Beijing South Railway Station.....a very futuristic building

[amoy]

No fence along tracks unlike Metros. No cattles can enter the station. Passengers check in 10mins bfore departure.

I usually buy tickets at TVM machine with cash. 'Business' class only means bigger seats. Inside a 'double-deck' couchette 6 passengers are allowed, with 2 LCD TVs and magazines. Very clean and user friendly incl. toilets.

the HSR I regularly take is probably of highest utilization in China linking 2 biggest and prosperous coastal cities of the province. The extention of railway down south will be completed in 2011 to Shenzhen. It takes 1hr roughly from where I am to Shenzhen by air. In comparison the HSR will take 3hrs. But taking the traffic to and fro airports and lead time for check-in into account people are most likely to choose HSR instead of airline.

By the way that King Long Bus is located in our city. It takes the biggest market share in China. IMo of good quality with rarely break-downs. u probably are aware Volvo was sold to Geely Motors China.

The phase-in of HSR does hurt bus traffic. For example I used to spend 3.5-4.5 hours by coach. But now despite the lowered bus fare @rmb65 /one-way trip, I still opt for rmb85 by HSR for less than 2hrs.

But rmb85 x 2-way x 4 weeks is not a small amount for me (usd1=rmb6.7) plus taxi fares

 

[Ray]

High Speed Trains will move along the countryside.

Therefore, is it that there are no fences along the line?

Obviously, in any country, cattle will not be on the platforms.

 

[nimo_cn]

That is a good thing that all and sundry are not allowed inside the platform.

However, I did see crowds on the platform (in photos) during the Chinese New Years and there were more people than it could meet the eye.

It must be quite a task to control so many people in the few minutes that are allowed to passengers to come in and board.

Do people miss the trains some times?

When people start getting aboard, it will become crowded, especially during spring festival. Just imagine 2000+ people boarding a train in just a few minutes. The pictures you saw must be taken when people were getting aboard.

If it is normal trains, passengers are allowed to board about 20-30 minutes before the train departs. 20-30 minutes is quite a long time, there is enough time for people to get on the train.

I have not missed a train before, but i won't be surprised if people miss a train during Spring Festival. Because there are too many passengers, anything can happen.

 

[nimo_cn]

High Speed Trains will move along the countryside.

Therefore, is it that there are no fences along the line?

Obviously, in any country, cattle will not be on the platforms.

Yes, there are fences along the line, including both normal train lines and HSR lines, in many of the cases HSR train and normal train run on the same tracks.

Fence along the line, this woman is accused of vandalism.

 

[nimo_cn]

I sincerely hope the quality of the trains are better than regular chinese stuff. The most complex chinese equipment I'm familiar with are Huawei and ZTE telecom switches. They are basically cheap workstations in a 'telecom chasis' with horribly buggy code and very basic features. Basically it can connect calls and allow SMS to be send. Very little in terms of diagnostic support, or even full standards compliance.

However, they are also incredibly cheap compared to the european equipment (which costs way too much to pay for their lazy indulgent lifestyles) and chinese provide one engineer to stand by for pretty much every switch they sell. They also respond to software change/fix requests from big vendors faster than europeans with all their processes and general disdain for 3rd world markets.

The end result is chinese technology is just enough to roll out a network, with some glitches, but still extremely cost effective. As the users get more demanding, the manufacturers also respond slowly growing up the value chain. IMO quite an interesting strategy.

However, a high speed train may not be an ideal product to apply the start cheap and low quality philosophy.

Another example is king long buses some municipal corporations in india ordered. They were swayed by the low costs compared to Volvos and they looked just as good. Within a year, these king longs were discarded as they kept breaking down all the time. New orders were given to Volvos and Tatas.

And so on for Chinese Cars etc etc.

If these chinese trains run in another country (where one can access maintenance logs transparently) and turn out to be as good in performance as they look, it would be a major step forward for China, graduating from cheap trinkets and knock-offs to making high-quality high-tech machines. Assuming these trains and Chinese built, and not just the body work is chinese are all other parts came from european companies in China.

