China rapidly narrows technology gap with S. Korea

[antonius123]

Agree, far more qualified and intelligent than certain forum members with +200 or 100 positive ratings.

Well, as long as someone is staunchly a China basher, it will be easier for him/her to be promoted as a think tank or professional.

Martin is simply kicking their a$$ in a debate, that's why he got so many negative ratings as a retaliation.

Yeah you both are truly chear leaders

I am still waiting Martin's response to my questions which are logical challenge to him on post #186 and #215. It seems either he is still busy googling, or unable. Blind nationalistic cannot beat LOGIC.

Could you help him?

Japan is deficient in many technological domains.

LOLs. Before China can compete with USA in industrial technology, china has to beat Japan first in many industrial tech.

The answer is yes.

Sukhoi Superjet 100 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Irkut MC-21 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

BTW, this first flew in 1988.

You dumb!

Both SS100 and Irkut MC21 is nowhere near A380.

Russia still need to cooperate with China to build wide body passenger planes, and still below A380 in term of capacity.

 

[j20blackdragon]

You dumb!

Both SS100 and Irkut MC21 is nowhere near A380.

Russia still need to cooperate with China to build wide body passenger planes, and still below A380 in term of capacity.

Just a few pages ago you said size doesn't matter and compared your forklift to a Porsche in terms of technology. Now you're bringing "capacity" into the discussion? How do you know the Russian planes are "nowhere near" the A380?

Also here's a sampling of industries where China has superiority over South Korea. Do you want to debunk any of it?

1. PCs
2. Servers
3. Supercomputers
4. Machine Tools
5. Real Estate and Infrastructure Construction
6. Heavy Construction and Mining Equipment
7. Automobiles (Volvo)
8. High-Speed Rail
9. Commercial Aviation
10. Electric Vehicles (BYD)
11. Telecommunications Equipment (Huawei)
12. Solar Panels (Trina Solar)
13. Wind Turbines (Goldwind)
14. Nuclear Reactors
15. Home Appliances (Haier and Midea)
16. DNA Sequencing (BGI and Complete Genomics)

 

[j20blackdragon]

1. PCs
2. Servers
3. Supercomputers
4. Machine Tools
5. Real Estate and Infrastructure Construction
6. Heavy Construction and Mining Equipment
7. Automobiles (Volvo)
8. High-Speed Rail
9. Commercial Aviation
10. Electric Vehicles (BYD)
11. Telecommunications Equipment (Huawei)
12. Solar Panels (Trina Solar)
13. Wind Turbines (Goldwind)
14. Nuclear Reactors
15. Home Appliances (Haier and Midea)
16. DNA Sequencing (BGI and Complete Genomics)

Adding #17 to my list.

1. PCs
2. Servers
3. Supercomputers
4. Machine Tools
5. Real Estate and Infrastructure Construction
6. Heavy Construction and Mining Equipment
7. Automobiles (Volvo)
8. High-Speed Rail
9. Commercial Aviation
10. Electric Vehicles (BYD)
11. Telecommunications Equipment (Huawei)
12. Solar Panels (Trina Solar)
13. Wind Turbines (Goldwind)
14. Nuclear Reactors
15. Home Appliances (Haier and Midea)
16. DNA Sequencing (BGI and Complete Genomics)
17. Commercial Drones (DJI)

Also huge news for Haier.

GE to sell appliances business to China's Haier for $5.4 billion| Reuters

 

[gambit]

No. China built its own technology.

No one helped China's atomic bomb project. China detonated an atomic bomb in 1964.
No one helped China's hydrogen bomb project. China detonated a hydrogen bomb in 1967.
No one helped China's ICBM project. China launched the DF-5 ICBM in 1971.

Wrong.

Of each of those things you mentioned, the CORE technology came from elsewhere.

 

[Martian2]

Wrong.

Of each of those things you mentioned, the CORE technology came from elsewhere.

Prove it.

The Soviet Union and the United States had no reason to help China. Prove to me that the Soviets or the Americans gave the CORE technological knowledge to China. They didn't.

