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: JMD who wrote (11065)	6/3/1998 12:32:00 AM
From: engineer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

Mike, I don't get WSJ, but the world is a packet world today. all the telephone backhauls in the world are packet right now. ATM packets have been the rule for more than 10 years. the CDMA radio is really just a great packet modem which just happens to have a very good voice thing on the front to make it into a telephone. The real GEM for digtial systems is the digital part. trouble is that most people are focused on voice, since this digital thing just got here in the last 10 years when the PC got big and the internet got going. If you look back at the growth of both of these in the last 5 years and try to project that same growth for the next 5 years, it is hard to imagine what we will have as our day to day carry-around thing. IF everyone was using packet and we got your phone hooked up to a packet world, then you can exchange anything with most anything by means of something called an Interworking Function (IWF). the only thing that varies here is the speed of them. But you can get your phone to talk internet, phone packets, voice packets, video packets, etc. Just get the right encoder and packet IWF and your hooked up. Behind the switches in phone systems are giant packet routers, such as T1's, T3, ATMs, Frame relays, etc.

To: JMD who wrote (11065)	6/3/1998 10:07:00 AM
From: mrknowitall	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Cool and groovy, yes, but . . . What Sprint has probably considered is that they are going to have to "play nice" with a lot of large, well entrenched local phone monopolies for access to the wire out there in residential-land. CDMA is great and the fact that it fits nicely into ATM mappings for carriers makes it a better (slightly less expensive) choice for wireless site connections, but the kind of bandwidth to do what Sprint is saying they're going to do leaves wireless CDMA technology in the voice-only or slow-message/text/fax data world. Even WCDMA isn't going to be able to handle consumer video or high speed internet access.

To: JMD who wrote (11065)	6/3/1998 10:39:00 AM
From: bananawind	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Mike, Assignment WSJ accepted (will have to wait till lunchtime) but based on their track record it would surprise me if the "journalists" even come close. On the other hand, hopefully it will be more readable than the following post that I found on the FON thread. exchange2000.com Anyone care to translate this mumbo-jumbo? -JLF

To: JMD who wrote (11065)	6/3/1998 11:21:00 AM
From: Sawtooth	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Surfer Mike: Here's an article with a whole different perspective on the Sprint/Cisco/BellCore "miracle". The initial announcement did ring a little hollow to me. ...Tim Message 4699124

To: JMD who wrote (11065)	6/4/1998 8:06:00 PM
From: A.J. Mullen	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

Sprint ION or Fastbreak: my question comes from the opposite direction. Mike, you asked whether the local phone companies could be bypassed by going wireless. My question is: why can't CDMA be used to make more efficient use of whatever medium is used, viz. copper or fibre? CDMA is a practical method to approach the theoretical maximum information content within any given signal. As far as I know there is nothing special about wireless. Surely CDMA (and to a lessor extent, TDMA) would allow a greater flow rate of information. When you think about, it's crazy to have a dedicated piece of wire from your telephone that does nothing most of the time. Even when you're using the telephone, a processor could compress the speech to occupy the line for just a tiny fraction of the time you are conversing (TDMA), or interweave your voice with other signals (CDMA). Why aren't cable companies using CDMA? There is (or was) a company (Pairgain?) that was developping a method of boosting the bandwidth of boring old copper wires. Does/did this use CDMA? AJ