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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Gorilla and King Portfolio Candidates -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: DownSouth who wrote (27932)	7/14/2000 1:30:38 PM
From: Mike Buckley	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 54805

Jerry, If you had said "the only real difference between Qualcomm's CDMA ASICS and everyone else's CDMA ASICS is that Qualcomm's works better." I would have agreed. I stand corrected and clarified. :) You're right. However, (there always is a "however" :), as much as I agree with you about Qualcomm's ownership of the IPR that makes it possible to use CDMA, as a non-technologist I have to assume that theoretically (if not practically) there is the very remote possibility that someone could come up with a way of using CDMA without needing Qualcomm's IPR. I'd say the same thing about Gemstar's IPR. That's why I leave open the general comment that the really big distinction is that Qualcomm's (and Gemstar's) works better until someone comes along and builds the better mouse trap. You and I know the possibility is far greater that a discontinuous innovation in an entirely different category is more likely to unseat the Q or the Gem because of the strength of their IPR, but I'll always leave room for the possibility of a better mousetrap in the same category in the spirit of keeping a careful, watchful eye on my hard-saved investments. --Mike Buckley