For example, the American hydrogen bomb was based on a "reflection" of X-rays for implosion design. The Soviets used a "layer cake" desgn. China used a "refraction" of X-rays design. All three are completely different.

If you want to argue core technology, I would say that China invented gunpowder and paper. All other inventions derive from those two. Without paper, there are no books or libraries. Without books and libraries, scientific knowledge cannot be stored and propagated.
----------

The Americans used a supercomputer to make their calculations in designing the American atomic and hydrogen bombs.

I'm not sure what the Soviets used.

China built a "mechanical" computer to laboriously calculate whether its design would work.
-----

Mechanical computer used for calculations to build China's atomic and hydrogen bombs

China's mechanical computer looks like a "slide rule" integrated with a keypad. It's essentially a specialized hard-coded machine with built-in equations or functions.

The mechanical computer is the mechanical equivalent of an ASIC (ie. application-specific integrated circuit). China probably had thousands or tens of thousands of these units for use by engineers.

Here is a picture of the said "abacus." Also, I would call it a mechanical computer. I took the picture while I was in the China National History Museum for the Road to Renaissance Exhibit. They apparently calculated nine simulated detonations with this thing before they lit the fuse on the big one. (Photo and caption credit: Luhai)

[Note: Thank you to Luhai for taking the picture of the extraordinary Chinese mechanical computer and describing it in the caption.]

 

[oprih]

@Hu Songshan @Slav Defence post #243 by antonius, he called a fellow member dumb. I recall such comment merits a negative rating as shown by jhungry who is mpre than willing to give tons of negative ratings left and right for words that are more or less synonymous to dumb.

Gee, antonius needs to be civil, despite losing constantly in arguments he needs to remain calm.

 

[antonius123]

@Hu Songshan @Slav Defence post #243 by antonius, he called a fellow member dumb. I recall such comment merits a negative rating as shown by jhungry who is mpre than willing to give tons of negative ratings left and right for words that are more or less synonymous to dumb.

Gee, antonius needs to be civil, despite losing constantly in arguments he needs to remain calm.

I just follow / carried away by martian style who were calling other fellow member "dumb" on post #181 & #183?
You should advise this to martian. But I realize cheerleader like you wont do it, and it is so hillarious to see how you with 6 negative rating lecture other fellow member about being civil

Adding #17 to my list.

1. PCs
2. Servers
3. Supercomputers
4. Machine Tools
5. Real Estate and Infrastructure Construction
6. Heavy Construction and Mining Equipment
7. Automobiles (Volvo)
8. High-Speed Rail
9. Commercial Aviation
10. Electric Vehicles (BYD)
11. Telecommunications Equipment (Huawei)
12. Solar Panels (Trina Solar)
13. Wind Turbines (Goldwind)
14. Nuclear Reactors
15. Home Appliances (Haier and Midea)
16. DNA Sequencing (BGI and Complete Genomics)
17. Commercial Drones (DJI)

Also huge news for Haier.

GE to sell appliances business to China's Haier for $5.4 billion| Reuters

OK, give me evidence why China is more technologically advanced than Korea in the field of:

1. PC
7. Automobile
12. Solar Panels
15. Home Appliance

Please dont use "market share", sales quantity, sort of as the parameter technology. Quality, performance, technology barriers overcome, patents portfolio should be more proper parameter to measure the technology level.

 

[Place Of Space]

I just follow / carried away by martian style who were calling other fellow member "dumb" on post #181 & #183?
You should advise this to martian. But I realize cheerleader like you wont do it, and it is so hillarious to see how you with 6 negative rating lecture other fellow member about being civil




OK, give me evidence why China is more technologically advanced than Korea in the field of:

1. PC
7. Automobile
12. Solar Panels
15. Home Appliance

Please dont use "market share", sales quantity, sort of as the parameter technology. Quality, technology barriers overcome, patents portfolio should be more proper parameter to measure the technology level.

The title is "China rapidly narrows technology gap with S. Korea".

In my opinion, China is still super large scale, Korea is still ahead of China in technology overall.

