Huawei files to trademark mobile OS around the world after US ban


Huawei files to trademark mobile OS around the world after US ban

LIMA/SHANGHAI: China’s Huawei has applied to trademark its “Hongmeng” operating system (OS) in at least nine countries and Europe, data from a U.N. body shows, in a sign it may be deploying a back-up plan in key markets as U.S. sanctions threaten its business model.

The move comes after the Trump administration put Huawei on a blacklist last month that barred it from doing business with U.S. tech companies such as Alphabet Inc, whose Android OS is used in Huawei’s phones.

Since then, Huawei – the world’s biggest maker of telecoms network gear – has filed for a Hongmeng trademark in countries such as Cambodia, Canada, South Korea and New Zealand, data from the U.N. World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) shows.

It also filed an application in Peru on May 27, according to the country’s anti-trust agency Indecopi.

Huawei has a back-up OS in case it is cut off from U.S.-made software, Richard Yu, CEO of the firm’s consumer division, told German newspaper Die Welt in an interview earlier this year.

The firm, also the world’s second-largest maker of smartphones, has not yet revealed details about its OS. Advertisement

Its applications to trademark the OS show Huawei wants to use “Hongmeng” for gadgets ranging from smartphones, portable computers to robots and car televisions.

At home, Huawei applied for a Hongmeng trademark in August last year and received a nod last month, according to a filing on China’s intellectual property administration’s website.

Huawei declined to comment.

CONSUMER CONCERNS

According to WIPO data, the earliest Huawei applications to trademark the Hongmeng OS outside China were made on May 14 to the European Union Intellectual Property Office and South Korea, or right after the United States flagged it would stick Huawei on an export blacklist.

Huawei has come under mounting scrutiny for over a year, led by U.S. allegations that “back doors” in its routers, switches and other gear could allow China to spy on U.S. communications.

The company has denied its products pose a security threat.

However, consumers have been spooked by how matters have escalated, with many looking to offload their devices on worries they would be cut off from Android updates in the wake of the U.S. blacklist.

Huawei’s hopes to become the world’s top selling smartphone maker in the fourth quarter this year have now been delayed, a senior Huawei executive said this week.

Peru’s Indecopi has said it needs more information from Huawei before it can register a trademark for Hongmeng in the country, where there are some 5.5 million Huawei phone users.

The agency did not give details on the documents it had sought, but said Huawei had up to nine months to respond.

Huawei representatives in Peru declined to provide immediate comment, while the Chinese embassy in Lima did not respond to requests for comment.

(Reporting by Marco Aquino in Lima and Brenda Goh in Shanghai, Additional Reporting by Sijia Jiang in Hong Kong; Shanghai Newsroom and Mitra Taj in Lima, Editing by Himani Sarkar)

Source: Reuters

Related posts:

Huawei’s Hongmeng will be 60% Faster than Android Huawei OS: A secret OS history, development and future https://youtu.be/i3kl4.

..

https://youtu.be/VaREP75PlSA https://youtu.be/YWdNP2u7voo Global financial markets are facing a stark wake-up call that they need t…
Advertisements

Huawei developed own operating system Hongmeng OS; 5G商用 中国准备好了! China roll-out affordable 5G


https://youtu.be/uHlrc7kWh-w

Huawei OS ‘Hongmeng’ could be known as ‘ARK OS’ globally

US vs Huawei: This is How the US Economy Crashes

Huawei CEO Ren Zhengfei remains positive, despite U.S. sanctions

这是特朗普面对中国犯的最大错误

5G商用 中国准备好了! 20190605 | CCTV中文国际

 

Chinese consumers expected to use affordable 5G phones next year

 

After 5G commercial licenses have been officially issued, how long will Chinese people have to wait before they can use 5G smartphones?

The official issuance of the licenses shows that China — the world’s largest mobile phone market — has entered the 5G era. Industry analysts predict that Chinese consumers will be able to use 5G smartphones at prices ranging from 2,000 yuan ($290) to 3,000 yuan next year.

“Some 5G smartphone products will be released this year, but will be quite expensive, over 10,000 yuan,” Xiang Ligang, director-general of the Bei-jing-based Information Consumption Alliance, told the Global Times on Thursday. Consumers can buy 5G phones at affordable prices in a year, he noted.

Major regions such as Beijing, Shanghai and South China’s Guangdong will be the first places covered by 5G networks. Based on previous in-formation unveiled by the three carriers, smartphone users will have access to 5G high-speed internet and voice services without having to change SIM cards.

China’s telecoms industry regulator officially re-leased the first four 5G business licenses to Chi-na Mobile, China Union, China Telecom and Chi-na Broadcast Network on Thursday, helping the country get into the fast lane in commercializing the next generation of wireless technologies.

China released licenses a year earlier than scheduled to boost the economy while strengthening the overall telecoms sector in light of the US-led crackdown on Chinese telecoms vendors, Xiang noted.

“It will also help boost the sluggish smartphone market,” he said.

