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 : Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Jon Koplik who wrote (1490)	7/28/2000 9:08:27 AM
From: 100cfm	Respond to of 196652

Jon It would be a good ploy but for one thing. Q has committed itself to producing a WCDMA chip by 4th Qtr of 01. They cannot just turn around and say next November, Hey guys we don't have a WCDMA chip we were only bluffing. Q has too much credibility to lose where as NOK and Co. have no credibility so they can play the vaporware game. I strongly believe their will be a Q WCDMA/GSM chip by the end of 01. Whether it works have as good as CDMA2000 is anybody's guess. 100

To: Jon Koplik who wrote (1490)	7/28/2000 10:33:47 AM
From: CDMQ	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 196652

WCDMA /VAPORWARE /LEGAL STRENGTH I'm sure we appreciate that when IJ and the boys were bringing CDMA to commercialization and refining it they designed the channel architecture using the best most efficient parameters. They could have chosen the less efficient chip rate of WCDMA. Clearly, WCDMA was created in a "board room" not a laboratory. It seems to me the only reason for QCOM to spend valuable resources of time, talent and money on this creation is, that in spite of what management says, they don't have the legal clout to stop it in court with an injunction. There is no doubt they could stop a CDMA pirate! No one is even considering trying. It would be more simple to stop WCDMA in court, or tie it up, if you could. This makes the strategy of the anti CDMA group more plausible. I understand QCOM has the "essential patents" for WCDMA, but, they are sure not acting like it! I can't believe it is more effective to make an inferior product, WCDMA, than to turn our legal team loose. What am I missing?