Huawei's Android-free PC alternative for Windows will reportedly ship later this year with a macOS-inspired design

[Windows Central]

Huawei might get back to developing its own operating system — HarmonyOS Next for PC to compete with Windows later this year.

Huawei's Android-free PC alternative for Windows will reportedly ship later this year with a macOS-inspired design : Read more

 

[GraniteStateColin]

People outside China should not use an operating system from China. This is a national security risk. Just as long-standing exploits are found years later in Windows, Linux, and even Cisco hardware, holes and exploits that are known to the Chinese government can be buried in any of the Chinese equipment or software without being found by researchers in other countries.

China can, and we should assume will, use these to gather information on people in other countries, use them to deliver malware to other systems on the network, or have it as a trigger where they can crush the communication infrastructure in other countries in the event of a conflict. Hopefully, none of these will ever matter or happen, but because of the risk, unless you live in China, you should avoid Chinese tech devices and software, especially if you live in a country known to have a potentially adversarial relationship with China, like the U.S., Taiwan, India, and other such countries.

 

[fjtorres5591]

This is most likely a domestic use only product.
Rather lije Red Star Linux.
Given how much they are cooying Apple, they'd better not distribute to any country with Trade Dress IP laws. Apple will sue them out of that market.

 

[GraniteStateColin]

This is most likely a domestic use only product.
Rather lije Red Star Linux.
Given how much they are cooying Apple, they'd better not distribute to any country with Trade Dress IP laws. Apple will sue them out of that market.

Good point. Probably not being developed to compete abroad, but to get Chinese customers and users out of paying license fees to American (or any non-Chinese) companies.

 

[fjtorres5591]

Good point. Probably not being developed to compete abroad, but to get Chinese customers and users out of paying license fees to American (or any non-Chinese) companies.

...plus Keeping the company afloat without western tech.

You can't serve two masters, your government and the paying customers simultaneously. Note how both MS and Apple regularly butt heads with overreaching governent aparatchicks in the US and other countries. Their primary focus is serving their customers as best they can. They accomodate the bureaucrats but only up to a point.

Huawei serves the CCP, first and formost, customers be da**ed.
(Keeps them.out of jail, don'cha know? )
That works in China but not in the major tech markets.

 

[praz01]

People outside China should not use an operating system from China. This is a national security risk. Just as long-standing exploits are found years later in Windows, Linux, and even Cisco hardware, holes and exploits that are known to the Chinese government can be buried in any of the Chinese equipment or software without being found by researchers in other countries.

China can, and we should assume will, use these to gather information on people in other countries, use them to deliver malware to other systems on the network, or have it as a trigger where they can crush the communication infrastructure in other countries in the event of a conflict. Hopefully, none of these will ever matter or happen, but because of the risk, unless you live in China, you should avoid Chinese tech devices and software, especially if you live in a country known to have a potentially adversarial relationship with China, like the U.S., Taiwan, India, and other such countries.

This simply didn't age well. It seems Microsoft is the biggest risk to your business out there at the moment with banks, airlines and governments out of service right now. When the dust settles from the last few days we will likely see a very different ways of working landscape where productivity will move away from OSes to SaaS services, so customers are able to continue operating when their unreliable operating system fails them. It's also less likely they will pander to the whims of cyber security, given end-point protection has cost most companies more money over the last few days than they could have ever potentially saved.

 

[fjtorres5591]

This simply didn't age well. It seems Microsoft is the biggest risk to your business out there at the moment with banks, airlines and governments out of service right now. When the dust settles from the last few days we will likely see a very different ways of working landscape where productivity will move away from OSes to SaaS services, so customers are able to continue operating when their unreliable operating system fails them. It's also less likely they will pander to the whims of cyber security, given end-point protection has cost most companies more money over the last few days than they could have ever potentially saved.

A common day one reaction.

Unfortunately, the facts don't bear this out.

The issue has nothing to do with the OS but with poor quality control at CLOUDSTRIKE, which led to this (previously) trusted supplier of mission-critical software deploying a corrupted/bad updated kernel level driver that prevented the OS from completing bootup.

As it turns out, the OS itself offers a simple fix: boot up in local-only Safe mode and using Recovery roll back the system to the last known good configuration, or if you don't have recovery files (a bad practice, generally) manually delete the corrupt file.

This kind of issue has nothing to do with the idea of local computing or anything other than GIGO and quality control. It happens all the time with software on all platforms including SAAS products. (Hosting services suffer their own outages regularly.)

Pretending that orgs should abandon local server systems in a full embrace of remote mainframes is no different that claiming the ISS must be abandoned because Boeing's STARLINER QA produced a buggy flawed vehicle.

You might be justified in switching to a different mission critical software supplier or use more than one supplier (as NASA does in the access to space sector) but not in abandoning an effective system. You just need better risk mitigation policies.

For single user systems, this means things like automated cloud backup and recovery files. There are no silver bullets and no bulletproof solution. Just good risk mitigation.

GIGO rules.