×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

cancel ×
This is a preview of your comment

No Comment Title Entered

Anonymous Coward 1 minute ago

No Comment Entered

96 comments

Trade deficit (1)

Dan East (318230) | more than 2 years ago | (#37131646)

Good. Even though the product is made in China, there is still a large profit margin that will stream some money the other way, reducing the USA's trade deficit a bit. Essentially any money coming OUT of China is a good thing at this point.

Re:Trade deficit (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37131716)

Good. Even though the product is made in China, there is still a large profit margin that will stream some money the other way, reducing the USA's trade deficit a bit. Essentially any money coming OUT of China is a good thing at this point.

Yeah, the CEOs and Wall Street pukes really need the money!

Gotta go, my 401K is in the toilet and I have to get to the store and unload a truck. It's a good thing I went to college and got that MBA because they'd have me cleaning bathrooms without it!

*Any money flowing back in to the US hasn't and won't do you or me any good. It just enriches the top 1%. We are spiraling down and if you're doing well, enjoy it while you can.

Re:Trade deficit (0)

scottbomb (1290580) | more than 2 years ago | (#37131910)

And if it weren't for CEOs and Wall Street, few of us would have a job to go to.

Re:Trade deficit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37132062)

Eh? We would be decently off without neither. Perhaps if we had CEOs that only made four to 10 times as much as the grotts on the front lines instead of 2 orders of magnitude minimum.

Wall Street just amplifies disasters. Crap happens, stocks hit the shitter, banks freak and stop lending, and down we go.

Re:Trade deficit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37132150)

Believe it or not, as a consumer, you have a say in how much CEOs make. If you don't like how much they make, buy a different product, or invest in a different company. And don't tell me that all companies from which you buy products are like this. You can get everything you need from locally owned businesses.

Re:Trade deficit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37132610)

Haha. That's the dumbest version of "vote with your wallet" I've read yet. Thanks. At least the suggestion about buying local is a good one, even if it has absolutely no effect on CEO salaries.

Re:Trade deficit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37132908)

Of course it has an effect on CEO salaries. Where do you think their money comes from?

Re:Trade deficit (1)

antifoidulus (807088) | more than 2 years ago | (#37137780)

Cannibalizing the assets of the corporation they are supposed to be in charge of? Thats pretty much it, Republicans have fought tooth and nail to make sure that CEOs are not at all responsible to the shareholders they are ostensibly serving. As a result CEOs have pretty much been given the go ahead to gorge themselves on as much of the company's stored wealth as they can, and if it gets to the point of collapse, they can liquidate whatever productive assets there may be and give it to themselves.

Re:Trade deficit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37132198)

And if it weren't for CEOs and Wall Street, few of us would have a job to go to.

You are kidding right? Why don't we just rid of all them rich folk who fired us right now! Get rid of the CEOs, The Investors, get rid of the banks too right?
I heard that them jews have banks with 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 gold shekels in there and they won't give us any! Down with the rich!

Because that will get you your job back. moron.

Re:Trade deficit (1, Insightful)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | more than 2 years ago | (#37131930)

my 401k is chock full of shares of stock in the companies you are hating on. they do well, I do well. because I own part of them.

what the hell is your 401k full of? Raisins and modeling clay?

Also, the "top 1%" isn't a club that's impossible to get in to. hard? sure. impossible? nope. how did Bill Gates get in? How did the waltons get in? How did Paul McCartney and Oprah get in? Find a nitch, fill it, manage your money well, make sound decisions, and you can get in.

Me I'm perfectly happy if I can pay my morgage, car payments, put money away for retirement, etc... while still affording the occasional toy like an ipad or a new guitar without going in to debt. I can do that. That's all I ever really wanted out of life. Some of us are perfectly happy not trying to be Warren Buffet, but that doesn't mean that we couldn't be.