China may develop all fields, category of industry, for example, from plastic lighter to nuclear power plant, Korea may focus on some important consuming-product industry.

 

[antonius123]

The title is "China rapidly narrows technology gap with S. Korea".

In my opinion, China is still super large scale, Korea is still ahead of China in technology overall.

China may develop all fields, category of industry, for example, from plastic lighter to nuclear power plant, Korea may focus on some important consuming-product industry.

Thats more realistic point of view

 

[S10]

Wrong.

Of each of those things you mentioned, the CORE technology came from elsewhere.

Do tell.

 

[Economic superpower]

@ Martian,

in 70 China had been able to build aircraft that overcome Supersonic boundary (you said much more difficult).

But China still failed to build passenger plane Y-10, you know that?

Why?

If Speed is that much more difficult to attain then jet passenger plane should be easier to build.



Your argument doesnt make Sense.

Skyworth selling that OLED still under brand "Skyworth" not brand "LG", so the well recognized brand advantage has no impact at all.

If you say that because of brand, then why Skyworth and other Chinese maker still use Chinese made LCD panel, and OLED panel for lower end TV?

Most other TV Skyworth and other Chinese TV maker sell are using Chinese own panel from BOE, CSOT, Panda, because of the price. So Price has much more impact rather than LG brand of the component (panel) which barely noticeable by consumers.




That argument is more than enough, as long as you think with proper LOGIC.

If you still unable to discern that, then another prove:

Quality vs. Quantity: Korean LCD Industry to Beat Chinese Rivals with OLED Panels | BusinessKorea

Also another aditional prove, that chinese top panel maker BOE need to cooperate with Koreal OLED maker.

China grows OLED business with Korean firms

From chinese side, of course the advantage is access to technology and know how. From Korea side they can get better market access. Simillar to the cooperation between China-Japan-Germany for bullet train some years ago.

Have you ever heard allegation that China try to steal panel technology from Samsung/LG?




Quality.

The same like India/Thailand doesnt have that Japan has for Auto tech.
The same like China doesnt have that USA has for turbojet engine tech
The same like Indonesia doesnt have that Korea/Japan has for shipbulding tech.





Questions:

1. Is Volvo is still registered as Sweden company? in spite of Geely purchase.

2. Can Chinese car industry already able to absorb, emulate, and develop the Volvo technology then produce their own car with the same quality of Volvo?

I asked you a very simple question.
You haven't even bothered to answer it. All you did was give me a link to a biased Korean website that will obviously say Korea is ahead.

I want PROOF where it shows Korean OLED is superior to Chinese OLED. Saying Skyworth or some other Chinese brand buying Korean OLED in no way, shape or form proves Korean OLED is superior to Chinese OLED. Established players have a reputation advantage for new technology. Japanese high speed trains have an established reputation so it's hard for Chinese high speed trains to compete even though there is no major difference in technology.

What does Korean OLED have that Chinese OLED don't have? Do they last longer? Do they have some special technology?

As far as I'm concerned, Korea has OLED technology and China has OLED technology. Both are equal.

 

[antonius123]

I asked you a very simple question.
You haven't even bothered to answer it. All you did was give me a link to a biased Korean website that will obviously say Korea is ahead.

I want PROOF where it shows Korean OLED is superior to Chinese OLED. Saying Skyworth or some other Chinese brand buying Korean OLED in no way, shape or form proves Korean OLED is superior to Chinese OLED. Established players have a reputation advantage for new technology. Japanese high speed trains have an established reputation so it's hard for Chinese high speed trains to compete even though there is no major difference in technology.

What does Korean OLED have that Chinese OLED don't have? Do they last longer? Do they have some special technology?

I have told you many times => Quality.

It seems your logic doesnt work.

I have debunked your logic about Skyworth buying LG panel (unnoticable to consumer) to raise brand image. And you cant reply anymore. Also I've challenged you if it is because of brand then why skyworth changhong konka buy chinese own LCD not Korean LCD? but this is not the same case with OLED, and you CANT answered that yet either.