Chinese smartphone makers such as OPPO and vivo have shown confidence by releasing the first batch of 5G phones as soon as possible, and will adjust shipments in line with demand, media re-ported on Thursday.

– Global Times

 

Related posts:

 

Huawei could end up challenging Google

TV debate exposes US bias against China on trade and intellectual property


A screen shot of Liu Xin of China Global Television Network appearing on Trish Regan’s show on Fox Business Network on Thursday Beijing time Photo: IC

China won’t accept unequal trade deal

FOX Business’ Trish Regan talks with CGTN’s Liu Xin on trade and intellectual property

A heated online feud between two high-profile news anchors from China and the US ended on Thursday morning in a seemingly friendly manner, but also laid bare the prejudice of some US elites against China.

The highly anticipated debate between Liu Xin of China Global Television Network (CGTN) and Trish Regan of the Fox Business Network, hailed as a first of its kind, also underscored the urgent need for the two countries to conduct better engagement as the trade and technology war has escalated to dangerous levels, Chinese analysts noted Thursday.

After days of hype, Liu appeared on Regan’s primetime show Thursday morning Beijing time, where the two anchors went head-to-head over a wide range of issues, from the ongoing trade war to China’s economic system.

Many in China praised Liu’s performance for pushing back Regan’s questions with clearly biased connotations, despite Liu being at a disadvantage because it was the US anchor’s turf and she was in control of the conversation.

“Liu was very calm and showed great demeanor; in contrast, [Regan] appeared to be fanning the flames, instigating war and judging from an established angle,” one Sina Weibo user wrote.

Clear prejudice

Despite her apparent attempt to appear fair and friendly with occasional smiles, Regan’s prejudice was palpable throughout the showdown lasting around 16 minutes.

She started off the conversation by introducing Liu as a member of the Community Party of China (CPC) and painted Liu as a spokesperson of the CPC, drawing an immediate rebuke from Liu, who said she was not a CPC member.

“Please don’t assume,” Liu said. “I’m here today, only speaking for myself as Liu Xin, a journalist working for CGTN.”

“Right off the bat, [Regan] put a huge label on Liu, saying Liu was representing the CPC… so the American was obviously biased,” another Sina Weibo user wrote. Some online even pointed out that there were about 88 million CPC members and 1.4 billion people in China. “How hard can it be to understand that?” one wrote.

After mumbling about unsupported claims that China steals US technologies, Regan dropped another ideologically biased question, while appearing to be asking about China’s economic system: “How do you define state capitalism?”

As she did throughout the show, Liu responded with sound arguments, educating the US anchor about China’s socialist economy with Chinese characteristics, where market forces play an increasingly bigger role and the private sector is a major force in the economy.

“Such prejudice [against China] has long existed in the US,” said Liang Haiming, dean of Hainan University’s Belt and Road Research Institute, who also focuses on China-US trade relations. “This will not change from one exchange like this.”


Better dialogue

However, Regan, who had fiercely defended the trade war the US government has initiated against China without concrete proof, did show a much softer tone and even appeared to be backing down from some of her earlier comments.

The showdown on Thursday appeared to be friendlier than their earlier fiery exchanges online, drawing praise from some Chinese and even Chinese officials.

Reacting to the debate, Lu Kang, spokesperson for China’s Foreign Ministry, said that he was happy to see “rational, open and frank” dialogue between Chinese and US people in different areas.

At a time when tensions between the two economic powers are running high, the two countries need more effective dialogue rather than constant finger-pointing and the debate might have set a great example for that, analysts said.

“This is like in 1971, when the US ping-pong team was invited to China. No one remembers who won the matches, but people remember only that the US team went to China,” Feng Da Hsuan, chief adviser of the China Silk Road iValley Research Institute and former vice president for research at the University of Texas at Dallas, told the Global Times, referring to a ping-ping match that has been widely credited as the start of China-US diplomatic relations in the early 1970s.

Anchors’ debate trumps China-US tensions

The debate between Fox Business’ Trish Regan and China Global Television Network (CGTN)’s Liu Xin began around 8:30 on Thursday (Beijing time) and lasted only 16 minutes, much shorter than people had expected. The debate went more like an interview where Regan kept throwing questions and Liu responded.

Before the debate started, other topics and an advertisement were broadcast, including a long talk by Venezuelan opposition leader Juan Guaido. After the event, Michael Pillsbury from Washington DC-based Hudson Institute, who is known for his anti-China stance, appeared to make his comments.

The international community has shown interest in the debate mainly because of the conflict between China and the US, which has gone far beyond being a squabble to do with trade. There is increasingly intense exchange of opinions but both sides barely conceded to each other’s stance.

A straight-out face-to-face talk between the two anchors would have been generally welcomed, although there are some people who just wanted to be bystanders.