Let's wait and see.

You can keep on exaggerating, but Huawei's products will still be sold well all over the world.

Let me remind you of some basic facts about Huawei. Huawei is the second largest global telecom vendor if measured by profit. Huawei's telecom equipments are not only widely used in developing countries like India, South Africa, Brazil, etc, but also in developed european countres like Britain, Denmark,etc. If what you said is true, i am sure Hauwei would have gone bankruptcy long time ago.

I won't be arrogant to say Huawei's equipments are of the best quality and performance. But it is safe to say Huawei's products have pretty decent quality.

Same with the case of KingLong.

You can thump your chest for a thousand times, claiming all Indian products have better quality than Chinese ones, but still can't change the fact that Chinese goods are beating Indian's down.

 

[badguy2000]

You can keep on exaggerating, but Huawei's products will still be sold well all over the world.

Let me remind you of some basic facts about Huawei. Huawei is the second largest global telecom vendor if measured by profit. Huawei's telecom equipments are not only widely used in developing countries like India, South Africa, Brazil, etc, but also in developed european countres like Britain, Denmark,etc. If what you said is true, i am sure Hauwei would have gone bankruptcy long time ago.

I won't be arrogant to say Huawei's equipments are of the best quality and performance. But it is safe to say Huawei's products have pretty decent quality.

Same with the case of KingLong.

You can thump your chest for a thousand times, claiming all Indian products have better quality than Chinese ones, but still can't change the fact that Chinese goods are beating Indian's down.

haha. it is easy for dove to persuade himeself that "made in India" is better than "made in CHina".

But it is mission impossbile for him to persuade others to buy more "made in India" than "made in CHina"....

 

[dove]

I want to call you two idiots, but that will be impolite. So let me ask nicely, are you unable to follow my english writing ? am I using wrong words or did you just not read what I wrote before replying ?

I'm saying the same thing as you, Huawei, ZTE etc makes really low quality switches that does just enough to make networks do basic functionality at a very low cost. When bugs come out, they fix it one by one. This approach is fine with Indian telcos I know, because they can charge only very low rates to indian customers. So they like cheap low quality equipment that can be fixed when problems happen.

Where did I compare Chinese and Indian products ?

India not having competing products is not an excuse for China to build low quality goods. India is a customer, and we look for value for money. So far many chinese goods provide value for money (like Huawei and ZTE switches!!) because even at low quality, they are so cheap its preferable to overpriced gold plated european products. (PLEASE READ THIS SENTENCE SLOWLY AND CAREFULLY AT LEAST 3 TIMES. 请仔细阅读这句话的3倍。)

However, like Kinglong buses (which are also cheap junk that caught fire many times) one cannot buy high-speed trains just because they are cheaper than european ones. That is putting too many lives at risk, unlike telecom equipment. So, as a customer who has lots of experience with Chinese philosophy of selling cheap low quality products, which we do appreciate most of the time, in case of high speed trains, India should wait and see maintenance reports from other countries before deciding if Chinese trains are any good.

I think many other countries also will take this cautious approach except Pakistan etc to whom China may give it almost for free.

If these Chinese trains run well in a country outside China with an open society etc, then I hope India will buy them from China so we too can have a futuristic rail network at low cost. If China can make acceptable quality equipment for low prices India should buy from China. I support it. But with High-speed some non-chinese view-point is needed as it is a dangerous experiment if one only looks at cost.

So before going ha ha hu hu, try to read patiently. Even if you are not in practice of reading more than a few words a day, and sooner or later you will succeed in understanding whole posts.

 

[Ray]

While costs are important, there has to be some baseline for for quality too.

Some of the contractors make quick money and the customer suffers because of giving economy higher priority over quality.

Chinese goods, by and large, is no patch on German, Western and Japanese products. In fact, some of it is sheer junk!

