SI
SI
discoversearch

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: tinkershaw who wrote (42761)5/17/2001 11:21:22 PM
From: Ali Chen  Respond to of 54805
 
"Then how do you explain DDR which has so far proven as unstable as the initial 820 mislaunches"

You partially answered your question yourself:
"Heck, I'm typing on a Pentium II, 266 Mhz computer. RDRAM and high-bandwidth, and Ghz processors are still not necessary."



To: tinkershaw who wrote (42761)5/18/2001 12:15:21 AM
From: Ali Chen  Respond to of 54805
 
"That is the equivalent of saying that CDMA in 1996 was not able to meet the needs in the handset market. Which is ridiculous. Of course, in 1996, CDMA could have met the needs of the marketplace."

You must be confusing terms "needs" and "requirements".
In 1996 there were no proper transistors to transmit
the signal, no compact batteries, no mobile DSPs to
process the signal. The thing just could not meet
the main requirement for portables - be portable.

- Ali



To: tinkershaw who wrote (42761)5/18/2001 9:29:06 AM
From: SBHX  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 54805
 
Hi tinkershaw,

...CDMA in 1996 ...

At the risk of being tarred and feathered by americans,

1. I didn't see the actual need for cdma when the rest of the world already adopted GSM.

2. I don't know why the americans assigned 1.9GHz for digital cell phones when the rest of the world was using 1.8GHz. Adopting 1.8GHz would have avoided a lot of reengineering and manufacturing rampup costs.

Respectfully,

SbH