You're delusional (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37132212)

Man, you sure bought into American Myth. Dream on. You will never be rich - ever. McCartney (British), Oprah, Gates, Zuckerburg - you name it - were extremely lucky: either lucky to have been born with the talent; lucky for being at the right and time place; or all the above. You can work until you're blue in the face and balls and you will never ever get to where they are. I know this. We're told to work hard, get an education, take some risks and you will become rich - it's a GIVEN! Bullshit. Utter bullshit. Been there done that (3 times!) and I'm broke!

And look at the markets. Your 401ks are doing shitty if not now, then they will be.

You're delusional.

Re:You're delusional (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37132376)

Actually my 401(k) is up 4 fold since the March 2009 low, up 30% since the S&P downgrade, and up 0.4% in today's bloodbath.

Re:You're delusional (1)

lgarner (694957) | more than 2 years ago | (#37132392)

We're told to work hard, get an education, take some risks and you will become rich - it's a GIVEN!

That's a flat-out lie. Either someone lied to you and you were unusually gullible, or you're lying now. I believe the latter.

No one's ever said anything like that to me, or to anyone that I know of. You and I almost certainly won't get rich, but you create your own opportunities. Work creating value and you can do all right. The world doesn't owe you anything.

Re:You're delusional (0)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | more than 2 years ago | (#37132786)

no, your 401k is shitty. mine is fine.

Btw, tell you "it's impossible" story to my mother-in-law who grew up in a tiny little house, the daughter of a car salesman, and now owns several businesses, multiple houses, many acres of land (the parcel which the main branch of her businesses sitting upon last appraised for ~ $3 million, SANS the business on it), gets paid many thousands to give seminars at national conventions, plays around in the stock market as she likes, and travels abroad when she desires.

Know how she did that? hard work, good business decisions, and being smart with her money. In the 12 years that I have known her, I've watched her be quite unlucky several times, and still her fortune is intact.

Maybe you need to re-evaluate.

Re:You're delusional (1)

Dogtanian (588974) | more than 2 years ago | (#37133146)

Gates

Bill Gates was from a very well-off and (even more importantly) well-connected upper middle class background. His father was the president of a national bank, and his mother was a businesswoman who served on the board of the United Way charity along with... the CEO of IBM.

Now, I'm not claiming that Gates' success was solely due to this, but you can bet it clearly gave him a major advantage and opened some doors that might never be opened to the majority of Americans. His background was far more privileged than that of the ordinary American middle-class guy some believe him to be.

Re:Trade deficit (2)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 2 years ago | (#37132248)

Also, the "top 1%" isn't a club that's impossible to get in to. hard? sure. impossible? nope.

I'd say it's closer to impossible, and I don't know what that has to do with GP's point. We shouldn't try to change the current situation where the top 1% takes all because there's a slightly greater than zero percent chance we could make it into that 1%? That seems to be the only semi-logical reason people are opposed to any talk of wealth redistribution for the uber-wealthy. I guess if you think you have a shot at that, it's valid.

My philosophy is hope for the best and prepare for the worst: you should do all you can to get into that 1% but vote for taxes, a public welfare system, and budgets on the assumption that you won't.

Some of us are perfectly happy not trying to be Warren Buffet, but that doesn't mean that we couldn't be.

It's worth pointing out that Warren Buffet is telling anyone who will listen that he's not being taxed enough and that he shouldn't be that wealthy. One of the guys at the top is saying the situation is absurd.

Re:Trade deficit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37133134)

It's worth pointing out that Warren Buffet is telling anyone who will listen that he's not being taxed enough and that he shouldn't be that wealthy. One of the guys at the top is saying the situation is absurd.

Well, I'll point out that if Warren doesn't think he's paying enough taxes, how about he just give me some (no strings attached)? I'm sure I'll find good use for his money :)

Re:Trade deficit (0)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | more than 2 years ago | (#37133194)

I'd say it's closer to impossible, and I don't know what that has to do with GP's point. We shouldn't try to change the current situation where the top 1% takes all because there's a slightly greater than zero percent chance we could make it into that 1%? That seems to be the only semi-logical reason people are opposed to any talk of wealth redistribution for the uber-wealthy. I guess if you think you have a shot at that, it's valid.

no it seems to me that the GP is engaging in sky-is-falling-we're-all-screwed delusions just like every generation has engaged in. Only one of them was right, the one in the 30s, and what happened? the economy re-emerged to become one of the strongest in the world. It's popular to say nowadays "oh no the next great depression is coming", because people like to worry and complain. Doesn't make it true, or even truly likely. It sells papers and gets web hits, that's it. doesn't make it any more true than the rest of the BS alarmist stuff on the net.

