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 : The *NEW* Frank Coluccio Technology Forum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Frank A. Coluccio who wrote (3491)	7/28/2001 5:53:59 PM
From: axial	Respond to of 46821

Hi, Frank - Thanks for your thoughts. "I wouldn't be quick to suggest that they might let 3G or 4G get ahead of them in a meaningful way, when weighed against the massive market share and inertia that they presently enjoy." Exactly. Perhaps my meaning wasn't clear, but that is why I posted elmat's excellent quote about 'killer' incumbents. The reason for the question is to focus on exactly that point: how great is the probability that the incumbents will allow these alternatives to succeed, (or, not be able to stop them)? But the counterpoint to the question of probability is that the ability to incorporate voice, outside the control of the incumbents - is a signicant, perhaps necessary, driver for profitability in the wireless LAN/WAN business. Or so it seems...>g< Upstream, we discussed the stalling tactics of the ITU WRT exactly this sort of incursion, and Jeff Pulver's efforts. As a relatively uninformed observer, it seems to me that more sharply-defined incumbent/non-incumbent lines are being drawn up. Some of the players (Nokia, Ericsson, eg) are cross-dressing, but others (Microsoft, Cisco, eg) would love to have voice. I don't discount for a minute the lethal protectionism of the incumbents. Regards, Jim