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 : Nokia (NOK) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: slacker711 who wrote (17478)	12/20/2001 12:41:20 PM
From: Dave	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 34857

slacker, First, let me use an analogy concerning a patent, or a portfolio of patents. A patent tells a story of the prior technology and presents a solution. Therefore, a patent present a way from going from point A to point B. Very rarely do patents cover all ways from going from point A to point B. For the sake of argument, I concede that Qualcomm's earliest patents cover all ways from point A to point B; I tip my "virtual" hat to them. In addition to those "building block" patents, Qualcomm has filed, and received, "improvement patents". However, Qualcomm no longer enjoys being the sole technology innovator. Now, other major telecom companies are also performing R&D on CDMA. While there is clear speculation on my part, I believe that these other companies focusing on CDMA R&D are, also, focused on the improvement of the CDMA air interface. Does this mean there could be a variety of improvements? Absolutely. The problem is that I doubt that this handset would be compatible with existing CDMA2000 and W-CDMA networks. Why do you say that? Alledgedly, CDMA2000 networks are backwards compatible to IS-95. Why would you say that future generations of WCDMA would not be backwards compatible to the "original" WCDMA(UMTS)? These standards have incorporated Q's later patents (even if they werent essential). And portions of their own IP, do you see a trend? I do. And if there is a 4Q CDMA technology, most likely, even less Qualcomm IP will be used. The operators will have already spent hundreds of billions on their existing infrastructure. Hundreds of Billions???? I think you are overexaggerating that figure. Perhaps in multiple upgrades from AMPS to TDMA to whatever, in toto. The only way I see a problem arising for Qualcomm is if someone can create a W-CDMA (or CDMA2000) compatible handset using ONLY early 90's patents. I have a feeling that this would be almost impossible I would find it hard to believe that Qualcomm has identified each of every improvement, and all the variety of improvements, to each and every aspect of their air interface. I still find it hard to believe that one company could have the lock on a single technology. Clark Hare and I discussed this privately, and he made a statement such as, "Qualcomm was the first company to perform R&D on CDMA and they had a huge lead." I can believe that. And, of course, their patents were broad and valid enough to be enforced. Other companies will have differing "improvements" to the air interface. Of course, some will be better than others.