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 : Booms, Busts, and Recoveries -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Raymond Duray who wrote (16567)	3/8/2002 5:38:37 AM
From: elmatador	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74559

The US did a lousy job implementing wireless. Hodge-podge of technologies. Poor coverage. No national roaming. Clumsy price structures. etc etc. That's why the Euros took the leadership in this segment from the US. Leadership that QCOM is now trying to get back. I have a way to compare. Lived in Asia and Europe with GSM. Now I am just like an American. Because Brazil made the serious mistake of opting to the way Americans built their networks. I am hooked to TDMA and CDMA networks. I only use my fixed line and my mobile for voice mobility. If i had never ever tasted what GSM is about and its potential, I would feel like Seybold. The US is fixed-line centric. People there care pagers. Seybold has this mindset. Hence I don't trust his analysis. Don't be fooled by the misdeeds of the symbiotic relationships of Euro operators and the governments, the thing is for real. (You know I doubted 3G before and said so openly elsewhere. But I educated myself over these last six months and am now less ignorant than I was before Summer 2001) But if 3G wasn't not for real or phones would be voice-centric, do you think MSFT would be battling Nokia in a fight to dominate the OS that will run those non-voice terminals? I think the only way the US can recover the leadership in mobiles is if MSFT defeats NOK.