iPhone has lost quite some market shares to local brands like Huawei, Xiaomi in the past few years, and more people are feeling local brands knows what people needs better. Having a faster service might actually help bringing back some market share.
iPhone has lost quite some market shares to local brands like Huawei, Xiaomi in the past few years, and more people are feeling local brands knows what people needs better. Having a faster service might actually help bringing back some market share.
Does this mean anything? You also breathe polluted air like "most people", do you want new fresh air then?
The reason of "__INSERT ACTION HERE__ won't practically have any impact on 'privacy' or 'human rights concerns'" is because "most people" unaware the importance of their privacy, NOT because their privacy is not important.
So, their is a choice to make: To make people understand the importance of their privacy; OR, continue selling this unawareness (to make people ignorant). Which way you go?
It's not that we are "unaware" of anything, we just don't feel the same way about privacy (and many other western values as well). Not that they're bad, we just don't believe they're so important. Sure you think you "know the importance of privacy", but that's rather just an opinion, not a fact.
In fact, another apparent trend in China is that people who have been studying and living in US for some time tends to become more agreeable with Chinese government afterwards.
Or you'd feel real different if you were a Uighur who lived in Xinjiang.
Right now, thanks to a growing economy, no one cares about rocking the boat, or what the government does. That will all change when China experiences its first deep recession, and like the US, the government will have no choice but to stoke dangerous levels of nationalism to deflect anger away from it, while ratcheting up the amount of control it has.
The official "social credit" system that the government wants to build is still at a very early stage right now, and it'll be no where close to what the western media imagined (or rather, hoped)
The fairy tales about Chinese social credit system denying loans because of private messages are malicious wishes of western media or Chinese activists at most
In China, you have this combined with a President who seems bent on keeping power forever (removing term limits), a party which aggressively blocks and filters anything critical of the government, the installation of key-loggers, face recognition cams, firewalls, and a huge system of monitoring social media, that should raise alarms when there is talk about a universal social ranking, as it's pretty obvious how easy you could end up with a low ranking from off hand joke about the government on Weibo. (https://international.thenewslens.com/article/65955)
I assume you've been living abroad for a while, so you must know we that aggressively criticize our own governments because we don't trust them to do the right thing, and there is ample lessons from history that proves that out. While the Chinese government wants to credit a social credit system to keep the population "honest", there is no "good governance credit system" to keep the government "honest". In the West, we have independent court systems to try and achieve that, as well as democratic elections. It doesn't always work, and corruption still flourishes, (good lord, the fucking Trump administration) but at least there's some attempted check on government power and corruption.
All I'd say is, a glass heart when China is criticized is probably not the best way to react, but I guess it may be the only way to react, since criticism of the government isn't really permitted publicly internally, the only Chinese widespread public criticism is from the external diaspora. My own feeling is that Xi is taking the country in the wrong direction and there appears to be no internal forces to stop him.
Anyway, here's an example of the hell of disputing these kinds of lists.
https://www.marketplace.org/2018/02/13/world/social-credit-s...
"Lawyer Li Xiaolin was also not given advanced notice that he was blacklisted.
In 2014, Li was sued for defamation and lost. A judge ordered Li to make an apology, which he submitted in writing in April 2015. Ten months later, when he was away on a work trip, he was blocked from buying a return flight home to Beijing. That’s when he found out he was blacklisted.
It took him another three weeks before an official told him why.
“The court said my apology was not sincere. I asked officials how they determined what is sincere.” Li said.
Eventually Li wrote a second apology and the court removed him from the blacklist in 2016. Then last year, he tried to get a credit card.
“The bank denied my application. I figured out that the bank might still have my name blacklisted and I was right,” Li said.
The bank updated its records the next day, but by that point, he had spent almost a year to fully clear his name."
Do you think you have to be super careful if you are in China and not to call Xi "Steamed Bun"?
Do you seriously believe anyone in China would get blocked of loans because a credit system is in place that assigns low score to anyone talking ill of the government?
That's what western media wants you to think. The truth behind these stories are usually a lot more complicated, but it's not in the interest of the media to unravel all the truth.
In fact, tons of people calls Xi "Steamed Bun" in China, it's like his nickname, I also do that myself.
And yes, a government blacklist do exists in China. It's totally reasonable you'll at least be denied of applying for loans if you made your way to that list. I couldn't find the reason why those Xie is on that blacklist (the article certainly downplayed that part, at least), but the article also said "Hu said the central government has not assigned any social credit scores to its citizens yet, but eventually there will be a financial credit score".