Imagine, with good faith people bought Chinese copy of Swiss chocolate. To their dismay they learnt it was dangerous to health since the milk used was not milk at all but items with serious health hazards!

China has copied Daewoo's Matiz and selling it as an original product called Cherry!! How very ingenuous!

 

[Ray]

Chinese?

Or Korean copy?

copying a third world car!!!

 

[dove]

True, but if you just want to keep a door closed to prevent random public from going in (and not determined thieves) then Chinese locks are cheaper and acceptable, compared to Godrej locks that cost 5 times more. One has to admit China has found a niche in world demand which clearly has succeeded in generating wealth for them. So there is some credibility to that strategy, even if it comes at times with horrible cost to their customers.

My point was that as customers one should assume CHinese goods are low quality and then choose to buy or not. Somethings are OK. High speed trains, food items etc - better wait until someone else has experimented with it first.

As far as toys go, I do buy chinese toys but avoid ones with bright metallic paints - which contain lead. So I can't criticize all Chinese stuff.

 

[Ray]

I am afraid I have a very bad experience with Chinese toys.

The work for sometimes and then goes phut.

I lost a sizeable amount thinking that they will bring joys to the little ones!

 

[nimo_cn]

I want to call you two idiots, but that will be impolite. So let me ask nicely, are you unable to follow my english writing ? am I using wrong words or did you just not read what I wrote before replying ?

What you said can be termed as personal abuse, but i will let it go this time.

I'm saying the same thing as you, Huawei, ZTE etc makes really low quality switches that does just enough to make networks do basic functionality at a very low cost. When bugs come out, they fix it one by one. This approach is fine with Indian telcos I know, because they can charge only very low rates to indian customers. So they like cheap low quality equipment that can be fixed when problems happen.

Huawei is not only doing business in India.

The revenue gained from Indian market consists of approximate 10 percent of Huawei's total revenue, whicn means Huawei's equipments are not only widely used in India, but also in other counttries. Huawei's global market share is as high as 14.2%, which is getting close to the number one Ericsson's 20.8%.

The good performance of Huawei on global stage contradicts with your account of Huawei's "low-quality" products.

Would you please explain how could Huawei rise from a nobody to the No.2 if it manufactures so crappy equipments? All we need is a decent explanation on that one.

Where did I compare Chinese and Indian products ?

Well, you did not explicitly compare Chinese and Indian products, but your identity as an Indian makes this like a China-India comparison. So next time you'd better specify the benchmark.

India not having competing products is not an excuse for China to build low quality goods. India is a customer, and we look for value for money. So far many chinese goods provide value for money (like Huawei and ZTE switches!!) because even at low quality, they are so cheap its preferable to overpriced gold plated european products. (PLEASE READ THIS SENTENCE SLOWLY AND CAREFULLY AT LEAST 3 TIMES. 请仔细阅读这句话的3倍。)

Is that also the reason why Huawei and ZTE's products sell well outside India?

Chinese products are cheap, but not necessary low-quality.
Chinese products win becasue they are cost-effective. Cost-effective does not equal low-quality. Customers from all over the world like cost-effective products, but hate low-quality products.

By the way, it is "请仔细阅读这句话3遍", not "请仔细阅读这句话的3倍". I can understand your english well, but your odd chinese confounds me.
And i am asking you to the same thing for me, 请仔细阅读以下这句话3遍(PLEASE READ THE FOLLOWING SENTENCE SLOWLY AND CAREFULLY AT LEAST 3 TIMES)
Chinese prodcuts are cost-effective, cost-effective does not equal low-quality.

However, like Kinglong buses (which are also cheap junk that caught fire many times) one cannot buy high-speed trains just because they are cheaper than european ones. That is putting too many lives at risk, unlike telecom equipment. So, as a customer who has lots of experience with Chinese philosophy of selling cheap low quality products, which we do appreciate most of the time, in case of high speed trains, India should wait and see maintenance reports from other countries before deciding if Chinese trains are any good.

