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: qdog who wrote (7818)	1/31/1998 9:27:00 PM
From: JMD	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

qdog, nice fang pup! I separately e-mailed Raymond implying that he ought to consider Rabies shots--we'll see how that goes. Is the European (ETSI) thing as big a deal as now appears to be the case, in your opinion? The Q saying that they'll respond in March could be interpreted as great negotiating tactics or as "what's the rush"? Do you think the Q should 'cut a deal' in order to get established in Europe? It seems very important to me: you cannot walk down a street in even a medium sized European city, and not see folks just jabbering away on their cell phones. In the big cities, it is amazing, seems like everybody has a cell phone. It is in that sense that Tero, Tora, Tora is correct when he describes Europe as having higher celluar teledensity than US. I don't think there could be any dispute about that--the Europeans were early adopters. Now maybe it's because their wireline phone system was such a mess (and so expensive) that celluar looked good by comparison so that's why they jumped on it. Whereas in U.S., we have had an excellent, relatively inexpensive wireline system and therefore under no pressing urgency to jump on celluar. Whatever, the Europeans are cell phone nuts and that's a fact. So it seems like this is a must have market for the Q if it is to be a truly world class company. Hell, I don't want them installing in the Congo, Ivory Coast, and east jesus Russian towns forever. A couple of thousand cell towers in London would look just fine to me. What's your take--think we should make our play and assume that our technological lead over the flat-worlders will allow us to make mucho dinero? Y'all growl back! Mike Doyle

To: qdog who wrote (7818)	1/31/1998 10:48:00 PM
From: Jim Lurgio	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Hey QDOg check this 02/01/98 article. This quote from the article sounds like you may have helped write it ? ( just kidding ) "Right now you have a competition, a pissing contest between Japan Inc. [the Ministry of International Trade and Industry; MITI] and the Ministry of Posts and Telegraphs; MPT] and the European Telecommunications Standards Institute [ETSI] for the development of a 'universal' multimedia wireless standard," americasnetwork.com

To: qdog who wrote (7818)	1/31/1998 10:59:00 PM
From: Jim Lurgio	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Did you read this ? 14,400 aint nothing to brag about? It won't be a big thing in any industry . ISSUE #6 TUESDAY 27 JANUARY 1998 CDMAOne Packs New Punch With Packet Data Solution By Jeremy Scott-Joynt CDMAOne is to become the first cellular standard to offer packet-switched data transmission without having to resort to an overlay network. Qualcomm has unveiled a new base station controller, called the QCore, for its range of CDMAOne infrastructure. The new kit offers circuit-switched data and fax traffic as standard, but under a protocol named IS-707 can be software configured to connect directly to an IP router . The equipment will go on sale at the end of March. According to Qualcomm , users of IS-707 packet-switched data services will be able to access the Internet at a speed of 14.4kbps. They will also be able to connect a laptop computer or or other mobile data device directly to a CDMAOne phone to transmit and receive data, because the BSC includes software modems. According to Qualcomm, the entire system is software, not hardware, driven. The base station allocates its resources dynamically depending on demand, without setting aside processor time specifically to each of the three functions - fax, data and voice - it can support. The development of packet data is seen as vital for cellular operators if they are to boost the takeup of data services ahead of third generation systems. Packet switching offers promises essential improvements in spectrum efficiency. While circuit-switched data locks up a slice of spectrum for the duration of the call, packet switching sends small chunks of information through the network as and when requested. So, whereas the dead time between bursts of data is lost in a circuit-switched data system, packet switching allows many data streams to use the same frequency sequentially, since every packet is tagged with the information needed to identify the intended recipient. GSM still lacks an operational packet-switched architecture. The General Packet Radio System (GPRS) - which promises speeds of 144kbps - is set to be rolled out in 1999, although operators are nervous of the expected cost of deployment so close to the onset of 3G. The only existing packet-switched data service over a public network is Cellular Digital Packet Data, which at the moment runs over AMPS networks in the US. But since CDPD needs an expensive overlay network, coverage is patchy, and according to US consultancy the Strategis Group had only 17,000 subscribers at the end of 1997, mostly because of competition from dedicated data networks like Ardis. Subscriber numbers, Strategis predicts, would climb to nearly 70,000 by the end of this year - but income per subscriber was set to drop from $41 to $36. [

To: qdog who wrote (7818)	2/1/1998 6:58:00 AM
From: Raymond	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

My point was that all systems builds on another.When GSM was developed it took the experiences of earlier systems and used it.They still use Viterbis algoritms in the GSM system and also in the WCDMA system. So what! They use thousands of patents when they develop a new system.When IS95 and IS-41 came they took a lot from GSM.It's the same thing now.Do you really think that the only difference between a IS-95 airinterface and the WCDMA is a wider channel.In all this years since IS-95 was standardized don't you think that they can be able to develop a better system.Or do you think IS-95 is the end of develoment.It sounds like IBM mentality in the 70:s.On this thread it is repeted time after time that Ericsson said that IS-95 would never work.I have followed this debate for a long time and I haven't seen any quotes from Ericsson saying that.Today it is possible via internet to search alot.So I ask you all on this thread to come out with one article with a quote like that. The only thing I have heard is that they have said is that the standard is not mature enough and that it doesn't give any extra compared to GSM for example.But many years ago they said that they saw CDMA as a promising candidate for the future next generation systems. /R