Slashdot Mirror
Chinese Pirates Copy iPhone, Make Improvements
An anonymous reader writes "Popular Science notes that manufacturers in China duplicate many well-know products. This includes the Apple iPhone, imitations of which are rolling off the assembly line already. That might actually be a good thing for some users, who might enjoy the user experience of China's own miniOne. 'It ran popular mobile software that the iPhone wouldn't. It worked with nearly every worldwide cellphone carrier, not just AT&T, and not only in the U.S. It promised to cost half as much as the iPhone and be available to 10 times as many consumers.' The cloned iPhone uses a Linux-based system. 'The cloners hire a team of between 20 and 40 engineers to begin decoding the circuit boards. At the same time, coders start to develop an operating system for the phone with a similar feature set. (The typical cloner either uses off-the-shelf code, writes something entirely new, or modifies a publicly available Linux-based system.)' Using the iPhone as an example, the PopSci site walks through the process of making imitation technology."
"The typical cloner either uses off-the-shelf code, writes something entirely new, or modifies a publicly available Linux-based system"
Doesn't that describe just about every single software project that anyone here has ever done? We either use something we already have, hack some other code into doing what we want, and then write new code as a last resort.
Sometimes I am astounded by the brilliance of the observations that are posted on the front page.
There is always a differance, you won't get the same hardware, it will be slower. You won't get the same software, it will be badly integrated with the rest of the phone. And most importantly I'm not sure we will ever see the sourcecode, and this is the bad thing. These phones won't sell that much, but if I ever get my hands on one I would love to have the Source code, ... I've talked with chinese firms it's hard enough to get it right when you have a contract.
I want one if it's cheap, and if I get the source, but that's because I can stand sucky interfaces to be able to fiddle with the source.
Say what you like about Apple, there should be some rewards for innovation.
When the people fear their government, there is tyranny; when the government fears the people, there is liberty.
If you were an old fart like me you would remember when exactly the same criticisms were said about the cheap Japanese rip-offs that were flooding the market and undermining domestic products that were simply superior in every way. The very idea that Japan would, or could, become world class was laughable, just ask the British motorcycle industry - or the US motor industry
Beware complacency.
init 11 - for when you need that edge.
>> Reverse engineering someone's product to market your own substitute would describe a something besides capitalism in my opinion
Can you explain why?
Isnt the ability to make a similar product cheaper the sheer essence of capitalism?
Arent all those les afaire capitalists complaining about arbitrary limitation of the market forces?
HI O WISE PRINCE. WHT TOOK U SO DAM LONG?
The title of this story is misleading and the story is as well. Pirates copy DVD's, not create new consumer electronics products.
The company in question, Meizu, has been working on this product since before the iPhone was launched and is planning to base the it on Windows Mobile 6. Some have said that Apple "ripped off" LG's touch screen phone but, it could be like this situation. One product inspires another. The only difference is the popularity of the product doing the inspiring.
Sure, its a clone but, not a rip-off. Thats the way tech goes. You make a good product & people will emulate and attempt to improve it.
BTW, I do own a Meizu MP3 player & wouldn't trade it for an iPod. http://http//en.meizu.com/product_m6.asp
I think I think, therefore I think I am.
Isnt the ability to make a similar product cheaper the sheer essence of capitalism?
Arent all those les afaire capitalists complaining about arbitrary limitation of the market forces? Maybe because they aren't completely 'making' the product when they copy the internal workings of another? Development costs are a real factor in the manufacturing of a product. Someone who gets to copy another's product without paying the development costs reaps an unfair advantage, it's just like industrial espionage.
Also, if you will note, twice the mention knockoffs that are inferior:
"These clones bear our name and address," David Blackburn, the company's CEO, told the U.S. China Economic and Security Review Commission. "The label . . . contains our catalog part number and the initials of a calibrator, as well as a final tester."
Now, how does selling a counterfeit under someone else's name fit in to your view of capitalism?
