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 : Nokia (NOK) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Quincy who wrote (554)	2/26/1998 6:52:00 AM
From: tero kuittinen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 34857

Perhaps there's a language barrier here. In Finnish, when you claim that certain leading companies like Phillips are favoring GSM, it doesn't preclude them making CDMA phones. It merely indicates that the companies are putting far more R&D money into GSM than into CDMA. Of course Phillips is making CDMA phones. But that doesn't change the fact that with six different recently introduced GSM models the company is predominantly a GSM company. Just like Nokia. That these companies are hedging their bets by making phones for a niche technology is just sensible. I find that wise, just like it's wise for Nokia to make phones for Japan's PHS standard. Has Phillips made a CDMA phone that weighs under 100 grams? Or a CDMA phone that has 10 hours of talk time? It has achieved both these feats in its GSM line-up. There is little doubt that its GSM phones are far more advanced than its CDMA phones. The same applies to Nokia and Sony. Sony's new CDMA concept phone is really nifty. So is Ericsson's James Bond concept phone that can be used to drive a car and operate a rocket launcher. Until these phones reeach mass production they have little impact on the companies' profits. I don't see the fact that some company is planning, maybe, sometime in the future, to launch a CDMA smartphone at all flattering to the standard. First GSM smartphone was launched in spring -96. I think you know perfectly well that I was talking about NTT's choice of 3G in my post. That was made perfectly clear in the context (which you left out of your quote). It is a fact that NTT has now endorsed the Nordic W-CDMA solution that is compatible with GSM and not compatible with IS-95. The messages in Qualcomm thread claimed erraneously that NTT will endorse the IS-95-compatible 3G, they were dead wrong, and I still haven't seen people acknowledging this mistake. Qualcomm can dream up as many new new standards as it wants. If Europe and Asia will pick W-CDMA all that R&D expenditure will be in vain. Nokia and Ericson will probably get a hefty return for their investment in W-CDMA development. How about Qualcomm? Why isn't Qcon's stockprice keeping pace with Noka's and Ericy's even after the recent flurry of press releases? Is it because investors are realizing that W-CDMA will have brighter future than American 3G version, because they are winning over Asia? The recent Motorola debacle isn't really creating confidence in the American CDMA camp's ability to come up with a good 3G standard if the world's best known mobile company can't even make its second generation CDMA networks operate without crashing a hundred times a year. Tero