Jump to content

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


KD8JBF

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

....kinda points back to that wire tapping the German Chancellors Cell phone.....lol

 

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

  • Like 6
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.

  • large.unreadcontent.png.6ef00db54e758d06

  • gallery_1_23_9202.png

  • Similar Content

  • Posts

    • Looks like there's a slightly taller building going up next door to where the decommissioned site used to be. Taking a look at StreetView, T-Mobile likely decommissioned the site because the east facing sector would blocked by the new building. If I had to guess, T-Mobile has already agreed to move to the roof of the new building and is just waiting for it to be completed to install the site there. What they should've done is just rearrange the sectors in the meantime but it seems like T-Mobile just bit the bullet and decommed the tower in the short term. — — — — — A permit was issued for a Sprint conversion at 150 Prospect Park West, finally filling in what is T-Mobile's largest coverage gap in Park Slope. Verizon is collocated on that building and AT&T has placed small cells along Prospect Park West to fill in coverage there while T-Mobile struggled using two sites, one at Grand Army Plaza at the far north and another at Bartel Pritchard Square to the far south.  
    • Yep, you can see the site was taken down between Aug 2022 and Apr 2023.
    • Verizon site at Woodbury Commons finally got C-band. I'm seeing upwards of 600Mbps there, a massive improvement over the <1Mbps I used to see. LTE is now at 10-20Mbps which is significantly better than before where speed tests would often fail. My only complaint is that C-band is super inconsistent. Not sure if it's a software issue but sometimes I'm connected to it and get the 600Mbps speeds previously mentioned and other times I connect and only see 15Mbps. Seems like whatever load balancing the network is trying to do is still shoving a ton of people to LTE, even in conditions where I have a strong C-band signal.  — — — — — You're absolutely right. The site on top of Bais Sarah Hall at 6101 16th Ave got decommissioned. Sad that they haven't installed a new site to fill in that coverage gap.  — — — — — In other news a carrier reached out to the board of my grandmother's building in Brooklyn about installing antennas on top of it so she called me today because she knows I map cell towers and she said a lot of people in her building, especially the folks on the upper floors, are worried about the health effects lol. I asked her if she knew what carrier it would be but she said she doesn't know. A quick glance at Cellmapper tells me it's either Dish or AT&T since Verizon and T-Mobile both have sites within a two block radius of her building but AT&T barely builds new sites so I'm leaning Dish. They're asking for a 25-year lease with an option to renegotiate the lease after 10-years. The board of her co-op said that if they do it, maintenance fees will go down since they'll be offset by the rent that the carrier would be paying them. She said she already voted in favor of it but she thinks that a lot of the older people in her building are against it.
    • Galaxy S7 FE most certainly doesn't have the same level of NR CA (if at all), it also looks like it doesn't have SA NR, so it's is inherently going to be much slower since most of the spectrum is now focused on NR rather than LTE. It's likely the same generation radio as the S21 (or maybe S20). Having trouble finding which it would be.
    • T-Mobile seems to be paying close attention to how much of B2 they refarm for NR, as on this trip down to South Padre Island I saw both 20x20 n25 and 20x20 B2 (but not both simultaneously) at various points on the trip. At South Padre itself, seems like someone else has 2.5 GHz licensed so the n41 setup here is 20+80 MHz. Speeds are still decent, but VZW has 100+60 MHz n77 live (and AT&T has some 80+40).
  • Recently Browsing

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