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: Clarksterh who wrote (16840)	10/21/1998 4:24:00 AM
From: gdichaz	Respond to of 152472

To Clark: Again thanks for helping us walk through the convergency and compatibility maze. Just to try to be sure, do I understand that your opinion is that it will be perfectly possible from a technological standpoint to devise a WCDMA standard which is backwards compatible to IS-95 alongside a backwards compatible CDMA2000. In other words, both are possible and practical from a technological standpoint. And that further that having two backwards compatible standards is easier from a technology standpoint than combining the WCDMA (at least as best we now know what it is - or may be) with CDMA2000? Seems this is very important since the US Trade Rep may succeed (sometimes that happens) in pressuring Europe and Japan to accept a seat at the table for CDMA2000 and backwards compatibility for IS-95 (and GSM) for WCDMA and yet fail (that happens sometimes too) to obtain one fully converged backwards compatible standard. . And two or more such "standards" are perhaps more realistic and possible politically in the world in which we live than an "ideal" single standard. Don't wish to put words in your mouth, you speak too well for yourself, but trying to think out loud so to speak as I go. Many thanks again. Respect. Chaz