Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting

Technology Stocks | Qualcomm Moderated Thread - please read rules before posting

To: FUBHO who wrote (110804)	3/29/2012 7:23:07 PM
From: engineer	of 117477

oh, yea, so let's all write our congressmen about MORE spectrum.... However the LTE problem can be solved quickly and for less cost if they just rolled out SMALL cells. These are fully functional basestations which can do 50-100 Mbps in LTE on the PRESENT DAY frequency plans. Just do it wiht a cheaper core and small, cheaper cell sites. Put them on light poles and cable infrastructure. ( www.publicwireless.com). LTE from quite a few sources. so why NOT? (A radio and antenna to get to a new band takes about 2-3 years to build an Rf chipset to use, anotehr 2-3 years to get into a handset and in FCC compliance....so we may see real integrated LTE in year 2015-2016?? And this is for already monitized bands we know of TODAY. What about new bands we WANT to use and have no license to use? try 2020 or beyond. ) (So in the past 36-48 months we went from Ipads being introduced, to ipads totally clogging hte network. Growth rate (sales) is exponential and useage is exponential on top of that.....but hey, let's hold hte consumer hostage with blocking, limits, caps, etc while we prove our point on spectrum.....)

Share	Recommend \| Keep \| Reply \| Mark as Last Read \| Read Replies (1)

From: Bill Wolf	3/29/2012 7:51:14 PM
	of 117477

Google to Sell Tablets on Its Own This Year By AMIR EFRATI Google Inc., undaunted by a short-lived attempt to sell a smartphone on its own, is now pushing into Apple's iPad market. The Internet search company is planning to market and sell tablets directly to consumers through an online store, similar to rivals Apple and Amazon.com Inc., according to people familiar with the matter. The move is an effort to turn around sluggish sales of tablet computers powered by Google's Android software. Some of the online store's future tablets are expected to be co-branded with Google's name, said people familiar with the matter. Google won't make the devices and its existing partners such as Samsung Electronics Co. and ASUSTeK Computer Inc. will be responsible for the hardware. One Android tablet that may be sold in the online store is due to be released later this year by Taiwan-based Asus, said one of these people. Some details about the project remain unclear, including when Google plans to unveil the online store. Google is expected to release the next version of its Android software, called Jelly Bean, in the middle of this year, people familiar with the matter have said. A Google spokesman declined comment, as did an Asus spokeswoman. To boost the prospects of its new online store for tablets, Google has considered subsidizing the cost of future tablets in order to compete on pricing with Amazon's $199 Kindle Fire, said one person with knowledge of the effort. With Google's new online store, which will add a new revenue source, the company is showing it isn't discouraged by a brief attempt to sell smartphones directly to consumers in 2010. At the time, Google offered an Android-powered smartphone called Nexus One that was manufactured by HTC Corp. But the effort was discontinued after several months amid increased sales of other Android-powered smartphones. Write to Amir Efrati at amir.efrati@wsj.com Copyright 2012 Dow Jones & Company,

