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: Eric L who wrote (44091)	7/4/2001 12:07:49 AM
From: Uncle Frank	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 54805

>> GPRS standards revision are currently available, you might ask? I'd be more interested in how many subs there are on gprs systems, what the handset battery life is, and if there are any gprs systems that are fcc approved at this time. Do you have a handle on any of those numbers? uf

To: Eric L who wrote (44091)	7/4/2001 1:42:38 AM
From: Mike Buckley	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 54805

Eric, What is the GPRS that is constantly being delayed? Is it 2.5G or 3G? I'm referring to the so-called "first" GPRS handset that was shipped in Europe to the Isle of Mann (I think.) As I understand it, that technolgoy is still not deployed to customers. I believe that's the technology Christensen and the person asking the question was referring to and I gather from Hambrecht's summary that its authors also thought that. I could be wrong on all counts. --Mike Buckley

To: Eric L who wrote (44091)	7/4/2001 4:02:51 AM
From: gdichaz	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 54805

Eric L: Buried in your otherwise useful laundry list on GPRS is this: <<In addition, multi-mode GSM/GPRS/WCDMA handsets ("promised" by Ericsson H1 2002, and "promised" by Nokia H2 2002) will allow GSM/GPRS subscribers to practically use WCDMA even when WCDMA infrastructure is relatively lightly deployed, and potentially much earlier than Dr. Irwin Mark Jacobs would have led us to believe (or believed himself).>> Do you seriously believe that you are enough inside Dr J's head (and if so how?), to know what Dr J "believed himself"? And are you saying you know Dr J deliberately lied? Easy man. Best. Cha2