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: 100cfm who wrote (6497)	2/14/2000 11:15:00 PM
From: nbfm	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 13582

"The above statement makes me wonder whether Nokia's bumbling attempts at producing a cdma phone are intentional rather then due to incompetence. Why would they want to proliferate the very thing that will soon render them an also ran. Same with Ericy, should it have really taken them almost 18 months to come out with a CDMA phone??" Adding to this comment, one of the factors which has been slowing CDMA growth is reportedly component shortages. I note that NOK has specifically stated that it has not been placed on allocation by its suppliers while q [when it manufactured], MOT and others have been placed on allocation. Is is possible that some of the "short components" are usable in GSM phones? By, in essence, diverting the components (or, heck even buying up the supply of these components and burying them), NOK is able to slow the availability of CDMA phones (which it reportedly cant make very well) while it (a) tries to perfect a CDMA chip and/or (b) awaits a "breakthrough" on EDGE or wcdma [NOK has never acknowledged that q has essentialIPR's to WCDMA],or anything else which would aid GSM last several more years. Am I being paranoid? As Mq pointed out, even one more year of a legacy system means billions to its supporters. Comments?

To: 100cfm who wrote (6497)	2/15/2000 3:07:00 AM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13582

Tero used to argue that Nokia would produce B grade CDMA handsets and keep their good technology for GSM. That never seemed sensible to me. To develop a market leading position in CDMA they would need to produce leading phones. It is absolutely not intentional that Nokia has delayed their entry to the CDMA market with bumbling [though some delays would result from having limited R&D people and budgets and some timing issues - don't want to go too early or too late]. They cannot slow the development of CDMA one iota. All they can do is take part or not. They are already an also-ran in CDMA. They have to become the market leader. Yes, Ericy could easily take a year or two to come out with a phone. Motorola took longer than that. Motorola had a shambles. Making really good CDMA ASICS is not a simple thing like a round of golf. Meanwhile, I was surprised to see that there are now about 42 subscriber equipment CDMA licensees. There were only 26 last time I looked a couple of years ago. That means there is a LOT of competition in subscriber devices. Making bad ones is not a good strategy for ANY company. The most Nokia could do with that strategy is contaminate their good brand name and their GSM range. CDMA is bigger than everyone now. Bigger than Qualcomm. It used to be that mobile CDMA breached the laws of physics [according to a Stanford physicist]. Now CDMA is a law of the universe. A bit like the Web was the creation of people, but it is now in the process of becoming a living entity in It's own right, outside the control of people. Still part of and symbiotic with people, but off and running on It's own account. Don't try to get in the way! I suspect It would be quite vicious and determined to protect Itself. Mqurice PS: Thanks for the PM comments Bux! I'll think about it. I'm just having a little dabble here today.