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 : METRICOM - Wireless Data Communications -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Clarksterh who wrote (2039)	1/26/2000 6:58:00 PM
From: shoe	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 3376

Gus & Clark: Since you both know something about telecom, I have a couple of questions. I have been reading the QCOM thread for a couple of years. (I remember you Clark from the old days on the QCOM thread.) As I recall (although with the new SI it's impossible to go back and find the original posts), Ericsson proposed the WCDMA protocol as a way of getting around having to pay QCOM any royalties. The actual differences between the two protocols (WCDMA & CDMA2000) were posted on the thread and they were minimal. But, expert posters at the time pointed out, as did QCOM, that the WCDMA changes degraded the quality of transmission. I assumed then, perhaps wrongly, that WCDMA would eventually go away because it was inferior. With regard to GSM's market dominance, I am reminded of the fate of Western Union and the telegraph after the telephone start to take hold. I invested in QCOM in 1996 because I read that CDMA provided clearer and more reliable transmissions at its higher frequency and also had the capacity to carry a much greater number of simultaneous calls that GSM and TDMA. It also included PCS as a nice bonus. Even at that time, people were complaining about call congestion, dropping, fading, etc. Your opinions about my assumptions are appreciated.

To: Clarksterh who wrote (2039)	1/27/2000 12:38:00 AM
From: Gus	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3376

, if you concede that DDI/IDO CDMAOne is growing much, much faster in percentage terms..... I expect that to take well over a year for W-CDMA (in contrast, I expect that, as an evolutionary product, it will take only a few months for CDMA-2000). But of course. In Japan. In North America. In a market nearing saturation like South Korea which accounts for 50-60% of its 50 million installed base. But, percentage AND absolute numbers count in a global tariff business like global telecom. You know that, Clark. As for CDMA-2000, why? TDMA/GSM is vastly cheaper where voice is the driver of demand, which is why wireless is expected to crossover with wirelines in the next few years. As for wireless data, Metricom has time to market advantages that probably means that it will be closer to the way the market adopts wireless data. (Note that you missed another cost differential between CDMAOne (or any CDMA) and GSM. CDMA is more complex, and therefore the hardware is almost inevitibly more expensive per line.) Not really. This combined with the vastly more expensive technology needed for CDMA ($300,000 per base station compared with $80,000 for TDMA) calls into question what real savings CDMA technology can offer. webproforum.com Would you believe that the lowest possible bill of material for a complete GSM handset is now $40? ebnews.com Nice typing at ya'.

To: Clarksterh who wrote (2039)	1/29/2000 2:30:00 AM
From: justin55	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 3376

<<But I will bet you a lot of money that NTT does not have a W-CDMA rollout in 2001. If they are lucky they will have a city trial (like IS-95 in Los Angeles many years ago), where they beta test all the loading problems in a real life environment. I expect that to take well over a year..." Clark, did you see the article on 01/27/00 about NTT's current field trials of its WCDMA with SK Telecom in Korea? Does this change your opinion about the near-term commercial feasibility of WCDMA, and any threat it might pose to CDMA-One? Also, what is your independent opinion about whether Q has claims on NTT's WCDMA? (Please note that the last time Q's mgmt addressed this issue was in April 1999, before NTT's WCDMA came to the fore, and was in the context of Ericsson's WCDMA instead.I consulted an attorney about this, and his view is that the prior assertions re Ericsson's WCDMA cannot be taken as basis for assuming that Q's mgmt has made similar assertions re NTT's WCDMA. Are you aware of some other forum where Q's mgmt has DIRECTLY addressed the issue of NTT's WCDMA patents?) I am long (very long) Q and would greatly appreciate your opinion on the above. Many thanks in advance.