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 : Qualcomm Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: w molloy who wrote (53079)	12/8/1999 5:09:00 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

W, yes, all true enough. But handsets cost $1000s in the early 90s. Now we are down to $100. Minutes are way down too. So we are in the realm of mass marketing now, not premium services for the few. True too that HDR will gobble bandwidth so it depends on cheaper networks that 30c per minute before any significant use will be made of it. But 10c per minute is common. Cricket is less than that. The actual marginal cost of a minute is less than 1c per minute [leaving aside all the nonsense of marketing, churn costs and stuff and assuming they actually get the networks full with WWeb Marketing 101.] Cars are a good WWeb place. So are airports. So are lots of places. Mountains not so good, though I got my first WWeb thingy from Bux up a mountain! Oddly enough. There will be heaps and heaps of demand for WWeb. Not for idle browsing and goofing off, but certainly for 'I need some information and I want it NOW' applications such as "where the hell is a hotel with a vacancy" at 9pm? Can they do DSL and Bluetooth for people in cars? I think Webtime is going to change the pace of progress in WWeb stuff. The hard work has been done. The competitive pressure is on and monopolies have gone in many places. Mq

To: w molloy who wrote (53079)	12/8/1999 9:13:00 AM
From: gdichaz	Respond to of 152472

w molloy: Much appreciate the history lesson. Yes, there is many a slip between the cup and the lip (or somesuch), but even so Korea is going with packet data HDR shortly and Japan is going full speed ahead on data on CDMA One. (While DoCoMo flails around with vaporware (vapourware in Mauricespeak - but the concept is valid no matter what the spelling)) WCDMA). The Q has not always delivered perfectly, but usually comes damn close and often ahead of time - viz the ASICs upgrades. My money is on the Q. Chaz

To: w molloy who wrote (53079)	12/8/1999 1:52:00 PM
From: Bux	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

W Molly, You forgot to consider a few things when you said; I'm not convinced that wireless web browsing will be cellular based either. It's simply too expensive. 'engineer' calculates that 1 2.4Mbps HDR channel consumes as much bandwidth as 700 VOX users. I can't see the network operators buying into that. Remember 2.4Mbps is the total throughput for the whole cell. To put that into terms more familiar with landline connections I think would be 2,400,000 bps. Internet Explorer is telling me I'm connected at 48,000 bps with a 56K modem. If that speed was doubled to make it feel "zippy" then it would be 100,000 bps which would be 24 users downloading streaming video and audio non-stop. But that's not what people browsing the internet tend to do all the time. They are checking stocks, news, weather, sending and reading e-mail or messages like I'm doing right now. So I think there could be 100 times the number of users or 2400 people browsing the internet etc. instead of only the 700 voice users chatting away. Does that put it into better perspective? Bux