I'm curious what right you think you have to the wealth of the uber-wealthy, what justification you have for wealth redistribution. "They have more than they need, so fuck them, gimme"? I was raised to believe "what's mine is mine, what belongs to others belongs to others". I always figured that's how everybody thought. I never understood lambasting the top 1% for being greedy and then saying that we should take their money from them because we want our cut of it. Is that not the same greed that we're accusing them of? Or is it different because, you know, we're special... and once again, fuck them for having the audacity to have a lot more money than we do? Where does our right to their money come from? assuming that aren't illegally gaming the system, and they're paying in fairly just like we are, where is our right to demand more? what is our moral justification?

My philosophy is hope for the best and prepare for the worst: you should do all you can to get into that 1% but vote for taxes, a public welfare system, and budgets on the assumption that you won't.

your idea and my idea of "preparing" may be different.

It's worth pointing out that Warren Buffet is telling anyone who will listen that he's not being taxed enough and that he shouldn't be that wealthy. One of the guys at the top is saying the situation is absurd.

That's not what I got from his article. What I got was "there are loopholes that benefit the rich that we don't need and are unfairly benefiting us over those who earn less. Also, some of us are taxed much less than others of us who make similar income by qualifying for loopholes based on the manner in which we earn money, and that is unfair." Both of these are sentiments I agree with. There is no reason that one guy should be taxed differently than another guy depending on how they make their income if they make the same amount in the end. Nor is there a reason to provide loopholes that do not apply equally to different people (or really a reason to provide loopholes at all).

I never heard Mr Buffet say "I have too much money, please come take it". Perhaps I need to re-read. If you'd be so kind as to point out where he said that? He used the final percentage of his income that he pays compared to his employees to point out the unbalanced benefit he receives from those deductions and loopholes. I noted that he paid more in taxes last year than I am likely to even earn in my entire lifetime, for roughly the same overall benefit that I receive for paying a couple or orders-of-magnitude less.

People like to say that the rich pay more because they benefit more, but that's not true. Not really. If the US gets invaded, the marines aren't heading to his house first to guard it. I doubt his roads get repaved every 6 weeks instead of once a decade or so like mine. FDIC isn't insuring much more of his money than mine at this point. Hell, his kids probably didn't even go to the public schools he is funding. Where's the 2000% benefit over what I'm getting?

Re:Trade deficit (3, Interesting)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 2 years ago | (#37134644)

I'm curious what right you think you have to the wealth of the uber-wealthy, what justification you have for wealth redistribution. "They have more than they need, so fuck them, gimme"?

You seem to have typed an awful lot there, it's too bad you had to go and throw a ridiculous straw man in there at the beginning, advertising that there was nothing of value in your post.

Re:Trade deficit (0)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | more than 2 years ago | (#37135088)

odd, I was replying directly to your own assertion that we should be looking at wealth re-distribution, or is that not what your quote below means:

That seems to be the only semi-logical reason people are opposed to any talk of wealth redistribution for the uber-wealthy.

Sure sounds like you're promoting the idea. Me, I provided the only logical thought process by which I believe people can justify wealth re-distribution, that is the "I think that we should take their money from them because I personally do not think they should have it." i.e. "because, fuck them."

I then questioned the morality of that assertion.

Re:Trade deficit (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 2 years ago | (#37136048)

Sure sounds like you're promoting the idea. Me, I provided the only logical thought process by which I believe people can justify wealth re-distribution, that is the "I think that we should take their money from them because I personally do not think they should have it." i.e. "because, fuck them." I then questioned the morality of that assertion.

