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 (16702)	10/18/1998 1:55:00 PM
From: Clarksterh	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 152472

DaveMG - curious whether you think it might actually be possible to compromise in such a way that both sides are "winners", or is this a technological impossibility? Do spectrum and chiprate differences in GSM and CDMAone make a simple migration impede such an outcome. Yes and no. First it needs to be understood that Ericsson doesn't have a much of a winning position outside of defining it as that which most destroys any Qualcomm advantage. Ericsson has no installed base since backwards compatibility with GSM is impossible and they haven't even finished their trials on W-CDMA (where all of the kinks are worked out). Thus, in a sense, a win-win compromise is not possible. Technically, a compromise is possible, but it will be somewhat lumpy. For instance, it is no compromise for Qualcomm to accept a chip rate somewhere between the ones originally proposed for W-CDMA and CDMA-2000. However, determining which lumps must go together requires knowledge I do not have. It's been suggested in the past that some of the technical details such as pilot tones and adaptive array antennaes were inserted into Wcdma in order to get around Q patents. Comments: 1)I would not say that adding in Adaptive Array Antenna technology is an attempt to bypass Qualcomm patents. This is, IMO, a very smart addition, and will add significant amounts of capacity. 2) 'Getting around patents' is, as far as I'm concerned, a fine thing to do if they can do it without significant performance penalties. If they can't do it without paying a penalty then too bad. (Note that this is a completely different issue than arbitrarily changing the spec so that the same technology is used, but backwards compatibility is not maintained.) 3) There seems to be a prevalent misunderstanding about WCDMA, CDMA-2000 and AAA's. CDMA-2000 does have the option for distinct pilots which in turn allow for Adaptive Array Antenna. This is not unique to W-CDMA. It may be that that option won't work on the legacy systems (I would have to do some more research), but so what? I hope this helps. Clark