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: mightylakers who wrote (11145)	5/30/2001 6:30:34 PM
From: Ibexx	Respond to of 196719

ML, It's entirely possible that they missed the "PC" part - thanks for pointing that out - and I wouldn't underestimate SKT's stupidity, having followed their recent maneuvers, political and otherwise. Ibexx

To: mightylakers who wrote (11145)	5/30/2001 8:45:02 PM
From: Eric L	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 196719

lakers, << If you understand the time need for the requirement-design-implementation-testing-shipment cycle, >> By virtue of vocation, let me assure you that I absolutely do understand that. I may be a sales dummy, but I've been around IC modules for one heck of a long time. That is why, as an investor, I follow Qualcomm's roadmaps, IC products press releases, product specifications, and brochures, very closely. It allows me to estimate when AS ICs potentially translate into revenue from Qualcomms sampling dates.. << you have been saying, or say implying, how Qcom used 5105 as a half ass patch for the carriers because qcom suddenly found out they can't ship 5100 on time then you will know how impossible for that to be true >> I did not say it was half a**. I think I understand why it was a late addition to the line up, and I do NOT think it was because carriers wanted a "value" tier chip, although I can understand them wanting that. Let us review a few things here, and if I say anything that you think is inaccurate please advise on thread. Qualcomm announced the MSM3000 based MSM5000 in July 1999. The chip is compliant with the TIA standard released same month but NOT compliant to the IS-2000A standard accepted by the IMT-2000 dated march the following year, therefore this chip which has been referred to as a "trial" chip on Qualcomm roadmaps can legitimately only by a stretch of the imagination be called a 3G chip (although the MSM5105 can since it is compliant with an IMT-2000 standard and offers 144 kbps peak rates in a mobile environment and like the 5100 supports R-UIM I/O). Qualcomm announced the MSM3300 based MSM5100 (compliant with the about to be IMT-2000 standard) in late February 2000 and specifically spelled out a sampling date of Q42000. In September Qualcomm (long after SKT had made plans to commercially "launch" (trial) 1xRTT "3G" services (well they call it 2,5G - Qualcomm & CDG calls it 3G) with AOD/VOD services (the 3G differentiator) announced the MSM3100 based MSM5105 that would sample Q42000. The MSM5100 moved slightly right on the roadmap (looked like Q1 - made it in Q2). << Let's face it, the Korean carriers made a wrong estimate of what is the best sell over there and they change their strategy. It's as simple as that. >> Lakers, I don't buy that for one minute. The Korean carriers who already use packet data at peak speeds of 64 kbps did indeed make an estimate of what would sell over there. The "estimate" was AOD/VOD capabilities. This to justify the higher prices of handsets, and provide the end user with a rationale for moving from peak 64 kbps data to higher speed voice and data. 3G is about multimedia. 1xRTT is 3G is that not correct? << Keep in mind, Q is just manufacturing whatever are ordered out there. Unless SKT really missed that PC part. There's no way they don't know what they are ordering. >> ROFLMAO** once again. You are not, I hope, implying that, The MSM5105 only supports applications such as video streaming, file transfers, Web browsing, voice recognition and QCT's Compact Media Extension (CMX™) Musical Instrument Digital Interface (MIDI)-based multimedia software, when it is interfaced to a PC are you? If so, don't apply to my company as a marketing tech-writer please. <g> You are telling me that SKT who has a handset manufacturing facility that supplied them with the first 20,000 MSM5000 driven phones doesn't know what they are ordering. This is the same company that participated in a live WCDMA video conference in motion in February 2000. Give me an ever loving break. Please, old buddy. Qualcomm for several reasons (status of standard migration, MSM3300 just itself sampling so unproven, easier migration), etc. decided to use an MSM3100 based product to get off the MSM5000 platform on the sampling schedule of the MSM5100. I believe, (just an opinion) that Qualcomm believed that the MSM5105 chip used in conjunction with SKT's PacketVideos streaming multimedia platform would be able to provide satisfactory streaming audio & video and AOD/VOD. I further believe that (at this juncture) it could not, but the recently sampled MSM51000 can. Now perhaps you can answer a question I asked engineer. Did the MSM5100 sample on time? If yes, how is that? Also, how and why did the MSM5105 jump ahead of the MSM5100, in your estimation? Best, - Eric -