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: jpbrody who wrote (23264)	2/23/1999 5:38:00 PM
From: Maurice Winn	Respond to of 152472

Multipath patents Engineer, Clark and co should come in here, but Qualcomm does something similar in that they check out the various signals and combine them into one if they match, so Q! technology benefits from multipath in that the signal is stronger. Ericy is cursed by multipath and has to try to discriminate between the various signals - multipath being a problem. Both systems seem to examine the multipath signals but do it in a different way and use the outcome in different ways. Ericy is using a two stick bathtub type concatenated and convoluted system with two modulations to try to get anything out of it whereas Q! uses smarts and enjoys the fact that signals come from everywhere so their handsets can operate in a lousy signal area. I don't believe Q! uses any of the Ericy software, gizzard design, algorithms or anything to achieve this enhanced performance. This comes into the category of rake receivers where Q! is hot stuff and holding good patents essential for CDMA to work well in cellphones. One of the other patents was the silly "check to see whether the next base station is using the same frequency and if it isn't then hand the cellphone over to that frequency" which Ericy tried to call soft handoff. The fact that CDMA ALWAYS uses the same frequency and doesn't look to see whether that frequency is available doesn't mean Q! is using an Ericy invention. I reckon even an OJ jury could just about grasp it. If there is any issue about CDMA in 1988, Qualcomm won't have any trouble showing that they were working on CDMA before then. They formed Qualcomm back in 1985 with the idea of CDMA in cellular. They had been working flat out on TDMA in Linkabit and obviously decided that they could make CDMA run given the development in chip technology. They really struck gold because the rate of technological development has accelerated since then and all to the good and advantage of Qualcomm whose CDMA could benefit far more from the processing power and chip efficiency than TDMA or analogue. The rate of development continues to increase with more and more effort going into the industry - now with Silicon Geraniums which will make a billion WWeb devices bloom. A beautiful, huge, SiGe, WWebloom [TM]. Mqurice

To: jpbrody who wrote (23264)	2/23/1999 6:58:00 PM
From: JGoren	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 152472

At the Markman hearing, the experts testify. A decision is made as to whether the plaintiff has enough of a case to go forward for a trial. In other words, certain claims can be thrown out; some still go to trial. The expert was testifying about multipath. If I understood what he was saying there is a DELAYING process that filters out and leaves the message you want. Indeed, a diagram was shown of this process. It appears to be different from "matching" and unifying as one, which apparently is what Qualcomm does. It is one of the patents that Ericy appears to say is being infringed. BTW, I think I figured out why Ericy sued in Marshall. It is 1-1/2 hours outside of Sprint's footprint; nobody knows what cdma is there and surely doesn't realize the clarity of cdma. Sprint's signal magically dies somewhere around Kaufman. on I-20.