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 : Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Don Mosher who wrote (32997)	3/2/2003 1:42:22 PM
From: engineer	Respond to of 197253

I disagree on CDMA technology. At the time CDMA was introduced, it was a disruptive technology, exactly like the disk drive mfg in the CC book. analog was on the way out, digital was coming in, two new standards were already proposed (TDMA and GSM) and along came a newer technology which was much more advanced. It got started 3 years after the other standards, got implemented sooner and came into use sooner. It displaced the TDMA out there in a very short amount of time and would have displaced alot of GSM were it not for protectionism in other parts of the world. As for 40x, I have explained that before. In teh begging, the system was designed to match analog performance, which at that drop call rate, voice quality, coverage would have given 40x analog. but when they were demo'ing the system, the carriers found that at 10x they got regular wireline quality and no significant dropped calls, so they reset the bar at that level. they figured that they would not need the increased capacity for awhile and they went with good enough. When the number was reduced from 40x to 10x, everyone made a giant political statement out of it. Even you are still confused. The same system that was proposed is what rolled out. The newer coding methods have increased the present system well beyond what was possible in 1990. If a country like India wanted to settle for analog type response, they could just as well set the signal to noise ratio back down to acheive 40x or even 70x on their systems. On your item #3, I believe that we have the begginings of a disruptive technology coming along the lines of what Netscape did for the Internet versus teh old "FTP" stuff. the wireless technology is the Internet pipe, but I do not belive we have found the unlocking key yet to allow data devices to use wirelss technology in a massive way. I believe that the carriers barriers to roaming, revenue sharing, and "captive pops" are another major barrier to widespread use. Until they find the model like wireline which allows low cost simple access, they will not disrupt wireline. On disruptive technologies, I think that some of them have differnt timeframes than others. Some we see in months, but some are in years. Email verus postal mail is a good example. Email is very quickly overtaking postal mail worldwide. This has taken many years to get to this point, but it is slowly disrupting the paper mail system. (Perhaps this is also why the junk catalog mailings have gone up by 2 orders of magnitude when the postal guys try to create more business to offset loss in peraonal mail). But in all this, thanks for your ideas.