Well, that would be the strawman argument right there: I never made that assertion. Others may have, that's true. I'm in favor of wealth redistribution because I feel it's better for a stable society and is more moral. You can attack people who make statements in favor of wealth redistribution who do say "Because fuck rich people," you could even go so far as to say that MOST of the people who are arguing for wealth redistribution just hate rich people. Maybe it's the ONLY argument in favor of wealth redistribution you've heard.

But it's not an argument I made. It's not even an argument that the AC made.

Re:Trade deficit (1)

Bert64 (520050) | more than 2 years ago | (#37134552)

If Warren truly believes he's paying too much tax, he simply has to overpay his taxes and refuse to collect any refund they offer him.

Re:Trade deficit (1)

interkin3tic (1469267) | more than 2 years ago | (#37134794)

He is giving most of his money to charity [wikipedia.org] .

This is only hypocrisy if one confuses saying "Taxes should be higher" with "The government is better at investing money in society than anyone else." I'm sure his first preference would be that the wealthy give most of their money to effective charities. Realizing that they obviously won't do that of their own volition, his second preference is that the government tax the wealthy more. In the mean time, he feels he can give money to charity, spending it better than the government would, while urging the second preference.

Re:Trade deficit (1)

Cyberax (705495) | more than 2 years ago | (#37134676)

"We shouldn't try to change the current situation where the top 1% takes all because there's a slightly greater than zero percent chance we could make it into that 1%?"

Nope. We should strive to change the distribution of income. So that the top 1% were not owning many times that of bottom 50%.

Re:Trade deficit (1)

triffid_98 (899609) | more than 2 years ago | (#37132258)

Also, the "top 1%" isn't a club that's impossible to get in to. hard? sure. impossible? nope. how did Bill Gates get in?

Use his daddy's money to buy QDOS and license it to IBM?

Your 401k would be full of raisins and modeling clay too if you weren't making enough extra to invest, which lots of people aren't...meanwhile, the 'greatest generation' is enjoying prop 13 housing, social security and generous pension benefits. Rock on sir.

Re:Trade deficit (1)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | more than 2 years ago | (#37132858)

Also, the "top 1%" isn't a club that's impossible to get in to. hard? sure. impossible? nope. how did Bill Gates get in?

Use his daddy's money to buy QDOS and license it to IBM?
 

How does that invalidate my point exactly? sounds to me like a smart business decision, filling a niche.

Your 401k would be full of raisins and modeling clay too if you weren't making enough extra to invest, which lots of people aren't...meanwhile, the 'greatest generation' is enjoying prop 13 housing, social security and generous pension benefits. Rock on sir.

spoken like a defeatist. assuming you have a job, you can easily drop something like 5% of your pre-tax income into a retirement fund almost no matter what you make. if you think you can't, the answer is that you won't. you won't give up the beer. you won't give up the cable tv. you won't give up the premium tier internet connection. you won't give up the big gas guzzling pickup. you won't give up eating out at mcdonalds. something. you can find 5% pre-tax somewhere. you won't even miss it when it doesn't show up in your paycheck. I was able to do this a decade ago when I was making jack shit doing a bullshit menial job, why can't you again?

the answer is it is easier to complain, point fingers, and cry.

Re:Trade deficit (1)

triffid_98 (899609) | more than 2 years ago | (#37134832)

How does that invalidate my point exactly? sounds to me like a smart business decision, filling a niche.

It invalidates your point in that your dad won't give you 100K in 1975 dollars to speculate with? This may be because he doesn't own a highly profitable law firm or it may be that he thinks you should finish your degree at Harvard first, I'm not sure. You should ask him.

For myself, I put away money into funds/stocks every year. That does not mean I'll ever be able to retire, it just means I'll be able to supplement my income as a Walmart greeter assuming we still have those in the year 2025. Investing 5% with a real inflation rate of around 9% = not a lot without some serious risk taking.

Re:Trade deficit (1)

NFN_NLN (633283) | more than 2 years ago | (#37134456)

Also, the "top 1%" isn't a club that's impossible to get in to. hard? sure. impossible? nope. how did Bill Gates get in? How did the waltons get in? How did Paul McCartney and Oprah get in? Find a nitch, fill it, manage your money well, make sound decisions, and you can get in.