Share	Recommend \| Keep \| Reply \| Mark as Last Read

From: Bill Wolf	3/30/2012 8:34:42 AM
	of 117477

Google Heightens Rivalry With iPad By AMIR EFRATI Google Inc., undaunted by a short-lived attempt to market and sell smartphones on its own, is now trying the approach with tablet computers in a quest to capture market share from Apple Inc.'s iPad. The Internet search company will sell co-branded tablets directly to consumers through an online store like rivals Apple and Amazon.com Inc., according to people familiar with the matter. The move is an effort to turn around sluggish sales of tablet computers powered by Google's Android software. Google went this route with Android-powered smartphones in 2010 when it offered a device called the Nexus One made by HTC Corp. But the effort was scrapped after several months amid better sales of other Android-powered smartphones. Like the Nexus One, some future Android tablets are expected to be co-branded with Google's name, said people familiar with the matter. The company is expected to sell devices from a variety of manufacturers. Google won't make the devices and its existing partners such as Samsung Electronics Co. and AsusTeK Computer Inc. will be responsible for the hardware, these people said. One co-branded tablet that may be sold in the online store is due to be released later this year by Taiwan-based Asus, said one of these people. Details of the project remain unclear, including when Google plans to unveil the online store. Google is expected to release the next version of its Android software, called Jelly Bean, in the middle of this year, people familiar with the matter have said. Google will soon manufacture its own tablets, due to its pending $12.5 billion purchase of Motorola Mobility Holdings Inc., which has been approved in the U.S. and in Europe and is awaiting approval by Chinese authorities. People familiar with the Google's plans said Motorola tablets are expected to be offered in the online store. A Google spokesman declined to comment, as did an Asus spokeswoman. By selling tablets directly to consumers, Google is upping the ante against Apple, which debuted its market-leading iPad two years ago. Android-based tablets made by Samsung and others have been slow sellers by comparison. Last fall research firm Gartner estimated Apple would capture 73% of the tablet market versus 17% for Android. Google also faces competition from Amazon.com, which last year jumped into tablets with its $199 Kindle Fire, in a move to scoop up the less-expensive side of the market. Google is seeking to increase adoption of its Android software so that its search, maps and other services—which generate the vast majority of its mobile revenue through the sale of ads—become mainstays in the mobile-device world. While that revenue is small compared to PC-based ad sales, it's a fast-growing category for Google, and tablets can command better ad prices than smartphones. Google Chief Executive Larry Page said last fall the company was on pace to generate more than $2.5 billion in revenue from mobile devices, largely through selling online ads on smartphones. Google believes the current model for selling tablets is broken, said people familiar with its strategy. Google has watched as wireless carriers, who helped Android become the No. 1 mobile operating system for smartphones, have struggled to replicate that success with tablets. While some wireless industry executives said Google's Nexus One smartphone effort was a failure, Google Android chief Andy Rubin said previously that the company sold more than 100,000 of these phones in three months and "broke even" on its investment. Mr. Rubin said Google stopped the effort because other new Android-powered phones were on par with or better than the Nexus One. Google also couldn't figure out how to sell the Nexus One online on a global scale, he said, and its resources would be wasted in trying to line up wireless carriers in foreign countries to sell plans for the phone. This time, however, Google won't have to worry about pairing with wireless carriers because tablets are primarily used with WiFi connections in people's homes. To boost the prospects of its new online tablet store, Google was considering subsidizing the cost of future tablets in order to compete on pricing with Amazon's Kindle Fire, said one person with knowledge of the effort. In addition, Google will lend huge marketing support to the online tablet store, said people familiar with the effort. Since the Nexus One experiment, Google has honed its mass-marketing skills, spending heavily on TV ads and other marketing to promote services other than its Web-search engine. The first tablet running Android software optimized for tablets, Motorola's Xoom, went on sale in February 2011, nearly 11 months after the first iPad arrived. Motorola has said it sold about one million Xoom tablets in 2011, below its expectations. Several other Android-powered tablets, including two versions of Dell Inc.'s Streak tablets, have been discontinued. Other manufacturers have noted the disappointing results. "Honestly, we're not doing very well in the tablet market," Hankil Yoon, a product strategy executive for Samsung, said at the Mobile World Congress conference earlier this year. Physical stores will still remain an important sales channel for Google. Some U.S. retailers are anxious for an Apple rival to emerge in the market, said people familiar with the matter. Some retailers that sell iPads have chafed under Apple's rules that require stores to promote its products more prominently, these people said, and the retailers generate less revenue per sale of Apple products versus other electronic devices. Google has taken other steps to be a consumer electronics brand. The company is directly overseeing the manufacturing of a Google-branded music and video streaming device, to be used in people's homes, which it is expected to sell to consumers later this year, people familiar with the matter have said. It is unclear whether Google will offer the device as part of its new online store. Write to Amir Efrati at amir.efrati@wsj.com A version of this article appeared Mar. 30, 2012, on page B1 in some U.S. editions of The Wall Street Journal, with the headline: Google Heightens Rivalry With iPad. Copyright 2012 Dow Jones & Company,

