TE
科技回声
首页24小时热榜最新最佳问答展示工作
GitHubTwitter
首页

科技回声

基于 Next.js 构建的科技新闻平台,提供全球科技新闻和讨论内容。

GitHubTwitter

首页

首页最新最佳问答展示工作

资源链接

HackerNews API原版 HackerNewsNext.js

© 2025 科技回声. 版权所有。

Field Notes: Highlights from Huawei

149 点作者 yblu将近 6 年前

18 条评论

obiefernandez将近 6 年前
The last paragraph was fascinating...<p>&gt; My family uses Apple’s phones; Apple’s ecology is very good. When family members travel abroad, I would gift them an Apple computer. One can’t narrow-mindedly believe that if you love Huawei then you must only use Huawei mobile phones.<p>&gt; At present, public sentiment about Huawei is being spun in one of two ways. The first spin is that if you are patriotic then you should buy Huawei. The other spin is that Huawei has hijacked the patriotic sentiment of the people. [But this is just spin] after all, my own child doesn’t love Huawei [product], my own child loves Apple [product].
评论 #20058957 未加载
评论 #20058143 未加载
ohiovr将近 6 年前
I enjoyed this read. There is pride but there is humility too. We are separated by language difficulty. The 996 movement and this is a reminder to me that we are not all that different. They did not start the trade war, and everyone in my state desired low price goods for decades before it was suddenly wrong to have a trade deficit.
评论 #20056054 未加载
评论 #20056243 未加载
jhanschoo将近 6 年前
I cannot help but read the CEO&#x27;s comments in a strategic manner, where more than anything explicitly mentioned, they communicate an immense desire or even need for the company to be able to intensively work with US companies again.<p>Almost every comment noted makes a point to praise US companies or portray Huawei as a desirable and capable but non-threatening partner.
评论 #20060218 未加载
评论 #20058278 未加载
freewizard将近 6 年前
What made me particularly sick is when asked about over time working problem (996[1]), Ren&#x27;s answer was: Huawei obeys the law and protect workers, but our workers have a calling, they won&#x27;t be successful without their calling. Foreign scientists work even harder than Chinese scientists, many foreign scientists don&#x27;t get married before 40s.<p>This is the finest propaganda I&#x27;ve seen recently, well matching the &quot;Our great Patriot Farmers&quot; tweet[2]<p>[1] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;996_working_hour_system" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;en.wikipedia.org&#x2F;wiki&#x2F;996_working_hour_system</a><p>[2] <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;realdonaldtrump&#x2F;status&#x2F;1128261066654408709" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;twitter.com&#x2F;realdonaldtrump&#x2F;status&#x2F;11282610666544087...</a>
评论 #20056388 未加载
评论 #20058958 未加载
评论 #20056842 未加载
oh_sigh将近 6 年前
&gt; The United States does not have the power to call on all other countries to close the door to Huawei.<p>Sure it does. The US has the sovereign right to decide who it wants to do business with, and the right to say &quot;if you do business with Huawei, we won&#x27;t do business with you&quot;, and leave it up to other countries to decide which route they would like to go.
评论 #20056448 未加载
onemoresoop将近 6 年前
I would like to hear what they have to say about patent infringements and allegations that Huawei stole Cisco technology and sold it 10x cheaper.
peaktechisnow将近 6 年前
&quot;...yet we are still very grateful to the American companies. They have made a lot of contributions to us.&quot;<p>And not always voluntarily :)<p>e.g. MacBook --&gt; MateBook
评论 #20056390 未加载
评论 #20058018 未加载
评论 #20056628 未加载
j_shi将近 6 年前
Seems by and large reasonable but notably doesn&#x27;t address the elephant in the room: potential their hardware has built-in backdoors for China government access. Should be simple enough to provide at least basic assurances (a la Apple)
评论 #20055988 未加载
评论 #20058909 未加载
mberger将近 6 年前
I would have liked to see a comment on the extradition of the CFO to the US.
评论 #20055675 未加载
评论 #20057792 未加载
评论 #20055631 未加载
narnianal将近 6 年前
I haven&#x27;t seen it in other comments so let me add that interpretation as well:<p>It is not just an expression of a participant in a trade war between his and another country. It is also an expression of a politician who wants to become a father figure for his people.<p>It is very very risky to even hint at something like this in such times. It is not impossible that we see Xi Jinping taking apart Huawei at some point to beat a possible internal competitor.<p>Think about the admirable spirit one must have to put ones life on the line. Wow. That&#x27;s more than Elon Musk or Ma Yun are doing.<p>And it also means he&#x27;s either going crazy (unlikely) or that he has a lot of backing from political forces that try to undermine the Xi government from within. Let&#x27;s hope he&#x27;s more Cao Cao than Yuan Shu.
pnathan将近 6 年前
I would love to read a full translation of these remarks - along with a color commentary regarding the cultural expectations of what a proper Chinese CEO is expected to say vis-a-vis what a proper American CEO is expected to say.
caddytodaddy将近 6 年前
