Data, you clearly have your "biases" and axe to grind. Few here complain about your own sometimes "slanted" viewpoints. What puzzles me is why you are so "hostile" towards a new and still developing technology, as represented in the technology of Tantivy, especially when, as we all know, the competition among developing technologies in so many areas of wireless is so fierce and it is still far to early to KNOW who and what will be the ultimate WINNERS after the market has further evolved and reached maturity. We are far from having any CERTAINTY and absolute KNOWLEDGE in that regard. If anyone did, investing would not be "risky" or a high stake "gamble". You have been quite cynical about TANTIVY and IDCC's involvement with them from the VERY BEGINNING of their first contractual arrangement.
The fact that you are sceptical is fine, but that in itself tells us nothing of real value. Many of the greatest technologies invented may not have been commercially "viable" (just think of Sony's Betamax as one of many examples) due to all sorts of extraneous market factors. Or think of the fierce competition among the various computer operating systems with Microsoft coming out the winner (despite the many flaws in its windows system compared to Apple's or the Linux system to name a couple). The point is this: IF you really had ANY confidence in the skill and competency of the IDCC engineering team (I know you have NO confidence in Management), then you might at least show some curiosity or at least take a wait and see approach to learn what THEY can and will do with the Tantivy technology, even if circumstances (whatever they may have been) conspired against Tantivy itself being able to stay the course. No doubt this presents a NEW challenge for the combined IDCC and Tantivy engineers. Mschere has done a good job of presenting the background and context of that challenge, and helped explain why IDCC has taken this turn and risk in their development program. What is your "beef" or "gripe" with that? I thought that is what this board is for. If you want to present a negative and contrary view, that is fine, especially if you can add some "substance" to your views. Pointing out that Tantivy couldn't stay the course is pretty obvious and besides the point. The point is: What can IDCC do with this technology and that is yet to be determined.
In short, it seems to me premature (if not immature) and presumptuous to be so arrogant and cocky and dismissive about the Tantivy technology. It is still too early in the competitive game, as far as I can see, for anyone to know how the competition will evolve and who the winners will ultimately be. The marketplace is in too much turmoil and transition, with all sorts of new alliances and partnerships forming every day, to clearly see or know the endgame results. I suggest a bit more modesty to go with your appropriate scepticism.
