| To: Eric L. who wrote (24555) | 4/6/2003 11:33:39 PM |
| From: Jim Mullens | Read Replies (1) of 28730 |
| |
Hi Eric, thanks for your listing of the key items (IYO)), those making the statements, and for keeping this interesting discussion going. As you know, I also find this issue very interesting and have written and contributed to several emails to some of the authors of these stories. I also find in quite interesting that none of the authors provided any reasonable response (IMO) to the questions I raised.
What I find most interesting is the hypocrisy of those writing and being quoted in the articles, most entirely all of which are expressing the GSM party line to a tee. You and these GSM folks are coming unglued at the thought of the Congressman and apparently Qualcomm’s lobbyist attempt to alert our countries’ administration that they were about to award a GSM mobile wireless contract without even considering CDMA, a home-grown technology. You and these folks must have thought you and they were in Europe where the thought of using a wireless technology other than GSM or the European version of CDMA (UTMS) is unthinkable. Shame on the Congressman and the lobbyist for even considering such a dreadful thought. What is unbelievable is not the action of the Congressman and the lobbyist, it is the reaction of the GSM lobby and the many journalists that support its cause without regard to basic truths. Uppermost, I don’t recall even one of these many stories even mentioning that GSM is the only 2G wireless technology permitted by government regulation in Europe, and of the more than $100 billion in 3G European spectrum contracts only the European version of CDMA (WCDMA changed to UMTS) happened to be chosen by all of the carriers. You don’t suppose the American readership might have been interested in this fact do you?
To support my observation of the hysterical reaction of the GSM folks, I received this reply from Global Wireless- “The GSM Association was up in arms”---
>>>
“Thanks for the comments on the Issa story. Actually, the publications mentioned in this story definitely are not up in arms regarding the Issa letter, and that's not what this story said. We reported that the GSM Association was up in arms because it was. (You can see a statement the GSMA released last Friday regarding this issue on their Web site.) We didn't say we were up in arms. We just said we had reported the Issa letter last week, and then the GSMA was up in arms regarding that information."<<<
JMHO- jim
Your list- (what do most of these folks have in common and who's the stooge ?)
1. Mike Hibberd, editor of Mobile Communications International,
2 Andrew Orlowski wrote:
3 The BBC commented:
4 Mayank Thakkar of gate2info
5 CNET
6 The UK Inquirer
7 Francis Till, writing in the National Business Review of New Zealand
8 Philip Redman, of Gartner Inc.
9 Jeff Kagan, of Kagan World Media :
10 James S. Granelli of the Los Angeles Times established the Qualcomm commection:
11 Richard Dineen, research director at analyst firm Ovum |
