SI
SI
discoversearch

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 Incorporated (QCOM) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: surfbaron who wrote (123243)8/16/2002 4:03:35 AM
From: Wyätt Gwyön  Read Replies (4) | Respond to of 152472
 
you seem rather to have a chip on your shoulder about the WiFi thing. in fact many seem to. so there are questions about the commercial viability of WiFi; are there no questions about the viability of 3G services? have i seen anybody but myself question why anybody would pay money to download a stupid BREW-enabled bowling game to their cellphone? it seems people who are psyched about these games have never heard of the Gameboy Advance.

there are questions about all sorts of businesses. either they will succeed or they won't, and your yammering about WiFi changes nothing. the fact that you feel the need to call it "Why-Fi" shows you are not very objective regarding the matter.

really, voice has been the only killer app for wireless. what will it take to make wireless data a hit, and will anybody make any money at it? time will tell.

my own guess is that WiFi will find a viable niche, and this seems to make QCOM hypesters very uncomfortable. but i think it is just one of many factors working against QCOM on the wireless data front (the main negative factor being that people seem unlikely to fork over a lot of money for wireless data, just as they won't fork over a lot for wireline broadband).

so which of the companies is a WHY-FI pure play and is profitable?

so which of the CDMA pure plays is profitable? don't mention QCOM until you check their core earnings.