China's record in handling (other people's) IP, and human rights isn't a "touchy subject". It is a matter of record, whether or not people like to hear of it. Attacking the sources of the information as being hypocrites, biases,jingoists... etc isn't a response, it's merely an ad hominem argument. To ignore China's past behavior if it's inconvenient or politically inconvenient is dangerous if you are going to put your money down on one of China's barrel heads. If you have no skin in the game, then you are free to choose the information you wish to see, and act accordingly. By the way, if you rely too heavily on SNL for interpretation and analysis of politics, you run the risk of being regarded as a comedian. Rick's post merely states that China's left a well-known trail of unsavory industrial actions (let's ignore for the moment it's activities in other venues) and expresses exasperation with the many companies that choose to increase the bottom line by lowering costs. Of course, that's not a bad way to increase profit, unless, as is evident to all, that supping with China demands a long spoon. Whose spoon is long enough?
Nice, controversial post, Rick. This speaks to hypocrisy,political biases, jingoism, off-shoring, IP and even racial stereotypes. China's views of IP, government and human rights is a touchy subject given the US economy and electronics business worldwide is so reliant now on money from China. The soap box these days is made of soggy cardboard. This SNL skit rolled it up pretty well http://www.nbc.com/saturday-night-live/video/china-cold-open/1178451/
Every company I have worked for in the last 15 years has either had technology stolen by China or been supplied defective parts by China. Motorola is perhaps the poster child of stupidity in these deals. It's hard to believe that major US companies keep ignoring this to get access to cheap labor and a large low margin consumer market. At least somebody in the government has noticed.
hey folks in US, you guys need to support Huawei's entry which will bring you super cheap telecom service the rest of world now enjoying.
In china, monthly mobile cost could be lower than $1 for a normal user now. (based on recent promotions)
so this is for your benefit as well, imagine no chinese shoes, a pair of nike could still cost $100.
While I can understannd the concerns around Huwaei's meteoric rise and allegations of IP thefts from Cisco, I think this letter by a number of US senators is simply a political stunt for electoral reasons. There are indeed serious questions related to intellectual property protection in China and others countries, fair trade, employment laws etc. but the way to deal with these is through concerted "international" efforts.
Huawei and ZTE are now winning 3G infrastructure business in India by agreeing to very strict security regulations and huge fines for security breaches -- and it is the U.S. and European companies that are complaining that these new security compliance regulations are too strict!
I hope that EE Times picks up on the story I just saw elsewhere about this. India has lifted its ban on imports of telecomm networking gear from Huawei, ZTE and Nokia Siemens Networks.
Apparently ZTE has agreed to hand over it's source code to India telecomm officials and has agreed to strict new security regulations, huge fines for security breaches, and also agreed to employ Indian engineers for the 3G build-out.
Rick - You are naive on this one. With this attitude add these companies to the long list of once strong now dead US firms. In an ideal world your are absolutely correct. Unfortunately, China and HuaWei do not participate in a fair and level playing world. The entire foundation of the company is tainted by outright IP theft. They receive tremendous government subsidies (as do most Chinese firms). Their goal is dominance an any cost; forget about profits or employees, etc... They will buy and steal thier way to success. Some oversight is needed. Thanks to these Senetors for standing up.
Anyone who would like a taste of what cooperation and aid to an industry in China can do has a simple assignment. Have a look at the production of apples in the US. Before, and after the Dept. of Agriculture assisted the Chinese in developing apple production. It's not a pretty picture. Competition, of course is a primary ingredient of capitalism. However, teaching your competitor to produce one of your products, using dirt-cheap labor and relative freedom from anything resembling quality controls is not. To add insult to injury, US taxpayers funded whole fiasco.
I supports Rick's points. China telecom has been buying many equipments from Cisco, why can not US companies buy from HuaWei? I know HuaWei very well, they have cruited many engineering talents and they work much harder than Western engineers. It is very often for them to work till late night to finish tough projects, so it is not surprising their products become more and more competative than Cisco's, they started to get international market shares from Asia, then African, then East europe, now it turns to fight with Cisco on its home - US. This is very natural thing, Prodcuts speak for themselves. Market protection is bad for both sides, actually China wants US's high tech products badly, but US does not want to export...
Perhaps I am paranoid, too. But I think it would be interesting to trace what donations certain Huawei competitors have made to these senators.
What an idiot you are. That is the most idiotic statement in your whole misguided rant.
They are the ones stealing. They are the ones cheating. They are the communists. They are the ones abusing human rights.
You're just and obvious lib.
My Mom the Radio Star Max MaxfieldPost a comment I've said it before and I'll say it again -- it's a funny old world when you come to think about it. Last Friday lunchtime, for example, I received an email from Tim Levell, the editor for ...
A Book For All Reasons Bernard Cole2 comments Robert Oshana's recent book "Software Engineering for Embedded Systems (Newnes/Elsevier)," written and edited with Mark Kraeling, is a 'book for all reasons.' At almost 1,200 pages, it ...