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: DaveMG who wrote (16488)	10/14/1998 9:12:00 PM
From: gdichaz	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 152472

To DaveMG: Hey, you ain't the "other Dave". The other Dave is the Johnny come lately other Dave. :-) Chaz

To: DaveMG who wrote (16488)	10/14/1998 10:54:00 PM
From: Dave	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

DaveMG: I am not arguing that "WCDMA was designed to EXCLUDE IS95". I am arguing what has been stated on this thread many times. To summarize: I feel people on this thread feel that since the Q was the first to bring CDMA to market (commercialize), the Q has all the patents necessary for all current and future CDMA systems. That is what I have been trying to argue. dave.

To: DaveMG who wrote (16488)	10/15/1998 5:00:00 AM
From: Rajala	Respond to of 152472

>I haven't read all the posts yet so perhaps someone else already >brought this up but I think you're missing the point of WCDMA. >WCDMA was designed to EXCLUDE IS95, not as ploy to reduce royalty >rates although they'll be happy to use it for that also I'm sure. What WCDMA was originally designed for was to be the optimum 3G system for GSM. In other words the best possible compromise between bit rate, cost, technical needs and anticipated end user requirements. So DaveMG, in a way you are partly right when you say it was designed to exclude IS95, but it is not the complete picture. - rajala