I have a feeling the “spare tire” chips are chips they’ve been ripping off from Qualcomm et al, and now they have an excuse to make them. That would explain why he is framing it that they were just for a contingency, they never planned on using them.<p>They’ve done that many times in the past, but they’re too big to get away with it so easily now.
devoply将近 6 年前
I dunno how much of this is P&#x2F;R and how much is humility. If this was coming from a CEO of a Japanese company I would be much more likely to believe him. In the end it was his government&#x27;s power moves that have started all of this. He&#x27;s not at fault but his government sure is.
评论 #20056100 未加载
评论 #20056903 未加载
joel_liu将近 6 年前
<p><pre><code> Forced-IP-transfer is a double-edged sword </code></pre> This article is about Huawei and the trade war is the larger background. I had some entrepreneurship experience both in China and the States. &quot;Forced IP transfer policies&quot; is one of the core issues between the US and China. I&#x27;d like to share some thoughts about this issue from the perspectives of some entrepreneur friends in China. AFAICT, the real impact of the &quot;forced IP transfer&quot; is very complex. I didn&#x27;t see any media report about it, so I share it here.<p>The perspective from media: &quot;Forced IP transfer policies&quot; is very unfair because it helps Chinese companies to get an unfair advantage. It&#x27;s bad for foreign companies and good for Chinese economies.<p>The perspective from many entrepreneurs in China: &quot;Forced IP transfer policies&quot; is very unfair because it helps the foreign companies get an unfair advantage. It&#x27;s bad for Chinese private companies and economies.<p>Here is the explanation from the entrepreneurs&#x27; perspective:<p>1) The most &quot;forced IP transfer&quot; happened in the Chinese-foreign partnership companies.<p>2) However, the partnership is between state-owned companies and foreign companies.<p>3) Most of the state-owned companies are very inefficient. The system makes people lazy and corruptive.<p>4) The partnership companies did get some technologies, often the older technologies. However, they also get benefits from the state, very cheap land, subsidies, etc.<p>5)From the perspective of local entrepreneurs: Benefits from state + Foreign tech and brand makes the already-strong foreign companies even stronger. They get double advantages. It&#x27;s very hard to compete with them. To local entrepreneurs, the Chinese state-owned companies + Foreign companies partnership model kills many local private companies unfairly.<p>6) From the technologies side, the state-owned companies get some older technologies, but since the state-owned companies have their own issues like lazy, corruption. They didn&#x27;t get a tech edge in the competition. The transferred technologies outdated very fast.<p>One example is the Auto industry. Most auto brands from the US is very successful in China, for example, Buick is not very successful in the US, but the overall sales in China exceeded 10M! Ford is also very successful in China <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;thenewswheel.com&#x2F;ford-sales-in-china-surpass-1-million-vehicles-in-november&#x2F;" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;thenewswheel.com&#x2F;ford-sales-in-china-surpass-1-milli...</a><p>Did the &quot;transferred technologies make them less successful&quot;? It&#x27;s really hard to say.<p>There is some &quot;forced IP transfer&quot; in some sectors, but the impact to the overall economies may or may not positive because it makes the local private companies in a very disadvantaged position. It&#x27;s really a double-edged sword.
_iyig将近 6 年前
&gt;…on a Google and Huawei phone operating system:<p>&gt;Google and Huawei are discussing together how to implement a solution.<p>Curious what he means by this. Such cooperation may violate U.S. law.
wangii将近 6 年前
I&#x27;m annoyed by folks keep talking about Chinese govt. bans Google and Facebook whenever they see fit.<p>Let&#x27;s be clear: no, thanks but no! We&#x27;ve got 1 big brother and really not interested 2 more.
评论 #20057901 未加载
评论 #20058047 未加载
m3kw9将近 6 年前
I’m not sure if this spare tire is as potent as he is saying it is. His analog of nuclear weapons are his spare tires(home grown microchips). I’m not sure if it even makes sense given if they had it, they would save costs to use their own. On the other hand, if using their own chip means they can cause more security back doors, then that could be right, but it still doesn’t make sense.
ngcc_hk将近 6 年前
So far it is a bad PR from America. Imagine some Chinese said :<p>“Your world is mine, my China is mine.<p>I can protect my market and none of you can access unless I approve it. Many don’t. Google, movie, ... security you know. But thous should not. you should not use security argument.<p>Or legal ... Try to sue government in court ... we are now in USA court but thou should not.<p>We have law on paper all Chinese are our spy. You should not.<p>You should free trade and you should not use national security or tariff like us.<p>As your song said Imagine there is no country ... I would not buy you should.<p>...”<p>Can we just use one yardstick. And not just make China great again.<p>Btw have time read about hk extradition law.