Do We Need To Support A Monopolistic Technology Like Cdma?

[metangp 1]

Hi Everybody,

I am a new member in this forum. I was a reliance post paid user but gave up some time back and have moved to GSM. I personally think that India should stop supporting monopolistic technology like CDMA. When a person buys a CDMA handset and service, he or she indirectly pays Qualcomm. Why support a monopoly and pay for patented techs when one can use GSM. I understand that GSM has its own limitations in terms of voice clarity and data speed but as a country we should not support anything that is monopolistic irrespective of that fact whether it is CDMA or I phone or apple may be. These are just my few cents. Would like to know what others think.

Regards

Kapil

[Honest 836]

^^^

You are correct my dear Kapil. Actually we should not support any monopolistic technology at all. Although the voice clarity in Cdma is much better then Gsm but their are many other con's under Cdma like we don't have much options for better handsets as they are widely available in Gsm.

Spending huge amount on costly handsets to be used with Cdma could be a big mistake now a days.

Regards.

[kshah 452]

Agreed we should not support monopolistic technologies.

[Sadikk 301]

There was huge war of patents between nokia and Qualcomm.

if cdma players wud have supported nokia to day we might have had good options in CDMA as well.

As i recall there was atleast 2 Symbian based handsets announced by Nokia and Samsung.

Nokias 6638 and samsungs brave.

when they got in full fledge in war qualcomm didnt allow nokia to launch it, and nokia didnt allow samsung to launch symbian based in CDMA.

Nokia 6638 Symbian based OS PICS attached.

[ravi_patent 28]

i deal with patents and i see both nokia and qualcomm behaving similarly.as a matter of fact qualcomm chrages more royalty in india than it does in china and anil ambani made a

futile effort in convincing qualcomm ceo in getting the same reduced.since profit is the motive of anybody who is in business ,it is the govt which should have stepped in but unfortunately the competion commission of india as well as the Act governing it have been only paper tigers.

we shd also keep in mind that Tata's cdma service is quite popular .and finally the Google phone uses a qualcomm chip.in contrsat the apple phone has been mostly a monopolistic affair.

the need of the hour in india is regulating businesses balancing corporate and consumer interests.

[kshah 452]

i deal with patents and i see both nokia and qualcomm behaving similarly.as a matter of fact qualcomm chrages more royalty in india than it does in china and anil ambani made a

futile effort in convincing qualcomm ceo in getting the same reduced.since profit is the motive of anybody who is in business ,it is the govt which should have stepped in but unfortunately the competion commission of india as well as the Act governing it have been only paper tigers.

we shd also keep in mind that Tata's cdma service is quite popular .and finally the Google phone uses a qualcomm chip.in contrsat the apple phone has been mostly a monopolistic affair.

the need of the hour in india is regulating businesses balancing corporate and consumer interests.

Happy to see reply from a person who knows about IPR.

Nokia and qualcomm both have many patents and they do sell and charge royalties. China they charge less because chinese government is interested in their own technology known as TD-SCDMA. Chinese government was lamost on verge of declaring it as the only approved technology but I think international pressure prevented them from doing so.

Chinese government has rejected Qualcomm petition for patent violation on TD-SCDMA out right and Qualcomm could not do any thing. They still sell technology to china at cheaper rate because they need chinese manufacturers.

India is poor cow, which can be milked by any one. Anil Ambani tried but he did not had that impact because we Indians are not persistent and we are affraid that what if they withdraw support? Contrary to our behavour, fact is EU and US need us more that we need them.

BTW apple uses Samsumg chip (most probably) and in GSM Qualcomm has many patents. But there they are not able to dectate terms because open standards of GSM. CDMA basic technology is patented. In GSM basic technology has no patents.

[mobsac 0]

with falling voice revenues and now Local VOIP guidelines coming in, the voice charges for mobile operators will fall further.In this environment it will be very difficult for CDMA players to continue maintaining their benchmark ARPUs while paying huge royalties to Qualcomm.

We are already seeing the effects of it with Reliance deciding to launch its GSM services all over India.

[ravi_patent 28]

talking abt google phone ,nokia was saying that one can decide between mature propreitary symbian platform and immature and free open source platform...read recently in economictimes online edition.

the only solution is to allow competion to survive and grow...

btw the biggest and horrible monopoly in india goes unquestioned ...in case if u didnt guess correctly...i was referring to Microsoft ..

[vmsanghrajka 0]

I have my different view on this.. I really, do not see it as supporting 'monopolistic regime' consumers know that CDMA has its associated cost to it like higher phone prices, but they tend to choose better technology over it.. Can we deprive our self of better technology just on an argument of being monopolistic..

And frankly, I dont even think Qualcomm is monopolistic in true sense coz then it would have dictated its terms which is not a case here.. Off course they charge royalty but that does not amount to being monopolistic.. They have developed CDMA technology since it was nascent, betted on it with huge sums they definitely deserve right to earn..

WCDMA aka 3G GSM by Qualcomm also charges royalty so are we gonna shun that and deprive ourself a better technology?