The Chery QQ demonstrates more than just the skill of modern cloning. It also illustrates the danger. Easy-fit doors and rearview mirrors aside, there are differences--scary differences--between the Spark/Matiz and the QQ. As news of the copycat car spread last year, a German automotive club conducted and videotaped a comparative crash test between the two vehicles. When the Matiz hits the barrier, the front end crumples. The rear of the car bucks upward and then thuds back to the ground. An impact chart shows serious yet nonfatal injuries to both the driver's and passenger's head and legs (the chart distinguishes impact with color: the redder the deadlier). The Chery hits the obstacle at the same speed. The rear end of the car lifts higher than the Matiz and begins to rotate. The driver-side door pops open. Hood, engine and roof crumple into the passenger compartment. The frame buckles, bringing the vehicle flat to the ground. On the impact chart, the driver's head, neck and chest are brown and red: not survivable.
Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
Right this is the UK here, can we have damages with interest for all the stuff the USA ripped off in the 19th century from us then please. Pot meet Kettle.
true, but unfortunately, it's worked for them in the past. Why do you think so many products are made in China:
Company makes product.
China copies product.
Company notices China's version is almost as good, and contracts with them to make their product at a fraction of the cost.
???.
Profit!
ZuluPad, the wiki notepad on crack
The copy is better than the original.
For a long, long time, you could often only distinguish between the original and the "cheap" copy by looking at quality. A real Rolex usually beats the crap out of one of those cheap imitations in reliability, accuracy and longevity. A real shirt of some brand was usually much more resilent and had better seams than the rip offs.
This changed dramatically in the last few years. Especially in the electronics market.
Electronics vendors want to grab you in their stranglehold of vendor lock-in. They want you to use their, and only their, accessories, or at best some that they approve (and get royalties for). Add DRM and the need that they must not allow you to use your tool in the way you want and you know why the copy is actually "more" what you want. They already ignore trade laws by copying the brand, how much do they care for DRM? And on top of it, they certainly don't care about vendor lock-in, since, well, why should they help the company they copy?
Now the quality argument has been eroded away as well, since yes, the copies are made in cheap sweatshops in China. Guess what? SO ARE THE ORIGINALS! There is no quality argument anymore for brand vs. copy.
So we have two tools which are essentially of the same quality, but one wants to limit me while the other one doesn't care as long as I buy the thing. Question for 100: Which one will you buy?
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Maybe because they aren't completely 'making' the product when they copy the internal workings of another? Development costs are a real factor in the manufacturing of a product. Someone who gets to copy another's product without paying the development costs reaps an unfair advantage, it's just like industrial espionage.
Capatalism doesn't diallow this. Your trying to attach notions of innovation with capalism but it's not an inherent part. Look at the free wheeling capalism at the turn of the century. Or even the capalaism of the US ve Europe. MAssive technical espionage and stealing of ideas, designs, machines etc...Even as little as 25 years ago with the massive cloning of the IBM PC. The Theft of ideas has always been a part of capalism.
"There are more things in heaven and earth, Horatio, than are dreamt of in your philosophy."
As long as the purchaser agrees to purchase at his own risk it is peaceful. Otherwise if I am making any false claim of safety or fail to mention what should obviously be mentioned it's no longer peaceful. If I kill people when I produce my product it makes me a murderer, it has nothing to do with trade, you are mixing different issues here.
\u262D = \u5350
...so much as crippling ourselves. The iPhone has some obvious flaws. Not engineering ones, really. Not things that couldn't've been overcome by the engineers at Apple. But things enforced by the telecoms. The phones are deliberately damaged. The Chinese ripoff is carrier independent. Allows people to write their own applications. And it's probably easier to use it like a general purpose machine, too. There is no technical reason why Apple could not do these things. But, because of corrupting influence (I suspect the pure-evil, anti-free market attitude of the telecoms), the iPhone doesn't have them. Americans are deliberately making inferior products. No wonder there are issues competing.
If your theory is different from practice, then your theory is wrong.
Now, how does selling a counterfeit under someone else's name fit in to your view of capitalism?
The key issue here, I think, is one of honesty and decency. Have a look at some typical products developed in the capitalist West: MacDonald hamburgers, most cosmetics, most 'health' products. MacDonald meals are full of fat, sugar, soy powder and other 'goodies' that are basically ruining the health of the nation because they are being power-sold to our children through TV - this is certainly very capitalistic, but is it right? Is it 'deceny and honesty'? I think not. Cosmetics companies try to convince you that using their products will make your skin younger - which can't be called anything but a flat out lie; and the same can be said about all these dubious health products, which at best have no effect, or worst are harmful. Very capitalistic - you make as big a profit as possible no matter what - but fundamentally dishonest and indecent. Seen from this angle I think ripping off somebody and counterfeiting their product fits right in.