Anyway, the debate has made headlines. This shows that there was too little effective communication between Beijing and Washington. The US is a country where the press is largely free but their reports about the trade war and China have been colored with views of the US political elite. The voice that reflects China’s views can hardly spread in the US. American media outlets would censor China’s voices to fit the agenda set by the US administration, thus rendering the message going across almost ineffectual.

There were no big flaws in the anchors’ performance in the debate. Regan was aggressive while talking about China in an earlier broadcast, but this time she was restrained – more like an anchor. In the meantime, Liu was humble and candid. The whole dialogue was cordial.

What they talked about was not surprising – the possibility of zero tariffs between China and the US, disputes about intellectual property, and whether China is a developing or developed country. When the debate began, Regan introduced Liu as a member of the Communist Party of China (CPC), but Liu corrected Regan by saying that she was not, “Please don’t assume that I’m a member. And I don’t speak for the CPC. Here, today, I’m only speaking for myself as Liu Xin, a journalist working for CGTN.”

This has demonstrated that Regan, as well as many other US media staff, don’t understand how the Chinese system led by the CPC works. They have taken many things for granted. Such misunderstanding colors US public opinion about China.

Apparently, the brief dialogue came short on being thorough. It was far from meeting people’s expectation. But it was still regarded as conducive. It is better to make such efforts rather than desisting from trying to have effective communication between China and the US.

We hope the debate could remind people of the importance of China-US talks and help the two countries get rid of political shackles and utilitarianism in consultations and strive to break the estrangement.

Have the anchors set a good example? It depends on what happens in the future. We hope people can say “yes” when they look back someday.

By Shan Renping – a commentator with the Global Times. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn
Newspaper headline: Anchors’ debate trumps China-US tensions

Source link
Read more:  

Huawei row mirrors pernicious American traits

Clear-headed Americans will understand: the mirror shows a different America from the one they take pride i

 

Related posts:

 

https://youtu.be/nzhZGUfaZhI China-U.S. trade tensions | Mideast tensions take turn for worse    https://youtu.be/eQbQbvGBDaM..

https://youtu.be/oiGm2E8BaC4 Martin Jacques Martin Jacques (2012) Born 1945 (age 73–74) Coventry , England, Great Britain, U..

华为不惧美国封杀 美式霸凌失道寡助!Huawei’s goodwill gesture being treated unscrupulously by the US !

 

Pride and prejudice


THE United States ranks low in the credibility stakes. It can no longer wax lyrical about free trade and fair play because the world now knows that when it finds itself facing stiff competition, it uses a ruling the magnitude of a nuclear bomb to retaliate.

Firstly, US president Donald Trump declared a national emergency and barred American companies from doing business with companies deemed a national security risk.

Then, companies like Google and Microsoft stopped making software and services available to Huawei, China’s biggest smartphone vendor.

The ban essentially means that future Huawei phones will no longer get Google play apps, YouTube, and almost certainly no updates to Android Q or other platform-level upgrades since these would require Google’s sign-off, too.

Sure, you can still make calls or use WeChat and other Chinese platforms, but for users in most parts of the world, the phone is pretty much useless.

Word is that Huawei poses a security risk, but no clarification has been forthcoming to what these threats include exactly.

There is a sense of déjà vu here.

The world was once told by the US and its allies that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction, but we learnt in the end there were none. Now, we have the Iran threat, but that’s another story all together.

From what little info has trickled into the worldwide web, the suggestion is that Chinese-manufactured devices have hidden back doors that could potentially allow an attacker to gain special access.

It sounds like a script excerpt from a James Bond movie, with spooks using a master password to break into high security facilities.

But incredibly, Huawei and ZTE Corp, another telecommunications equipment manufacturer, were cleared by the US House of Representatives permanent select committee on intelligence.

The two had been accused of providing “incomplete, contradictory and evasive responses to the committee’s core concerns” during their year-long investigation on the threat they supposedly pose to American interests.

In the end, the committee found no concrete evidence of infringement. But that didn’t stop the two companies from being labelled a national security risk and getting kicked out of the US.

IS, the German internet security watchdog, inspected Huawei laboratories in Germany and found no evidence of espionage, and The New York Times quoted American officials saying that the case against the company had “no smoking gun – just a heightened concern about the firm’s rising technological dominance”.

Rightly or wrongly, in the game of perception, the US has lost its moral ground. Thanks, in many ways, to an impulsive president.

Most of the world’s population thinks the bullying of Huawei is simply Trump’s hallmark. It isn’t about a security risk, but an economic threat.

Outside China, Huawei is arguably the most successful Chinese consumer brand so far. Thanks to a good and relatively cheaper product, it is now the second largest phone vendor in the world.

One strong accusation levelled at Huawei is that it enjoys Chinese government backing, and that China uses its spies to steal US technology for these private companies.

It’s a really warped perspective because, using the same logic, why is the US president taking such a hard line against a private company that’s merely selling phones?

The answer could well lie in the technology race.

Now, it’s about who launches 5G first, the next generation of mobile broadband imminently replacing 4G.

