I hope the US and Europe can advance 5G so that it does not need to rely on Huawei. If there are true security threats, it's fine to not use Huawei, but we shouldn't use excessive export bans that damage American chip manufacturers and normal consumers who are just using their cell phones.
Hobbling Huawei: Inside the U.S. war on China’s tech giant
11–20 of 108 posts
Re: Hobbling Huawei: Inside the U.S. war on China’s tech giant
#12"The chance of a vulnerability with a Huawei piece of kit is much higher than other vendors,"
Is this British slang or a typo ?
Re: Hobbling Huawei: Inside the U.S. war on China’s tech giant
#13For me, the key quote: The United States and its allies were derelict in not developing a 5G supplier, former Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said in a speech in London in March. “With the benefit of hindsight it beggars belief that the countries which pioneered wireless technology – the United States, the UK, Germany, Japan and with wifi, Australia have got to the point where none of them are able to pres…
I think there was substantial skepticism among those nations and those companies that anybody was going to beat them to the punch, specifically that China would present such a credible offering. China went from barely having any tech in 1999, to showing up for the race by 2009, to competing to lead in 5G by 2019. If you asked Intel, Cisco, Qualcomm, or the European suppliers, about that in 2005 or 2010, they would have never believed it. Simply put, I think they all believed they could take their time and that the market was theirs (resting on one's laurels). They underestimated China's determination. We'll see if they keep making that mistake.
Re: Hobbling Huawei: Inside the U.S. war on China’s tech giant
#14"The chance of a vulnerability with a Huawei piece of kit is much higher than other vendors," Is this British slang or a typo ?
? not sure what you mean is it the use of "kit"?
Re: Hobbling Huawei: Inside the U.S. war on China’s tech giant
#15For me, the key quote: The United States and its allies were derelict in not developing a 5G supplier, former Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said in a speech in London in March. “With the benefit of hindsight it beggars belief that the countries which pioneered wireless technology – the United States, the UK, Germany, Japan and with wifi, Australia have got to the point where none of them are able to pres…
The US doesn't have large domain players in the telecom space that supply the broad spectrum of equipment that runs what is known as the 4G EPC[1] or 5G Core[2] (data & packet processing) and RAN[3] (radio access network).
Qualcomm and Intel focus and specialize on chips. Cisco focuses on layer 2, layer 3 and partially layer 7 equipment (think: routers & switches). Cisco has some products that compete against Huawei to a certain extent, alongside a wider product suite by Ericsson and Nokia, but all three vendors are more expensive than Huawei.
From the article:
"But the options are limited. Huawei is one of only three major global companies that analysts say can supply a broad range of advanced mobile network equipment at scale. The other two are Ericsson and Nokia. And Huawei has a reputation among telecom operators for supplying cost-effective equipment promptly."
As per the article, Huwaei is flat out cheaper. On top of this, they provide good-enough products (sometimes better, sometimes not) across performance, feature, stability and scale dimensions. The telecom vendor game is often one of references and precedent, especially when dealing with large telecom groups operating in multiple countries (think: Orange Group, Deutsche Telekom Group, Telefonica Group, Vodafone Group, etc.).
[1] https://www.3gpp.org/technologies/keywords-acronyms/100-the-...
[2] https://www.ericsson.com/en/blog/2018/5/core-network-evoluti...
Re: Hobbling Huawei: Inside the U.S. war on China’s tech giant
#16"The chance of a vulnerability with a Huawei piece of kit is much higher than other vendors," Is this British slang or a typo ?
Piece of kit is a british idiom, yes if that's what you mean.
Re: Hobbling Huawei: Inside the U.S. war on China’s tech giant
#17For me, the key quote: The United States and its allies were derelict in not developing a 5G supplier, former Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said in a speech in London in March. “With the benefit of hindsight it beggars belief that the countries which pioneered wireless technology – the United States, the UK, Germany, Japan and with wifi, Australia have got to the point where none of them are able to pres…
This goes back to Carly Fiorina gutting Lucent (Western Electric and Bell Labs) before she gutted HP. Quite a career to set up the decline of two of the most iconic US tech companies.
Re: Hobbling Huawei: Inside the U.S. war on China’s tech giant
#18For me, the key quote: The United States and its allies were derelict in not developing a 5G supplier, former Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said in a speech in London in March. “With the benefit of hindsight it beggars belief that the countries which pioneered wireless technology – the United States, the UK, Germany, Japan and with wifi, Australia have got to the point where none of them are able to pres…
Qualcomm, Cisco and Intel left the base station business a long time ago or were never in it. Samsung, Ericsson, Nokia all have 5G equipment, some of it semi-widely deployed already. None of the countries he mentioned had any 4G business to speak of either.
Re: Hobbling Huawei: Inside the U.S. war on China’s tech giant
#19For me, the key quote: The United States and its allies were derelict in not developing a 5G supplier, former Australian Prime Minister Malcolm Turnbull said in a speech in London in March. “With the benefit of hindsight it beggars belief that the countries which pioneered wireless technology – the United States, the UK, Germany, Japan and with wifi, Australia have got to the point where none of them are able to pres…
The US doesn't have large domain players in the telecom space that supply the broad spectrum of equipment that runs what is known as the 4G EPC[1] or 5G Core[2] (data & packet processing) and RAN[3] (radio access network). Qualcomm and Intel focus and specialize on chips. Cisco focuses on layer 2, layer 3 and partially layer 7 equipment (think: routers & switches). Cisco has some products that compete against Huawei…
Wonder if someone could elaborate on the hardware or what makes cell network hardware unique? Isn't it all just chips, boards, and cables?
Re: Hobbling Huawei: Inside the U.S. war on China’s tech giant
#20Hypocrisy and arrogance at its finest - its ok for us to engage in illegal spying but not other countries. US leads the world in illegal activities and spying/stealing from foreign nations.
> US leads the world in illegal activities and spying/stealing from foreign nations.
That's one of those empty, non-falsifiable statements that don't do anything to further a discussion. Spying and illegal activities are by definition supposed to be secret.
But it also doesn't matter. Because...
> Hypocrisy and arrogance at its finest
... as a matter of general principle: it's in the best interest of a country to know what other countries are doing and to protect its own assets. There is no contradiction in doing both at the same time.
If a country suspects that one of the cornerstones of its communication infrastructure is at risk of being infiltrated by a foreign power, it makes sense to take steps to avoid that.
I'll leave it to others to judge whether or not that principle applies to the Huawei case.