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: q_long who wrote (11663)	6/6/2000 8:11:00 PM
From: engineer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 13582

It really is just a play on words. Both of them use frequency for voice and data. It just matters how you split them up. HDR does not share the SAME frequency space as voice. In HDR, it can use one of the possible 1.25 MHz wide frequency slots for the HDR data. In a basic system you have the frequency space split into many 1.25 MHz bands. Usually these are all voice. Bu the fact that HDR and voice are on similair band sizes makes it even more flexible than the WCDMA scheme. The operator can mix and match the bands as they need them. Put on 7 bands of voice and one band of HDR during the peak hours (rush hour traffic) and perhaps mix it to 4 bands of voice and 4 bands of HDR during peak internet access time (evenings from 6-11 PM). The flexibility far outwieghs the loss of freqneucy space. I believe we are into the most major FUD attack to try to get European vaporware accepted before Qualcomm comes out with their already tested system. Q is only a few months away from having 1xrtt plus HDR on the MSM chip and the radio doesn;t change, so expect the HDR rollout to be very fast when it happens. Bottom line - Frequency use is Frequency use. You have to use it to send bits and the actually way you use it doesn't matter. In the end it is the entire capacity that you gain for the frequency you have. PERIOD.