{whistle}{whistle} Fetch the carrot boy, come one... fetch the carrot... you almost got it, fetch the carrot... {whistle}{whistle}

Re:Trade deficit (1)

LBArrettAnderson (655246) | more than 2 years ago | (#37131974)

Nothing is stopping you from buying Apple stock. I know a lot of people who own shares of aapl who aren't anywhere near the "top 1%"

Re:Trade deficit (1)

Marc Madness (2205586) | more than 2 years ago | (#37132798)

The fact that Apple stock is hovering around $364 [google.com] at the moment is probably stopping quite a few people from buying it.

Re:Trade deficit (1)

Anonymous Psychopath (18031) | more than 2 years ago | (#37133226)

The market is tanking, not Apple specifically. I hate to point out the obvious, but you want to buy low and sell high, not the other way around. Just 'cause a stock is down doesn't mean you shouldn't buy it. Doesn't mean you should, either.

Re:Trade deficit (1)

Marc Madness (2205586) | more than 2 years ago | (#37133848)

The stock being down does not change the fact that most people probably can't afford to buy stock at $364/share.

Re:Trade deficit (1)

Anonymous Psychopath (18031) | more than 2 years ago | (#37134846)

The stock being down does not change the fact that most people probably can't afford to buy stock at $364/share.

They can if they don't buy an iPhone instead.

Re:Trade deficit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37135836)

How do you go from "only benefits the top 1%" to "well, there are some people who can't afford any shares of apple." ? More than 1% of the population can afford to buy stock in almost whatever company they want (Berkshire Hathaway being one exception--which is funny, since poor people seem to love Warren Buffett these days).

Re:Trade deficit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37132386)

"Yeah, the CEOs and Wall Street pukes really need the money!"

Pukes indeed. Everyone I know is celebrating this implosion fo the stock market. The rich bastards that have been robbing us working folks blind for decades are finally getting whats coming to them. People like us living paycheck to paycheck aren't being hurt by this. It's the greed rich bastards that are crying now, and you know what? I don't feel a BIT sorry for the assholes.

Re:Trade deficit (1)

Anonymous Psychopath (18031) | more than 2 years ago | (#37133300)

"Yeah, the CEOs and Wall Street pukes really need the money!"

Pukes indeed. Everyone I know is celebrating this implosion fo the stock market. The rich bastards that have been robbing us working folks blind for decades are finally getting whats coming to them. People like us living paycheck to paycheck aren't being hurt by this. It's the greed rich bastards that are crying now, and you know what? I don't feel a BIT sorry for the assholes.

Are you somehow under the impression that you need a mustache, monocle and top hat in order to invest? Or perhaps you think Social Security will be enough to retire on? Good luck with that.

Re:Trade deficit (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37133978)

stick with me for a moment here.

If you're hanging around slashdot, one would assume you probably have some sort of "nerd knowledge". the katy perry, abercrombie, and jersey shore crowd doesn't generally spend a lot of time here.

Generally speaking, if applied correctly, the knowledge that I am assuming you possess can probably be parlayed into a fairly lucrative position, even if only to get in on entry-level and earn more over the next few years. there are plenty of staffing agencies/headhunters that would love to help you with this. I had no less than 3 looking for temp-to-hire positions for me when I moved to my current location. positions I was offered -started- at $19/hr, and I don't even have a single certification to my name (I'm fairly lazy about actually getting them, though I have taken the MOC classes). Within a month I was on a temp project making $24.63 an hour, and two months later I was interviewing for my current position where after being hired full time I'm now making $58k a year with a $3.8k bonus yearly. I still don't have certifications or even a BS. I have experience and knowledge, and I worked my way up the ladder (I won't bore you with the bullshit minimum wage jobs I worked and every step up the ladder.)

I no longer live paycheck to paycheck. maybe you should stop glorifying the position you've found yourself in that you are obviously unhappy with, and start leveraging the knowledge you most likely possess in order to get ahead.

