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: Maurice Winn who wrote (56544)	11/2/2006 10:50:34 AM
From: waitwatchwander	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 196961

VW-40 your arguments haven't changed one iota since 1999. it takes two to tango. choosing not to play is always one's option but that also means one has less chance of impacting the ultimate outcome. you (and qualcomm?) choose to ignore the irrelevance of being superior or inferior in this battle, at least publicly. Did Qualcomm really choose not to play? msft windows was inferior to unix. apple was superior to msft. the result of those battles had very little to do with better or worse technologies but had a lot to do with market control. one thing that is obvious about the europeans and the chinese, they understand the importance of serving those who "maintain" their market. in that respect qualcomm and the jacob's name became overtly arrogant. solely focusing on the provision of superior market dominating technologies has it's pitfalls. isn't that the downfall of all engineering types. think about all the great inventors and those who made their fortunes commercializing their efforts. i see Woz's book is finally in the stores. innerfrontier.org fortunately, "matters" are moving forward and maturity is rising through the fog. it is hard to "rant" about Qualcomm's risk taking. it is a double edge sword. they spend billions ... they win some, they loose some. i don't think paul is as good as his dad at "winning some", at least not yet. that's a red flag. i only trust that the voices of Altman and Jha are not getting lost in the bellows. i could go on, but i'm sure you're getting my drift. Trevor ps Qualcomm's cdma efforts started in 1989. That was the same year Paul got his Ph.D. It took 10 years to make cdma a commercial success. The TD-SCDMA Forum was started in 2001. It is now in year 5. qualcomm.com You are right about the rational for creating the other cdma derivatives but that fact like the "superior/inferior" and hubris arguments become irrelevant as commercialization proceeds. pss Is it an omen having the Dow challenged the downside of 12K today? tinyurl.com