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

To: Raymond who wrote (6576)	12/17/1997 4:20:00 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 152472

Raymond, "...you continue to talk about WCDMA as a tactic to get a cheap license from QCOM". That's because I believe it's true. All the standards discussion in Madrid is only hot air in the absence of any working multimedia CDMA. Ericsson could well be left fallen between two stools. With GSM/cdmaOne a la Newbury, there is real risk for Ericsson. I can't see why Germans would want to support Germans if they don't have the best technology. Ira Brodsky says the Europeans will approve lots of standards because there are going to be lots of approaches to multimedia CDMA. There will be NO attempts to get GSM working to multimedia standards. Looks as though GSM is a dead end. Now it is just a matter of who is able to build good multimedia CDMA. Qualcomm and pals seem the best bet so far. Ericsson and the others are hoping to escape Qualcomm's Intellectual Property rights. Otherwise, why not just go with W-cdmaOne.

To: Raymond who wrote (6576)	12/17/1997 4:25:00 PM
From: Walter Liu	Respond to of 152472

"Halfrate is beeing delivered now for the European market." Congratulations! I was told in September 1994 that one year later half rate would be a standard feature without voice degradation. I am just sick of these European comapnies critizing CDMA One just because they don't have it. The latest claim is that the promises and claims are delivered late or at a discount. Well, look at the mirror and improve GSM. Let's wait for the voice quality test result: full rate vs. half rate. The jury is still out. Remeber Narrow band TDMA? "Where was that promised and by whom?" When GSM was comparing CDMA and often it points to ETDMA being the capacity gain that will catch up with CDMA. You can say it is not a promise, but ETDMA is always thought as the capacity savior of GSM. "What I know that is not part of the GSM-standard." You are right it is not. But when the European vendors propose contract bids, they always points it will be a future add-on feature that gains capacity. It was in 1995 when rumor starts in GSM community that it will be only another year before the techonology is mature. Well here we are, delayed again at best. "They have frequency hopping as a feature but no dynamic channel allocation." As you know the control channel BCCH carrier can not hop. You need at least two GSM traffic carriers to have frequency diversity, which is the reason for frequency hopping. In fact, you need three hoppable traffic carriers to fully obtain the diversity gain. To do that, US PCS carrier will have to use all of their 30 Mhz bandwidth, assuming they want a quality 7-21 reuse pattern. A lot of work to get a 3 dB gain. Don't you think the CDMA approach of frequency diversity, interference reduction is much more nature than slow frequency hopping? "You mentioned that GSM was "extremely narrowband".If GSM wasn't to narrow it wouldn't be any reason to develop a 3:rd generation system would it?" I think GSM is very good for TDMA approach. It is the way that the European vendors sell it that bugs me: When they sell GSM product, they don't mention GSM is narrow band compares to CDMA One When they sell WCDMA, they point it out CDMA One is narrow band. Does this approach very self serving? I think it is, but I am not sure it works for people who understand the truth.

To: Raymond who wrote (6576)	12/17/1997 4:44:00 PM
From: Quincy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Hi Raymond! "If GSM wasn't to narrow it wouldn't be any reason to develop a 3'rd generation system would it?" But, GSM is wide enough for wireless consumers in Europe. Will they buy lots of 3GW because someday they can carry picturephones? Why not adapt IS95? It works. It's secure. It gives me standby times that last all day. Why send email when voice mail is so much easier? "The vote in ETSI will decide the future for all the countrys that has implemented GSM and the ones that are thinking about it" The worldwide use of different GSM frequency allocations has me wondering if WCDMA can fuel enough "me-too" in the face of better and cheaper solutions (like Qcom's Vodaphone project.) It would be unfortunate for Ericy/Nokia/ETSI to completely avoid Qcom's CDMA innovations if they can't work all the bugs out on their own. Even techno-consumers don't take too well to unreliable cell phones, even at a discount.