In the past, there were always people – including foreigners, but also our own people – who always made irresponsible remarks about domestic substitution plans.
For example, in the case of computer procurement by government and enterprise units, HP and Dell used to have a very high share. Because of the market economy, both domestic and foreign capital should be treated equally, so in the past, the computers of relevant domestic units were basically covered by Lenovo, Dell, and HP.
Why can these three companies eat through the business computer market? Isn't the assembly machine for playing games in an Internet café better than their performance? And the price is only a fraction of it, but you can't buy those messy miscellaneous brands.
Quite simply, because business PCs don't care about gaming performance, they care more about stability, security, and after-sales service, which many people overlook.
In addition to Lenovo, for a long time, there was a lack of a computer brand in China that could meet the needs of large customers and had good business after-sales attributes. Based on the WTO fair principle, we can't always purchase all of our own brands, so many foreign PC brands, including Dell, eat up a lot of domestic large customer markets.
Well, I know that some people think that the traditional top three are all virtuous and all outsiders, and I still have reservations about this. Fortunately, Huawei appeared, and Huawei became a disruptor in the PC market.
Then came the better news, the United States has basically destroyed the WTO rules, and we can put forward "domestic substitution" in a bright and bright way.
Obviously, the market share of HP and Dell will continue to decline. Even so, our 2024 procurement plan for relevant units is still symbolic of the purchase of some foreign PC products such as Dell, HP, etc.
Many people at home and abroad are not convinced, saying that we are unfair.
However, I still remember that Dell had been very arrogant in saying that it would move the PC industry chain out of China: Oh, while making our money, we also smash our pots, and we still have to have a "fair principle" for it?
Fortunately, the news on May 10 helped us a lot.
A notice statement issued by Dell
The official website of Dell headquarters confirmed that more than 49 million customer information has been hijacked and leaked by hackers, including many Chinese customer information.
Dell issued a notice saying that it is investigating the incident, and the main leaks include the user's name, delivery address, purchased Dell hardware and order information, etc.
At present, the hacker named Menelik is already selling information to the public. According to other media outlets, it is not possible to confirm whether the data is the data disclosed by Dell, but it matches the information listed in the data breach notice.
The author just visited the sale site, Breach Forum, and the sale post has been deleted. Generally speaking, this kind of webmaster will not delete the post, and it is expected that Menelik has found the seller and has made a move.
In order to make up for it, Dell said that because the type of information involved is relatively common, there is not much risk to customers.
What is called covering ears and stealing bells, this is called covering ears and stealing bells.
Although it is not known how many Chinese users' information was leaked, according to the website "Security Insider", it was confirmed that "a large number" (note, a large amount) of Chinese users' information was included.
So Dell, are you embarrassed to bid for business orders in China?
Of course, this is not a good thing, not only for individual users, but also for our large customers who use foreign computers in government enterprises and other relevant units.
So why do we want to promote domestic substitution?
Do you think it's safe to keep your server in the country? Your purchasing information may also be transferred overseas, as in the case of Dell's information breach.
Through these data, outsiders can know which units are using foreign computers, and can also judge the user's status or occupation according to the price and model, and even make some targeted behaviors.
So don't you think that's a big safety hazard?
Are some people no longer interested in domestic substitution? In any case, many experiences are often bought in exchange for these lessons, and behind every seemingly unreasonable policy there is a rationale behind it.
So now, will anyone still complain about the domestic substitution program?