And now you repeat the same question I had answered and debunk your argument without your ability to answer anymore? Is that all the quality of your intelligence?

The reason why chinese TV maker buy LG's OLED for their high end TV is obviously because of the picture quality that LG OLED can offer, cant you get that?

As far as I'm concerned, Korea has OLED technology and China has OLED technology. Both are equal.

By your logic => can I say:

China has aircraft, Korea has aircraft, then both are equal in technology?
China has air launch vehicle, Korea has air launch vehicle, then both are equal in air launch technology?

Look, i have stimulated your logic many times but amazingly you unable to answer but repeat the same mistake / fallacy?

Your logic that Korea has and China has then both are equal is blatantly FALLACY!




Konka and Changhong also buy LG's OLED Panel.

According to the same Chinese report, both Konka and Changhong are expecting to release OLED TVs soon (with LGD panels). Changhong will release its first OLED TV in mid May, with a price tag of less than 40,000 yuan ($6,400).

LG Display can make 110" OLEDs, yields increase, more Chinese OLED TVs expected | OLED-Info

 

[Economic superpower]

I have told you many times => Quality.

It seems your logic doesnt work.

I have debunk your logic about Skyworth buying LG panel (unnoticable to consumer) for to raise brand image. And you cant reply anymore. Also I've challenged you if it is because of brand then why skyworth changhong konka buy chinese own LCD not Korean LCD? and you CANT answered that yet.

And now you repeat the same question I had answered and debunk your argument without your ability to answer anymore? Is that all the quality of your intelligence?

The reason why chinese TV maker buy LG's OLED for their high end TV is obviously because of the picture quality that LG OLED can offer, cant you get that?




By your logic => can I say:

China has aircraft, Korea has aircraft, then both are equal in technology?
China has air launch vehicle, Korea has air launch vehicle, then both are equal in air launch technology?

Look, i have stimulated your logic many times but amazingly you unable to answer but repeat the same mistake / fallacy?

Your logic that Korea has and China has then both are equal is blatantly FALLACY!



Now I challenge you: Can China produce 110 inch OLED

LG Display can make 110" OLEDs, yields increase, more Chinese OLED TVs expected | OLED-Info

Konka and Changhong also buy LG's OLED Panel.

According to the same Chinese report, both Konka and Changhong are expecting to release OLED TVs soon (with LGD panels). Changhong will release its first OLED TV in mid May, with a price tag of less than 40,000 yuan ($6,400).

You're continuing to humiliate yourself in front of everyone. I asked for proof and you cannot give me a single reason why Korean OLED is superior to Chinese OLED. You ramble about quality of Korean OLED but cannot show me how it's of higher quality.

You STILL cannot prove that Korean OLED is superior to Chinese OLED. All you do is change the subject about rockets and Skyworth buying some Korean OLED. Before you said Korea is ahead in 13 industries and you couldn't prove any of it and now trying to save face and saying it's now only 6 industries

Buddy, you're not fooling anyone here. Martian and J20blackdragon have made you into a laughing stock with your laughable statements without backing it up. When you lose the argument, you change the subject and try to weasel out when we call you out.

Now, YOU prove to me why Korean OLED technology is superior to Chinese OLED technology.

Go on.

Beating Samsung, LG
Chinese Company Releases World’s First 110 In. Curved UHD TV

TCL’s 110 inch curved UHD TV.

Chinese TV manufacturer TCL surprised the global electronics industry by introducing the world’s biggest 110 inch curved UHD TV at IFA 2014, the electronics exposition currently being held in Berlin, Germany. The largest screens of Samsung Electronics and LG Electronics are only 105 inches, so this Chinese company beat them to 110 inches.

Chinese companies TCL and Hisense also revealed quantum dot TVs at this IFA exhibition, which are considered to be the next generation of TV technology with its remarkably higher definition than current TVs, putting them even further ahead of Korean companies.

TCL earned two titles of “World’s Biggest” and “World’s First” through its 110 inch UHD TV and quantum dot TV introduced at this IFA. Chinese companies, which previously have been following the market leaders and manufacturing budget products so far, are showing the technological capability to potentially dominate the global market.