With 5G, we will see exponentially faster download and upload speeds. Huawei is widely renowned for being 12 months ahead of its competitors in the 5G race.

It began to develop its own 5G technology in as early as 2009. In 2013, Huawei hired more than 300 top experts from the wireless industry around the world and announced that they had invested US$600mil (RM2.5bil) in 5G research.

In 2016, Huawei set up a 5G product line for such devices.

What started as a three-man company now has thousands of employees engaged in 5G product development. Following this, in 2017, and then in 2018, Huawei invested almost US$1.4bil (RM5.8bil) in 5G product development.

The South China Morning Post has, however, also reported that apart from its tremendous commercial benefits, 5G – the fifth generation of mobile communication – is revolutionising military and security technology, which is partly why it has become a focal point in the US’ efforts to contain China’s rise as a tech power, and the Western nation’s allegations against Chinese companies is simply symptomatic of its insecurities.

“The future landscape of warfare and cybersecurity could be fundamentally changed by 5G.

“But experts say 5G is more susceptible to hacking than previous networks, at a time of rising security concerns and US-China tensions on various interconnected fronts that include trade, influence in the Asia-Pacific region and technological rivalry.

“These tensions provide the backdrop to controversy surrounding Huawei, the world’s largest telecoms equipment supplier.”

It’s also a fight between China and the US on who leads the artificial intelligence domain, as with 5G advancements, it means “whereas existing networks connect people to people, the next generation will connect a vast network of sensors, robots and autonomous vehicles through sophisticated artificial intelligence.

“The so-called Internet of Things will allow objects to ‘communicate’ with each other by exchanging vast volumes of data in real time, and without human intervention.

“Autonomous factories, long-distance surgery or robots preparing your breakfast – things that previously existed only in science fiction – will be made possible.

“Meanwhile, though, it is being identified by many military experts as the cornerstone of future military technology,” the newspaper reported.

As TV personality Trevor Noah says, humorously, in his show, the 5G war isn’t just about “loading an entire movie in three seconds but about the Chinese spying – which the US also wants to do.”

He sarcastically added that “the US is losing the 5G race and luckily, we have a maniac in our team who’s willing to play dirty.”

As the battle rages on, spilling into the already acrimonious US-China trade war, the controversy has become more bitter, and complicated, with the US egging its allies to ban Huawei from building its next generation of mobile phone networks. So far, Britain, Germany, Australia, New Zealand and Canada have either banned Huawei or are reviewing whether to do so.

Japan, a US ally, seems to have been dragged into the propaganda of persecuting Huawei, too.

In China, the actions against Huawei have stirred a storm of nationalism, with the Chinese calling for a boycott of iPhone, a reaction which could eventually affect other American and European products, at the rate things are escalating.

Even within the Chinese diaspora, the messages of unequivocal support for Huawei have gone viral in the world’s social media sphere.

The irony is that the iPhone is not only assembled in China, but its very inception starts in that country at a much earlier stage, and from a much deeper part of the earth, too.

At least 90% of rare earth minerals – naturally occurring solids whose combination comprises essential iPhone parts – are mined in China, notably in Mongolia, it’s reported.

“Lanthanides, scandium, yttrium and some other alien-sounding names at the bottom of the periodic table (remember your secondary school?) make the iPhone ‘light, bright and loud.’ Its colour screen, glass polishing, circuitry, speakers and vibration unit come from a mix of these rare earth minerals,” it says in Finances Online.

The report added that where American companies would take months to pool thousands of industrial engineers, and even more months to construct new assembly lines to accommodate a trivial but urgent change in an iPhone spec (say, its glass panel needing to curve to hatch on the body six weeks prior to launching), it only takes 15 days in China to do the same.

“To put it in perspective, one production line in China can assemble 72,000 iPhone 5 back plates daily; one factory can have four to five production lines and China can have as much as a hundred of these factories, opening or closing a few of them depending on the current demand.

“The last part – opening and closing plants like a mom-and-pop store – is almost impossible in an American economy.

“It is no longer a city counting the number of manufacturing plants it has, but the manufacturing plant can be counted as a city in many Asian economic zones.”

And it’s common knowledge that Mickey Mouse merchandise is made in China, and likewise all the branded sportswear sold globally. The profits these companies are raking in are simply down to the low cost of operation.

Trump should know and do better. Instead of threatening and bullying Huawei with trumped up charges, he should urge American companies to be more competitive, make better products and keep prices low.

I am dumping my iPhone, upgrading my South Korean Samsung and for the first time, getting myself a Huawei. I hear the camera is really good, and it doesn’t even need a zoom lens for magnification. And that sophistication comes from a license to thrill.

By Wong Chun Wai

Wong Chun Wai began his career as a journalist in Penang, and has served The Star for over 27 years in various capacities and roles. He is now editorial and corporate affairs adviser to the group, after having served as group managing director/chief executive officer.

