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 : Nokia (NOK) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (1643)	3/22/1999 1:26:00 PM
From: Mika Kukkanen	Respond to of 34857

Actually, apart from Korea, is there anywhere in the world that the number one mobile operator in a particular country uses IS-95? Independent analysts agree that GSM will always be the preferred second generation technology (i.e., the most widely deployed and used). Note there are only around 15 million people in Australia, so the subs impact of IS-95 is small (although as a leading Far East country it is important). Telstra may well become an example operator that I called for above (but not yet).

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (1643)	3/22/1999 1:45:00 PM
From: Valueman	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 34857

"Various stages" is an apt description of the Australian CDMA development. How about discussing which operators actually are close to a national footprint? Those are the networks that get the subs. Using that fine bit of logic, there are then NO CDMA operators in the US. No operator has close to a national footprint at this time. Actually, there would be NO CDMA operators anywhere except Korea.

To: tero kuittinen who wrote (1643)	3/22/1999 11:50:00 PM
From: Peter J Hudson	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 34857

Tero, A couple of comments and a couple of questions. The reason the qualcomm zealots have invaded this thread is because we are seeking you out. I own both Nokia & Q, but I have to admit a bias for the latter, not to mention a much larger position. I would like you to answer a couple of simple direct questions. We all know why Europe chose GSM as their digital standard. We know why Korea went CDMA, but why did the US PCS operators go with IS95 when GSM had such a huge headstart? Why is Japan going CDMAone? Why would any operator use CDMAone? Do you believe that GSM is the superior technology? I honestly would like direct answers to these very simple direct questions. Thanks Pete