Huawei

Chinese smartphone and tablet manufacturer just hit us up to tease some new kit in 2012, promising we'll see "our smartest, fastest and most high-performing smartphone yet, taking a leap into the future of mobile communications." The announcement will come on the eve of Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, Spain. 

Huawei has yet to really break into the U.S. market, though it does manufacture the uninspiring T-Mobile Springboard tablet. And while MWC isn't a U.S.-centric show, it is a high-profile show. And with Android Central in attendance yet again, you can bet we'll have plenty of American eyes pointed that way.

 
There are 52 comments

kameleon says:

Phil, while not directly labeled a "huawei" the Motorola Triumph for Virgin Mobile is actually a Huawei phone IIRC. Which for a no-contract carrier the phone is pretty dang good. I may be a little biased though since I have one. ;)

cgardnervt says:

I wonder what sort of specs this phone will have. SPEC lest please!

Javiggan69 says:

It must have a huge battery.

inuchan says:

You know what they say about phones with high specs..

halfpassed says:

Let's hope this really ends up being a viable option besides the typical "HTMotoSung" offerings. Had an Ascend X which was, while a little buggy, a pretty decent option for a smaller carrier like Cincinnati Bell (which I am on) before they got typical stuff like my current HTC Sensation. Hopefully, this will be a real huge step up, considering the standard now is dual core, 4.3"+ screens, Gingerbread devices. Something new would be great for us little guys.

droidman2177 says:

i played with a couple of their phones and must say COMPLETE GARBAGE.

HAAS599 says:

The headline is sensationalized. The quote begins with "our" which completely changes the expectations of what they will be showing at MWC.

dchawk81 says:

Indeed. Things are getting a bit dirty over at AC. They're starting to lose me, to be honest. Visiting has become more of a habit than an interest, and it really just makes me kind of sad.

Mikey47 says:

Dirty? I'm not a Phil apologist, but seems like calling this dirty or sensationalized is little like complaining that AC mainly covers news about Android stuff.

dchawk81 says:

Yes, A BIT dirty. Not filthy, not skeezy...a bit dirty.

The headline gets people's attention by saying "cheap Chinese company announces plans to outsmart all smart phones."

The company's actual quote says "we're going to make stuff that's better than we made before."

The former is "oh snap look at the trash talk from these guys!" and the latter is "duh." The former gets clicks. The latter does not.

HAAS599 says:

I would prefer the headline be "Huawei sends out press release" and the article be nothing but a screenshot or copy and paste of the press release.

Yeah. I mean, writing a headline quoting exactly what the company is promising sure is sensationalizing the story.

Please give me three alternate headlines, in active voice. I'm new here. :p

HAAS599 says:

Wow, for all the moaning and groaning you do on Google+, you sure seem to get upset when someone pokes you back.

If you don't think Huawei saying they will bring "the best Android phone" and "their best Android phone" are 2 completely different things than someone is spiking your kool-aid.

dchawk81 says:

Except you didn't quote the company exactly in the headline. That little word "our" is pretty darn important to the meaning of the statement.

Grammar is important.

Grammar is important. Pronouns in headlines often are not. Especially when the first two words of the headline tell you who says the part that's quoted. "Huawei promises." Which part of that was confusing?

HAAS599 says:

The headlines reads that Huawei are promising THE best Android phone ever. When, in fact, they are promising THEIR best Android phone ever. In this case, I feel those are 2 very different expectations.

All the headline needs is the word "their" after promises.

Wow. Really? This isn't that tough, folks.

Tell you what. I'm going to go to Spain and find out. Check back here on Feb. 26 if you wanna find out with me. :p

turbofan says:

Phil: You're a journalist (so you say). You know better than this. Quit being an ass about it an own up. You know damn well there's a big difference between "Huawei promises '[their] smartest, Fastest, most high-performing smartphone yet' and "Huawei promises 'smartest, fastest, most high-performing smartphone yet."

As the poster above said: One means that Huawei is setting out to build the most powerful smartphone ever, and the other means they're going to make slightly less crappy phones. It's a totally different thing, and if you wish to continue being an idiot about it, I no longer feel the need to read what you have to say. I've been a proponent of this site to friends and others but this is getting ridiculous.

HAAS599 says:

No point in trying to talk sense into Phil. To him we are just a bunch of stupid commenters. I have been following AC from the start and have never thought of Phil as a grumpy old man but in the past few months he seems to have become more cynical than ever and its very annoying.

HAAS599 says:

May I suggest a slice of humble pie with your humble brag?

Mikey47 says:

Heaven forbid that you actually have to read the article to find out information.

Phil, here's a suggestion for the headline:

"Chinese smartphone and tablet manufacturer just hit us up to tease some new kit in 2012, promising we'll see "our smartest, fastest and most high-performing smartphone yet, taking a leap into the future of mobile communications." The announcement will come on the eve of Mobile World Congress in Barcelona, Spain.

