Chinese Telecom Company Launches 'RedBerry'

Ubergrendle writes "The Globe&Mail is reporting that Chinese telecom company China Unicom Ltd. is launching a new wireless device unapologetically named 'Redberry'. This comes in the wake of an almost 2 year regulatory delay blocking the introduction of RIM's Blackberries to mainland China. Certainly this delay was convenient to China Unicom, if not deliberately staged to allow for domestic competition."

No Picture

[Ecko7889]

No picture in article (-1, Uninformative)

Leave it to China

[42Penguins]

I'm not sure whether to laugh or cry at the name "RedBerry." Does the "awakening dragon" suddenly have a sense of humor??
It sounds like something a college kid would make up as a prank and try to sell.
There's gotta be some marketing exec in Beijing reading the paper and going "ROFL" over this...

Why the fascination

[IamGarageGuy 2]

I know that China is the "new world" and all but for every company to fall all over themselves to deal with them is a bit rediculous. A country that prides itself in constraining all markets, destroying their populace and basically giving the middle finger to rest of the planet is put on a pedestal by the countries that should be invading them to free their people? As all the "free" countries fall all over themselves to sell and buy from a country that is as close to slave labour as we have presently. Maybe we should just forget about them for a while and they may go away, just like Soviet Russia. Before you mod me to hell, think about when you purchase your Walmart crap that is produced by children that don't make enough to feed themselves.

Re:Why is blackberry so unique?

[Kadin2048]

I used to wonder the same thing. The closest I've ever heard to an explanation is that Blackberry's "product" is less the little handsets but the infrastructure that the cellular carriers use to provide email service. Apparently BB is very easy to deploy, and they have patents on some rather vague concepts regarding (don't quote me on this exactly) where the email is cached. I think the crux of it is that when a cell carrier deploys a BB system, they don't have to dick around with actually running the mailservers or anything else; it's a very holistic/'total package' type solution from their perspective.

Now why somebody else doesn't just make a similar network and market it to the cell carriers, I'm not sure. That's where I'm betting the patents come in. But I think BB has sold itself to the cell carriers as being easier to implement and maintain than a roll-your-own solution, and their handsets and all-you-can-eat pricing (versus SMS) have gotten them a good userbase and the associated name recognition.

If anyone can elaborate on exactly how the BB system works, I would be interested.

Re:Why is blackberry so unique?

[Rude Turnip]

"Also, what about all those other ideas like having two letters assigned to each keyboard button and then having the phone sort it out based on what it thinks you're probably trying to type? Or something like a chording keyboard (though that would require learning)?"

The only types of people I know with crackberries are attorneys, hedge fund managers and accountants that would have zero patience for learning a new way to type. They don't want to fiddle with T9 when most of the stuff they type is very specialized and wouldn't show up automatically. A mini-QWERTY kbd is quick and good enough for their needs.

How Typical!

[abstractrude]

RedBerry, wow what a suprise. I love this communist scum, they keep blackberry out so their state controlled telecom company can introduce "MaoBerry" which is probably full of snooping tools. I bet the every email coming from a "MaoBerry" is processed by the government for improper use of the "MaoBerry" or RedBerry. But the guy earlier was right, where is the picture. I wonder if the battery door has a hammer and sickle?

How about "We take our ball and go home"?

[Sir Unimaginative]

After God-knows-how-many years of "most favoured nation" trade status, a freakishly large amount of production takes place in China; they also have a lot of our foreign debt.

Now imagine either of two scenarios:

1) China ceases production for the US market. (They could easily turn to produce for their own domestic market, and at not too dissimilar revenue levels.)
2) China calls in our tab.

Sleep tight.

Berry Timely

[Doc Ruby]

China probably waited for the BlackBerry/RTP patent lawsuit to settle. So BlackBerry (RIM) would have the least cash, and maybe the case would reduce the risk China's corporation would be blocked by patents. While BlackBerry and the problems of a single supplier make all the headlines. The last couple of weeks since the settlement is just enough time to unleash the hounds, but too short for the timing to be merely coincidental.

Re:So this is the thanks we get?!?!?

[wigginz]

Hmm, you got me there. However the basis of my point is still valid, China's trade and economic policies are still anti-American (and apparently anti-Canadian and probably anti-every other country).

Re:that doesn't seem very sporting of 'em

[rainman_bc]

If a country were to stop paying their debts, they would find themselves unable to borrow because of a loss of credibility.

Would you borrow from a nation that isn't repaying their debts?

Look, you're willing to accept money in lieu of your services because it has a fiat value. You can exchange that currency for goods or services in trade. That currency is only valuable because it is universally accepted. Ask someone who survived ww2 in Germany about currency confidence.

Similarly with government bonds you purchase them on the promise your money will be returned, and while they have your money you earn interest. You are more than happy to buy tresury notes in the US because you know you'll get your money back. If there was ever any doubt, you'd be less inclined to give up your money in exchange for this interest bearing bond.

Certainly you cannot foreclose, but the market in general can.

Re:Remember *Why* We Have a Trade Deficit

[maxume]

You are making an implicit assumption, one that isn't necessarily true. You are assuming that the US 'the nation' would be better off buying only american goods. Sure, the people who lose jobs experience a particulary nasty effect of the trade deficit, but the nation as a whole may be better off, we are getting more for our money(productivity).

The huge trade deficit with China isn't a mystery. Labor there is drastically cheaper than it is here; any labor intensive product will be much cheaper to make in China. In "The Undercover Economist", Tim Hartford states that the cost of shipping something inside Los Angeles is greater than the cost of shipping it from China, so(if he's right) shipping costs aren't particularly relevant. If the United States did not collectively have good enough credit to maintain the deficit, the deficit would collapse. It is also a possibility that the calculation of the deficit is ignoring some american export and thus is too large.

China would not(and will not) expend a great deal of effort keeping the United States propped up in style. The best evidence for the trade deficit not being a big issue(for the US or for China) is the existence of the trade deficit.

As China's economy grows, one of two things will likely happen: the US will be fuxored, as no one will be able to afford the high price of Chinese goods or production will move back to the US. Buying goods that are produced as efficiently as possible usually isn't a bad thing, it frees up production for other things.