On The Beat made its debut on Feb 23 1997 and Chun Wai has penned the column weekly without a break, except for the occasional press holiday when the paper was not  published. In May 2011, a compilation of selected articles of On The Beat was published as a book and launched in conjunction with his 50th birthday. Chun Wai also comments on current issues in The Star.

Source link

 

Read ,more:

China digs in for protracted trade fight with US – The Sun Daily

 

Commentary: China fights U.S. trade bullying with “Long March” spiri

Trade war gives US unfavorable image

US President Donald Trump on Thursday announced a $16 billion aid package for farmers to offset their losses from the trade war with China. He said the package “will be paid for by the billions of dollars” from tariffs on Chinese imports.

Bannon promotes economic fascism

All Chinese companies wishing to get to the high-tech mountaintop should learn from Huawei’s composed example. If only there were a group of Chinese companies sharing intellectual property with foreign partners, then certain malicious forces would hesitate at a crackdown.

Fast economic development best way to deal with security challenge

China’s economic potential is far greater than that of the US, the largest economy. There is no doubt that China’s economic prospects are the best in the world. These facts drive China’s core competitiveness. They will make Washington feel its ability falls short of its wishes when it comes to containing Beijing.

US orchestrates self-defeating maneuvers

Chinese people do not know whether we should call US approaches hegemonic politics or profiteering politics. But in short, they are crooked means. The threat of tariffs will not work. Neither will US threats against Chinese companies create a shock wave against China. The US is picking a wrong opponent at a wrong time. It will find no way of crafting a good result from a strategic mistake.

Growing US pressure won’t force China to submit

The US is having a profound effect on the global economic order by abusing national security and trampling on commercial principles. Current US administration is destroying the reputation and national image that generations of Americans have built. Such arrogance and hegemony are by no means good signs for the US.

Huawei could end up challenging Google


 

 

Google Ban Huawei 谷歌封杀华为 || Epic Asian

Surprising Facts About HUAWEI – Is it Evil?

Interview With Ren Zhengfei, Founder And CEO Of Chinese Telecom Giant Huawei | TIME

BY imposing restrictions on Huawei Technologies Co, the administration of US President Donald Trump may force the Chinese company to do something that no one in tech has dared to do for a long time: Challenge Google’s control of the Android universe, which earned the US company a huge European fine last year.

Huawei faces two big threats from US technology export restrictions. One is the loss of American components for its products, a blow it cannot parry immediately if it wants to keep making top-flight smartphones.

The other is the potential withdrawal of its Android license, which would stop Huawei from preinstalling the latest Google-approved version of the operating system and some key services Western users see as necessary – above all Google’s Play Store, the biggest repository of Android apps.

This particular obstacle could, under the right conditions, turn into a Huawei strength in Europe, a market that accounts for almost a third of the company’s smartphone unit sales, according to market analytics company IDC.

Last July, the European Commission fined Google €4.34bil for imposing illegal restrictions on smartphone manufacturers. In exchange for the right to preinstall the Play Store, they had to agree, among other things, not to sell devices running versions of Android not approved by Google: so-called Android forks. These operating systems are developed from the open source version of Android, which anyone can use, including Huawei if the US bans it from using American technology. Amazon.com Inc’s Fire OS is the best-known Android fork today, though there are others around.

The commission wrote that by obstructing the development of Android forks, Google and its parent company Alphabet Inc “closed off an important channel for competitors to introduce apps and services, in particular general search services, which could be pre-installed on Android forks.”

In its ruling, it made a strong case for forks as platforms for Google-independent innovation that, if they were allowed to spread widely, could have curbed Google’s market dominance in various areas.

Google has appealed the ruling, but it has also removed restrictions on handset makers to avoid further fines. This, however, hasn’t led to the proliferation of alternative platforms based on open-source Android: Big phone makers are locked into comfortable relationships with Google and see no need to experiment. Days after the European Union fined Google, Huawei, at the time the biggest phone manufacturer that provided an easy opportunity to install alternative Android-based operating systems on its devices, ended the programme without explanation.

If Google takes away the Android license, it’ll yank Huawei out of its comfort zone. The company isn’t likely to give up the European market without a fight, after spending billions of dollars developing a customer base. Consumers in some European countries now appear to be put off Huawei by the US attack, although, paradoxically, it appears to have fuelled the brand’s popularity in France.

France for Huawei

Percentage* of consumers who say they’ll consider buying a Huawei device when they’re next in the market for a smartphone
Source: YouGov BrandIndex

The company has said it developed its own operating system (likely an Android fork), and it’s been trying to lure developers to its app store.

If the US stops Huawei from preinstalling the Play Store, the Chinese manufacturer probably won’t spend much time educating consumers on how to install it on their own (the way people do now with phones bought in China).

That’s not what most users expect on a new, expensive device. Instead, Huawei will want to offer developers an easy way to sell apps not just in the Google store but also in one preinstalled on Huawei devices – to “multi-home” them.

Huawei hasn’t been eager to get into an open confrontation with Google, which was a valued partner.

