"I guess what I'm trying to say is why would anyone care to spend more on a w-cdma or cdma-2000 for that matter phone and infrastructure (especially since you are saying it carries higher prices and royalties)? Could this be why 3G did not take off strongly as everyone expected?"
This was the most important question anyone could have asked from qcom's ipo on. Those of us who bought qcom knew the answer and believed qcom's management and research...I happened to know some engineers who were credible, and we now know we were right...obviously it was a bit of a leap of faith at the time.
the answer: it was NEVER about the consumers, it was about companies building a network that would eventually become this 3 g network we have cheaper. The cdma network would work and be more cost effective. Nok and its ilk spead all the disinformation because their way was less cost effective...they couldn't compete with their technology, so they tried to distort, deceive, delay and misinform. we all knew that, but it can be an effective tactic...it works well for msft, but nok didn't have that kind of edge.
I have no doubt they may have even believed some of the stuff they put out...but that didn't mean it wasn't bs. In the end, it was VERY likely that the cdma networks would have to be built..folks like vz aren't idiots and didn't fall for it. they want save money as much as anyone, and use chipsets they don't explode into flames.(It can be interesting to have your phone explode into flames but i don't think it will ever catch on with the masses). One piece at a time the fraud has been exposed
AI
