I think this boils down to:
1) Does the US have a monopoly on smarts? NO
2) Does China have a cost advantage? YES (see how many goods designed by EU and US companies are manufactured there) - some of it is unfair (artificial exchange rate, poor working conditions)
3) In a non-saturated and buoyant market, does handset lifetime matter? NO - the expectation is you change to a new one rapidly
4) Is this sustainable? In a business sense - yes it will go on for sometime. In an environmental sense NO - all that churn on handsets is massively wasteful and polluting
5) Does it hurt when your nation is no longer certain that it is top dog? YES - the UK went through this process around 1920 and more so after 1950. Get over it - and don't resort to military means to try to reverse it
6) How do those outside China make some many out of this? By changing their assumptions to better fit the Chinese model, whilst trying not to descend into a lowest-common-denominator fight on pollution and human rights
You are absolutely right, and China has the advantage that they don't really support free trade by foreign companies in China and they have a large number of slaves to call on. Any arguments and the tanks roll out. In a true level playing field the Chines would struggle due to cultural differences that stifle independent thought, the west's only real strength. Over time however they would be able to follow Japan's example and equal the west.
I lived and worked in China for 4 years, and I can echo many comments here. The IC design capabilities within China have jumped tremendously over the past decade.
Companies like RDA are leading the way, but others will follow. There are countless startups and medium-sized companies fighting tooth-and-nail to get a foothold into many consumer markets. While most will ultimately fail (just like in the US or EU), it only takes a few to cause significant disruption in the industry.
Thank you very much for interesting interview.
AS of our priorities they seem to be clear - after the big Change and Hope fraud and incompetence.
1. We will very likely build at least ten more aircraft carriers - our presidential candidates must compete on who is more "patriotic" and supports our "defense" industry.
2. Creating even higher percentage of our population who believes in soon coming "Rapture" and in the cretenism "science" (pardon creationism) is very high priority in order to keep unemployed docile and brainwashed in the "low taxes" for rich
3. Mass transportation and high-speed trains and similar ideas will be cancelled and suppresed - this is "pure communism" apparently - we don't need any inrastructure investments
Well stated KB3001.
If you are going to compete or build a business, you must look at the following:
Profitability, Cash Flow and Survival in the Long and Short Term.
They know they are building for the future and started with Cheap poor quality and have grow.
They have a stellar example in Japan to go by.
Wow, such harsh words to use on a business related site. Let's face the facts, America grew to greatness as the educated and low cost labor leader. This has changed, like or nor not, as China has the larger workforce that is becoming highly educated. Add the labor costs far below that of Western Hemisphere nations (Mexico / Costa Rica / Brasil) and you can see that they will be dominating the work place if we don't change things here.
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight – as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.