Blog
Comment
maxjoe
haha everyone knows that. Just that you are first one to put it in words :)
jaybus
The worst case scenario is that someone feels so left out by Google's ...
Yoshida in China: Beijing's misguided Android worry
Junko Yoshida
3/6/2013 2:01 PM EST
Japan's TRON project
Led by University of Tokyo Professor Ken Sakamura in mid 1980’s, supported by the Japanese government, and embraced by practically all of the key players in the Japanese electronics industry, Japan, in a project called TRON, succeeded in developing its own indigenous open real-time operating system kernel. Subsequently, an Industrial TRON (iTRON) derivative was born, becoming one of the most successful operating systems in embedded systems such as cellphones, appliances and sometimes even in cars in Japan.
Japan’s goal then was clear. A nation needs its own operating system to create and control an ideal computer architecture and network.
While I admit that I’m amazed at the success of iTRON, I think that China should pay attention to what happened next in Japan.
Japan developed TRON to stem the onslaught of technologies coming from the United States. But iTRON never penetrated the global market, and no Japanese company saw significant gains by sticking their guns to iTRON. And iTron ended up getting used only in products made by Japanese companies for the Japanese market.
The hard lesson for Japan was that “containment” is a strategy that might work in geopolitics, but it rarely applies to technology and business fields. Advancements in technology and discoveries in science happen regardless of national borders.
Japan’s pursuit of proprietary technologies only helped Japanese electronics companies to delay their embrace of operating systems developed abroad (Windows, Symbian, Linux included) and associated software applications. It also held back Japanese product development for the overseas market – especially now in the burgeoning smartphone market.
China could argue that the sheer size of its domestic market will alter that picture.
They might say that it’s not the Chinese who will suffer, but overseas vendors coming to China who will be forced to license proprietary technologies from China.
We’ve all heard that argument before.
But again, name a Chinese technology that proves the Chinese technocrats’ argument. Ostensibly, TD-SCDMA, China’s alternative to W-CDMA, is a possible example. Perhaps. But in the end, even China Mobile, the only Chinese cellular network operator who embraced TD-SCDMA, ended up requiring their next-generation LTE handsets to be compatible with not just TD-LTE, but practically all flavors of global wireless standards.
In today’s well-connected global world, neither one country nor a single proprietary technology gets to be king of the world.
Related stories:
Led by University of Tokyo Professor Ken Sakamura in mid 1980’s, supported by the Japanese government, and embraced by practically all of the key players in the Japanese electronics industry, Japan, in a project called TRON, succeeded in developing its own indigenous open real-time operating system kernel. Subsequently, an Industrial TRON (iTRON) derivative was born, becoming one of the most successful operating systems in embedded systems such as cellphones, appliances and sometimes even in cars in Japan.
Japan’s goal then was clear. A nation needs its own operating system to create and control an ideal computer architecture and network.
While I admit that I’m amazed at the success of iTRON, I think that China should pay attention to what happened next in Japan.
Japan developed TRON to stem the onslaught of technologies coming from the United States. But iTRON never penetrated the global market, and no Japanese company saw significant gains by sticking their guns to iTRON. And iTron ended up getting used only in products made by Japanese companies for the Japanese market.
The hard lesson for Japan was that “containment” is a strategy that might work in geopolitics, but it rarely applies to technology and business fields. Advancements in technology and discoveries in science happen regardless of national borders.
Japan’s pursuit of proprietary technologies only helped Japanese electronics companies to delay their embrace of operating systems developed abroad (Windows, Symbian, Linux included) and associated software applications. It also held back Japanese product development for the overseas market – especially now in the burgeoning smartphone market.
China could argue that the sheer size of its domestic market will alter that picture.
They might say that it’s not the Chinese who will suffer, but overseas vendors coming to China who will be forced to license proprietary technologies from China.
We’ve all heard that argument before.
But again, name a Chinese technology that proves the Chinese technocrats’ argument. Ostensibly, TD-SCDMA, China’s alternative to W-CDMA, is a possible example. Perhaps. But in the end, even China Mobile, the only Chinese cellular network operator who embraced TD-SCDMA, ended up requiring their next-generation LTE handsets to be compatible with not just TD-LTE, but practically all flavors of global wireless standards.
In today’s well-connected global world, neither one country nor a single proprietary technology gets to be king of the world.
Related stories:
|
|
|
|
|
Navigate to related information
Bert22306
3/6/2013 5:02 PM EST
I think the modern-day model that works best is the one where any company or university interested in being at the leading edge of technology invest in participation in international forums. Because I agree that attemtping to wall off outside "influences" can only result in falling behind in your domestic industry.
There are simply too many smart people all over the world. Cannot be helpful to ignore all the ones outside one's own borders.
Sign in to Reply
sprite0022
3/6/2013 7:40 PM EST
china should have been more critical with MS windows.
it's a monopoly and overcharging the poor chinese folks.
the reason why it's omitted maybe because they can make free copy of it.
Sign in to Reply
Bert22306
3/6/2013 8:52 PM EST
What's wrong with Linux? No need to justify illegal copying.
Sign in to Reply
sprite0022
3/6/2013 9:52 PM EST
linux 's GUI isn't quite mature yet.
I tried it and just don't want to waste time to get used to it.
android camp need to improve on multitasking etc. then we can forget MS.
Sign in to Reply
DMcCunney
3/7/2013 12:39 PM EST
*Which* GUI? There are a number of them, and which default you get will depend on the distro you run.
I run Ubuntu, which defaults to a new interface they designed called Unity. I wasn't thrilled by it, and because it's Linux, I had alternatives. I prefer XFCe4, but Gnome, KDE, Enlightenment and a number of others exists and can be used.
Sign in to Reply
eewiz
3/6/2013 10:48 PM EST
"While the Android system is open-source, the core technology and technology roadmap is strictly controlled by Google,"
Since Android is opensource, Anyone can create their own roadmap.. like Amazon did. So whats the problem with too much dependency?
Sign in to Reply
kjdsfkjdshfkdshfvc
3/7/2013 3:46 AM EST
isn't this why MIUI was created?
Sign in to Reply
KRS03
3/7/2013 2:25 PM EST
iOS clone based on J.B. Android. For home market just lock it to an old Android version.
Sign in to Reply
Zy
3/7/2013 7:47 PM EST
What is wrong in the iTRON case? Is it because they do not take the route of open sourcing like Android?
Sign in to Reply
chanj
3/7/2013 11:46 PM EST
It is very difficult to believe dependency on Android is a bad move. Relying on Google's support to build a device might be.
The computer industry has become more open for years. Embracing open source is widely adopted. What Chinese's firms have to do is to be able to make their own device w/o any help from Google. In addition, they shall focus on developing apps. If they don't like Android, there is Ubuntu (generally speaking, Linux) to choose from. If GUI wasn't ready, put their hand on it to make it attractive. Really! In today's world, if OS is widely available from source code level, why spending extra effort to re-invent an OS? Efficiency is very important.
Sign in to Reply
jaybus
3/8/2013 6:46 AM EST
The worst case scenario is that someone feels so left out by Google's development that Android is forked. Not that big of a deal. It is just the typical government agency doing what they do best....drawing more attention (and funding) to themselves.
Sign in to Reply
maxjoe
3/8/2013 12:49 PM EST
haha everyone knows that. Just that you are first one to put it in words :)
Sign in to Reply