I think many other countries also will take this cautious approach except Pakistan etc to whom China may give it almost for free.

If these Chinese trains run well in a country outside China with an open society etc, then I hope India will buy them from China so we too can have a futuristic rail network at low cost. If China can make acceptable quality equipment for low prices India should buy from China. I support it. But with High-speed some non-chinese view-point is needed as it is a dangerous experiment if one only looks at cost.

So before going ha ha hu hu, try to read patiently. Even if you are not in practice of reading more than a few words a day, and sooner or later you will succeed in understanding whole posts.

I can understand your point that the India should get cautious if considering purchasing HSR from China, no dispute on that one.

I am mainly controverting your irresponsible accounts on Huawei and KingLong's products, because their good performances on global market prove what you said about Huawei and KingLong is not ture, or at least indicates you were exaggerating the deficiency of Chinese products by calling them junks.

If you can't make it better than us, you are not entitled to call it junk.

 

[tarunraju]

I think "no entry on the platform without valid ticket" is a fantastic idea. IR should implement it.

 

[plugwater]

I think "no entry on the platform without valid ticket" is a fantastic idea. IR should implement it.

We have that system. I paid 200 rs fine for entering without platform ticket

 

[tarunraju]

We have that system. I paid 200 rs fine for entering without platform ticket

I'm talking about a system where they check your ticket before you enter the platform. That way there's no need for CTCs inside the train.

 

[plugwater]

I'm talking about a system where they check your ticket before you enter the platform. That way there's no need for CTCs inside the train.

My bad, i took it differently. But its very difficult to implement in all stations but in metro stations its possible.

 

[dove]

What you said can be termed as personal abuse, but i will let it go this time.

Thanks! Can I ask what will be the punishment next time ? Bullet to the back of the head or jail time for rest of my life ? Do you still do re-education camps ?

Huawei is not only doing business in India.

The revenue gained from Indian market consists of approximate 10 percent of Huawei's total revenue, whicn means Huawei's equipments are not only widely used in India, but also in other counttries. Huawei's global market share is as high as 14.2%, which is getting close to the number one Ericsson's 20.8%.

The good performance of Huawei on global stage contradicts with your account of Huawei's "low-quality" products.

Would you please explain how could Huawei rise from a nobody to the No.2 if it manufactures so crappy equipments? All we need is a decent explanation on that one.

Huawei has a lots of products. Without knowing the break down of their revenues from different markets for different products, its difficult to answer that question. IN any case, I have repeatedly said that Huawei has a GOOD BUSINESS MODEL in India. They sell ultra-cheap low quality telecom equipment to Indian telcos who are focussing only on basic voice and SMS services - not VAS, Sophisticated Diagnostics etc for now. They overcome quality issues by sending large number of support engineers (I have rented a flat to Huawei where 3 chinese engineers live!) who are always available to fix problems.

In Indian market, low cost and availability of onsite engineers are the main reasons for Huawei's success over NSN, Ericsson etc. On quality alone, they are very much behind European equipment as of today. Indian engineers keep changing jobs between NSN, Ericsson, Alcatel, Huawei etc. So please, we do know quite a bit about all these equipment.

Well, you did not explicitly compare Chinese and Indian products, but your identity as an Indian makes this like a China-India comparison. So next time you'd better specify the benchmark.

I have -many times in my last mails. The benchmark is EUROPEAN standards. Why ? Because your CCP strongman Mr Badguy claimed Chinese trains are going to soon push out european and japanese ones from world market. As a potential customer, I just find this statement difficult to believe, until China has demonstrated an ability to make quality goods from the first attempt itself.

My response (again !!) is that unlike Telecom switches where cheap and low quality with good support will work, when it comes to things that can kill people, the same strategy may not work.

Is that also the reason why Huawei and ZTE's products sell well outside India?