Huawei has yet to really break into the U.S. market, though it does manufacture the uninspiring T-Mobile Springboard tablet. And while MWC isn't a U.S.-centric show, it is a high-profile show. And with Android Central in attendance yet again, you can bet we'll have plenty of American eyes pointed that way."

The text of the article can then just say: "Please see the headline for more information."

turbofan says:

You're being ridiculous, and you know it. Knock it off.

dchawk81 says:

Do you truly believe pronouns are not important??

turbofan says:

The issue isn't who said it, that's obviously not confusing. It's the part where you totally change the meaning of their quote. And it's not confusing. It's very clear, just misleading.

HAAS599 says:

"tease up some new kit"?

Phil is British all of a sudden.

Nothing wrong with being British!

mikeymop says:

I'm betting on a Tegra 3

JHK1984 says:

Pff.... still made in China.

hmmm says:

Hey if it's good enough for Apple...

...everything is made in china

3rdpig says:

Which is why there's such an large return rate. But if you can build it cheaply enough, and sell enough of them, you can absorb the losses from a 20% return rate. Just ask Samsung.

JHK1984 says:

Samsung is made in Korea and the labor fee is much higher than in China.
Dumb ass.

jlschulz says:

cheap Chinese crap from a communist country that shouldn't be allowed to sell in this country anyhow. Just another nail in our self imposed coffin.

turbofan says:

So what are you using to post this comment? Odds are, it's made in China too.

MagyariBulan says:

If it's not made in china, it is counterfeit.

Unless AC changed the article wording, it's really clear-cut and straight forward. AC puts what the company promises in quotes. When you put it in quotes, you're quoting another entity and is not a personal reflection.

So when it says 'our smartest, fastest', it means that the company is saying of all our choices, it will be the best yet. Do some of y'all need something to bicker about that badly?

dchawk81 says:

That isn't the issue.

turbofan says:

The issue is in the wording of the HEADLINE, not the article itself. Compare the headline with the actual quote in the article and you'll notice they have two completely different meanings.

The only reason I'm making such a big deal of this is because it's not the first time. I see things like this pop up, I see the increase in pop-up advertisements, I see the occasional poor grammar or misworded sentences that require several re-reads to properly understand... These are paid journalists, and I just feel like they're not doing as good of a job as some others.

HAAS599 says:

If a fact was wrong or a word was misspelled I would think Phil would want someone to speak up but I guess I was wrong.

What's wrong with the headline, Turbofan? He's quoting Huawei's quote so he puts the quote in single quotes because typically when you are quoting a quote, you put it in single quotes.

The headline reads Huawei promises 'smartest...smart-phone' in Feb. So he's writing that Huawei is saying this, not AC.

HAAS599 says:

You are the problem.

The quote is misleading. Huawei didn't say they promise THE best Android phone ever. Huawei said they promise THEIR best Android smartphone ever. You seem to think they meant the former so our point is proven.

Huawei best Android phone is junk compared to the galaxy nexus, sgs2, or Razr so the bar isn't set as high as the headlines may have you believe.

Ah, I see.

Well, okay. I stand corrected. Maybe AC should should add the pronoun their to the beginning.

And, eh, as far as me being the problem, I'm sorry I stress you out so much.

HAAS599 says:

lol, I just thought that was the simplest way to put it.

I wasn't stressed out by you at all. More by Phil replying to me as if I'm an idiot.

dchawk81 says:

Your confusion is the result of the headline being misleading. It's not your fault; it's Phil's.

If the headline has confused anybody to the point where they had to read the story, you have my apologies. I'm going back to work now. :)

HAAS599 says:

Actions speak louder than words. Headline is unchanged.

EDIT - Don't change it. A bite of humble pie is enough.

The_Engine says:

I never read the headlines or the articles. Just the comments. It makes the work day go by.

dchawk81 says:

Your sarcasm underlines the fact that it was indeed intentional clickmongering.

prelude884 says:

Why does it matter? Even if the quote included our or before the quote Phil put their, you most likely would have read the article anyways, and if you wouldn't have big deal you lost 30 seconds of your time. . Besides, any site like ac needs clicks on articles so that type of thing should be expected. If you don't like it or don't like the way Phil does things then don't visit the site. That's the great thing about free will, you can choose if you visit here or not.

ChillFactorz says:

Phil how could you create a headline that draws the readers in? I'm furious that a journalist would stoop to such lows as this. you paraphrased and quoted part of the article then pointed us to the actual article. to have us read in its entirety. WHY?

HAAS599 says:

It's exactly what most of us commenters said it was. The only person denying it was Phil. We all understand it is par for the course and to act like he wasn't doing it on purpose when called out on it is ridiculous.