If on the other hand you really don't know what you're doing, I apologize, go back to your grind.

Re:Trade deficit (1)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 2 years ago | (#37132058)

The iPhone 4 is already sold in China. This is just a deal to offer it on another carrier, China Mobile.

Re:Trade deficit (1)

SLot (82781) | more than 2 years ago | (#37132064)

If apple wants to do business in china, part of it will be setting up chinese company. so a lot of that money will end up staying in china anyways.

wouldn't this involve just not exporting them? (1)

Skarecrow77 (1714214) | more than 2 years ago | (#37131650)

Considering they're all made there?

yes yes, technological differences and all...

Re:wouldn't this involve just not exporting them? (1)

mjwx (966435) | more than 2 years ago | (#37137208)

Considering they're all made there?

yes yes, technological differences and all...

What scares me is the number of people that think Iphones haven't been available in China since they were first manufactured.

Yes, Authentic Iphones.

News report continues (2)

Oxford_Comma_Lover (1679530) | more than 2 years ago | (#37131658)

The Demolition Man inspired phone will issue citations to chinese citizens for violation of the verbal morality statute on the recognition of key phrases including "human rights," "free tibet," "taiwan had the right idea," and "Hey, you sass that hoopy Ford Prefect? There's a frood who really knows where his towel is."

Good Plan (1)

mr1911 (1942298) | more than 2 years ago | (#37131662)

Distract them with Angry Birds.

Re:Good Plan (1)

EraserMouseMan (847479) | more than 2 years ago | (#37131926)

Angry Jobs maybe. He's pissed that China just leaked that they are in talks with Apple. Not even the Chinese government are permitted to speak of secret Apple deals in the works.

Re:Good Plan (1)

GameboyRMH (1153867) | more than 2 years ago | (#37131944)

I think they'll have to change up Angry Birds for the Chinese release. All those rebellious dissenting birds knocking down the establishment of the pigs who stole from them?

Instead maybe they'll call it Hard-Working Miner Birds, replace the various bricks with different kinds of soil and the pigs with precious gems that the birds must work together to extract.

Re:Good Plan (1)

Cryacin (657549) | more than 2 years ago | (#37132146)

it has come to my attention that a few of you "bad eggs" have been smoking mari-hu-juana i have news for you thats illegal not cool!

Establishment! Establishment! You always know what's best!

Dammit! (1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37131736)

I was going to send all my relatives out to the Apple stores to buy the iPhone 5 when it comes out so I can sell to China for insanely huge profits! Damn you Steve Jobs!

Slashdot Reverses Real Story +4, True (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37131756)

iPhones coming from China To U.S.A. !!!!!

Losers.

Yours In Osh,
K. Trout

They already have the iPhone (1)

MattGWU (86623) | more than 2 years ago | (#37131758)

Oh...what, real ones?

Re:They already have the iPhone (1)

Macrat (638047) | more than 2 years ago | (#37135960)

Oh...what, real ones?

Apple has been selling real unlocked iPhones in China for quite a while. My factory unlocked iPhone 3GS was sold in Hong Kong.

Ripper from the headlines... (1)

mcmonkey (96054) | more than 2 years ago | (#37131760)

...of 2008.

iPhones are already out in China. What do they think those Apple stores are selling?

What is wrong with Slashdot? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37131780)

Seriously, a one or two sentence advert gets top billing here? Who cares if China is getting the iPhone, what is this Engadget?

Been there for a year (3, Informative)

dogmatixpsych (786818) | more than 2 years ago | (#37131792)

http://www.apple.com/pr/library/2010/09/19iPhone-4-Available-in-China-on-September-25.html [apple.com]

The iPhone is on China Unicom; this is just an announcement about being on a new provider too. China Mobile is much bigger though.

Re:Been there for a year (1)

Cryacin (657549) | more than 2 years ago | (#37132172)

I seriously read that as China Unicorn.

Re:Been there for a year (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37133204)

I seriously read that as China Unicorn.

Ditto! :-)

Re:Been there for a year (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37132224)

The iPhone is on China Unicorn

Wait wait wait.

