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: Scott Zion who wrote (4335)	11/6/2000 12:38:06 PM
From: Keith Feral	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 196448

The battle between 1X & HDR and EDGE has officially started. This is very good news as it confirms Gilder's comments that QCOM is beginning to play a much greater influence over the standardization process for 3G designs. QCOM's ability to commercialize 1X & HDR for TDMA and GSM systems is their main responsibility, not to mention WCDMA chip designs. We all know that CDMA is the eventual platform for the wireless air interface, but now we can see the actual migration away from antique technologies like GSM, TDMA, iDen, and other to an air interface that supports a digital, high speed connection to the Internet. How long before Europe dumps GPRS for 1X and HDR overlays as a bridge to WCDMA?

To: Scott Zion who wrote (4335)	11/6/2000 12:42:17 PM
From: foundation	Respond to of 196448

Wireless carriers ponder technology flip ---------- A remarkable article! "Wideband CDMA (W-CDMA) networks require carriers to carve out large chunks of their existing spectrum—a negative because it’s unclear how much spectrum will be available to U.S. operators." Ruff has alluded to this on numerous occasions. "EDGE technology, which will require core network changes for TDMA operators to reach high data speeds with no capacity enhancements." Capacity problems and spectrum squeeze again. Not much for AWE, or anyone else for that matter, even if EDGE were to function... "There’s a concern for spectrum, and 1X is more spectrally efficient than EDGE or W-CDMA...Operators are doing the cost/benefit analysis and realizing they still have to make significant upgrades to go to EDGE or UMTS...With the capacity factor, carriers don’t have to go to [wideband systems]...Many technology analysts say 1X could become a de facto standard for operators constrained by spectrum." Aside from existing CDMA Operators, what operators aren't spectrum constrained? In Europe, aren't Operators that pay billions upon billions for spectrum - spectrum that has finite capacity to meet future needs - immediately constrained? Will they contentedly apply technologies that squander this precious, finite resource? It will be interesting to watch events unfold...

To: Scott Zion who wrote (4335)	12/10/2000 8:12:00 PM
From: Scott Zion	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 196448

Fighting the CDMAcause, v.2001 As CDMA turns 10, CDMA Development Group executive director Perry La Forge reflects on success, failure and the road ahead. By Grahame Lynch The next twelve months will see a major effort by CDMA vendors to influence the third generation path for cdmaOne operators. Central to this contest is the CDMA Development Group, which is driving the development of the so-called IXEV standard for 3G networks. One goal – to convince TDMA and GSM operators to marry the new 3G CDMA interface to their existing IS-41 or GSM MAP networks. But first the CDG has to resist the European W-CDMA push and crack the elusive China market. In this interview with group editorial director Grahame Lynch, the executive director of the Orange County, Calif.-based CDMA Development Group, Perry La Forge, outlines the issues. ------snip------ There’s been some good news for CDMA deployments in China in the past few weeks, but there’s been less reporting on the deployment announcements in Vietnam and Thailand. Do you see these breakthroughs as a good sign for CDMA in other mid-size developing economies? We’ve always done pretty well in Southeast Asia and we’ve done very well in the whole Asia Pacific area, including Australia and New Zealand. In many of these countries, deployment has been more of a financial issue than a technology issue. You should see some continuing progress there. In China, Unicom has said they will deploy CDMA but they have yet to issue RFPs. "Relatively speaking, you’d be surprised at what little government help we had." They’re about ready to launch RFPs. There’s been some preliminary RFPs, so they’ve got something to work off. There was a delay, and I think that’s been resolved. What do you think of the current talk about TD-SCDMA and the potential for China to develop its own standard? Will that impact on the deployment of cdmaOne and CDMA2000? I don’t think so. We’ve been working on them with different things and I don’t think it’s in a position to delay us. China Unicom is pretty bullish on moving forward and they have wanted to launch for some time. They’ve now picked up the four Great Wall networks and they’ve got something to build out. Will TD-SCDMA have an influence in the future? Time will tell. One of the big selling points for CDMA 1X is that you can put it on the GSM MAP, which creates new potential markets. Are you aware of any interest in this from Europe or Asia? There is interest. I’m not naïve in the sense that I have any delusions that it will happen fast in Europe. There’s a real strong emphasis there for W-CDMA over the new spectrum. Whether you believe me or not, W-CDMA was almost set up as a policy initiative. There is still a lagging feeling that this is something that needed to be done. As time goes on and people get settled with spectrum and understand the technologies, there will be some opportunities for us. NMT-450 could move that forward [to CDMA]. That’s a real opportunity, and there are some small operators who would like to that, but again, there is resistance at various levels to that happening. Our focus is full-speed ahead in areas where we have access. We’ve taken that approach with TDMA operators. A good example is Bellsouth [which operates TDMA in the US]. They’re using CDMA in Latin America. We’re not the best geo-political organization in the world, but as things shake out we’ll look for opportunities. In the last couple of years the CDMA cause has been extended a helping hand from the US government. With the election, how will that change? I claim we had very little of a helping hand. You didn’t get help in Asia? Hey what? Relatively speaking, you’d be surprised at what little help we had. I know it’s popular opinion to think that we’ve had this huge administration support in Europe, but we have an issue that whenever they do anything for CDMA, you’ve got TDMA right on our tails. In Asia we had a little bit of help, particularly in China. That’s been thwarted by the fact that they can’t come out behind a particular technology because it would disadvantage another technology such as TDMA. One thing we haven’t done well is enlisting the support of governments. On the European side, there were some letters written with [US Secretary of State] Madeline Albright, but nothing really happened. With a new set of faces in the administration, might things change? I doubt it. It’s a very sticky geo-political issue. There might be some support, but by and large, there is a view in support of a free market. I just wish Europe would have a free market. It’s a difference of policies and I’m fine with that as long as everyone recognizes it. It’s a fundamental difference of views. americasnetwork.com