Share	Recommend \| Keep \| Reply \| Mark as Last Read

From: Bill Wolf	3/30/2012 9:15:24 AM
	1 Recommendation of 117477

Verizon Pitches Mobile Video By ANTON TROIANOVSKI Verizon Communications Inc. Chief Executive Lowell C. McAdam said the company could have a wireless video service by year-end that lets pay-TV subscribers see some content on their mobile devices if regulators approve a proposed cable partnership. Mr. McAdam said an "integrated" service could be made available to customers of Verizon Wireless, Verizon's pay-TV service and its new cable-company partners. "We could have something out that would be the beginnings of an integrated offering in time for the holidays," he said. Verizon is seeking approvals from the Federal Communications Commission and the Department of Justice for $3.9 billion in deals to buy spectrum licenses from Comcast Corp., Time Warner Cable, Bright House Networks and Cox Communications Inc. The companies also reached agreements that would allow Verizon and the cable companies to sell each other's products. Critics have called the deals anti-competitive, charging that they signal a truce between longtime rivals. Serving up TV shows and movies on mobile devices—and getting paid for it—has been a long-held dream for the wireless industry. With the introduction of next-generation high-speed wireless networks and big-screen devices like Apple Inc.'s latest iPad, ubiquitous mobile video seems closer than ever. Some cable companies already allow subscribers to watch some TV channels at home on mobile devices, such as the iPad. But cable operators have negotiated fewer rights to offer such services outside of the home. Yet as more video content moves to mobile devices, Mr. McAdam sees consumers able to pick and choose what content they want to buy rather than paying for bundles of dozens of channels as they do in the TV universe. "Most content providers realize that the number of channels and the layout that you have within your home may not be appropriate for the mobile environment, and those discussions are just beginning now," Mr. McAdam said. Some content providers, he said, "have come to us and have said, 'We are willing to do an à la carte approach here.'" Mr. McAdam's comments reflect a debate about whether consumers should have more choice over the TV channels available from cable, phone and satellite operators. With the amount of cheap online video options increasing, and little growth in the traditional pay-TV industry, some media executives have acknowledged the need for letting consumers choose smaller packages of channels that would cost less. Still, many entertainment companies that own cable channels have resisted a move away from the bundled model. They fear that without the bundle, their content might not see as much demand from consumers. Mr. McAdam said on Thursday that he believes that in the mobile world "customers will eventually win out," adding that Verizon wasn't "the ones" pushing the existing bundles. Cost considerations could limit consumption of video on mobile devices. Buyers of the new iPad, which runs on new high-speed "LTE" networks being rolled out by Verizon and AT&T Inc., have found that watching just two hours of mobile video can run through $30 worth of wireless data. Mr. McAdam said that Verizon, like AT&T, is looking at ways to bill content providers for the data their offerings consume, thereby exempting them from counting against consumers' allotments of data. But he said he didn't view such arrangements as necessary for mobile video to be adopted more broadly, predicting that data prices would fall and consumers would become willing to pay more for wireless services. "On the wireless side, I think the bill will probably go up because people are going to be using it a lot more," Mr. McAdam said. —Shalini Ramachandran contributed to this article.

Share	Recommend \| Keep \| Reply \| Mark as Last Read \| Read Replies (2)

From: Maurice Winn

3/30/2012 11:33:57 AM

3 Recommendations of 117477

The captain goes down with the ship as a management and compensation principle. On executive compensation, tail risk, capturing the random upside while avoiding the probabilistic downside. aka stock options and bonuses for short term performance, with no clawback. The article is about the financial system, but the same things apply in corporate finances

