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 : Vari-L (VARL) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Frank Byers who wrote (598)	12/29/1997 7:00:00 PM
From: Rensho	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2702

more "comment"ary ... I was just pricing cellular service and I came away from the store with the impression that analog is a lot more practical due to its larger geographical coverage but that digital service is generally of higher quality. Note the use of the word impression. Unless I were Newt, I think I would be inclined to buy analog. I think this confirms some of the previous post, which I found quite enlightening. The big question is whether or not I should sell this one during the next two daze and get my tax loss. Any commentary on that concept?

To: Frank Byers who wrote (598)	12/29/1997 10:22:00 PM
From: Clarksterh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 2702

Frank - << Pure analog is the best you can get, the digital cellular and PCS (they both use the same technologies, just a different frequencies) digitize your voice and then compress it, similar to zipping a big file on your PC. Except in the case of cellular (and PCS) the compression is lossy, that is to say you don't get back all the sounds when you reconvert to analog again at the receiver's end.>> Just for further clarification, from another engineer. Digital does have some qualitative differences: 1) Better capacity for the same priced ground stations equals cheaper calls. Analog cell phones can only compete because they have a payed-off infrastructure. But, eventually replacement costs will force them to move to digital, or lose out. 2) Digital actually produces a cleaner sounding signal when the signal is moderately good. Analog, on the other hand, will show signs of this 'moderateness' - as echoes or noise or, ... . However, at some point when the signal drops below a threshold, digital falls apart almost completely, while analog will still be intelligible, even if with annoying noise. 3) Digital voice compression is indeed lossy, but the newest systems are specially designed to transmit voices, so for conversations it works fine at reasonable compressions. However, other sounds are likely to come across garbled in digital voice compression. Analog, since it is uncompressed, does not have these concerns. (Note, this is very similar in effect to the digital video compression used by DirecTV. It is lossy, but no one would deny that they majority of the time it is a better picture than analog cable.) Clark PS I also am disappointed at the apparent lack of blossomming sales that was supposed to occur with the introduction of PCS. However, sales have still grown pretty substantially, just not as much as I would have expected given the boom in PCS phone sales.