Friends who often pay attention to the world now should have vaguely felt that there seems to be no innovation in all walks of life, especially in the field of pure technology. It seems that everyone is used to copying me and you, and the word "quantity" is also used badly. Familiar areas are copied from each other, and new areas dare not break through. Obviously it is a dead end, but not many people are willing to change this situation.
A friend has worked in a manufacturing company for many years. His company applies for many "patents" every year and declares "intelligent manufacturing" to the outside world. At that time, I thought his company was very powerful, and he smiled without saying a word. After a while, he said that many patents are actually very simple, and they can be passed after being modified on the basis of other people's designs. Of course, I didn't verify whether this is true or not.
According to him, this situation is not a case in the industry. Many companies will do this in order to make patents look better in quantity, regardless of whether there is gold content or not and whether there is practical use. Therefore, although we have numerous patents every year, when we are really stuck in the neck, they all show their true colors. So under such circumstances, whoever is willing to take the initiative to innovate is obviously great.
In the era of technological change, whether it is admitted or not, American theory of strength is well-deserved, but strength is not innate. Moreover, the strength of the United States should be called a rare miracle in the past few hundred years, because it took only 100 years for the United States to become the only superpower in the world. When we look for the root of American power, we can easily find that technology has played a vital role in their power path.
A useful technology is enough to change an era, and the emergence of steam engine technology ignited the first industrial revolution; The appearance of internal combustion engine changed the life of steam engine and created the second industrial revolution. The greatness of country M lies in that although these technologies are not from its own hands, they can be fully utilized every time, and ultimately the comprehensive national strength of country M will be comprehensively improved.
Moreover, there is a saying that the United States used special means to "steal" Britain's "steam engine technology", and the British who took out the technology are still placed on the shame column of British history. The United States knows best how terrible the power of technology is. Huawei was suppressed because of this. If they can't keep up with the technology of this era, they are likely to be caught up or overtaken.
Without the support of mobile phone business, Huawei, a pioneer, would indeed slow down the overall development, and high-end chips could not be produced, but Huawei did not stop. On the way forward, it is not the first time to encounter difficulties. As Ren said, the more dangerous it is, the easier it is to inspire Huawei's fighting spirit. So Huawei has always been different from those companies that like to be content with the status quo.
The same is the beginning of playing assembly, but there is almost no such level as Huawei. This has a lot to do with the way a company plays. For example, Lenovo at the same time with him started as well as Huawei, but after so many years, apart from having a good market share, there are not many core technologies that are really available. If the outside world does something bad, it may directly step into the edge of life and death, so why doesn't Huawei?
Just look at how Huawei does it. Many companies encounter such difficulties, and the first reaction is mostly to lay off employees and save costs. However, Huawei is doing the opposite. It first recruits top talents in the industry with high salary, and then forms a new technical team to rush to new goals. As the saying goes, if the east is not bright and the west is bright, and the chip can't be broken for a while, then I will work hard in other areas. This is certainly wise.
Why dare you play like this? The first point, of course, is that Huawei has a solid foundation, and the immediate difficulties are not enough to affect Huawei's lifeline. Secondly, Huawei knows the importance of talents and technology, and only by retaining talents can it have a future. Having top talents is hope. With this feeling, I don't trust Huawei. Do you believe in low-end enterprises that are unwilling to work hard on talents?