I'd like some reference to exactly which other markets Huawei and ZTE is able to sell Telecom Switches. Not data networking equipment etc, but specifically telecom network equipment. Do you have this information ?

Chinese products are cheap, but not necessary low-quality.
Chinese products win becasue they are cost-effective. Cost-effective does not equal low-quality. Customers from all over the world like cost-effective products, but hate low-quality products.

Most Chinese products are cheap and low quality. The whole world knows that's the China way. May be you will improve in quality like Koreans and Japanese did, but right now there are hardly any Chinese products that can compete on quality alone. This is not my opinion, a simple search on internet will show you world opinion.

I can understand your point that the India should get cautious if considering purchasing HSR from China, no dispute on that one.

That's my main point. Thanks!

I am mainly controverting your irresponsible accounts on Huawei and KingLong's products, because their good performances on global market prove what you said about Huawei and KingLong is not ture, or at least indicates you were exaggerating the deficiency of Chinese products by calling them junks.

Kinglong is Junk, Huawei and ZTE are not junk. The reason is Kinglong kills people, where as Huawei/ZTE products work just about OK enough to make buyers happy for the low cost. I know quite a bit about telecom equipment used in India and also what goes on in Huawei center near guangzhou and bangalore.

If you can't make it better than us, you are not entitled to call it junk.

Really ? So when children eat your poisonous baby power and die, the parents should not complain because they can't make it themselves ? Nice ! Let me introduce to you another new concept that exists in civilized world - CONSUMER RIGHTS !!!

 

[dove]

I am afraid I have a very bad experience with Chinese toys.

The work for sometimes and then goes phut.

I lost a sizeable amount thinking that they will bring joys to the little ones!

I meant dolls and such that do not have electrical or electronics inside. I have a daughter, so she is happy with such toys. Even if they break its cheap to replace.

 

[tarunraju]

Thanks! Can I ask what will be the punishment next time ? Bullet to the back of the head or jail time for rest of my life ? Do you still do re-education camps ?

No, nimo will report your post, and we'll act on it. Therefore tone down the personal rhetoric. Argue on the message, not the messenger.

Most Chinese products are cheap and low quality. The whole world knows that's the China way. May be you will improve in quality like Koreans and Japanese did, but right now there are hardly any Chinese products that can compete on quality alone. This is not my opinion, a simple search on internet will show you world opinion.

Stereotyping is not fact. The world stereotypes Chinese goods to be of low-quality, but that's not the same as knowing for fact. A Chinese-made mobile handset made by a foreign company (such as Nokia made in China), have identical product quality to the same things made elsewhere. Did you know, Apple iPhone is made only in China? that Cisco's high-end routers are made in China (the same country where Huawei works)? But why doesn't the world "see" Cisco in that light? Because of the same stereotype I talked about, attached to goods made by manufacturers of developing countries (South Korea and Japan are developed).

Cisco + Made in China = good; but Huawei + Made in China = "cheap low-quality Chinese"

The same exact stereotype is attached to TATA motors, when you and I know that an Indica can kick Suzuki WagonR's arse out of its mouth. When Tata acquired Jaguar, the same "ewww" resonated in the UK. When Indica was released in the UK (even under a different model name), the people didn't receive it well, only because it was stereotyped as being an inferior product it's the product of an Indian company, although it meets all safety standards of UK. Ironically, cars manufactured by Ford or GM in India and exported to developed countries don't invoke any animosity.

So the same :

Suzuki + Made in India = good; but Tata + Made in India = "cheap low-quality Indian"

So it's just a mix of stereotyping and racism by the "developed world".

Gandhi had an apt quote for this:

"first they ignore you, then they make fun of you, then they come and fight you, then you win"

 

[dove]

I'm sure nimo can reply for himself.

If you find my posts objectionable, a personal message would suffice. May I suggest you go easy with the public rebukes, unless you are open to a fair debate - which I assume you aren't ?