Taleb: How to Prevent Other Financial Crises fooledbyrandomness.com Mqurice

Share	Recommend \| Keep \| Reply \| Mark as Last Read

From: Bill Wolf	3/30/2012 11:52:14 AM
	of 117477

Google's Android has generated just $550m since 2008, figures suggest Data provided in response to Oracle claim suggests Google gets more revenue from iPhone use than from Android ads and apps Huawei Ascend D mobile phone, which runs on the Android 4.0 operating system The Huawei Ascend D mobile phone, which runs on the Android 4.0 operating system. Photograph: Bloomberg via Getty Images Android generated less than $550m in revenues for Google between 2008 and the end of 2011, if figures provided by the search giant as part of a settlement offer with Oracle ahead of an expected patent and copyright infringement trial are an accurate guide. The figures also suggest that Apple devices such as the iPhone, which use products such as its Maps as well as Google Search in its Safari browser, generated more than four times as much revenue for Google as its own handsets in the same period. With roughly 200m Android devices having been activated to the end of 2011, including an estimated 90m during the past two years, it suggests that Google derives slightly more than $10 per Android handset per year. That compares to Google's $38bn total revenues in 2011, almost entirely derived from advertising on PCs, of which there are 1.25bn installed worldwide, according to Microsoft. That suggests an average revenue for Google of about $30 per PC per year, though not all will be capable of accessing the internet or will use Google, so the actual figure will be higher. Google has never released figures for revenues it derives from the use of Android handsets, where it makes the software available to handset makers for free and generates revenues from adverts and app sales. The company declined to comment on the Guardian's calculations, which it was shown ahead of publication. The figures emerge from a damages offer that Google made to Oracle as part of settlement talks ordered by Judge William Alsup in the case, in which Oracle is alleging that Android infringes patents and copyright that it owns on the Java programming language. It acquired that intellectual property when it bought Sun Microsystems, which owned Java, in 2010. The trial is due to start on 16 April. The suit began in 2010 with Oracle claiming that Android infringes a number of Sun patents and also infringes copyright in Java. The number of patents has been whittled down to just two. In a pre-trial settlement offer, Google proposed that it would pay Oracle a percentage of revenues from Android, suggesting it would pay $2.8m in damages on the two remaining patents that Oracle is asserting for the period to 2011, and then 0.5% of ongoing Android revenue on one patent which expires this December, and 0.015% on another which expires in April 2018. The court documents (PDF) do not explain how the Android revenue is calculated, but the key source would be advertising revenue. Google also gets a 30% cut from app sales to Android devices. Google said the damages figures matched what had been calculated by a court-appointed expert. The offer does not mean Google accepts that it has infringed the patents claimed by Oracle. The $2.8m offer, at a combined rate of 0.515%, suggests that Android's total revenue since the launch of the first handsets at the end of 2008 through to the end of 2011 was $543m. Patent payments relating to phones are generally made on a per-handset basis at a fixed licence fee for any phones that would be judged to infringe the relevant patents. The figures also suggest that Android could generate more than $1bn in advertising revenues this year. To achieve Android "certification" handset manufacturers have to include services such as Google search, maps, YouTube and other functions. Some companies, including Amazon, have declined to do this. Google has however talked up mobile generally as key to its future. Larry Page, Google's chief executive, said during an earnings call in October that Google was "seeing a huge positive revenue impact from mobile, which has grown 2.5 times in the last 12 months to a run rate of over $2.5bn." But while some people interpreted that to indicate Android revenue, it overlooked Google's deal with Apple, in place since the introduction of the iPhone in 2007, through which it provides maps and the default search engine for its iPhone, iPad and iPod Touch products, which run Apple's iOS software. Apple's chief executive Tim Cook said the company has sold 315m iOS devices, though nearly half of those have been sold in the past year. In turn, the comparison of total Android revenues from the court documents suggests that iOS has so far generated more revenue for Google than its own handset ecosystem. Oracle rejected Google's offer, saying the proposed damages were too low. The lawsuit began after Oracle bought Sun Microsystems for $7.3bn in 2010 and with it the rights to the Java programming language and its patents. Oracle has complained that Android in effect copies functions of Java without a valid licence. Oracle, a business software maker with $36bn in annual revenue, has said it is seeking hundreds of millions in damages – though it was forced to water down its earlier damages claims after pre-trial examinations led to a number of claimed patents on Java being invalidated. Google, which relies on its dominance of search and advertising for most of its $38bn in annual revenue, believes that even if it loses the case, it won't have to pay more than a few million dollars. A joint statement filed this week provided the latest reminder of the friction between the two companies. In the papers, Google argued that the trial could be shortened from its scheduled eight weeks and sought to appear before a US district judge instead of a jury. Oracle doesn't believe the trial schedule should be revised, nor is it willing to waive its right to a jury trial. Juries typically award larger damages and are seen as more likely to find in favour of the plaintiff in patent and copyright trials. • Article updated to include data about PC installed base and that Google has not released Android data before. Clarified that iOS does not use the Chrome browser. Sub-headline clarified to indicate that Android revenue does not come from handset sales. guardian.co.uk

