Hacker News Reader

Comment by amelius | Hacker News Reader

Huawei just follows the law in China, just like Apple follows the same law but perhaps with some more delay.

Correct, but Apple follows US law first and Chinese law second. And Huawei follows Chinese law first and US law second. For example the US could block Apple from selling iPhones in china. If they didn't listen the US government could (theoretically) have the board arrested. Same story with China and Huawei. What this means is that China could tell Huawei to shut down their infrastructure in the US. Wether they would actualy be able to do so is unknown, but that that isn't a risk that makes sense to take.

But to your point, China has more control over Apple than the US does over Huawei as iPhones are assembled there (with most components beinf made in Korea and Taiwan).

I also read that iPhones are quickly growing in market share in China as Chinese people see them as more luxurious than their domestic brands. Which raises the question, how does iMessage, the App Store, data collection and western app policy stuff work on Chinese iPhones? There has to be some collusion/government pressure on Apple to regulate their Chinese App Store the same way Huawei is forced to regulate its domestic app store.

It's no longer just about luxury. Apple has won over the CCP with their China/Taiwan-first outsourcing practices -- not to mention $270+B invested to train young, unskilled laborers from rural China and prop up China's domestic chip business -- and now some Chinese even consider Apple as their own.

iCloud has a China region operated by a Chinese company.

https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT208351

There is no first or second tier with law the local law prevails however bad it may be.

maybe the law is wrong?

yeah, rhetorical question, but the issue here isn't necessarily adherence to local laws, but rather having some principled stance.

yeah, I'm hearing it, "principled stance"... one can dream

Apple has shareholders. It is eternally bound by the idiotic rules of capitalism, which demand higher returns every year. Principles will not matter until we force the system itself to change.

I recently read an interesting book that's picking up traction among managerial types, called "The Infinite Game" by Sinek

One of the main points is about this view that "companies must always make more short-term profit at any cost". Sinek says this is just a mind-virus that took hold after Milton Friedman started pushing it, and not only is it not actually true in any legal sense, it's a toxic philosophy that eats away at companies and slowly destroys them. He outlines how it's a big part of why Microsoft keeps losing out to Apple again and again.

(Another point it goes on about is how much more productive your workers are if you treat them like human beings)

So hopefully this book will keep getting more and more traction, and eventually we might not live in a toxic corporate dystopian hellscape

Reply on news.ycombinator.com