Wang Xing's satire on Huawei's car-making is not worth talking about, but his satire on Wang Xing is worth talking about.

Wang Xing satirized Huawei's car-making as a hot topic. However, after reading it, I feel that Wang Xing is not worth mentioning, and everyone's evaluation of this matter should really be said.

( 1)

Looking straight, Wang Xing's words were directed at Huawei people. He believes that the traditional car companies' view of smart cars is to embed a computer in the car, while Huawei's view is that the computer is the foundation and the car is regarded as a computer peripheral. And think that this is the essence of different views, which will lead to different views on everything.

In response to this statement, Wang Xing does not seem to agree, commenting that "Tesla finally met an opponent with equal technical strength and flickering ability."

Regardless of whether we should agree with what Huawei Su Jing said. This is a question with professional depth, and many readers may not be interested. Let's get to the point first, and then discuss this point with interested readers at the end of the article.

I'm afraid Wang Xing's comments alone are biased and ironic against Huawei. It is unlikely that someone at Huawei will be labeled as a "fool's ability" because of his words. But even so, at best, it shows Wang Xing's personal narrowness and meanness. What's more, maybe we can find some jealousy in it. But after all, this is his personal opinion and temperament, and there is nothing to say.

(2)

Looking at your comments, most of them focus on two levels of meaning.

First, focus on comparing the two companies: Huawei has core technologies, and what technologies does your Meituan have? To satirize Wang Xing.

However, is there technology and how much technology should be the standard of company value and even company quality?

The mission of the company is to meet the living needs of specific social groups. Whether it can provide excellent user value is the only fundamental criterion to evaluate the company.

Since when have we changed such values? Or have we never established such business values?

Social needs are diverse. Are business services that provide basic living needs really unimportant?

Because we were short before, we still feel short of technology and think technology is very important, but even so, we can't use means instead of ends. Only by proceeding from our fundamental purpose can we be reminded not to be biased.

In this wave of Internet craze in the past, we also admired the Internet, which became the dominant factor. Later, it was found that this not only crowded out many other important things, but also the development of the Internet itself eventually drifted away from the direction of improving people's lives.

In fact, the pursuit of user value is the real driving force for the company's scientific and technological development. Really starting from user value and taking user value as the test standard will prompt the company to seek technological progress as much as possible according to its own actual situation and provide better and more competitive user value. Only in this way can the company maintain a reasonable and balanced allocation of social resources.

Of course, the technological progress generated in this way may be used to realize more sophisticated social products, improve ordinary daily necessities and provide more valuable life services for ordinary consumers with higher efficiency. This is what we need, all positive and valuable business practices can also be said to be a sea of stars!

We also see that many enterprises use technology cores bought from abroad and use false technological progress and social support to defraud policy subsidies without user value evaluation standards.

In times of war, in times of danger, we had to separate the front line from the rear. Everything in the rear is to support the front, and all resources are used in the front as much as possible. Teenagers go to the front, young and old are in the rear, and it is also a war of resistance to fight more food! But it was an extraordinary period after all. All our efforts are actually aimed at leading a normal life.

Improving the direction of our various life contents should be the fundamental driving force to promote social and economic development and scientific and technological progress. This is the normal development of a society.

(3)

The meaning of the second level in everyone's comments focuses on Wang Xing's qualifications: a car maker selling vegetables, what qualifications do you Wang Xing have to evaluate Huawei?

Once upon a time, chains of contempt were found around us. Compared with those who build cars, selling vegetables naturally exists in some kind of contempt chain. As a capital tycoon, you may be at the top of another contempt chain, but here, of course, vegetable sellers must be despised.

You may say that this is not contempt, but that Wang Xing's enterprise does not know how to build a car, so it is not qualified to evaluate the matter of building a car. I'm afraid this is not the case. Because in our social context, it is recognized that ordinary people are fully qualified to evaluate or even identify experts with their own experience and understanding, which is a broad contempt for the aura of authority. So, why can't the vegetable seller evaluate the car maker?

I also sold vegetables in the market. I sell vegetables, and I am honored! I evaluate not only those who make cars, but also those who make planes and rockets.

In fact, what kind of contempt chain means a social class and social strength. They are rooted in respect for social classes and social forces. And its essence is the law of the jungle. This is something that should be abandoned with the evolution of human civilization, and it is rubbish in social civilization.

(4)

Finally, off topic, let's talk about what Huawei Su Jing said.

This actually means two different ways of product definition. The actual industrial path of traditional automobile enterprises is automobile+information intelligence, and the actual industrial path of information intelligence enterprises is information intelligence+automobile. Different industrial paths objectively have different effects on industrial perspectives, and different industrial perspectives and product definitions will bring different concepts of the whole product. Su Jing's implication is that traditional car companies will limit the product concept to the scope of cars and conceive the application of information intelligence within this scope; Huawei, on the other hand, can break away from the car's mindset and exert its intelligence to a greater extent.

But this kind of thinking is taken for granted, and it is easy to amplify your sense of superiority in this kind of taking for granted. In fact, this is also the problem that many car companies will first think of and subjectively avoid when facing industrial renewal. To be honest, it is much easier to change industry from the perspective of R&D than to change habits from operation.

More importantly, this idea is only based on the subjective thinking of technology and product providers. From the perspective of demand, we should consider two issues.

First, in the corresponding consumption scenario, what kind of smart demand is significant enough for consumers?

Second, what kind of price and boundary restrictions does this demand have?

Judging from these two points, I am afraid that the plan of intelligent drama will be greatly limited. Just like smart home, there is no decisive intelligent application until now.

For Wang Xing, he is also a master of playing with concepts. He probably thought they were all foxes on the mountain. What do you think of serial killers?