Did you see what that mean? At least these cases in the report do not have much to do with credit system because it doesn't exist yet. How things would turned out eventually is a guess, at most.
I've lived in US for quite some time, and saw tons of shit show. Why do American news media split into "Left" and "Right"? If you read reports from both sides, you'll almost see two entirely different world. And yet most Americans do not do so, they chose one side and read only what they want to believe. Is either side lying? Maybe, but not necessarily. News reporters just need to selectively report the truth that can reinforce what they believe. Magnify problems of the other side, and downplay anything that they found hurtful. That's just human nature
I'm sure you're aware of this, but I'd like to point out that U.S. (and many of its allies) has all those things as well, apart from the aggressive filtering.
At least China is up front about it.
The US has no regulation that requires the installation of spyware or face a fine or jail. China does (https://www.deepdotweb.com/2017/08/12/chinese-government-req...).
The US has no laws requiring firewalls to block or censor content from foreign countries. The US doesn't block VPNs and there is no law against them.
Yes, they try to snoop on communications, but in US domestic citizens and companies can resist with encryption and in the courts, and in general, a warrant is required for legal access. Having the NSA snoop on your conversations or use 0-days to hack isn't the same as being told to put security backdoors by the government and go to jail if you don't.
And "aggressive filtering" is your euphemism for the Great Firewall? I'd call sending to to jail for selling a VPN a little more than "aggressive filtering"
I've lived in China and to call it "aggressive filtering" is a pretty nice way of putting it.
There are some aspects of China's proposal which are good in regards to giving scores to businesses in an effort to regulate them, similar to independent reputation systems in the West, but it is the promises of "holistic rating of character" they've made and the comments about introduction of big data deep learning techniques that have people concerned. Even if intentions were completely benign, you could end up with something very bad.
The idea of using surveillance capitalism in a multipolar system is one thing, especially if there is a very transparent dispute system, but using it at the state level should scare everyone. People complain about being ruined by small tweaks to Google's ranking algorithm, but having a single ranking instituted by a government monopoly would be inescapable.
So what you consider "Important" may not be as important to them when you consider they may already expect society knows these things.
only reason gov doesn't care about imessage is either because everybody use Wechat or they know already how to read your conversations even there
The truth is, Chinese government treats foreign companies much better than local ones. Foreign companies are much easier to get loans and tons of other resources. But it certainly defines rules that all players in the market needs to obey. Do Chinese people buy Apple products because Cook has been sleeping with Chinese gov? Did Baidu, Tencent, and Alibaba all succeed because they followed instructions of Chinese gov?
Each time our wise government protects us from something unnecessary or dangerous (like ban on European dairy products or LinkedIn storing data abroad) we're only winning from this, as almost no one needed that anyway, and that now our own positions are even stronger, etc.
I can't help myself but find very close resemblance here. ;)
Just saying.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/262176/market-share-held...
Sales in China have been expanding, though it goes up and down with new iPhone releases:
https://www.forbes.com/sites/chuckjones/2018/01/13/apples-ne...
Samsung has absolutely gotten killed in China recently, but I don't think Apple has.
Apple is not doing poorly in China by any economic measure, but ya they don't sell many $200 Xiaomi/Huawei phones. I'm sure that Apple wins consistently based on phone sales revenue, even if they trail in total units sold.
The fact it's moving servers to China is most likely going to have positive effect on their sales, not negative.
The effect of iCloud moving will be mostly neutral. As long as WeChat continues to work on iPhone, whatever iCloud does won’t be very significant. I doubt most iPhone users in china even know what iCloud is.
apple devices are a few times more expensive than say Xiaomi, they thus stay in people's pocket for much longer. for shipment data, Apple's figure is not that fancy any more, they count for only 8% of the shipment in Q2 2017.
http://www.businessinsider.com/apple-and-samsung-are-losing-...
https://www.gartner.com/newsroom/id/3859963
Before start to waste your time, the 8% shipment in China figure was >14% just 24 months ago.
https://www.theverge.com/2015/5/11/8584277/smartphone-shipme...
To give you some extra details - I live in downtown Shanghai, as of writing, several months after IPhone X's release, I have not even seen the IPhone X yet as not any single one of my families, friends or colleagues has switched to that.
You are not the only one with this observation as well. Most of my friends and colleagues in different area of China had the same observation as well. I wonder why.
And may be given a lot of these phones are likely being used to do App Store Reviews, ranks, Gaming levels, etc. May be that is why we see them less around us but sales figure tells a different story.