I agree with Wholz. The article is basically a whole lot of "Huawei says… ". No independent opinion, critique, doubts, agreement from another source, anything.
Reads like a press release from corpo.
Edit: OP this is not a criticism of your posting. I’m criticizing the article.
Yes, the article is covering an announcement by Huawei. There’s literally zero reason to assume that Huawei is lying about any of this. Everything doesn’t need to be framed as both sides kind of argument. Also, anybody can go look up technical specs that are published if they don’t trust the figures in the article. This whole drama is just so weird to me.
Nobody said they were lying per se. Marketing types do tend to push the limits of what the truth is, however - mentioning only best case scenarios rather than what users will experience in real life, for example (e.g. perfectly controlled temperatures in the testing lab vs. out in the heat at the installation).
I have no way of knowing for sure whether they are guilty of that, but it’s tedious to wade through all the superlatives to parse what the likely reality actually is. To be fair, however, that may just be an effect of living under western modus operandis, and they are more on the up-and-up over there. The way the piece is written sure doesn’t look good to me for that possibility, however.
I agree with Wholz. The article is basically a whole lot of "Huawei says… ". No independent opinion, critique, doubts, agreement from another source, anything.
Reads like a press release from corpo.
Edit: OP this is not a criticism of your posting. I’m criticizing the article.
Yes, the article is covering an announcement by Huawei. There’s literally zero reason to assume that Huawei is lying about any of this. Everything doesn’t need to be framed as both sides kind of argument. Also, anybody can go look up technical specs that are published if they don’t trust the figures in the article. This whole drama is just so weird to me.
Nobody said they were lying per se. Marketing types do tend to push the limits of what the truth is, however - mentioning only best case scenarios rather than what users will experience in real life, for example (e.g. perfectly controlled temperatures in the testing lab vs. out in the heat at the installation).
I have no way of knowing for sure whether they are guilty of that, but it’s tedious to wade through all the superlatives to parse what the likely reality actually is. To be fair, however, that may just be an effect of living under western modus operandis, and they are more on the up-and-up over there. The way the piece is written sure doesn’t look good to me for that possibility, however.
🤷♂️