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 : Nokia (NOK) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: carranza2 who wrote (5564)	6/14/2000 3:36:00 PM
From: ehopper	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 34857

Saying that Long term GSM will dissappear is obvious, that is why WCDMA is already on the road map. As for questioning the technical capability of WCDMA ...sounds alot like Ericsson's complaints about QCOM's CDMA IS95 proposals a few years ago...time will tell. Since QCOM receives the same royalties (in theory) for CDMA2000 and WCDMA then at least the following can be said 1) IS95B vs GSM: No one is going to rip up hundreds of millions of dollars of equipment to put in IS95 which is also seen as "old" technology. Also, convincing a country surrounded by GSM to put in IS95B will be very tough since there are any CDMA/GSM dual mode phones out there and not likely to be (with "old" technology) 2) CDMA 2000 vs WCDMA: moot point wrt QCOM provided that the patent structures are the same. I am convinced that WCDMA not only will work but that QCOM is further along than they say in WCDMA. 3) CDMA2000 vs EDGE : EDGE is the 2.5G technology that provides for a transition to WCDMA, not a long term solution. ed.