Quantum dots, which emit light when excited by electricity, replace light emitting diodes (LEDs) in these new TVs. Quantum dot TVs are much clearer and lighter than the current liquid crystal display (LCD) TVs, and production costs are lower than organic light emitting diode (OLED) TVs. This is why TV manufacturers are focusing on the commercialization of quantum dot TVs.

The market understands that TCL introduced its quantum dot TVs at IFA before officially launching them in the market, not with the purpose of showing off its technological capabilities in this situation. A TCL employee said, “We plan to release a 55 inch quantum dot TV at the price of around 2,000 euros [US$2,585] next year.” The price is similar to a same-sized UHD TV. Another Chinese TV company Hisense introduced a quantum dot TV as well under the name “ULED TV.”

This preemptive attack by TCL was totally unexpected in the market, as Samsung and LG which are considered to have the best TV technologies in the world were assumed to be releasing quantum dot TVs first. Samsung and LG, the world’s number one and two, did not. A Samsung Electronics representative claimed, “We possess the technologies for quantum dot TVs, but it is too early to introduce in public.” In fact, Korean companies are very cautious to introduce advanced products at major expositions recently, as they are worried about technology spill to Chinese companies.

However, employees of Samsung Electronics and LG Electronics visited the booths of Chinese companies to compare display definitions and to take pictures of their products. A high-ranking official in the Korean electronics market said, “Only two years ago, technological skills of Chinese companies were almost a year behind the global market leaders. This gap was narrowed down to six months last year. But looking at IFA this year, I see no differences anymore.”

So far in terms of definition and materials, the global TV market has been led by Samsung and LG of Korea and Sony of Japan. Sony was the first to ignite the definition competition by introducing the world’s first UHD TV. Samsung and LG are dominating the UHD TV market. Samsung and LG are number one and two, respectively, in market share in the global TV industry.

 

[antonius123]

You're continuing to humiliate yourself in front of everyone. I asked for proof and you cannot give me a single reason why Korean OLED is superior to Chinese OLED. You ramble about quality of Korean OLED but cannot show me how it's of higher quality.

You STILL cannot prove that Korean OLED is superior to Chinese OLED. All you do is change the subject about rockets and Skyworth buying some Korean OLED. Before you said Korea is ahead in 13 industries and you couldn't prove any of it and now trying to save face and saying it's now only 6 industries

Buddy, you're not fooling anyone here. Martian and J20blackdragon have made you into a laughing stock with your laughable statements without backing it up. When you lose the argument, you change the subject and try to weasel out when we call you out.

Now, YOU prove to me why Korean OLED technology is superior to Chinese OLED technology.

Go on.

Beating Samsung, LG
Chinese Company Releases World’s First 110 In. Curved UHD TV

TCL’s 110 inch curved UHD TV.

Chinese TV manufacturer TCL surprised the global electronics industry by introducing the world’s biggest 110 inch curved UHD TV at IFA 2014, the electronics exposition currently being held in Berlin, Germany. The largest screens of Samsung Electronics and LG Electronics are only 105 inches, so this Chinese company beat them to 110 inches.

Chinese companies TCL and Hisense also revealed quantum dot TVs at this IFA exhibition, which are considered to be the next generation of TV technology with its remarkably higher definition than current TVs, putting them even further ahead of Korean companies.

TCL earned two titles of “World’s Biggest” and “World’s First” through its 110 inch UHD TV and quantum dot TV introduced at this IFA. Chinese companies, which previously have been following the market leaders and manufacturing budget products so far, are showing the technological capability to potentially dominate the global market.

Quantum dots, which emit light when excited by electricity, replace light emitting diodes (LEDs) in these new TVs. Quantum dot TVs are much clearer and lighter than the current liquid crystal display (LCD) TVs, and production costs are lower than organic light emitting diode (OLED) TVs. This is why TV manufacturers are focusing on the commercialization of quantum dot TVs.

