Jump to content

Huawei CEO says Company has Exited U.S. network gear Market


KD8JBF
 Share

Recommended Posts

Huawei CEO Formally announces exit of U.S. Network Gear Market:

 

Read more: Report: Huawei CEO says company has exited U.S. network gear market - FierceWireless

 

Expected this with U.S. Gov't breathing down their necks! 

 

Kris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Huawei CEO Formally announces exit of U.S. Network Gear Market:

 

Read more: Report: Huawei CEO says company has exited U.S. network gear market - FierceWireless

 

Expected this with U.S. Gov't breathing down their necks! 

 

Kris

 

I never understood this, China owns most of the US anyways plus we have many other companies from other countries making gear for us.  Did they have any proof of this?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I never understood this, China owns most of the US anyways plus we have many other companies from other countries making gear for us.  Did they have any proof of this?

 

I doubt they ever had proof at all.....Its just our government is paranoid and assumes the worst on anything....kinda points back to that wire tapping the German Chancellors Cell phone.....lol

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt they ever had proof at all.....Its just our government is paranoid and assumes the worst on anything....kinda points back to that wire tapping the German Chancellors Cell phone.....lol

Didn't you read the White House report on it? They couldn't find any spying but they said that it wasn't very secure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but there has to be more to it than just, "Security Issues" Not sure I'd want to stab the backs of the country that basically owns us...LOL

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That was no big deal.  All of the conversation was just blah blah blah bratwurst...blah blah blah lederhosen...blah blah blah David Hasselhoff.

 

AJ

blah blah how to run an economy that turns a surplus blah blah universal healthcare blah blah low unemployment blah blah decent education system ;) Well I guess they weren't listening too hard after all ;)

 

But the point is well made re China listening, we know there are back doors sorry deliberate security issues in all the kit (that we put there). Do we want to make it easier for China to spy? They obviously already do, would this make it easier? Probably. I think it's pretty much guaranteed that allowing that kit to become part of the national infrastructure would bring in compromises. The bigger question is (as mentioned) how far down are our pants already given the amount of Chinese stuff already in use and the economic dependence. I would hope however that anything important on a government \ military \ national security level would be safe by default as it should be encrypted in transit. The commercial impacts would probably be more severe, commercial espionage etc.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I doubt they ever had proof at all.....Its just our government is paranoid and assumes the worst on anything....kinda points back to that wire tapping the German Chancellors Cell phone.....lol

 

To be fair... they're paranoid because that's exactly what they're doing to everyone else. So if they're doing it... everyone else must be too!!!!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Call it paranoid all you want. The way I see it there was a security concern about Sprint using Huawei equipment since Sprint holds government contracts. Pretty significant with the accusation that China has stolen multiple plans for United States weapon systems.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sorry, but there has to be more to it than just, "Security Issues" Not sure I'd want to stab the backs of the country that basically owns us...LOL

 

I'm sure it is security issues, but the inverse,where they wouldn't have their listening/logging software installed, so they don't want them here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm sure it is security issues, but the inverse,where they wouldn't have their listening/logging software installed, so they don't want them here.

 

There is an element of lobbying and protectionism, which given the Chinese attitude towards their currency and state investment is understandable. They also have a long history of acting as manufacturers for western \ Japanese companies and then copying their work, then investing heavily in their own education to begin to develop their own technology based on what they 'borrowed'. They have an entire scooter and motorcycle industry built off the designs of a couple of Honda engines (to the point they can be part compatible in some cases). So not buying back stuff built off reverse engineering our products is not entirely crazy :) However yes, security is also a part. No sense making it too easy for them. We can't hop on our high horses about spying, it's not like we don't do it even to our allies, but we shouldn't make it too easy. I'd be worried however if transit gear were too vulnerable, surely it must be heavily encrypted if it ever goes near a public network?? Even government contracts, sure they could probably listen in on cell phone calls and intercept low level emails, but the real important stuff must be protected right? If not I think some of our people need to answer some questions. I guess it could leave us vulnerable to them turning everything off in the event of a war? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

China does not own us. The last time I heard, they owned only 20% of our debt. While that is a significant number, it is not even anywhere near a majority. It is dangerous for Americans to assume we are so indebted to the Chinese. It will just create a generation that feels we owe China much more than just money and be willing to capitulate our own interests out of fear of the debt holder.

 

Neither a borrower nor lender be.

 

Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

China does not own us. The last time I heard, they owned only 20% of our debt. While that is a significant number, it is not even anywhere near a majority. It is dangerous for Americans to assume we are so indebted to the Chinese. It will just create a generation that feels we owe China much more than just money and be willing to capitulate our own interests out of fear of the debt holder.

 

Neither a borrower nor lender be.

 

Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

 

I am well aware of the level of indebtedness...It was more satire in my post than anything... :P....After all I am no sheep in a herd....being a sheep is dangerous, as you say....It will just increase fear.... :D

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  

China does not own us. The last time I heard, they owned only 20% of our debt. While that is a significant number, it is not even anywhere near a majority. It is dangerous for Americans to assume we are so indebted to the Chinese. It will just create a generation that feels we owe China much more than just money and be willing to capitulate our own interests out of fear of the debt holder.Neither a borrower nor lender be.Robert via Samsung Note 8.0 using Tapatalk Pro

You beat me to the punch! The largest slice of our debt is money one part of the federal government owes to another part. The next largest slice, by far, is money owed to US citizens.

