower multipath fading and total equivalent bandwidth and data rate. A second general object of the invention is a spread spectrum transmitter having variable and/or adjustable signal bandwidth capabilities. Another general object of the invention is a system and method which results in maximization of user density within a cell domain while minimizing mobile user transmitted power. A further object of the invention is to provide an apparatus and method which controls the power level of a mobile station so that the power level received at the base station of each cell is the same for each mobile station. Another object of the invention is to provide a system and method for automatically and adaptively controlling the power level of a mobile user in a cellular communications network. A further object of the invention is to provide a spread-spectrum system and method which allows operating a spread-spectrum transmitter in different geographic regions, wherein each geographic region has a multiplicity of cells, and wherein cells within a geographic region may have different size cells and transmitter power requirements. they effectively applied some of these techniques in BCDMA (varying bandwidth and adaptive power control), and in this patent are applying said methods to mobility. I recall that Q currently also applies varying power control techniques. The method mentioned here attempts to equalize needed mobile phone power in both urban and rural environments in order that maximum time use be obtained and multipath problems be lessened (increased power interferes in more dense population or increased cell site areas). Also in doing this he defines an ingenious multipath processor for tracking spread spectrum signals. Even though Lomp's name is on the patent, it appears several individual techniques are "borrowed" from others in IDC's current fold (who, I think, have a bright future - varying bandwidth is not a new patent at IDC). So, Lomp appears to have combined several of these "individual" techniques into one system designed specifically for wireless fixed and mobile LANs. He is defining, basically, then, a system that attempts to marry a fixed architecture with a mobile architecture. I think that is his ultimate goal here. Even though it doesn't appear absolutely clear in his patent writing, this seems to be the end result. For this reason he needs the varying bandwidth, improved power control, and an ingenious multipath processor for signal maximization and interpretation. By Lomp's own comment in the patent, "As a means of responding to and dealing with this plurality of groups, the multipath processor is an improvement to a spread-spectrum receiver system." I believe he is saying (between the lines) "an improvement" over Q's spread spectrum receiver system. He said it, and in theory and in use (already been tested) these "combined" elements have worked as claimed. I certainly don't understand why so many continue to carry such an attitude toward IDC. Apparently it remains popular despite what is coming down the pipe. I know you're busy, but it seems you possibly skimmed the patent and possibly didn't read it all.