Huawei claims its alternative ecosystem to Google Mobile Services has 1.6 million devs, 73 million Euro users Huawei has highlighted growing adoption figures for its Android software ecosystem - Huawei Mobile Services (HMS) and the Huawei AppGallery - following the imposition of US government sanctions. At the end of H1 2020, the Chinese mobile biz said it had onboarded 1.6 million developers globally. That figure was up 76 per cent …
And if wasn't for Trump ban they wouldn't have put the effort in to develop their own app store or make chips they were buying from America.
How to win a trade war - stop your competitor from buying your stuff so they develop their own and can now under you in all other markets in the rest of the world.
So your income is down & you future sales opertunities are lost - Way to go Trump
Samsung of course has kept its own app store, alternative apps and even a potential OS on the simmer for years... only their motives are more about their relationship with Google, not S Korea's relationship with the USA.
- Sent from my Samsung Galaxy, with the Bixby button remapped to flashlight (only with the help of a 3rd party app called BXactions and jumping through some hoops)
They're own app store was on the last two phones I had made by Huawei/Honor, so they've been available outside China for several years now. It's more that the Trump issue means they've had to ramp up developers/ment of apps for outside China.
As for the chips thing - Huawei have frequently used their own design and build of chips - HiSilicon - for many years. The core is ARM, but they're not exactly bad at chip design.
Huawei's issue isn't that they can't design their own chips, but that they can no longer get them fabbed on a leading edge process at TSMC. They will have to use older processes at SMIC (China's largest fab) instead.
SMIC is working on rolling out a 7nm process that should be similar to TSMC's 7nm process used on HiSilicon's current flagship chips, but in a couple months Apple and then next year all their Android competition will be rolling out phones with chips made on TSMC's 5nm process leaving Huawei at a disadvantage. That new SMIC process may not be available for another year or longer though, so they may need to take a step back in the meantime.
>How to win a trade war - stop your competitor from buying your stuff so they develop their own and can now under you in all other markets in the rest of the world.
That's the living, breathing, emboiment of hubris. Obviously the World Cannot Exist Without Us.
Build versus buy is normally a business decision based on a mix of economics, corporate strategy and product roadmaps. Trump and his accolytes upended the normal flow, forcing what would have once been a decision to 'buy' to become one to 'build', the assumption that the Chinese lack both the manpower and knonwhow to build competitive products. This is a huge mistake -- compounded by Trump and Co shooting without even bothering to ask questions later -- which has caused the creation of yet more formidable competition for everyone to deal with. (...and it doesn't help that the second wave of development is always better because it avoids all the mistakes and blind alleys of the original developer.)
I kind of have mixed feelings on this. It's good to see a competing ecosystem to Google Play (although I wonder if they could have used F-Droid), but the more pressure put on Chinese companies, the sooner we might (might...) see the downfall of the CCP. Certainly need to see a reduction in their influence. That's worth some short-term loss on our part.
Sure, had it not been for cheap Chinese slave-labor we might not have the 'Internet of Tat' we have now, but that might not have been an entirely bad thing either.
Didn't Google say in their tax return that all their stuff is actually owned by a company based in the Bahamas and therefore all their profits have to go there and not get taxed by the UK. So, why can't Huawei get the Google bits of Android directly from the company in Bahamas?
Because the code is developed in the U.S., meaning that they're not allowed to supply it, even indirectly, through any entities they control or which control them, or through an independent entity which they know will be used to violate the sanctions. If they do, they can be penalized by the American government for trying to break their regulations, which is investigated on a when-they-want-to basis. This means that Google would be handing ammunition to cause them problems to any U.S. administration which has some reason not to like them.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