The iPhone really is powered by unicorn farts??? I thought that was hyperbole.

Re:Been there for a year (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37133748)

I think the news story here is that Apple is supporting another mobile standard, namely TD-SCDMA. This is news because it requires another baseband technology to support. By my count this would make three, listed by their common names, GSM (AT&T), CDMA (Verizon), and now TD-SCDMA (China Mobile). It appears this is a proprietary version of CDMA that emphasizes time division multiplexing over frequency division multiplexing, developed in China. Probably to reduce dependence on western technology and to reduce the costs associated with licensing CDMA technology.

I find this fascinating because Apple now needs to support three different standard for the future phones. This trend will greatly increase the development time and cost for future iPhones.

Re:Been there for a year (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37135968)

I've got a gf in china who has an iphone. But it was purchased in the states.

Misleading title (1)

euyis (1521257) | more than 2 years ago | (#37131802)

iPhone's actually coming to China Mobile - currently iPhone is exclusive to China Unicom in China.

I hope they fix the speed issue (1)

RobertinXinyang (1001181) | more than 2 years ago | (#37136830)

I am using my iPhone with a China Mobile SIM and it is extremely slow. All the apps and launching runs very slow when I have the China Mobile SIM in it.

I am hoping that, whatever they do, it will fix this issue and that it will allow me to update my OS without loosing my ability to connect to China Mobile.

China has the iPhone already. (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Psychopath (18031) | more than 2 years ago | (#37131862)

Just about everyone I saw in Shenzhen and Dongguan a couple months ago was rocking an iPhone 4. Fewer in Beijing but they were still plentiful. My unlocked iPhone 3G worked just fine in each of the six cities I visited, including data. The app store is a different subject, though.

Re:China has the iPhone already. (1)

antdude (79039) | more than 2 years ago | (#37132540)

Can you use this unlocked iPhone outside of China like in USA, Korea, Japan, etc.? I have a client who wants one use in anywhere in the world.

Re:China has the iPhone already. (1)

Anonymous Psychopath (18031) | more than 2 years ago | (#37133026)

This was a US AT&T iPhone that was jailbroken & unlocked, then used with a SIM bought while in mainland China.

Re:China has the iPhone already. (1)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 2 years ago | (#37133160)

Buy a UK one, that is already unlocked. It will work on any GSM network in the world.

Re:China has the iPhone already. (1)

tlhIngan (30335) | more than 2 years ago | (#37134434)

Buy a UK one, that is already unlocked. It will work on any GSM network in the world.

A lot of Americans actually bought iPhones in Canada because they were unlocked.

A lot less now since Apple sells unlocked iPhones in the US.

Re:China has the iPhone already. (1)

Macrat (638047) | more than 2 years ago | (#37135990)

I use my factory unlocked iPhone 3GS purchased from Apple in Hong Kong on a $49.99 T-Mobile plan in the US.

Re:China has the iPhone already. (1)

initialE (758110) | more than 2 years ago | (#37136736)

That's pretty sad that you need to ask for an unlocked phone in the land of the free, whereas unlocked phones are sold freely in more restrictive societies (*cough* Singapore *cough*)

Re:China has the iPhone already. (1)

donscarletti (569232) | more than 2 years ago | (#37137890)

If you want a internationally usable phone in China, just buy a standard WCDMA model from China Unicom and use it anywhere. If you insist on using China Mobile, just get a non-3G SIM and use GPRS to surf, hell, most people I know with an iPhone these days do just that, because Unicom signal is a little bit on the shitty side. If you buy a TDSCDMA phone in China and you are not firmly rooted in China then you are an idiot.

Re:China has the iPhone already. (2)

microbee (682094) | more than 2 years ago | (#37133500)

Yes. Unicom already has it. It's China Mobile that will get iPhone the first time.

