Support WAPI And Protect IP Possible; ROC/USA Compines Adopt WAPI

(charles liu) wrote in message . com...

I added comp.sys.intel for you. Enjoy....

I continue to believe the WAPI law in PRC in no way forces anyone to
compromise their IP. Who in the tech world doesn't work with partners?
To say partnership automatically equals to IP exposure is false.

Then your belief is wrong cuz the PRC laws says the WAPI standard
won't be licensed to foreign companies, so how can foreign company
comply the standard without signing a licensing agreement with Chinese
company? Any question?

Since earlier articles posted mentioned a ROC company nearing WAPI
support, and the technical details stated that thru sound design
process, they were able to start their work early, by treating WAPI
component as a modular "black box" unit. Standard industry process
like modularization also provides abstraction, which protects IP.

Then the question is -- can Intel add another chip in addition to
Centrino, have two systems on two chips, to make it comply to PRC laws
if your words is true. The answer is no.

http://www.google.com/search?q=BenQ+Acer+wapi+notebook

While looking, I noticed not only are Acer and BenQ adopting WAPI,
many US companies have decided to adopt WAPI as well:

http://www.computex.com.tw/roundup_a...040329&items=3

"As Acer and its affiliate BenQ Corp. have resolved to adopt the WAPI
standard, it is expected that many other own-brand notebook
manufacturers, including Legend Group, Hewlett Packard, Dell Computer,
IBM, and Asustek Computer, will follow suit."

Hehe, these companies are selling laptops, so they can surely welcome
WaPI. Ask for a Taiwan or USA company which sell WLAN chips and find
if some of them support WAPI. Hehe, that's the question you dodge.

So Acer, BenQ, Legend, HP, Dell, IBM - they all don't care about their
IP? Or they've managed "the impossible" like partnership with IP
protection? Something pretty much everyone knows how to do?

Do they sell motherboards or WLAN chips?

So the argument that Intel can't do it because the law forces them to
share IP is BS. To make the statement "Intel will have to share its
IP" to be true, the responsibility must be on Intel's side - Either
Centrino is so poorly deisgned that there's no way to take advantage
of standard industry manufacturing process, or their entire
engineering staff do not understand what "modularization", "interface
contract", "abstraction" mean.

You are confusing board and system manufacturers with WLAN chip
makers.

Oh yeah, there's one more possibility - Intel doesn't want to pay the
royalty. I think this is the most plausable explination. Sometimes the
simplest explination is the truth.

Unfortunately if it is just a fee, I think Intel is gonna love that --
after all, Chinese consumers will pay that fee. The problem is PRC
government don't just want a fee -- they say Intel gotta work with
Chinese compnaies. that's the problem.