Tianjin: Clio Coddle, a fashion brand i’ve never heard of but with a logo disturbingly similar to that of Singaporean chain Crocodile, which in turn itself has had a long dispute over logo infringements with well known manufacturer LaCoste. Apparently it’s not new – I just did a search online and found other references to it. Evidently they’re still alive. Just goes to show: there’s no shame at all with piracy in China, and it’s so easy to succeed.
Getting small change in Beijing is a constant and irritating challenge. Restaurants, taxis, convenience stores – pay with a 100RMB note (not much in today’s cities) and you will often be met with cries for something smaller.
Cab drivers have always despised splitting your hundred – but more recently i’ve noticed several restaurants refusing to split a few notes to help distribute change amongst a group. The usual excuse (“we don’t have change”) is most likely a lie and if you persist you’ll be amazed that change is suddenly produced from ‘out of nowhere’.
I’ve found this a lot at up market restaurants – and it’s amazing the lack of desire they even have to maintain a good image with good service. After spending 1000RMB on a meal, the least they could do is help your group with some small change.
If you ever find yourself with the same problem – insist to look at their till. I’d guess that 95% of the time they do have change to give you.
Having got my new China Unicom WCDMA 3G number, I was somewhat confused that (a) data service worked through my China Mobile settings (b) it didn’t work using the settings Unicom customer service provided, and (c) I found yet another set of settings that can be used.
Whilst I still don’t know why the above is true, I found the following:
1) Use China Mobile settings (APN: CMNET) for GPRS / 3G Data with no proxy works fine. MMS should be received using WAP profile (APN: CMWAP , MMSC: http://mmsc.monternet.com , Gateway or Proxy: 10.0.0.172. Port 80 for HTTP, port 9201 for WAP)
I don’t know if this is just compatibility, or a problem with China Mobile’s network.
2) The settings Unicom customer service now provide will only work through a proxy.
GPRS APN: 3gwap
WAP APN: 3gnet
- for both must set proxy through 10.0.0.172 . These settings provide support for web (HTTP) traffic only.
3) Older data suggests to use:
GPRS APN: uninet
WAP APN: uniwap
MMSC: mmsc.myuni.com.cn
- I use this and it works. No proxy needed for GPRS ; but use 10.0.0.172 (as above) for MMS. Works across all protocols (MSN, FTP etc…) unlike 3G settings.
Therefore if you have a China Unicom 3G card and have been given the new settings, don’t bother. It’s just more complicated, and using 3gwap non-HTTP based services will not work.
Note: I’ve subsequently discovered this site claiming that for certain applications like Mobile Television you must use the 3G settings. I haven’t tested.
Those Hong Kong passport holders out there may be interested to know that as of July 1st 2009, a mutual visa free arrangement between Hong Kong and Russia will allow visa-free access between both regions for a period of 14 days.
Russia isn’t high on my list of places to visit, but this is certainly welcoming news. Being so close, it even sounds mildly tempting…
Edit – Noting that many people get here searching ‘visa free access China’ in Google, note the following:
1) Only passport holders from Singapore, Brunei, and Japan can visit China visa-free for up to 15 days. Visitors from Hong Kong, Macau, or Taiwan should use a separate document issued by mainland authorities for travel.
2) Visa-free access to Russia granted to the following countries as of 28/08/2009 : Azerbaijan, Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, Cuba, Kyrgyzstan, Cuba, Moldova, Tajikistan, Thailand, Uzbekistan, Ukraine, Israel, Macedonia, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Serbia, Montenegro, Venezuela, Argentina – and Hong Kong.
I’ve never heard of it, but BBC news reported on Shizuishan (石嘴山), apparently China’s most polluted city, now blacklisted by the government.
What struck me about this report is not so much the content but yet more attempts by the Chinese government to cover up foreign media reporting. The BBC crew were subsequently questioned by police and denounced by local communist officials for reporting this ’sensitive topic’ – albeit simply a matter of pollution, and that much of the top polluters in the city are still operating (despite supposedly being shut down). Yet again the Chinese government fail to see that despite censorship, the western media will get the news they want: only with interference it makes the Chinese look pathetic, and the censorship itself draws attention amongst foreign viewers. It’s simply counter productive on both counts: it does not allow the media to seek genuine change and improvement in China where issues count, and it does nothing to improve the image of China externally.
Again, the west will see the news regardless, only with the added pathetic-ness of the attempted censorship.