Share	Recommend \| Keep \| Reply \| Mark as Last Read

From: Bill Wolf	3/30/2012 12:02:54 PM
	1 Recommendation of 117477

Apple May Give Up "Thermonuclear War" With Android URL: tomsguide.com By Kevin Parrish, published on March 30, 2012 at 11:00 AM Businessweek has a very long but interesting article about the patent wars between Apple and various manufacturers producing Android products. But towards the end, the paper proposes that Apple may be giving up on its "thermonuclear war" against Android, a war which the late Steve Jobs openly declared just before his death in October 2011. While speaking with his authorized biographer, Walter Isaacson, Jobs said that the litigation with component supplier Samsung was meant to communicate an unmistakable message to Google. "You f–king ripped off the iPhone, wholesale ripped us off. Grand theft," he reportedly said, adding that he would "spend my last dying breath" and "every [Apple] penny to right this wrong. I’m going to destroy Android, because it’s a stolen product. I’m willing to go to thermonuclear war on this." Five months later, current Apple CEO Tim Cook sees things a little differently. People close to the anti-Android crusade claim that top-level executives at both Apple and Samsung have communicated a desire to negotiate settlement options. They say Cook doesn't have the same vengeful passion to lay waste to all Apple foes. Yet litigation is a necessary evil, not a "vehicle of cosmic revenge." What may happen is that lawyers from both parties will be crammed into "a hallway of conference rooms" to bang out a series of comprehensive cross-licensing pacts. However these companies have shelled out more than $400 million to their lawyers over the last few years, so presently it's not clear what they will be getting for that money. Still, this process eventually resolved a similar litigation in the desktop computer field, Businessweek said. The feud between Apple and Google will never be over. While the two duke it out for consumer dollars on the smartphone and tablet front, they're also serving up competing networks loaded with multimedia like apps, movies, TV shows, books, music and more. Google seemingly has the upper hand thanks to the sheer amount of Android phones on the market, with sometimes sidekick Amazon by its side providing its own Android-based menu. Yet developers seem to prefer Apple's platform over Android due to a lack of hardware fragmentation. It's understandable but unfortunate for non-Apple consumers. Bloomberg's article actually starts on a comical note, opening with a scene that took place back in June 2011 during one of many Apple Vs. Samsung hearings. U.S. District Court judge Lucy Koh seemingly poked fun at the situation, noting that when they were last in court, both sides admitted that they had a business relationship of $8 million or $8 billion... she couldn't remember. "I think it was in excess of $7 billion," said Apple attorney Harold McElhinny. That's how much the iPad maker dishes out to Samsung -- the company it's presently suing -- for components. Their relationship is essentially symbiotic: Apple depends on Samsung to supply components for its insanely lucrative iPad and iPhone operations, whereas Apple is Samsung's biggest customer. Without each other, they could possibly grind to a halt. This is probably why Judge Koh seemingly thinks the whole dispute between the two is utterly ridiculous. "Seven billion," she mused. "Can we all just get along here? Can I send you out to ADR (alternative dispute resolution)? I will send you with boxes of chocolates. I mean, whatever." Nine months later, the two are still fighting. But perhaps there's finally an end to all the patent bickering in the near future as insiders suggest. Hey, if Sam and Dean Winchester can prevent Armageddon, then Apple and Samsung can surly prevent Steve Jobs' thermonuclear war against Android. Maybe they just need a trench coat-wearing angel to help them resolve their dispute.

Share	Recommend \| Keep \| Reply \| Mark as Last Read \| Read Replies (1)

Previous 10 | Next 10