But a breakup ordered by the US government changes things. Huawei, with plenty of resources of its own (and most likely with support from the Chinese government, determined to fight back against the US), could soon be investing heavily in the marketing and improvement of an Android fork. Given Huawei’s marketing potential, the effort isn’t necessarily doomed. And it could boost Asian and European developers deterred from competing in some areas – such as mapping, video services or even search – by Google’s enormous power.

Given the pushback in recent years against US tech companies’ relentless data collection and the widespread mistrust of Trump’s administration in Europe, there could well be demand for a Google-free phone from a major manufacturer known for superior hardware.

I know I’d be interested, and the French would probably lap it up, judging by their reaction to the US threats. The EU regulators, too, might be intrigued to see evidence that perhaps the Google antitrust ruling didn’t come too late.

This is something of a utopian scenario, I know. Huawei may never need to go on the warpath against Google: The US and China could strike a trade deal that would make the specter of restrictions go away.

Or, if Huawei is banned from buying US technology, it could find itself unable to produce marketable phones for a while. And, of course, it is a company from Communist China, making it difficult for European regulators, and even for private developers, to embrace it as a savior from the overly dominant US tech companies.

Monopolies in tech don’t last forever, however.

Sometimes they just need a push to start showing cracks. If the US moves against Huawei, it might be unknowingly giving such a push to Google in the smartphone market. — Bloomberg Viewpoint

Source link

 

Read more:

China will emerge victorious from US tech crackdown folly


But it needs a lot of time. During this process, China cannot avoid paying a price and will have a difficult time. But Huawei still has a domestic market of more than a billion Chinese people and the market of the Third World  countries. When the Trump administration cracks down on Huawei, the US also goes through hard times. The final
victory will certainly be China’s, but China must have adequate determination and endurance.

 

 

Huawei Accuses U.S. of Bullying as It Seeks Support From Europe – WSJ

 

 

Govt seeks Asian support

 

 

Even with trade war, Asia bond investors sleep better at night

 

 

Related posts:

 

 
  https://youtu.be/nzhZGUfaZhI China-U.S. trade tensions | Mideast tensions take turn for worse    https://youtu.be/eQbQbvGBDaM

Huawei Technologies CEO Ren Zhengfei says Huawei would be “fine” even if Qualcomm and other American suppliers would not sell …

KUALA LUMPUR: It looked like the start of semiconductor manufacturers’ nightmare when US President Donald Trump fired another salvo in t…

 

Core of May Fourth Movement still relevant in China today


Illustration: Liu Rui/GT


May 4, 1919 is the day the world changed forever and the Chinese will never forget

 

Jeff J. Brown Published on May 5, 2019  Pictured above: the May 4th uprising in China started in Beijing, with 3,000 angry students marching on the streets. They helped fan the flames of revulsion against Western imperialism destroying their people with drug cartel opium, while raping and pillaging their national resources. Within days, tens of cities around the country were filling the streets and began demanding Marxist socialism and the dream of communism for their future. It took thirty-five million martyrs over the  world’s longest civil war and they were finally victorious in  liberation from colonialism in a Free China, on October 1, 1949. Humanity has never been the same since.

Source article with all the images and hyperlinks: https://chinarising.puntopress.com/20…

Much more at http://www.chinarising.puntopress.com, http://chinarising.puntopress.com/201… and http://apps.monk.ee/tyrion

It has been 100 years since the May Fourth Movement, but to this day, the movement is still reminding Chinese people of the history while influencing today’s China.

However, some have deliberately divided patriotism from other keywords in the May Fourth Movement, an obvious deviation from the direction and implication of the May Fourth spirit.

The pursuit of prosperity and a strong nation has always been the movement’s historical theme and spiritual core, which constituted a key historical background and core proposition for the movement’s other themes, including enlightenment, science and democracy.

It was precisely due to this strong desire – leading the country to rise in the modern world – these significant themes related to democracy and science, needed for solving China’s problems, have been developed.

It should be noted that this movement was triggered by China’s weakness in international prestige and incompleteness of its national sovereignty at that time. Throughout the May Fourth period, Chinese pioneers’ thinking was based on the country’s historical situation and national mind-set of misfortunes.

The core theme of the May Fourth Movement lies in the deep understanding of China’s plight and the strong desire for the country’s prosperity and development in the modernization process. Patriotism is the foundation of the May Fourth spirit and the backbone of other spiritual elements.

Pioneers of the May Fourth Movement clearly recognized that the basic composition of modern society is centered on the modern nation-state, and that interstate relations constitute the most important practical relationship of modern society and provide the clearest way to define people’s identity. No social organization can be separated from the country it belongs to in modern society.

These understandings were basic acknowledgements by young intellectuals in the 1910s and also fitted realities back then. If detached from reality, any ideals such as democracy and science would be hard to realize. Without the emergence and development of China, the Chinese people would be in a disgraced and passive position in modern society. The country’s rise is based on the premise that the youth achieve their ambitions.