Re:China has the iPhone already. (1)

Threni (635302) | more than 2 years ago | (#37136042)

> Just about everyone I saw in Shenzhen and Dongguan a couple months ago was rocking an iPhone 4

Hey, if that's what you've got to do to get a decent signal on one, go for it. ( If the cellphone coverage in Shenzhen is as miserable as the population themselves then I'm not at all surprised. )

Re:China has the iPhone already. (1)

Anonymous Psychopath (18031) | more than 2 years ago | (#37138598)

> Just about everyone I saw in Shenzhen and Dongguan a couple months ago was rocking an iPhone 4

Hey, if that's what you've got to do to get a decent signal on one, go for it. ( If the cellphone coverage in Shenzhen is as miserable as the population themselves then I'm not at all surprised. )

You've been there, right? No, I didn't think so.

Privacy? (1)

chemosh6969 (632048) | more than 2 years ago | (#37131874)

Don't worry. Jobs won't have any problem making sure the government won't have trouble getting user info off the phones. If he supported privacy, the government simply wouldn't allow them.

Re:Privacy? (1)

tooyoung (853621) | more than 2 years ago | (#37131948)

Which phones do you recommend then that aren't sold in China?

Re:Privacy? (1)

chemosh6969 (632048) | more than 2 years ago | (#37132676)

You just need an unlocked phone that supports the network that you can put your SIM into. So that person can pick what they want.

Re:Privacy? (1)

jo_ham (604554) | more than 2 years ago | (#37133182)

So an iPhone then. They do sell unlocked ones. Not in China though at the moment, clearly.

Oh God No (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37132286)

What new incompetence is the Chinese cooking up this time?

Sounds like they're building... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37132306)

A Great Walled Garden.

Augg, what about all the clone ones there now? (1)

John Sokol (109591) | more than 2 years ago | (#37132362)

When I was in ShenZhen last, a few Chinese had iPhone clones that looked a lot like the real deal.

Re:Augg, what about all the clone ones there now? (2)

93 Escort Wagon (326346) | more than 2 years ago | (#37132686)

When I was in ShenZhen last, a few Chinese had iPhone clones that looked a lot like the real deal.

Apparently, as other people have pointed out, the real iPhone has been available to Chinese consumers since last September. This announcement is just about a second carrier also getting the handset.

It was a bit funny to read this Slashdot story, since just last night I saw a news story about how the Chinese are rather taken with Obama's new ambassador to China, Gary Locke [nwsource.com] . The reason? He carries his own bags. How do they know this? A photo on their big social networking site, taken by a Chinese businessman... using an iPhone.

iphone STARTED in china (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37132412)

The iphone is MADE in china, and was available in China before it was available in the USA. I knew chinese ppls who had one before it came out in the USA.

So what is this "coming to china" nonsense?

iPhone In China (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37133364)

China already has the iPhone, just with a different provider. China Unicom. As of last November, which I left China, they only offered 3g but it was Apple compatible.

sorry but (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37136004)

The iPhone was in China like 6 years ago under the name EyePho.

Duh.

Hey why not? (1)

Trogre (513942) | more than 2 years ago | (#37137022)

They're all made there anyway. They're just selling to their local market.

Designed by Apple in California means nothing.

Re:Hey why not? (1)

mjwx (966435) | more than 2 years ago | (#37137264)

They're all made there anyway. They're just selling to their local market.

Designed by Apple in California means nothing.

The Chinese version will say,

Built by slave labour in shenzhen.

It's been here for ages. (1)

maRwilli (1419171) | more than 2 years ago | (#37138498)

unlocked UMTS iPhones have been available in China for at least 18 months to 2 years. They run on the China Unicom UMTS network at 3G, or you can run them on the China Mobile network at 2.5G. The discussion is whether the iPhone should run TD-SCDMA or perhaps LTE, the first of which China Mobile supports as its 3G standard now, the second being what they are going to. As to the content of iPhones, they are assembled in China by HonHai (FoxConn), which has 1M employees all over China but the supply chain is from all over the world. Even with the Chinese labour component, the Chinese content is not the biggest component. (I can't remember whether it was Japan or Korea).

Isn't this backwards? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 2 years ago | (#37139526)

Aren't the phones already made in China, and shipped to the rest of the world? So they're already there..

Check for New Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Sign up for Slashdot Newsletters
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...