 

The security concerns are around potential backdoors. NSA spying notwithstanding, the government doesn't (and legally can't) compel Qualcomm to include spying hooks in baseband chips for example. But in China, the party and military can make them include hidden backdoors or anything else. That's the concern anyway, well-founded or not. It's already a concern for the military that so many electronic devices and chips are made overseas.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Similar Content

    • By lilotimz
      Samsung Network Vision equipment are highly distinct and fairly easy to spot compared to the equipment that other vendors are deploying. Sprint is Samsung's first extremely massive American contract (baring Clearwire) so there  should be no issues in confusing these equipment for another carrier which happens often with Ericsson NV equipment.

      Below are images of Samsung equipment which includes antennas, remote radio units, base stations, and their mounting configurations. 
       
      Samsung antenna with eSMR 800 RRU & PCS 1900 RRU

      A close look at a Samsung setup





      Next Generation Samsung Configuration
      RRH-P4 4T4R 1.9 GHz  | RRH-C4 4T4R 800 MHz| RRH-V3 2.5 GHz

      Next Generation 8 Port Dual Band Antenna Setup 
      4 port 800 MHz RRH-C4 800

      (source: dkyeager)

      (source: dkyeager)
      Narrow beam setup

      High Capacity Site with 2 Antennas & 3 RRUs (2x PCS & 1x SMR).
      Second antenna is PCS only for now.


      Canadian IBEZ (NO SMR)

      Special Case PCS Only Setup for Canadian IBEZ




      Close up of standard antenna connectors 

      Samsung Cabinets

       
       
      Powerpoint slides from Samsung / Sprint
      *disclaimer - all  powerpoint diagrams and images were found through public municipality online databases and is by no means misappropriated through malicious means*
      *Credit goes to those whom took pictures of these equipment. You know who you are*
    • By Ianmac23
      It seems like Sprint is putting LTE in all the states around Ohio and not in Ohio except for the 1 tower in Cleveland.
       
      Anyone heard a reason why it has not started in Ohio
    • By thesickness069
      I just want to start a topic just for the Chicago land area deployment. If anyone has any updates on this please post below. I've been having some major issues lately with dropped calls, missing and late texts, and very slow data speeds. I know that it isn't my phone since both my personal and work phones are Sprint and they both have been having similar issues as of late.
       
      Thanks everyone!!
    • By derrph
      With the introduction of the new plans Sprint has announced. I told one of my friends about the $60 unlimited plan and she was shocked yet happy about it. She currently has T-Mobile and there has been times where my Sprint service has out performed her service even in the city with puling up information and out of town...well... you already know how that went. She was talking about switching and stuff but then she sent me a typical article bashing Sprint and I got irritated by it and I had to explain to her that Sprint is not bad at all. These articles are based on past experiences from 3+ years ago. I told her I'm pulling 60+ mbps on LTE but she's worried about Sprint being slow ( because of what she read). Guys give me some advice on persuading her to give Sprint a chance. 
       
      I feel like articles that are being posted is what keeps away customers.  It makes no sense that T-Mobiles 2g network is not spoken about when they are in the news for changes to plans and such. But good ol Sprint makes changes and articles that get posted rips Sprint apart for filth. 
    • By lilotimz
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2vVxAHVUvU4
       
       
      Goal = 250 Million pops covered by mid 2014. 
  • Posts

    • Great job on your analysis of small cells versus the 3.45GHZ and the population coverage requirements. I wonder if the fcc is stalling because they may address the key limitation of of 2.5: the convoluted frequencies. Not sure how they would get there, but it would be better public policy if you could actually use a single license in current times, ie 5, 10 or 20MHz. Of course they could also go in more of a nonprofit or small business direction. But most likely they will keep it as planned given how messy the transition would be. In many/most metro areas BRS/EBS is fully licensed. Would be nice if they put pressure on the squatters.
    • I didn't actually look at the buildout requirements before making that comment - they're definitely going to have to deploy on macro sites if they want to hit the buildout requirements. PEA001 has a population of 25,237,061, of which they will have to hit 45% in 4 years (11,356,677) and 80% in 8 years (20,189,649). If they were to cover the entirely, all five boroughs, of NYC using only small cells (something I'd say is impossible considering their current small cell density), they'd only be covering 32% of the population in the PEA. And this is with spectrum that only adds 300Mb/s per sector and will likely have only 50% the range of their current n41 equipment. Doesn't really seem worth it to me. I'm of the opinion that they're looking to hedge their bets in further EBS/BRS acquisition. 
    • These strand mounts also are deployed with Band 46 (LAA), in my experience. I have yet to encounter a strand mount with exclusively 2/66. 
    • Bought a esim "sim" card a few weeks ago that operates in all of my more current phones according to its app. It arrived a couple of weeks early from Berlin.  Now if my MVNOs would get moving and support more than iPhones and rarely Pixels so I can test this thing. https://esim.me The only item really troubling so far is reviews in google play store keep getting deleted, even 5 star ones.
    • Still waiting impatiently for my T-Mobile security update.  
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...