The market understands that TCL introduced its quantum dot TVs at IFA before officially launching them in the market, not with the purpose of showing off its technological capabilities in this situation. A TCL employee said, “We plan to release a 55 inch quantum dot TV at the price of around 2,000 euros [US$2,585] next year.” The price is similar to a same-sized UHD TV. Another Chinese TV company Hisense introduced a quantum dot TV as well under the name “ULED TV.”

This preemptive attack by TCL was totally unexpected in the market, as Samsung and LG which are considered to have the best TV technologies in the world were assumed to be releasing quantum dot TVs first. Samsung and LG, the world’s number one and two, did not. A Samsung Electronics representative claimed, “We possess the technologies for quantum dot TVs, but it is too early to introduce in public.” In fact, Korean companies are very cautious to introduce advanced products at major expositions recently, as they are worried about technology spill to Chinese companies.

However, employees of Samsung Electronics and LG Electronics visited the booths of Chinese companies to compare display definitions and to take pictures of their products. A high-ranking official in the Korean electronics market said, “Only two years ago, technological skills of Chinese companies were almost a year behind the global market leaders. This gap was narrowed down to six months last year. But looking at IFA this year, I see no differences anymore.”

So far in terms of definition and materials, the global TV market has been led by Samsung and LG of Korea and Sony of Japan. Sony was the first to ignite the definition competition by introducing the world’s first UHD TV. Samsung and LG are dominating the UHD TV market. Samsung and LG are number one and two, respectively, in market share in the global TV industry.

It is you who are humiliating your self.
Those TCL UHD 110 inch is old LCD technology, not the frontier OLED / QHD / ULED. Yes in old LCD technology China is already on par with Korea, but not with the new frontier OLED case, sorry. The era of LCD will pass soon.

Please answer my questions and dont run away and show garbage. I repeat again:

Why skyworth changhong konka buy chinese own LCD not Korean LCD? but this is not the same case with OLED where they have to buy from Korea?

By your logic => can I say:
China has aircraft, Korea has aircraft, then both are equal in technology?
China has air launch vehicle, Korea has air launch vehicle, then both are equal in air launch technology?

Source: China rapidly narrows technology gap with S. Korea | Page 17

Tik tok tik tok .. So many questions that you FAILED to answer. Means you are incompetent in logical thinking/game


Another PROVE:
OK I understand your logic is below average. So I show you another BLATANT prove that doesnt require logical thinking that you cant discern:

LG can produce OLED 77 inch, the largest, While China cant !!

And .. how inch is the largest OLED panel that Chinese BOE or CSOT can make nowadays? Can China release 77 inch OLED already?

So many evidence has been shown. What else still insufficient? except your logic

LG is On Fire: Expanding Its Line of 4K TVs in All Directions -

In the meantime BOE is still strugling with low OLED yield
BOE struggles with low OLED yields, aims to start making flexible OLEDs by 2017 | OLED-Info

 

[CAPRICORN-88]

TV with 10K resolution exhibited by Chinese BOE
05 Jun 2015 | Rasmus Larsen

At the 2015 Display Week conference, Chinese BOE exhibited an extreme 82-inch display with 10K resolution (10240x4320 pixels). The LCD display has 21 times more pixels than a conventional HD displays.

More than 44 million pixels
We usually see these prototype displays from South Korean manufacturers but this first-of-its-kind display is made by Chinese BOE; a panel manufacturer that sell panels for use in TVs, monitors and mobile devices.

The 82-inch LCD display has an ultra-wide 21:9 aspect ratio. You basically take an 8K 16:9 display and make it much wider. That is how you arrive at 10240x4320 pixels (10K) from 7680x4320 pixels (8K). The pixel density of the impressive screen is 135 ppi, making the picture more detailed than the human eye can perceive from a typical TV distance of 3-4 meters.

BOE did not announce plans to start mass production but it is an important “first” for them and the Chinese display industry in general, demonstrating that China can produce cutting-edge display technology.

We are only just getting started with 4K (3840x2160 pixels) but the industry has no intentions of stopping there in the race for more pixels. Of course there are still major roadblocks and it is hard enough to find 4K content today but 10K content nevertheless exists.