The widely reported wielding of umbrellas in Tiananmen square during the 20th anniversary of was equally amusing – if not plainly embarrassing.
When will they learn.
I am told I don’t write enough good things about China. That’s not entirely true: despite my criticisms I have a very positive outlook for this country! Nonetheless I will praise China Mobile for their efficient use of text messaging for customer services. Afterall SMS popularity is not new in China.
Through SMS you can change plan, redeem your bonus points for gifts, apply or cancel mobile value added services (e.g. mobile news, caller id etc…) – even find out where a friend is. This is by far more advanced than most other mobile systems I have used, or at least they have been doing this for years even if others are just beginning.
China is now the biggest mobile market in the world and growing. For many it’s their only connection to the Internet, or indeed the world. For some, it’s also a handy payment platform.
Now that the telecom industry has been shaken up, and 3G becomes more prevalent (although China Mobile will use its homegrown standard), the service offerings are set to grow.
If only they can re-record the English prompt announcements on the topup hotline!
It’s amazing how many ‘half baked’ products you come across in China. I often wonder whether this just comes down to bad communication, downright stupidity, over-inflated ego’s, or the determination to be pretentious and give out a good impression – but fail to deliver. Or perhaps it’s all of the above.
Case in point: note the following series of screenshots (apologies for the bad quality). This series exemplifies the three-step payment process at the automated machines available in most China Mobile outlets in China. Through these machines you can pay your bill using bank card, without need to queue.
Tap “payment” to proceed with the payment.
Never mind the announcement that the ‘receipt printer works’ (though it’s nice to know) – note the “Credit Card” option. Tap here to select credit card payment method.
- and of course, finally an announcement that this feature is not yet supported. Which begs the question “why the hell is there a choice in the first place?”.
This example is not unique : many online payment gateways will “accept” credit card, only to disappoint later with a notice that the feature is not yet implemented. Similarly, we recently came across an option for “online submission” on our local tax receipt reporting form (地税发票审报) that we must regularly update with the government. Upon submitting the form (in person) we are told that there is no online submission yet.
If you take the express train to Tianjin and purchase your ticket at the aptly named TVM (Ticket Vending Machine), you are again given an option to pay with card (incl. bank card) – but none of those are currently supported.
When will China learn the importance of easy user interface and user experience vs. creating a false image of offerings it cannot fulfill? I suspect a lot of hairs can be saved if developers and system designers can finally come out of their bubbles and realise the time and frustration that can be prevented if something were designed properly.
As was announced throughout much of the international and local media yesterday, Wu Bangguo (吴邦国), chairman of the Standing Committee of the NPC, reiterated China’s position that it has no intention of becoming a multiparty democracy with separation of powers.
As quoted in the China Daily, Mr. Wu was reported to comment: “We will not have multi-party rule, or the separation of legislative, executive, or legal powers”. He called on deputies to maintain the “correct political orientation”. In other words: continue to do what they say. I suppose such an announcement is not entirely surprising: China has hardly made much progress in this regard anyways.
The SCMP takes a harsher view. It claims that “China will not have an independant judiciary. Elections will still have mostly government-approved candidates on the ballot”.
The statements are likely a renewed response to continued calls from the west for more political reform in China. To be fair, such a hard line answer should shut up critics who clung onto hope; and on the other hand western criticism (or even understanding) of China is often harsh and misrepresented. What surprises me about Wu’s comment was it’s brashness: to say now that China will never become something else politically would be as bold a statement as to attempt weather prediction for half a century later. Between now and then, anything can happen.
I do believe that China is opening up and will achieve it’s ultimate goal of a fair and just system with some semblance of a western style democracy. For that matter I think Wu Bangguo is wrong: China will some day have an independant judiciary and acceptable separation of powers. The question is when.
Meanwhile the west needs to understand that change will be gradual, that achievement takes time. People’s thoughts in China are not fully aligned and that’s not to say the west have it right. Afterall the China Daily does note that deputies to the NPC are broadly representative unlike western parliaments which can often also be one sided. China cannot be considered a dictatorship now by any definition of the word. Although the top job is not by mandate of the people, there is neither a personality cult nor absolute power to do whatever is wanted – no doubt to the disappointment of many in the West who still want to believe (and complain) that China is an evil empire run by a madman.
Although the merits of a Chinese vs. Western style democracy is certainly worthy of its own debate, I nonetheless still find Wu’s comments as somewhat drastic, if not childish.