Therefore, they considered “China” as the key topic. How China could get rid of its domestic woes and foreign invasions and how could the country stand up on its own were important questions.

Their thinking of enlightenment did not shy away from this major theme. When people who took part in the patriotic May Fourth Movement in 1919 thought of the future of their country, they thought of it within the context of China’s actual conditions and did not put the country’s rise against the liberation of the people.

When they talked about the different options of Europe, the US, the Soviet Union or Russia under different times and circumstances, they viewed China’s prosperity as a historical demand. The article “A Letter to Youth” by Chinese revolutionary socialist Chen Duxiu, which is seen as the pillar of the May Fourth spirit, was a response to such issues.

In his article, he clearly mentioned the sense of historic urgency. Such a sense of historic urgency came from worries about an endangering country, from which the author expanded his analyses. He proposed six ethics that China’s youth should have, including self-consciousness and struggling, which were all based on the fact that the country was in peril.

Therefore, patriotism, progress, democracy and science were all historic choices against such realities. This strong sense of identification and mission that stems from the May Fourth spirit still has an influence on China.

Some people tend to think that the ideals of the May Fourth Movement are abstract notions that go beyond nations and countries or try to separate these ideals from the prosperity and development of China, which is groundless. Those who disregard the significance of patriotism either lack the deep understanding of the core of the May Fourth spirit or have ulterior motives

By Zhang Yiwu,  professor with Peking University. opinion@globaltimes.com.cn

Read more:

Why US has never tried building Belt and Road for other countries as China does?

 

Related post:

Global market and opinion research spec PETALING JAYA: Corruption is no longer the top concern for Malay­sians as crime and the cost of…

 

Malaysia’s education policy must champion Meritocracy instead of Mediocrity system


Education system must champion meritocracy

THE country is facing yet another controversy of its own making – the matriculation programme for university entrance or matric, for short.

The matric programme was introduced 50 years ago to increase the enrolment of Malay students in the medical, dental, engineering and other science and technical studies at public universities. It was an interventionist policy to produce more Malay graduates for the professional occupations in government service as well as in the private sector, as part of the New Economic Policy to redress the racial educational and economic imbalances in the economy.

The programme was reserved exclusively for Malays but due to political pressure from other races , the government allowed a 5% quota and this was later increased to 10% for non-Malay students. Recently, with demands for more non-Malays to be given places in matric, the government increased the total number accepted into the programme from 25,000 to 40,000 while keeping the racial quota unchanged.

There are concerns that the large increase in the number of university intakes from the matric programme will reduce the places available for STPM students and affect the quality of education. There are already complaints from parents that even though their children who go through the two-year STPM are more educationally qualified than the one-year matric students, and have a stronger command of English, they cannot get a place in public universities because of the preference given to intakes from the shorter programme.

Fifty years on, this programme is still in place, despite the huge investments made by government through the Education Ministry to increase the access to STPM (Form VI) level education in both the arts and science streams in all parts of the country.

Malay students in rural areas today are no longer facing a disadvantage in  educational opportunities as there are many secondary schools with Form VI classes.

However, their parents prefer that they apply for the matriculation course as it is a faster and easier route to university.

As they are specially selected for the matriculation course, the students have a greater certainty that they will be given places in the medical , dental and engineering faculties. Another attraction is that there is very little competition with other races in the matriculation course.

There are suggestions that our universities should raise their entrance requirements so that they can get better qualified student intakes to facilitate higher quality teaching and learning and produce graduates with the right skills for the job market . This can be achieved by a policy decision that university entrance must be through the STPM stream only and that the matric programme will be scaled down to be eventually terminated as it is not a good alternative in preparing students for university education.

Matric has also become a source of continuing friction among the races as they feel that education is a human right and should not be subject to racial politics.

It is inevitable that there will be complaints from certain quarters against closing down the matric programme but the government must stand firm not to perpetuate a system that encourages mediocrity. If the country is to succeed in the digital  evolution, and make Malaysia a fully developed economy, the education system must shift direction towards competition and meritocracy. The abolition of the matriculation programme will show that Malaysia is serious in moving in that direction.

TAN SRI MOHD SHERIFF MOHD KASSIM

Another brick in the wall

https://youtu.be/YR5ApYxkU-U- a protest song against rigid schooling

 

Education is that realm where wrongs are set right and learning thrives, yet, right off the bat, the new matriculation intake has found itself in murky waters.

SOME leaders in our federal and state governments, now or then, seem to be guilty of this habit – announcing decisions before studying the implications of their policies.

So it was no surprise that after the Education Ministry announced the controversial changes to the matriculation programme, a row erupted, and soon, the Prime Minister had to weigh in on the debate.

Tun Dr Mahathir Mohamad said he would address the quota system issue of the pre-university matriculation programme intake.

When asked for his comments on whether the quota system would be abolished, he said: “We will study the problem.”

Once again, it looks like the 93-year-old leader must step in to clean up another mess before things start to stink.