There is another facet to this that is always ignored when people complain about China, namely the cultural difference. We in the West have got used to the idea that copying the work of others is wrong (although it has not been this way for long - I remember that The Lord of the Rings was in the beginning copied and sold in the US without permission from Tolkien). In China there is a long tradition for copying great masters, certainly in arts, but also in other matters. After all, if something is good, why not? I am not saying that this excuses making illegal copies, but that's the way it is. 2000+ years of habits don't die overnight.
Patents are regulation. Copyright is regulation. Trademarks are regulation. Welcome to the real world.
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
You seemingly fail to comprehend that the reason for this is that China is a terrible market for any kind of disposable spending because its people are for the most part extremely poor.
It's not that it'll get stolen---it just won't sell.
-=rsw
Sorry, but I don't remember "lying about your product" being part of Capitalism. Claiming something you make was made by someone else to a higher degree of quality definitely is not "truth in advertising".
Fly me to the moon Let me sing among those stars Let me see what spring is like On jupiter and mars
Right, because capitalism = greed. There is nothing "capitalistic" about stealing. Your definition of "competition" apparently also includes illegal activity. Laissez-faire economics does not say "the government should allow businesses to operate under whatever pretense they like." Here's its actual definition, from wikipedia: "It is generally understood to be a doctrine that maintains that private initiative and production are best allowed to roam free, opposing economic interventionism and taxation by the state beyond that which is perceived to be necessary to maintain individual liberty, peace, security, and property rights." (emphasis mine)
Nowhere in that definition do I see "allow businesses to cheat, steal, or engage in other illicit activity."
Except it's not--nice try at a straw man, though! You almost got it. Nobody (not even free market anarchists) asserts that "regulation" encompasses basic property and security law. It is not considered "regulatory" when the government arrests a businessman for killing a businessman from a competing firm. Nor would it be considered "regulatory" if the government punished one firm for stealing another firm's ideas outright. (Note that I don't consider reverse engineering to be stealing, but there is a healthy debate surrounding that issue.) So, you're 0 for 2.
Why do you think Chinese goods are so much cheaper? The Chinese economy has posted record gains year after year, and they have staggering amounts of foreign investment. They continue to industrialize at a breakneck speed. Under any capitalist society, their currency's value should have skyrocketed by now; if anything, they should be dealing with inflation problems because their economy is growing so fast. But they're not, because they keep the value of the yuan artificially low, essentially dicking the rest of the world over in the process. That is why Chinese goods are so cheap. Japan and S. Korea experienced similar booms, but their products got more expensive as time passed, because their currencies were determined by the free market. China's essentially cheating, but due to their size and their strategic importance, there's not much we can do about it.
But then, the less you know the easier it is to be certain. Lo, behold the kettle that which is blackest.
The GP refers to "property rights" as if that concept applies to knowledge. The problem with that assumption is, as any econ textbook will tell you, "property" has two defining qualities - it is excludable and rivalrous. Knowledge is neither and so his whole premise that cloners are somehow violating the principles of pure capitalism is completely without merit.
When information is power, privacy is freedom.
Since this phone is not the same as the iPhone, has different code, mmore functionality, how are these Chinese "pirates"?
If you want news from today, you have to come back tomorrow.
Uh yeah, because having a "hippy" image (sort of) makes you somehow less capitalistic. They're a publicly traded company with a ferocious marketing department. Apple is as capitalistic as they come. But hey, way to buy the hype in a weird inverted way.
In Capitalist America, bank robs you!
Anyway compare China to India, right next door. It's a very large market, but only 60% the size of China's. People are much, much poorer, believe me it's not like China where every urban motherfucker sports a $200+ cell phone. And yet India, with stronger IP laws than China, has a vibrant film and cultural industry, a fairly large (and rapidly growing) skilled labor pool, and can actually support locally-oriented industries.
Obviously that's a simplified breakdown - but saying "all 1.4 billion Chinese people are poor and could never afford to buy anything that isn't a bootleg" is even simpler, to the point of being nonsense.
Slashdot: providing anti-social weirdos a soapbox, since 1997.