D
Deleted member 15949
Guest
Korea imported $468 billion dollars of things in 2020
Chinese semiconductor industry
- Thread starter Hendrik_2000
- Start date
- Status
@krautmeister bro question are they using Intel chips, if yes then it doesn't matter cause a replacement is just around the corner with a localized 14nm chips next year or maybe under the table supply from SMIC.
from CnTechPost
Huawei enters top five in global public cloud market for first time, report shows
June 30, 2021
Huawei has achieved more than 200 percent growth in the infrastructure-as-a-service (IaaS) public cloud market for the second consecutive year and entered the top five for the first time in 2020 with $2.7 billion in revenue, according to research firm Gartner.
The results show that more than 90 percent of Huawei's revenue from this business comes from Greater China, where the cloud market continues to grow rapidly.
Huawei began shifting from selling equipment to investing heavily in its cloud services business after 2019, and that difficult transition is already bearing fruit, said Sid Nag, research vice president at Gartner.
The global IaaS market reaches $64.3 billion in 2020, up 40.7 percent from $45.7 billion in 2019, according to Gartner.
The top five IaaS providers account for 80 percent of the market share in 2020, with nearly 90 percent of IaaS providers experiencing growth.
Amazon remains number one in the IaaS market in 2020, followed by Microsoft, Alibaba, Google and Huawei, respectively.
Amazon continues to lead the global IaaS market with revenues of $26.2 billion in 2020 and a 41 percent market share. Amazon's growth rate of 28.7 percent is slightly below the market average, with its sales growth primarily coming from increased customer usage.
Microsoft continues to rank second in Gartner's IaaS market share with nearly 60 percent growth and $12.7 billion in revenue in 2020.
Alibaba, the dominant IaaS provider in China, has revenues of more than $6 billion in 2020, up 52.8 percent from $4 billion in 2019. Alibaba has the highest growth rate in the education vertical at 105 percent in 2020.
Google's IaaS revenue grows 66 percent to nearly $4 billion in 2020.
You know what brother, this topic is too complicated, and the next step in the China - USA trade war, tech war, will be this, the platform war.
People do not really understand PaaS, IaaS, SaaS, and it is not easy to explain.
For those technophobes reading this message, remember the fight about President Trump wanting to nationalize TikTok, because they wanted the user data to be on US soil run by US equipment?
In other words, they wanted TikTok to be running on their American platforms, besides owning it as well.
That really was platform war.
======= ======= ========
Okay, there are two fronts to this platform war. Look at that list of that article a couple of posts back. Notice the companies, they are all American and Chinese. That is one part of the platform war, the head to head competition. Here it is about the sale of platform services.
The other part of the platform war, is the sale of the platforms itself. There was a story the other day about Huawei selling the entire infrastructure of the servers and the software for an African government to run their health network database. That should be an example of China selling the platform.
Look at it this way. The BRI. China builds the port. Huawei automates it. These Chinese platforms are exported.
Note that the word "platform" in terms of being a technological term, seems to be expanding, and that is correct IMHO. It is how the systems are integrated to the network, then the uses are propagated everywhere. It is the container port. The platform is the backend. The servers, the database, the cables, etc. But in reality, the platform at the backend is indistinguishable from the front end, which is the actual container moving around in the port.
China is selling you the complete platform, the backend and the front end.
By now, even though people really sharp in this forum, most people think this is all weird talk. Well it is. You gotta be a little geekified to dig into this stuff.
Look at that list again. That is why the Europeans are scared. This is the future of business we are talking about. Where is their platform providers? Where are their platform builders? That would be Ericsson and Nokia, and Nokia is laying people off.
Guess who sells the best 5G equipment, the world's fastest and best server rack for platform computing!
Insert your curse words here because they threw that woman in jail!
And here is where I disagree semi-conductors are not/will not be the arbiter of future success of a country let alone a society, any more than not having nuclear weapons till 20 years after some one else or being only the 5th one to have them,
There is a paragon of semi-conductor policy on an island not too far from the east coast of China, the government's semi-conductor policies are stellar, so much so it makes sure its never banned by been best buds with the sanctioners in chief. OK they didn't get round to building enough reservoirs so there's water rationing, I mean its not like there was any warning like a drought a few years back, the electricity grid is on its last legs and the health policies are to put it politely a bit suspect, but hey semiconductor policy absolutely top notch, who needs water anyway!
Making a focused and specific nuanced argument only talks to I have a point and I am right about my point.
The point that things could be better if .... yes of course things can be better if .... but if things aren't that bad what does better give you? mRNA vaccines are more 'advanced' than inactivated ones if they made earlier efforts and investments they'd be providing 'advanced' mRNA ones instead of making do with giving people old technology inactivated ones. The shame of it, having to use old technology vaccines with questionable efficacy, when they could have had new technology ones . If half the brain trust died as a result that would just ruin the country!
As for government policy making, let's take some examples in transport, the government gave tax breaks and encouraged foreign car firms to come to China, surely they should have just invested that money in Red Flag and built a national champion, The money spent on Japanese bullet trains would have been better invested in getting the domestic high speed trains up and running sooner, I mean wasn't the former head of China's railways found guilty of graft and don't get me started about letting Chinese state airlines buy from Boeing and Airbus, I mean they even let airbus have an assembly facility in country if they got their act together the COMAC C919 would be flying already, instead of wasting billions on hundreds of grounded broken Boeings, the yankees are laughing all the way to the bank! This 'criminal' behaviour is endemic across Chinese policy making, a litany of poor decisions made with glaringly obvious consequences! Semi-conductor policy is surely just the latest in a long line!
Yeah in another life I too could be a copywriter for Apple Daily, RIP!
But how have the consequences of these 'criminal' policies turned out in 2021 and are they broadly good for the country or bad?
I get your nuanced and specific point and you may well be right about your point, IMHO the point just doesn't really matter in the grand scheme of things, in the absence of time machines anyway!
Agree having access to semi conductor designer and fabbers means having a access path into becoming a high income nation. Without it China will be stuck in the so called middle income trap or as I like to call it stuck in the intelligence black hole not able to innovate further then middle income products and supply lines.
Apple Daily, RIP? More like burn in Hell !
Capital efficiency matters. China’s industrial policy before reform and opening was a dud because it had extremely poor capital efficiency. China 20 years ago had 1/12th of the GDP it has today. China 10 years ago had 1/2th the GDP it has today. We can talk about self sufficiency all we want but you’re not doubling growth in a decade or making it 12 times bigger in two decades if you dump all your money into technology efforts that can’t make quick returns on investment. Finding niches in the global supply chain to anchor your position in an industry and its markets gets you faster returns on investment. Going with capital efficiency to build up your surplus, instead of burning surplus on self sufficiency efforts that don’t recuperate your investments, was the right strategy. China can afford to go chase self sufficiency now *because* of its willingness to employ foreign supply chains for high efficiency growth earlier. Saying China should have eschewed foreign suppliers twenty years ago, when its economy was only 1/12th the size it is today, to attempt self sufficiency earlier is like trying to start a pig farm with no grain fields.
There are nuts in every country -- even China.
For those members for whom English is not their first language cognitive dissonance - the perception of contradictory information
China bashing and Sympathy for Korea is not contradictory the two don't even intersect
- Status