Judge Immediately Bans Sale of Qualcomm W-CDMA Chips

clifto wrote:
> SMS wrote:
>> Yeah, sometimes the voice recognition works perfectly on my V325i,
>> sometimes I get so frustrated with it than when it says "Say a Command"
>> I respond with "you suck." What does work reliably is "digit dial" and
>> "redial." Sometimes when I say "name dial" it redials.
>
> Try just "name".

Yes, that's a good idea. That won't confuse it between name dial and
redial. I tried it and it works.

>> Sometimes when it
>> recognizes the name and there are multiple phone numbers and it says
>> "which number?" it doesn't recognize the answer and comes back with "no
>> match found."
>
> I have never gotten that. My V710 is even smart enough to recognize
"cell"
> to mean "mobile".

That didn't work on the V325i.


Yeah, though current handwriting recognition, such as what Microsoft has
in XP Tablet Edition, is excellent.

Steve

rlsusenet@NOSPAMPUHLEEZschnapp.org wrote:
> SMS wrote:
>
>> To me, the most glaring problem with the iPhone is that you can't
>> legally use it while driving in three states (NY, NJ, & CT), and
>> starting July 1, 2008 add CA and WA to the list. Many Asian and
>> European countries also don't allow its use while driving.
>
> Interesting.
>
> I would say that the overpriced and underpowered net connection (as
> compared to Sprint) was the most glaring problem with the iPhone. I
> _won_ an iPhone from a local TV station contest this year, and despite
> my long-time devotion to the Palm platform (I've carried a Palm-based
> device for 9 years), I would have kept that iPhone if I could have
> activated it on Sprint under EVDO. Instead, I sold it on eBay.

Certainly anyone that cared about the speed of the web experience would
not buy an iPhone, that's true. I think that many buyers either a) don't
understand what 3G is, b) didn't care because they were mainly using it
as a phone and iPod, c) didn't care because they were going to use it
mainly on WiFi, d) figured that it came from Apple it must be g-d's gift
to the wireless industry and as religious people they had to buy it, e)
didn't realize that they could get high speed data from Verizon or
Sprint, f) didn't want to pay for 3G speeds and were happy with the
lower price point for 2G,...

> As for hands-free usage, I'm not sure what you're talking about: The
> iPhone (like my Treo 700P) has Bluetooth support. Nearly all phones
> support hands-free usage compatible with the new laws -- via BT handsets
> and automotive hands-free systems. How is the iPhone any different?

There is no voice dialing. You can legally answer calls while driving,
but you can't legally make calls while driving (in places that require
hands free).

On Fri, 04 Jan 2008 02:23:15 -0800, SMS ???• ?
<scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote in
<477e0882$0$84241$742ec2ed@news.sonic.net>:

>"U.S. District Judge James Selna issued the ruling Monday, the latest in
>a series of legal victories Broadcom scored over Qualcomm last year
>related to rights to technology for cell phones. The three patented
>chips use WCDMA technology, a small but fast-growing part of the
>wireless market used mostly in American T-Mobile and AT&T phones.
>
>Selna ruled that Qualcomm can continue to sell other disputed chips in
>the United States until January 2009, but must pay royalties on those
>chips, which use a different technology called EVDO and are used on
>Verizon and Sprint networks in America. He also allowed Qualcomm to use
>a patented Broadcom walkie-talkie technology until January 2009."
>
>Broadcom and Qualcomm must be very far apart on settling. Reminds me of
>the whole RIM mess last year, but they settled eventually, as everyone
>predicted.

In fact the settlement was far outside of normal settlement territory,
and not what "everyone predicted".

>This whole patent dispute is one reason that W-CDMA didn't make it into
>the iPhone.

That last is even more patent nonsense. W-CDMA chips are readily
available from other sources. The primary real reasons is almost
certainly power consumption of the available chips.

--
Best regards, FAQ FOR CINGULAR WIRELESS:
John Navas <http://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Cingular_Wireless_FAQ>

Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
> clifto wrote:
>> Richard B. Gilbert wrote:
>>
>>>Speach recognition (voice command, voice dialing) is a great idea.
>>>Making it work, work reliably, and making it work for everyone, seems to
>>>be beyond the capabilties of some cell phone manufacturers! My Motorola
>>>RAZR V3m is supposed to accept voice commands and do voice dialing.
>>>Maybe it does for some people but it doesn't work for me. I can say
>>>"check status" twenty or thirty times before the phone finally
>>>recognizes it. In fact, the command "check status", when I say it,
>>>frequently results in my phone starting to dial my next door neighbor!!!
>>
>> Try speaking in a higher pitch.
>
> My vocal range is one note short of an octave! I don't have a whole lot
> of choice!

Mine isn't much greater after radiation treatment (successful) for throat
cancer. But often when the phone can't understand me, I can raise pitch
enough to make a big difference.

--
"I am for socialism, disarmament and ultimately for abolishing the state
itself as an instrument of violence and compulsion. I seek social ownership of
property, the abolition of the propertied class, and sole control by those who
produce wealth. Communism is the goal." -- Roger Baldwin, founder, ACLU