Discussions

I wonder if they've taken the "fan club" off their list?

- thanks for that!

G

Hey, I just saw your post about Wadja and I created a new account over there (coz I really like the idea of sending free SMS) and I didn't see this guy popping up in my friends' list.
From the few things I saw the site seems cool, simple and fun.

Edited by author 03-14-2008 06:43 AM

Nearly Finnished?

I blame Richard Lander for this awful pun...

---

Edited by author 03-10-2008 12:13 PM

Value for Money?

How good a service do you have to offer for WiFi on a train before people will want to pay money for it?

I think "always on" is definitely worth something! - but always on and "very slow" are not an acceptable compromise. What do you think?

---

Comment by clicking here or post a new message on this board...

---

Yo-ho-ho!

Collecting (by quite legal means) a bunch of Intellectual Properties and charging royalties: a legitimate business? It seems several mobile companies are not happy with the arrangement.

Comment by clicking here or post a new message on this board...

---

I don't think so... doesn't seem to be. Why?

Is that forum against Iphones?



----
Javatech
mobile marketing applications

These aren't the gPhones you're looking for...

But SOMEONE must recognise what the phones are? please
 check out the video and tell us what you think they are!

Edited by author 01-25-2008 09:59 AM

Me, you? go elsewhere...

I was going to say "I can't believe a million people sign up for Zlango" each month. But sadly, I can.

 

Edited by author 01-10-2008 01:16 PM

Everex Cloudbook

Note to the designers: Very nice - but where's the bleedin' Bluetooth?!?

Some of us live outside the US and want to use wireless broadband through our mobile phones, y'know.

Even within the US, I think you'll find Wi-Fi isn't quite ubiquitous yet...

Douglas Adams Boulevard?

I like the idea of a street named after him! but can't we call it something more exciting than his name?
 

Mike42*
" ANYONE! . . . who - er ! . . . " uses " . . . er ! um ! . . . You just said it ! ! ! . . . Tooth Fairy on the way !

Erwin,
If I understand what you're saying, your analysis is that Qualcomm isn't excluded by Intel's IP, but Intel would be excluded from the GSM IP? I certainly would go along with that.

Mike42: the term 4G is a quote from the ABI report. The story in NewsWireless is a report on the ABI report, so we quote it as they did. I wouldn't disagree with your analysis.

Blimfark: if you read that piece as in any way supporting a Nokia viewpoint, you didn't read what I wrote! And it's not just Nokia; it's anybody who is not a member of the GSM cartel.

Since when was WiMAX a 4G technology?

AFAIK, the ITU, IEEE etc haven't even yet agreed what a '4G' technology will look like.

WiMAX in its current form is no faster/more efficient/better range/cheaper for a given freq/BW/range/power/etc than HSDPA 7.2. And it doesn't have QoS or CS for voice prioritisation. Or just about any other feature that makes HSDPA/UMTS/GSM such a great system, warts & all. And the WiMAX hardware costs will be astronomical, should you decide to roll out a network of the stuff. If the requisite hardware (as the South Koreans have discovered) is the size/weight of a Coke machine, needs multiple 20W PA's, a 2KW aircon plant, LDF5-50 feeder, 21dB panel antennas...hmmm...sorry, why not just use HSDPA?

Anyone who uses the terms 'WiMAX' and '4G' in the same sentence is either in the pay of Intel, doesn't read technical literature, doesn't understand the laws of physics, believes in the tooth fairy, or all of the above.

Cheers,

Mike

Ummmmmmmmm......what?? Lighten up on the Kool-aid