Wiredoggy...you've got style...you don't understand anything about what you read and yet you choose to make a statement like you are qualified to evaluate a patent based upon a few big words.
Unless you know the difference between about a dozen protocols; understand the key differentiators between circuit switched and IP data transmission and how radios deal with each, know about SS7, SIP, XTEN, GSM, TDMA, WCDMA, UMTS, OFDM, and then the various flavors of unlicensed spectrum and their associated transport standards; 802.11a/b/g, 802.16e/n, 802.20...and can explain why each is useful for a particular application or in a particular environment, I suggest you stick with pumping stocks.
Just because a patent "sounds good to you" doesn't mean it is valid or defensible, especially when all it describes is a way of doing someting (and especially when the company that has been issued the patent can't seem to make that "WAY" work using their own proprietary gear...there are many patents issued that sounded good to an examiner that wasn't really qualified to make the determination; I used to make very good money reverse engineering chemicals when patents failed to produce the specified material...
The true value of a patent is only ever realized when that patent is tested in litigation. I think it will be a very dark day for many people here if that happens. The fact that the company is suddenly about handsets and using Cisco Gear and SIP tells me volumes. Particularly considering Cisco's very public announcements about their work with Motorola and UMA...If I were George, the last gear I'd want to be using about now is the gear made by the 900lb Gorilla who as already announced plans to work with one of the chief supporters of UMA and who would be directly challenged if ASNAP was for real...
Oh...and by the way ,seeing as how I work about 20 hours a day right now due to being over committed; "twiddling my thumbs" would be a welcome respite from pounding them on the keyboard...
-Stitch