The controversy exploded when the Cabinet decided to increase the number of students entering the matriculation programme from 25,000 to 40,000 while maintaining the 90% quota for bumiputra students.

The matriculation programme was originally aimed at encouraging bumiputra students to pursue studies in science.

The highly sought-after programme – due to its cost-effectiveness – is equivalent to a one- or two-year pre-university course, and enables students to pursue a degree upon successfuly completing the programme. Enrollees only need to pay a registration fee and the rest is borne by the government.

However, the concern now is that by doubling the matriculation intake, it will affect the seats available to those vying for places in public universities via the Sijil Tinggi Persekolahan Malaysia (STPM) route.

During my time, in the 1980s, when I was sitting for the then Higher School Certificate (HSC), the matriculation programme had already been launched. At present, STPM and matriculation students number about 43,000 and 25,000 respectively.

No rational or fair person will begrudge aid provided to students who need a helping hand, let’s be clear.

But I am not sure if the ministry has given thought to the fact that we may have a surplus of matriculation students – about 60% – at the expense of their STPM counterparts.

Let’s give the ministry the benefit of doubt that they surely would have, given the many experienced experts there, but no narratives have been forthcoming to explain anything to parents and students, especially those preparing for their STPM exams this year.

If the government plans to double university intake, have backup plans been installed to accommodate the sudden surge in science students into our financially-strapped universities?

While non-scholarship students in public universities must pay their own fees, matriculation students not only get free education, but are given allowances, too.

Public universities are already cutting down on contract academic staff as fundraising programmes are being carried out.

Unemploy-ment is underscored by the huge number of jobless graduates, whose changing fortunes have found them unemployed in a soft market. In some cases, their weak language and social skills put them at a disadvantage.

As the intake increases, other relevant infrastructure, like hostels, laboratories and teaching staff, won’t multiply overnight, as MCA president Datuk Seri Dr Wee Ka Siong rightly pointed out.

“How will the ministry ensure quality in matriculation education? And the suggestion of getting teachers from teachers’ training colleges to teach in matriculation is illogical because their syllabus is totally different,” he said.

The new matriculation policy has also taken the race-based programme to another level and goes against the aspiration of being an inclusive New Malaysia.

DAP leader Dr P. Ramasamy has rightly said the increased quota for bumiputra by the government was spurred by fears of a backlash from sections of the Malay-Muslim community. This is what happens when political expediency and interest come into play.

The former Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia political science lecturer said with the revised quota, the bumiputra allocation will increase the number of  students from 22,500 to 36,000.

He said, in comparison, the number of non-Malays will increase by only 1,500 students, beyond the current 2,500.

“I’m taken aback by the Cabinet’s decision. We have failed to move forward. It appears as though the Cabinet was not prepared to take a bold decision in increasing the intake of non-Malay students, particularly Indians.”

Education Minister Dr Maszlee Malik, in defending the new policy, said all students deserve a “better opportunity” when they apply for matriculation placement, adding that “the bumiputras will still enjoy their 90% quota”.

Dr Maszlee reportedly said the increased intake for matriculation students was based on a Cabinet decision to get more students into tertiary education and to accord all races equal opportunity.

He also said the Cabinet had instructed his ministry to discuss with the Finance Ministry the government’s burden in bearing the cost of the increased number of matriculation places.

This looks like another case of putting the cart before the horse. Announce first and work out the maths later.

Instead of emphasising need-based programmes, the government has, instead, strengthened a race-based system.

As a student at university, I was often queried by my well-intentioned Malay varsity mates about which scholarship I had obtained. I jokingly told them it was FAMA – father and mother.

I’ve always been grateful for having secured a place in a local university, particularly since there were only five then – and certainly no private universities – and that gratitude has only grown since that degree helped change my life.

And that conveniently brings me to my point: Let’s not deny our children, regardless of their race, a place in our universities, which are funded by multi-ethnic tax payers.

If parents are financially sound, no prayers would be needed for students to earn slots in our public institutions of higher learning, it’s that simple.

Wong Chun WaiBy Wong Chun Wai

Wong Chun Wai began his career as a journalist in Penang, and has served The Star for over 27 years in various capacities and roles. He is now editorial and corporate affairs adviser to the group, after having served as group managing director/chief executive officer.

On The Beat made its debut on Feb 23 1997 and Chun Wai has penned the column weekly without a break, except for the occasional press holiday when the paper was not published. In May 2011, a compilation of selected articles of On The Beat was published as a book and launched in conjunction with his 50th birthday. Chun Wai also comments on current issues in The Star.
Related posts:

Mediocre future? If selection at the matriculation level is not based on meritocracy, the quality of our tertiary institutions will be …

 

Global market and opinion research spec PETALING JAYA: Corruption is no longer the top concern for Malay­sians as crime and the cost of…

 

  The Pakatan government has little choice nor time to check the slide on its popularity and goodwill from voters. WHAT a difference a y…
%d bloggers like this: