After US$10 Usless Brick, India's US$35 Tablet is a Copy of Chinese product

Indians and Indian government are always ambitious even their capability is low. Many readers may still remember India's US$10 computer project turned out to be a useless brick in early 2009. Indian government anounced to the world loudly that India designed a tablet of a price tag of US$35 in July 2010. The tablet news made the world astonish about India's innovation since the Union Minister for Human Resource Development of India showed the world a real thing.

But the bubble did not last long. Now the world know that India's US$35 tablet is actually HiVision's Speedpad, or a copy of it. HiVision is a Chinese company that displayed the Speedpad in CeBIT, 2010. The Hivision SpeedPad has a 7-inch 800 x 480 resolution LCD touchscreen, Samsung ARM11 800MHz processor, 2GB of storage, 256 DDR2 RAM and runs Android. It has WiFi b/g, external 3G, Bluetooth and GPS dongle connectivity and also features a 4200mAh battery good for 6 hours of use between charges. Other goodies include web browser, email, webcam and a few other choice applications. HiVison's Speedpad has a sale tag of less than US$100.

India way behind China, world in innovation

New Delhi: India had a meagre 6,406 patents as compared to 182,385 in China and the world average of 846.71 patents in force in 2004, with the total number of patent filings by Indians per million population standing at 3.40 in 2004-05 as compared to the world average of 250.72 worked out on the basis of the world population of 6377.6 million.

Informing this in a written reply to the Rajya Sabha, the India’s Minister of State for Industry Dr Ashwani Kumar also told that the number of patents in India in force was 6,857 in 2005.

According to the Minister, the world average of patents in force in 2004 was worked out on the basis of the world population of 6377.6 million as per the ‘State of World Population 2004’ report by United Nations Population Fund.

The ‘Statistics on Worldwide Patent Activity, 2006 Edition’ of World Intellectual Property Organisation (WIPO) also suggest that the number of patents in force worldwide in 2005 was about 5.6 million, up from 5.4 million in 2004.

However, Kumar said that as these numbers also include patents obtained in different countries for the same invention, it would not be feasible to draw a conclusion on the proportion of patents in force in India vis-à-vis those in force worldwide.

Taking about the steps taken to strengthen the processes to help creation of Intellectual Property Rights in the country, he said that the Government of India has invested Rs 153.00 crore for modernisation of intellectual property offices during the 9th and 10th Five Year Plans.

These include infrastructure development, computerization, human resource development and training and awareness on the processes of IPR.

While four new integrated intellectual property offices were set up in Delhi, Kolkata, Chennai and Mumbai, e-filing of patent applications was also made operational in July 2007.

The government has also commenced the work for setting up the National Institute of Intellectual Property Management at Nagpur.

The Minister said that seminars, conferences and workshops at national and international level have been organized for creating awareness and promotion of IPR.

To bring in global cooperation in the field of IPR, the government has signed Memoranda of Understandings with France, US, UK, European Patent Office, Japan, Switzerland and Germany.

Source: http://www.igovernment.in/site/india-way-behind-china-world-in-innovation/

China firm wins patent on malaria vaccine

SHANGHAI April 24 (UPI) -- Chinese firm SinoBiomed said Tuesday it has been granted a U.S. patent for its malaria vaccine PfCP2.9.

The newly issued patent covers a fusion protein comprising the Plasmodium merozoite surface protein-1 and the Plasmodium apical membrane antigen 1, the encoding DNA sequence, the vector containing the sequence and the host cell containing the vector.

The patent also covers the method for preparing the fusion protein and the usage for producing anti-malarial vaccine.

The patent has been assigned to the Second Military Medical University in Shanghai for the preparation and dosage of the plasmodium fusion antigen, SinoBiomed said.

"The granting of this U.S. patent enables SinoBiomed to proceed with the vaccine development with full confidence in its potential for commercial development for the global market," said SinoBiomed President and CEO Banjun Yang. "The potential benefits to humanity as well as to SinoBiomed shareholders are significant."

The company said it has exclusive rights to develop, manufacture and sell the vaccine through its 82-percent owned subsidiary, Shanghai Wanxing Bio-pharmaceuticals Co. Ltd.


Source: http://www.upi.com/

China successes in test of quantum cryptography network: scientists

China's first quantum cryptography network has been successfully tested in Beijing, the Chinese Academy of Sciences announced on Monday.

The commercial communication network of the Chinese Network Company (CNC) was used to test the quantum network.

The testing was carried out by the Key Lab of Quantum Information under the University of Science and Technology. Leading scientist Guo Guangcan said that current cryptography faces challenges from quantum computers, because theoretically all codes can be deciphered.

But quantum information cannot be copied and any interception of quantum information is easily discovered, Guo said, adding that the new quantum cryptography is therefore "absolutely safe" and proof against decoding.

The research group successfully completed a 125-km fiber point-to-point quantum key distribution (QKD) experiment between Beijing and Tianjin in 2004, which solved the problem of stability in quantum cryptography systems.

Source

India surpasses China as key bio-technology leader in Asia?

This report said that India surpassed China for the first time in the number of hectares planted with genetically-modified crops, mainly cottons.

Can we say that India is a bio-tech leader in Gene-modification research as cliamed by Indian and some western medias ? No way! Those medias apparantly missed up a technology user and a technology researcher.

India may be a bigger user of the bt cotton than China. But almost all of the bt-cotton seeds came from Monsanto, a US comoany.

But fot China, it is a different story. Biocentury Transgene Technology Co Ltd (BTC) and Monsanto, through a joint venture offered Bt technology. BTC, which got the technology from the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences (CAAS) that developed the indigenous technology, sold it to more than 30 private and provincial seed companies (Source). BTC here is a Chinese tech company.

China's mastering of the bt-cotton technology determined that Monsanto can only sell seeds in China at much lower price than in India. Monsato charges Rs 900 per 450 gms of Bt cotton seed in India, but as little as Rs 40 for the same quantity in China. Why? China can make it, but India cannot. (Source)

Is India still a key bio-technology leader in Asia? You can get the answer now.

India's scientific talent pool much smaller than China's

Indians and many of India's propagandas often say that India is a scientific and techological power. But this claim can hardly be tested by real numbers. Of the 14 countries spends on research and development, India is the only country who spent single digit of US dollars per capita on R&D.

India has just 110 scientists per one million population and spends a mere $3.53 per capita on research and development in science and technology.

According to information volunteered by Minister of State for Science and Technology Kapil Sibal, India stands last in a list of 14 countries in spending on research and development in science. China, which stands one notch higher, spends $12.15 per capita and has 633 scientists per million - about six times as many as India's.


More data can be found here.

China Pursues Major Role in Particle Physics

The article originated from New York Times.

By DENNIS OVERBYE
Mao Zedong dreamed of splitting an electron.

This was no idle diversion. According to natural dialectics, which formed the philosophical underpinnings of Marxism, the entire universe, from top to bottom, was seething with tension and change. As a result, Mao thought, nature should be infinitely divisible.

“Take a footlong stick and remove half every day. In 10,000 years it will not run out,” Mao, who rarely missed the chance to chat up physicists, often said. “This is truth. If you don’t believe it, you may test it. If there is an end, there is no science.”

Suitably inspired by such thoughts, in the 1960s Chinese physicists invented a sort of onion-layer theory of particles called the straton model, in which both protons and electrons have a common constituent. Sheldon Glashow, the physicist and Nobelist now at Boston University, once suggested that such a particle, if found, should be named the Maon.

But Mao’s Cultural Revolution, which was unleashed in 1966, closed universities and journals and set back Chinese physics for a generation. In the meantime, quarks beat out Maons as the constituents of protons. To this day the electron remains undivided.

Mao’s enthusiasm for particle physics nevertheless left a legacy.

Ever since 1989, in a collection of buildings occupying about a city block in Beijing, Chinese physicists have been quietly shooting electrons and their evil-twin opposites — positrons — around a 80-yard-diameter underground track at nearly the speed of light, and then banging them together in little fireballs of energy.

Over the years, the work at the Beijing collider has produced results that are critical to efforts on the frontier of particle physics at more famous and much larger accelerators — those that have racetracks miles around and trillion-electron-volt energies, like the Tevatron at the Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, known as Fermilab, outside Chicago, and the Large Hadron Collider, scheduled to open next year at the CERN laboratory near Geneva.

Next fall, the Beijing collider, which is shut down for a major upgrade, will be reborn with the ability to produce 100 times as many collisions it did before, enabling physicists to investigate the quantum property called charm and resolve some standing puzzles about quarks.

By the end of the decade, as the world’s physicists shift their attention and money to the new CERN collider, experiments at the Stanford Linear Accelerator Center in Menlo Park, Calif., and the Fermilab are expected to shut down. The Beijing collider then will be one of the few other particle accelerators still doing physics experiments left in the world, and Chinese physicists are trolling for collaborators.

“Although collaborations are still modest, golden physics opportunities exist in China,” Hesheng Chen, director of the Institute of High Energy Physics in Beijing, recently wrote in the physics magazine Symmetry.

More important, Chinese particle physicists are poised to make a major contribution to one of the grandest collaborations of all, a proposed giant accelerator called the International Linear Collider, or I.L.C. The world’s physicists have already determined that it will be the Next Big Thing, but how many billions it will cost and where it will be built have yet to be decided.

Still in planning stages, the linear collider would be designed to carry international research beyond any new laws of physics and forms of matter that may be discovered using the new machine at CERN.

“China is certainly interested in the I.L.C.,” said Dr. Chen, who is a member of the steering committee for the international collider, and one of the organizers of a meeting this week in Beijing, where Chinese scientists and industry and government leaders will start talking about what role to take in the project.

Jie Gao, a physicist at Beijing’s Institute of High Energy Physics and a member of the big collider’s design team who helped instigate this week’s meeting, said he hoped the conclusion was positive, “for the good of sciences, economy, education, a harmonious and peaceful world, and a sustainable development of human being.”

It wasn’t until the early 1970s, after the turmoil of the Cultural Revolution began to wind down, that Chinese physics began to recover. Zhou Enlai, China’s premier, took advantage of Mao’s enthusiasms to endorse the development of high-energy physics, including a long-dormant dream of building a Chinese particle accelerator. It didn’t hurt that particle physics was closely connected to nuclear weapons.

Zhou got support from so-called overseas Chinese scientists, who had begun to visit their homeland in droves, like Chen-Ning Yang, then of Brookhaven National Laboratory in Upton, N.Y., and Tsung-Dao Lee, of Columbia University, who were Nobelists and heroes in China, and who talked up the importance of basic research to Mao and others.

A group of Chinese physicists toured Western laboratories in 1973 and returned with their hearts set on building a collider that would bang protons together at energies of 50 billion electron volts. When Wolfgang Panofsky, the former director of the Stanford accelerator, first visited China in 1976 in the wake of the Tangshan earthquake that killed hundreds of thousands, and after the deaths of Mao and Zhou, he was struck by the desire of the Chinese people to carry on, even though many were living in tents in the streets.

But Dr. Panofsky and others, including Dr. Lee, argued that a more modest machine would serve China better.

“We talked them out of it,” Dr Panofsky said. In 1982, in the midst of economic difficulties, the proton machine was canceled in favor of one that would collide electrons and positrons at the much lower energy of around 2 billion electron volts. Such a machine would produce synchrotron radiation, which has medical and other uses as well as a role in particle research. The site of the accelerator was also moved from a remote area outside Beijing near the Ming tombs into the city.

President Deng Xiaoping himself showed up to shovel dirt at the groundbreaking.

Dr. Panofsky remembered being in Beijing for a presentation on physics and the collider.

“Deng shut us up and gave an hour-and-a-half lecture on the beauty of high-energy physics,” Dr. Panofsky said. To learn the business, a group of Chinese accelerator engineers spent a summer at the Stanford accelerator.

“It was quite a scene,” Dr. Panofsky recalled. “We had 30 Chinese engineers in Mao suits running in and out of our lab.” It only took four years, an astonishingly short time, to build the Beijing collider.

“It was finished on time and on budget,” said Dr. Chen, who had returned to China from the Massachusetts Institute of Technology in the 1980s to work at the physics institute. where he became director in 1998. The size of the Beijing collider was based on what could be achieved at the time, but it turned out to be a fortuitous choice.

“The energy was lower but it was more interesting,” Dr. Chen said.

Particle colliders get their oomph from Einstein’s famous equivalence of mass and energy. The more energy they can pack into those tiny fireballs, the closer physicists approach the conditions of the Big Bang itself, and the more massive and strange particles can be created — as permitted by the laws of physics prevailing at those temperatures and times.

New particles, heralding perhaps new laws, are often first glimpsed by the mighty proton colliders. But such collisions are intrinsically messy and hard to understand because of all the junk that lives inside protons, and physicists often leave new particles behind and unstudied in their rush to build the next bigger machine and, in effect, go farther back in time.

The energy range of the Beijing collider, 1 to 2.2 billion electron volts per beam, contained a lot of puzzling left-behind physics, including the tau, a sort of superfat electron, for which nature has no obvious purpose, and the so-called J/psi. The J/psi, consisting of a pair of quarks each exhibiting the quantum property known whimsically as charm, set off a revolution and led to Nobel prizes when it was discovered in 1974.

“There is a lot going on in that energy region,” said Frederick A. Harris, a professor of physics at the University of Hawaii, who works often at the Beijing collider. By tuning the energy of their colliding beams, the Chinese researchers have been able to measure the mass of the tau very precisely, as well as carry out detailed studies of the J/psi and similar particles.

In the collider’s energy range, Dr. Chen said simply, “We dominate.”

Among the collider’s achievements, Dr. Harris said, was the most precise measurement yet of a number called “R.” In the so-called standard model, which currently rules particle physics, this parameter measures the likelihood of fireballs produced in the collider to materialize into so-called hadrons, particles made of quarks as opposed to other, simpler particles known as muons. That involved “changing the machine energy 91 times,” explained Dr. Harris.

When physicists at CERN fire up their new Large Hadron Collider, which will eventually collide protons with 7 trillion electron volts of energy, in search of new particles and clues to new unified laws of physics, the Beijing data on this parameter will be critical to their analyses.

“They are all dependent on measurements made in China at lower energy,” Dr. Harris said.

Dr. Panofsky, of the Stanford accelerator, said: “Most economic growth is not due to new invention, but making things faster and cheaper. High energy physics mirrors this. In China they measure things known to exist better and with higher accuracy than in the West.”

The improvement of the Beijing collider will extend the Chinese hegemony over this energy range, allowing the experiments to gather 100 times more data on rare events.

Recently, there has been a flurry of sightings at other particle experiments of other particles made of multiple quarks, including a proton and antiproton stuck together to make a six-quark particle first predicted by the Italian physicist Enrico Fermi in 1948. Confirmation of the existence of such particles would be an important clue for theorists who try to navigate intractable equations to calculate the properties of quarks.

“Do they exist or not?” Dr. Panofsky asked. “Tune in next year.”Completing the Beijing improvements, Dr. Chen has said, will also free Chinese accelerator experts to concentrate their energies on the international effort to build the proposed International Linear Collider some time in the next decade.

The proposed I.L.C. would shoot electrons and positrons at each other with 500 billion electron volts of energy through a tunnel 20 miles long. An approximate price tag will be announced when the international collider planning team meets in Beijing this February.

Since this collider is being planned to follow up on discoveries made at CERN, and is likely to cost several billion dollars, it probably won’t be approved by the governments that would have to do the heavy financial lifting until the end of the decade — when the new CERN collider has something to show for itself.

“The I.L.C is still a mythical beast,” Dr. Panofsky said.

Yet the jockeying for where to put the machine has already begun. The host country for the collider would have the advantage of being the center of 21st-century physics, but would have to bear a larger share of the cost.

Last spring, a report from the National Academy of Sciences urged the United States to do what it takes to get it built here rather than in Europe or Asia, or face the prospect of relinquishing traditional leadership in physics.

Barry C. Barish, a California Institute of Technology physicist who is head of the design team for the international collider, said the “informal plan” is for China’s role to grow in the coming years. Just how much depends on what kind of commitment the Chinese government decides to make.

Dr. Harris said, “The rate China is growing, this is something they could contemplate hosting in 10 years.” Although few accelerator experts expect China to be that aggressive, nobody really knows what the future holds. Given the explosive growth of China’s economy and the vow of the country’s leaders to emphasize science and technology, it is natural to wonder whether some future particles will have Chinese names the way many of the bright stars in the sky have Arabic names. Thanks to the Beijing collider, said Dr. Chen, “A new generation of accelerator engineers and data engineers is growing up.”

It has helped them that “now a person can have a reasonable life if you are interested in science,” said Dr. Chen, who spent part of the Cultural Revolution years as a high school teacher.

A middle generation of scientists have returned from the diaspora to pitch in. Among them is Dr. Gao, who came back to China a couple of years ago after spending 15 years in France. He is leading the design of the so-called damping rings that will keep the particle beams of the international collider tightly focused. Dr. Gao said he was struck by the pace of life in today’s China.

“Another big surprising change is that all Chinese are very busy in all fields, the work is busy and the life is busy,” Dr. Gao said. “I am terribly tired, but very happy, there are too many things to learn, to do and to improve.”

China overtakes Japan on R&D

The country is expected to invest $136bn in research and development this year after growing by more than 20 per cent in the past year, ahead of the the $130bn from Japan but still well behind the $330bn the US will invest, the OECD said.<

The report is the latest indication of the dramatic rise in research spending in China, which is beginning to cause concerns among western governments.
.

This is copied from here.

The number must be based on PPP. But it reflects the fact that R&D is booming in China.

China had the lowest performance in her history between the start of the reform and 1991 when the Gulf War happened. China invested only 0.7% of her GDP in R&D. The number has being increased since then. in 2005, 1.34% of China's GDP was invested in R&D. More cash is planned for R&D. The number will be increased to 2% in 2010 and 2.5% in 2020 which will be in par with developed countries.

China to build satellite navigation system

China has started to build its own satellite navigation system, called Compass.

The planned network, also referred to as Beidou in Chinese, entails the launching of five geostationary Earth orbit (GEO) and 30 medium Earth orbit (MEO) satellites, informed sources said here Thursday.

China plans to launch two Compass navigation satellites at the beginning of next year. The system is expected to cover China and parts of neighbouring countries by 2008 before being developed into a global constellation, according to the sources.

The system will provide two navigation services. The Open Service is designed to provide users with positioning accuracy within 10 meters, velocity accuracy with 0.2 meter per second and timing accuracy within 50 nanoseconds.

The Authorized Service will offer "safer" positioning, velocity, timing communications for authorized users.

More details can be found here.

Three Chinese groundbreakers in Biotech and nanotech

This is a report from Time magazine (Source). It reveals the Chinese achivements in R&D.

From biotech to nanotech, three Chinese pioneers look to lead the nation to a new scientific frontier

Nowhere is Asia's scientific revolution unfolding more dramatically than in China, where researchers are taking advantage of bounteous funds and pushing hard to fulfill a government mandate to innovate. Here are three Chinese scientists whose discoveries in the emerging biotech and nanotech fields could transform the way we live and help secure China's position as a scientific superpower:

More details could be reached here.

Comparing China With India by Numbers

1. The Geo-demographics of China and India
Land Area: China 9.6 million sq km; India: 2.97 million sq km
Population: China 1.3 billion; India 1.1 billion
Labor force: China 791.4 million; India 496.4 million
Population growth rate: China 0.59% (death rate 0.697%, birth rate 1.325%); India 1.38% (death rate 0.818%, birth rate 2.201%)

2. Economy in General
GDP in 2005: China US$2.225 trillion; India US$719.8 billion or
China US$8.859 trillion; India US$3.611 trillion by PPP
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ch.html
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/in.html

Economy sectors:
China: Agriculture: 15% of GDP, Industry 52% of GDP, Manufacturing 35% of GDP, service 33% In 2001
India: Agriculture: 24% of GDP, Industry 27% of GDP, Manufacturing 16% of GDP, service 48% In 2001
These data comes from World Bank. You can conclude that China's industry size is almost 6 times of India's after a very simple calculation. You can see how little India's industry is. More important, China’s industry is still growing much faster than India’s.

3. Agriculture
India has more arable land than China. Indian produced 250 million tons of grains in 2003 (Thanks for the good weather).
China usually produces 450 million tons of grains each year no matter how tough the weather is (record is more than 500 million tons) (Thanks for the biotech R&D and expansion of the technologies in agricultural filed in China).

India produces 87.6 million tons rice from 42.4 million hectares on the other hand China produces 178 million tons of rice from a mere 29 million hectares. There is only one big difference; China embraced ‘hybrid rice’ technology in a big way, while India has had a slow start.
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/15440.html

In 1980, China grew 4100 kg of rice per hectare; India, 2000. In 2005, China grew 6300 kg, India 3000 kg. The difference in yields had increased from 2100 kg to 3300 kg per hectare. For wheat the comparable figures were 1900 kg versus 1400 kg in 1980; and 4200 kg versus 2700 kg in 2005. For seed cotton, 1700 kg versus 500 kg in 1980; and 3200 kg versus 800 kg in 2005. For vegetables, 14500 kg versus 8300 kg in 1980; and 19300 kg versus 11300 kg in 2005.
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/16111._.html

4. Industry
As data in “Economy in General” section shows, China’s industry scale is 6 times of India’s. China’s industry is still growing at around 16% pace for many years. That means one year increase in China’s industry revenue equals to the total size of India’s industry. The gap is huge.
China’s industry revenue is about 3.5 times of the revenue from agriculture, but for India, its industry revenue is almost equal to the agriculture.
Around 43 million tons of iron and steel was produced in India in 2005 (An important index of infrastructure construction.) China produced around 349 million tons of iron and steel.
http://english.people.com.cn/200610/12/eng20061012_310940.html

55% of the world cement (Another infrastructure construction index) was used in China. See http://www.economist.com/displaystory.cfm?story_id=2446908

By the data from CIA fact books, India produced around 36 million tons of oil (A natural resource index) in 2003 and will face the resource problem soon.
China produced 160 million tons of oil in 2003 and imported more than 100 million tons in the same year.

Here talks about the Sino-India trade in 2004. It clearly tells that India is only a raw material supplier to China and China mainly sells industrial products to India.
http://www.indianexpress.com/res/web/pIe/full_story.php?content_id=81415

India’s average tariff fell from 56% in 1990 to 28% in 2004. By comparison, China’s average tariff dropped from 32% to 6% over the same period. That means, India has to use tariff to protect its weak industry. While, China’s industry competes against others fairly even in domestic market.
In 2002 the typical monthly wage of a manufacturing worker in India was US$23.80 while in China the figure was US$110.80, according to the IMF.
http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/cda/doc/content/US_ChinaIndiaReality_Research.pdf
Even India’s industry is under the protection of high tariff. India still has a huge trade deficit. The deficit could reach US$50 billion in the fiscal year of 2005-2006.
http://www.boloji.com/analysis2/0109.htm
But China always has a trade surplus. I even don’t bother to provide the links.

5. Service Industry
Calculating from the GDP numbers of both China and India and the percentage of service industry in them, China’s service industry contributed US$742.5 billion to China’s GDP, it is almost the total of India’s GDP. India’s service revenue was only US$345.5billion.

Chinese airlines carried 138 million passengers in 2005, and the loads will nearly double to 270 million passengers in 5 years.
http://www.usatoday.com/travel/flights/2006-10-02-china-airports-usat_x.htm
Passenger traffic grew to 52.12 million in the last fiscal in India, from 43.47 million in 2004-05, to register a growth of 19.9 percent.
http://investinginindianews.blogspot.com/2006/07/indian-aviation-soaring-into-greater.html

The annual insurance premium currently collected in India is $23 billion, which is expected to increase ten fold to $ 239 by 2020. In the same period, China’s insurance premium will rise to $863 billion from the present level of $60 billion.
http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/181_1821048,00020008.htm

Retail sales surged 12.9 percent in 2005 over the year before, to 6.7 trillion Yuan ($847 billion). By 2020, industry forecasts say the market could expand to about $2.4 trillion.
http://www.forbes.com/business/energy/feeds/ap/2006/10/17/ap3096453.html

India’s total retail market reached US $230 billion in 2005 and will grow to US$370 billion in 2011
http://sourcewire.com/releases/rel_display.php?relid=27553&hilite=
http://www.etretailbiz.com/feb06/SPECIALfeature.htm

India’s travel and tourism market was valued at US$42 billion in 2005. 340 million people traveled in 2005. The outbound travelers from India grew to 6.2 million in 2005. This was almost twice the number of arrivals witnessed by the country. That means only 3.1 million visited India in the same time.
http://www.euromonitor.com/Travel_and_Tourism_in_India
China received 47.11 million visitors in 2005. This number should not include the vistors from Hongkong, Macau and Taiwan.
http://www.bernama.com.my/bernama/v3/news.php?id=199299
There were 31 million outbound tourists from China in 2005.
http://travel2.nytimes.com/2006/05/17/world/asia/17travel.html
In 2005, inbound tourists reached 120 million (including Chinese from Hong Kong, Macau, Taiwan economies).
Overseas tourists contributed over $29.3 billion to the Chinese economy. But their contribution was far outweighed by that of domestic Chinese tourists, who contributed $66.7 billion.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China_Business/HC07Cb06.html

In 2004, China’s service exports were US$62 billion versus US$40 billion for India. On the other hand, 60% of China’s service exports were travel and transportation services while in India the figure was 22%.
In 2003, India’s exports of commercial services other than travel, transportation, and finance amounted to US$18.9
billion. The figure for China was US$20.6 billion. In other words, China may already be ahead of India in selling IT
services to the world.
http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/cda/doc/content/US_ChinaIndiaReality_Research.pdf

6. Financial Industry and financial stability
Indians always say that their financial industry is better than China’s. This claim can cheat a lot when Chinese banks were completely state-owned. But today, three of the top four Chinese banks were listed in Hong Kong stock market. When it goes to the truth in market, Indian financial industry looks so pitiful comparing with China’s.
After the IPO of The Industrial and Commercial Bank of China, its market value is about US$87 billion, This is almost one and half times of the collective market capitalization of all listed Indian banks - for the 37 listed Indian banks, this is about $ 62.76 billion (Rs 2,86,859 crore). Bank of China's market capitalization is now around $105 billion and that of China Construction Bank $ 99 billion.
India’s ICICI Bank tops the market capitalization chart with $ 13.59 billion (Rs 62,177 crore), followed by the State Bank of India with $11.89 billion (Rs 54,380 crore) and HDFC Bank with $6.29 billion (Rs 28,774 crore). None of the other listed Indian banks has over $5 billion worth of market capitalisation. Punjab National Bank, the fourth bank when it comes to market capitalization, is worth just $3.62 billion. Canara Bank is worth just $2.52 billion.
China’s ICBC has total assets of over $ 812 billion, close to the size of India's GDP! State Bank of India, which accounts for almost one-fifth of total banking assets in India, however, has an asset base of only $84 billion.
http://www.rediff.com/money/2006/oct/07bank.htm

How China’s banks are welcomed in the stock market? The institutional tranche, which makes up 95% of the ICBC offering, attracted more than US$300 billion in orders and is 23 times oversubscribed. In Hong Kong, ICBC's initial public offering (IPO) of H-shares was 76-times oversubscribed with one million retail investors putting in HK$420 billion. This broke the previous record, held by Bank of China, which attracted HK$286 billion (US$36.7 billion) earlier this year. This enables ICBC to price its shares at the upper limit.
http://www.atimes.com/atimes/China_Business/HJ21Cb03.html
After IPO, ICBC's market capitalization jumped to $156.5 billion, trailing the $165.6 billion of the world's fourth-biggest bank, JP Morgan Chase & Co in the world.
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=afBgyU3agIzY&refer=home

Budget deficit: 10% of GDP in India versus 2% in China. This could have big impact on financial and economical stability.
http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/cda/doc/content/US_ChinaIndiaReality_Research.pdf

China has almost US$1 trillion forex reserves with total of US$ 297.9 billion external debt
http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2006-10/09/content_5180188.htm
http://www.cctv.com/program/bizchina/20061023/102290.shtml
India has US$165.275 billion forex reserves with US$132.1 billion external debt.
http://www.hindu.com/2006/09/30/stories/2006093001431800.htm
http://www.financialexpress.com/latest_full_story.php?content_id=143426

India has a huge public debt, the ratio of public debt to GDP was 82% in 2005 and still growing fast, which is above the globally recognized alarm level of 60 percent.
http://www.indexmundi.com/india/public_debt.html
China’s public debt was 28.8% of GDP.
http://www.indexmundi.com/china/public_debt.html

7. Software Industry
India is famous for its software and back office service. China's software industry is actually much bigger than that of India even China keeps silent. Chinese companies rely on huge domestic market while India has almost no IT market comparing with the big countries around. China has its own software brands such as KingSoft, Rising(anti-virus), Jiangming (Anti-virus), RedFlag(Working on Linux), WPS ( office software), ufsoft(Enterprise), KINGDEE (Golden Butterfly in Chinese) ( Enterprise), Shanda (Games).
China’s Software industry revenue reached 390 billion RMB (around US$50 billion) in 2005.
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200603/17/eng20060317_251505.html
India’s software industry revenue reached US$29.6 billion in the fiscal year ended in March 2006.
http://blogs.zdnet.com/ITFacts/?p=11050

8. Infrastructure
India has total of 127 million cellular users as of the end of September 2006 and around 50 million landline phone users. See
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2006/10/10/business/AS_FIN_India_Mobile_Phones.php
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Communications_in_India
China has total of 437 million mobile users and 368 million fixed-line phone users as of the end of August 2006. Total of 800 million phones are being used in China.
http://english.peopledaily.com.cn/200609/21/eng20060921_304974.html

India had 27.7 million internet users by year-end 2005, and had only 1.3 million broadband users. China had 111 million internet users through the end 2005, among which 41.2 million were broadband users. See:
http://www.emarketer.com/Article.aspx?1004144
Don’t forget India defines access speed of 128 kbps as broadband even in 2004.
http://www.dot.gov.in/ntp/broadbandpolicy2004.htm

Railroad: In 1949, there were only 21,800 km of railway lines in China, with only 11,000 km opened to traffic. See: http://www.macrochina.com.cn/english/china/resources/20010412000136.shtml
As of the end of 2004, China had 74, 000KM of railroad with much better quality. See: http://english.people.com.cn/200501/26/eng20050126_171976.html
India had total of about 55,000 km Railroad in 1951. That’s much more than China had in 1952. See: http://irfca.org/faq/faq-history4.html .But India has fewer railroads than China now.

China's expressway (at least 4 lanes, speed limit 110KM/hour or 120KM/hour) reaches 42, 000KM at the end of 2005. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expressways_of_China
India has only 4,885 km are central-separated expressways.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expressways_of_India
In 2002 China spent US$128 billion on power and transport infrastructure compared to US$18 billion for India.
A very small share of India’s roads is composed of highways. Of 3.3 million kilometers of roadway, only 195,000 kilometers are highways. China, on the other hand, has roughly 1.4 million kilometers of highway.
Due to insufficient port capacity, the lead time for Indian exports to the US is roughly three to four times greater than Chinese exports.
http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/cda/doc/content/US_ChinaIndiaReality_Research.pdf

Indian industry has to pay double of what Chinese factories pay for power; for ferrying freight by railways, Indian industry pays three times what Chinese factories pay.
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/16111._.html

India has electricity capacity of 130,000 megawatts.
http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/10/13/business/power.php
At the end of 2006. China will have the power capacity of 590 million kilowatts (590,000 megawatts)
http://english.people.com.cn/200601/03/eng20060103_232522.html
India's power sector, infamous for its distribution sector inefficiencies, shares the top slot in the company of countries such as Nigeria and Nicaragua when it comes to overall transmission and distribution (T&D) loss levels.India's average loss in transmission and distribution (T&D) is about 33 per cent, The T&D lose in China is only 7%.
http://www.thehindubusinessline.com/2005/12/03/stories/2005120303300900.htm

9. Education
Around 30% of Indian male cannot read newspaper and 52% of female cannot read. that means around 40% of Indians cannot read. See
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/in.html
Less than 10% of Chinese cannot read (most of are old person and they missed the education opportunity in the old time). See
https://www.cia.gov/cia/publications/factbook/geos/ch.html

Indians are very proud of their software industry. But for the computer science education, China's education quality is much higher than India.

Here is the final list of the famous worldwide IBM ACM contest in 2006. So many Chinese universities were in the top list. You can clearly see Chinese students had much better performance than Indian counterpart.
http://icpc.baylor.edu/past/icpc2006/Finals/Standings.html
Here is another world-wide programmer contest. China and Chinese universities got much better scores than India.
http://www.topcoder.com/stat?c=country_avg_rating (Ranking by country)
http://www.topcoder.com/stat?c=school_avg_rating (ranking by school)
Here is the final list of Google Code Jam 2006, in which, there are 14 Chinese programmers entered the final competition, but you cannot find any Indians in the list.
http://www.google.com/press/annc/codejam06finals.html

Roughly 15% of China’s population aged 18 to 23 is enrolled in higher education compared to 7% in India. 91% of Chinese adults are literate versus 61% in India. Among females, the numbers are 87% and 45% respectively. In China, there are 18 pupils per teacher in secondary schoolsversus 34 in India. Clearly, China has an advantage when it comes to education.
http://www.deloitte.com/dtt/cda/doc/content/US_ChinaIndiaReality_Research.pdf

China’s education also more connected with outside.
South and West Asia is the origin of 194,000 mobile students, with two-thirds coming from India, according to a report from the UNESCO Institute for Statistics (UIS) titled 'The Global Education Digest 2006'. (That means about 130,000 students from India)
Between 1999 and 2004, the number of mobile students worldwide surged by 41 percent from 1.75 million to 2.5 million, according to the Digest. China sends the greatest number of students abroad - 14 percent of the global total - primarily to the US, Japan and Britain. (That means 350,000 students from China)
http://www.indiaenews.com/business/20060604/10169.htm

140,000 international students came to China for studying in 2005. The number will be doubled in 2020.
http://www.china.org.cn/english/2006/Aug/177200.htm
About 8,000 foreign students are studying in India.
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/12586.html


Today, on every parameter for basic education, China is far ahead of India. In 2000, only 47 per cent of all children managed to complete grade 5 of primary schooling in India, as opposed to 98 per cent of Chinese children. The pupil-teacher ratio for primary education in China is one teacher for every 20 students compared to one teacher for every 40 students in India. According to World Bank estimates, youth male illiteracy in India is 20 per cent. In China it's less than one per cent.
http://www.hinduonnet.com/2006/08/10/stories/2006081005691000.htm
Gross enrollment ratio is estimated to be more or less the same in both countries — but the drop out rate in India is 21 per cent, in China it is 1 per cent.
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/16111._.html

10. Science and technology R&D
China spent 245 billion Yuan (30.6 billion U.S. dollars) on scientific research and development (R&D) in 2005, a rise of 24.6 percent. The investment accounted for 1.34 percent of China's 2005 GDP. R&D funds coming from enterprises stood at 167.4 billion Yuan, making up 68.3 percent of the total investment.
http://english.people.com.cn/200609/14/eng20060914_302806.html
India's total domestic spending on R&D rose an estimated 9.7% to $4.9 billion, or 0.77% of GDP, in the fiscal year ended March 2005.
http://www.plunkettresearch.com/
Based on PPP value of the investment on R&D, China invested US$124.03 billion in 2005 and India did US$36.11 billion in the same year. The numbers will go to US$149.80 billion and US$41.81 billion in 2007.
China’s R&D investment was 12.7% of the total of the world, comparing with 32.7% of US, 12.7% of Japan and 3.7% of India in 2005 based on PPP.
57.6% of the R&D investment in China came from industry, 33.4% from government, 2.7 from abroad, 6.3% from others.
23% of the R&D investment in India came from industry, 74.7% from government, 23% from others.
http://www.battelle.org/news/06/2006report.pdf

Even China’s R&D is not high comparing with the developed countries, but it was 6 times of what India did. The huge investment gap can tell many things. The results are so obvious:
The number of papers that are being published by China and India in high-caliber journals - ones that are accessed by Science Citation Index and Social Science Citation Index, papers originating from China had was almost thrice those from India in 2005.
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/12493.html
In 2005, Indians published only 4 articles in the prestigious Journal of American Chemical Society (JACS) versus just 22 for China, 8 versus 28 in the Physical Review of Letters (PRL) and 2 versus 13 in the Journal of Biological Chemistry (JBC).
While China's score on the Knowledge Index has risen from 3.03 in 1995 to 4.21 today, India's has fallen from 2.76 to 2.61 -- that is, India has slipped even relative to itself!
In terms of innovation, which includes the articles published in scientific journals, apart from the number of R&D personnel and the number of patents, India's score has improved from 3.51 to 3.72 -- China, however, has improved from 3.94 to 4.74, another instance of that country's stupendous progress.
http://inhome.rediff.com/money/2006/jul/17china.htm
On public expenditure on higher education, India lags way behind at $406 per student, just a fraction of countries like China (US $2,728), Brazil (US $3,986) and Malaysia (US $11,790)
http://www.indianexpress.com/story/12640.html

Many Indian and west media say India has advantage in innovation over China. Let’s compare the patents from the two countries. The number of Patent applications of a country pretty much stands for the creative and innovation of this country’s economy. In 2004, over 130,000 patent applications were received in China and China became the No. 4 in the world. India only had 17,466 applications in the same year. China filed 51 applications per million people, while India had only seven filings per million people. India was second to last
http://inhome.rediff.com/money/2006/oct/18forbes.htm
China made 2,452 international patent applications in 2005, a growth of 43.7 percent compared with the previous year. http://china.org.cn/english/2006/Feb/156849.htm
India filed 648 PCT applications in 2005, compared to 723 in 2004 and 764 in 2003. The trend is so obvious.
http://www.hindu.com/2006/02/05/stories/2006020502761300.htm

Indians are always boasting about their high technologies even supercomputer technologies. Let's compare the super computer because Indians are always claiming India is the second IT country in the world.
China's homemade supercomputer listed as No. 14. But the fastest one used in India is No. 105. It was made by IBM. India's homemade one is listed as No. 258. Legend (now Lenovo) built another more powerful one this year. It could be listed as No. 3 or No. 4. More powerful and more supercomputers were used in China than in India. See http://www.top500.org/list/2003/11/
China’s Lenovo is working on 1,000 TFLOPS supercomputer already, and it could be ready before 2010.
http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/07/28/HNlenovosupercomputer_1.html?CLUSTERING
The super computer will have domestic CPUs: http://news.xinhuanet.com/english/2006-03/03/content_4254337.htm

Thanks for the large market scale and the recent progress in the technology, China is able and trying to set the international or national technology standards, such as TD-SCDMA, EVD, WAPI, AVS, RFID.
TD-SCDMA was accepted worldwide. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TD-SCDMA
FiberHome is the presenter of ITU-T X.85、X.86和X.87 international telecommunication standard: http://www.fhn.com.cn/fhneng/gyfh.asp?class=About_us
ZTE To Edit Key ITU Standard For Optical Network Technology. http://www.totaltele.com/View.aspx?ID=1226&t=1
China also has its own HDTV, IPTV standards. We know the standard can make more and easier money than the simple production and present the development level of technology in one country. I never hear any international industrial standard come from India.
AVS: http://www.forbes.com/markets/feeds/afx/2005/12/07/afx2376962.html
WAPI: http://english.people.com.cn/200610/13/eng20061013_311470.html

In the telecommunication technology, China is already one of the forerunners in the world.
Huawei along had registered over 8000 patents already. http://www.china.org.cn/english/BAT/142904.htm
Huawei’s global contract sales jumped up 40 pct to US$8.2 billion. http://www.forbes.com/business/feeds/afx/2006/01/15/afx2451344.html
Huawei became the largest supplier in the Optical networking market in the world in 2006.
http://telephonyonline.com/finance/news/huawei_alcatel_optical_090606/

China's IC industry is making great leap in recent years. China uses about 13% of the ICs in the world and will be one of the top IC producers in 2010.
http://en.chinabroadcast.cn/2238/2006-1-28/138@296061.htm

China is to complete its first very-high-temperature gas-cooled reactor (VHTR) by the year 2010. This will be the first such reactor in the world.
http://en.chinabroadcast.cn/2238/2006-2-2/135@296739.htm
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/11080908/site/newsweek/
China’s fusion research and achievements,
http://www.hindu.com/2006/09/29/stories/2006092901421800.htm

China today is actually one of the leaders in nano-technology research. 18.3 percent academic publications on nanoscale science and engineering topics were from China in 2004. http://www.smalltimes.com/Articles/Article_Display.cfm?ARTICLE_ID=270358&p=109
China's nanotechnology patent applications rank third in world even before 2003.
http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/en/doc/2003-10/03/content_269182.htm

In agriculture, China is the place where hybrid-rice came from. Yuan Longping is called the “father of hybrid rice” in the world. http://www.china.org.cn/english/2001/Mar/8452.htm
China developed high-yield "super maize": http://www.checkbiotech.org/root/index.cfm?fuseaction=search&search=China&doc_id=9797&start=16&fullsearch=0China aims for 30 pc increase in "super wheat" output by 2020.
http://www.hindu.com/thehindu/holnus/015200610061211.htm
China has taken the lead among developing countries in the research of genetically modified (GM) plants.
http://english.people.com.cn/200512/05/eng20051205_225772.html

11: International Trade
China’s international trade topped US$1.4 trillion (import: US$660 billion, export: US$762 billion) in 2005, and China became the 3rd largest trader in the world. See: http://www.iht.com/articles/2006/01/11/business/yuan.php
India’s international trade reached US$240.8B (export: US$100.6B, import: US$140.2 billion, import > export) in 2005 (ended in March 2006) with huge trade deficit (40% of its export). http://www.sunmediaonline.com/indiachronicleapril/bilateraltrade.html
From the data above, China does not only can sell a lot more to the outside and also provide a much larger domestic market to the outside. China’s market is not only huge on paper or by mouth. It is real.

12: Living standard
Infant mortality rate: China 2.312%, India 5.463%
Life expectancy at birth: China 72.58 years, India 64.71 years
(From CIA facts books)
People living with HIV/AIDS: China 0.64 million, India 5.7 million (The world No. 1 in 2005)
http://www.unaids.org/en/HIV_data/2006GlobalReport/default.asp

46% of general population in Bombay carries an active sexually transmitted disease (the greatest risk factor for HIV spread). Do you believe it? See: http://www.globalchange.com/indi.htm

Indian PC sales hit 4.6 million in 2005 (ended in March 2006) in the so-called the second IT superpower. See: http://www.boston.com/
About 20 million of PCs were sold in China in 2005 (ended in December 2005). China is actually the No. 2 PC market in the world, only after US. See: http://www.vnunet.com/vnunet/news/2150574/china-pc-sales-hit-billion-2005

Only 32% of Indian families have TV. See:
China's number is 94% which is was almost as high as in the developed countries. India will be 2/3 of this number at the end of decade.

India’s health system is worse than neighboring Pakistan and Bangladesh.
http://www.business-standard.com/common/storypage.php?autono=262521&leftnm=3&subLeft=0&chkFlg=
The proportion of children underweight in India is 47.5% higher than the proportion of children underweight in Sub-Saharan Africa as a whole.
http://www.financialexpress.com/fe_full_story.php?content_id=143751
According to UNICEF, India in fact has 57 million children suffering from malnutrition compared to only seven million in China.
In China, underweight prevalence in children under five was reduced by more than half from 19 per cent in 1990 to just under seven per cent in 2005. The under-five mortality rate also sharply dropped from 49 per 1000 live births in 1990 to 31 in 2004.
http://www.hinduonnet.com/2006/08/10/stories/2006081005691000.htm
India ranks 93 among 116 developing countries in the global hunger index. India’s score on the index for 2003, the latest year for which data is available, was 25.73, worse than Sudan at 27.20 but better than Burkina Faso (25.80). The index, comprising three indices - child malnutrition, child mortality and estimates of the proportion of people who are calorie deficient - ranks countries on a 100-point scale, with 0 being the best and 100 being the worst.
nearly 50 percent of the world’s hungry live in India. Around 35 percent of India’s population - 350 million - is considered food-insecure, consuming less than 80 percent of minimum energy requirements.
http://www.dnaindia.com/report.asp?NewsID=1058371

The long list of Chinese medal winners at Sydney 2000 Olympic Games: See: http://www.sportorganizer.com/2000sydney/2000sydney16.htm
Let's congratulate to the only one Indian winner in 2000: See: http://www.sportorganizer.com/2000sydney/2000sydney34.htm
2004 Olympics in Athens, Please look for China from the top of the list and India from the bottom:
http://www.athens2004.com/en/OlympicMedals/medals

13. Political system
Even Indians claim India is a democratic country. But its corruption is worse than China. see
http://www.international.ucla.edu/article.asp?parentid=5299 (The research result for 2003, Corruption Perception Index)
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0781359.html (The research result for 2006, Corruption Perception Index)
Another research report said India's corruption is much worse than China too: http://straitstimes.asia1.com.sg/topstories/story/0,4386,238369,00.html
Do you believe Democracy works in India?

Human Rights in India? See here: 3000 farmers committed suicide in a 11million farming area in one year. http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/3855517.stm
Suicide rate for women is as high as 148 per 100,000, and 58 per 100,000 for men in Tamil Nadu. http://www.rediff.com/news/2004/apr/15spec.htm
At least 5% of Mumbai's people live on the roads, and 2% are simply nomads. Another 2.5 million people live in dilapidated buildings which have been officially tagged as 'dangerous'. See the report: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/4222525.stm
Over 12 per cent of disabled women in Orissa have been raped and 25 per cent of those mentally challenged have been sexually assaulted in the state. Isn't that horrible? See: http://www.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=42099

Twelve protestors killed in police shooting in January, 2006
http://www.wsws.org/articles/2006/jan2006/oris-j17.shtml
Four killed in protests in India's Gujarat state in May, 2006
http://news.monstersandcritics.com/southasia/article_1159863.php
Four were killed in the Violence over Indian star's death in April, 2006
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/south_asia/4905880.stm

The ill-treated Indians have to take their weapons to stand up against Indian government
http://www.guardian.co.uk/india/story/0,,1770612,00.html
http://ottsun.canoe.ca/News/National/2006/06/02/1611463.html
Maoist rebels spread across rural India.
http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/0822/p06s01-wosc.html

The religious conflicts, fighting happens in India over and over again. You can see how divided India is as a country.
http://edition.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/asiapcf/south/12/06/ayodhya.background/

Don’t forget the caste system in India and 160 million Untouchables are living in India.
http://news.independent.co.uk/world/asia/article1868080.ece

In India, :At least 10,000 people, most of them civilians, have died in fighting between government forces and separatists since 1979."
http://www.localnewswatch.com/jordanfalls/stories/index.php?action=fullnews&id=40638

More than 50 were killed in India's Independence movement
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/01/06/ap/world/mainD8MFTQF03.shtml

It is well known that there is no space for the discrimination against other domestic ethnic groups In China. Women are enjoying the equal rights. Chinese minorities often have more rights or privileges than Han people.

To artificially make Kolkata "shining", gov "bought from farmers for 10,000 to Rs 12,000 per acre and sold to builders for Rs 300,000 to Rs 400,000 per acre ". This can happen in a large city in India.
http://specials.rediff.com/election/2006/apr/27sld2.htm
To make Mumbai as shining as Shanghai, so many slum residents losted their place to live in one day. Around 60% of Mumbai residents are living in slums.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/printFriendly/0,,1-3-1487253,00.html
60% poor people cannot beat 40% rich people in making policies in a democracy country. If you read the comments after the news, few think about the poor. See the comments: http://www.expressindia.com/fullstory.php?newsid=40309
Also please see the pitiful poor India after their slums were destroyed by Indian government: http://news.bbc.co.uk/

These two articles were written by the same foreign visitor (sounds like a biz man) after he visited both India and China in the same year (2000).
His view about India: http://berclo.net/page00/00en-impressions-india.html
His impression about China: http://berclo.net/page00/00en-impressions-china.html
He also described so-called Indian democracy in this article: http://berclo.net/page00/00en-india-1.html
"India is said to be the world's largest democracy. There is no dispute about its size, one billion is large, but I don't think that a country whose major priorities in the last 50 years have favored a small minority at the expense of the majority can be called "a democracy". "

Socialism or capitalism both are economical models and both can push economy ahead.
Socialism is not associated with slow development in history. USSR was converted into a modern economy in a short time in its socialism era. Germany was also developing very fast before ww2 even the government controlled economy tightly.
China's economy growth was also around 7% every year before the reform even China’s more attention was put on national security. 7% growth can not be thought as slow development even today, let alone China was under embargo.
India's problem was not because of social system. It was largely because the government did not have strategy and had no ability to implement its policy if it has some. That's why India sometimes has good policies, such as education, health care...., but the results are poor.
Today, China's system has both flexibility in policy and ability to implement changes. This can allow us to keep the good policies and makes changes on bad decisions quickly. Good example is China’s education system. Our old education system worked very well at low cost. China's illiterate rate dropped to less than 15% even before the reform when China was much poorer. But we trusted market economy too much and we commercialized many parts of the system. After years, it is now proven a disaster and government got a lot of complains. Government input into the system decreased percentage-wise (not by absolute value). a lot of burden was shifted to families. As a country, the total investment into the education system increased a lot, but families’ burden increased a lot faster, especially for the poorer family.
Now we are making changes again. The totally free compulsory education will be provided before 2007 nationwide. China decided to make changes in 2005, but now many provinces implemented the new policy already. We are very confident that the new policy will be pushed to all the country in time.
China even CCP does not take care of any ideology any more. As long as we think some new policy is good for China, we can try it and then expanded all over the country quickly if the test proves it works.

In Asia, at least in East Asia, countries or economies can only get rich under the dictatorship not democracy. S Korea, Singapore, Taiwan area and Hong Kong, even Japan. There was no exception.
Japan was de facto one party government arranged by US until recent years the rival party could win. S Korea was completely a dictatorship with the support from US before 1990s. Taiwan did not have real election until 2000 (but it is real unfortunate for Chinese on the island. The election is proven to be disaster. Look at what is happening in Taiwan). Singapore is a dictatorship controlled by Lee family even today. There was no any election in Hong Kong until it was returned to China in 1997.
On the contrary, Philippines were some sort of rich. It was even considered as luck if a Taiwan people could find a job there in 1960s. Philippines has the democratic government that is almost a copy if US's. But now it is almost the poorest country in SE Asia. Taiwan’s fast development happened under the dictatorship. Its economy has been stagnant for almost 10 years since election happened on the island.
From both history and today’s truth, democracy does not translate into economical development as many people take for granted. You should understand why Goldman asked India government to following China’s political model.
http://www.financialexpress.com/fe_full_story.php?content_id=142344

14. Economical History
Data show that China developed much faster than India even before China's reform. India was much better than China before the Chinese Communist Party took power. In 1950, India’s GDP per capita was almost 1.5 times of China’s. But China's GDP caught up India in 70s last century. Now China’s GDP per capita is almost 2.5 times of India’s
GDP Per capita ( I believe it is based on PPP)
Country...1820....1870....1913....1950....1973...1998…2003
China.......600......530......552......439......839....3,117…4392
India........533......533......673......619......853....1,746…2160
http://www.ggdc.net/Maddison/Historical_Statistics/horizontal-file_2006.xls

This is only the economical data. China was doing much better than India in social development before the reform, such as education, health service, scientific R&D, …. These laid down a very solid foundation for China’s economical reform that happened in late 1970s. Many people say India lags behind China because of its late economical reform. It is not true in fact. The truth is: China did better than India before the reform and is continuing to do better than India after the reform.

15. Some more links
India asks how its economy can catch up with China's
http://www.forbes.com/home_europe/newswire/2003/11/19/rtr1154472.html
India Versus China-- Was written by some Indians
http://www.samachar.com/tech/archives/techtalk51.html
Can India Catch-Up With China? -- Was written by some Indians
http://www.indiadefence.com/ind-china.htm
The Population Bomb that can devastate India, actually it is a comparison between India and China
http://www.india-watch.com/4.htm
Can India catch up with China?
http://www.flonnet.com/fl1715/17150480.htm
Can India Overtake China? -- The famous article saying India will overtake China
http://www.alternatives.ca/article1053.html

16. Conclusion
The above links come from various resources. I collect these data to show the facts to people because I have heard too much from Indian high rank officials and Indian and western media that say: India is better than China, India has more potential than China, India is more innovative than China, India is better in quality and China is better in quantity… All of these claims are basing on no facts, at least today.

India’s economy is doing well in recent 3 or 4 years and the trend could continue for some time. I wish Indian people can enjoy their good life and make progress.

China has been high economical growth since 1949 even China had some setback during the Great Leap during 1959-1961 and the early stage of the Cultural Revolution during 1966-1970. The Cultural Revolution lasted for 10 years from 1966-1976, but China’s economy recovered and was in growth path after 1970.

In the past about 60 years, India’s economy was caught up by China and was put behind by China. Today, China’s economy is still growing at more than 10% pace, India, around 8%. These are simple facts.

Undoubtedly, China is a developing country with population of 1.3 billion. It has a lot of issues in the past, in today and in the future. I don’t deny that.

China aims for 30 pc increase in "super wheat" output by 2020

China is doing pretty well in applying biotech in agriculture.

We had hybrid rice since 1974 and now China's "super rice" technology is expanding worldwide. United Nations is helping Yuan Longping, the "Father of hybrid rice of the world", to extend his tech to other countries.

Controversial Gene modification technology is also used in agriculture in China. such as BT-cotton.

Only with the successful development and implementation of those innovative technologies, China can feed 20% of the world polulation by 8% of world arable land. That's also why China can produce more than twice grains than India in less arable land.

Source

Beijing, Oct 6. (PTI): China will develop 50 new breeds of "super wheat" in the next 15 years, raising the output capacity in major wheat production areas by 30 per cent, the state media reported.

According to the target set at a recent national seminar on super wheat breeding, the planting areas of the new breeds of super wheat will be about 33.3 million hectares during the 15-year period, and the expected unit output will be 10,500-12,000 kilograms per hectare.

President of the Chinese Academy of Agricultural Sciences, Zhai Huqu said super wheat refers to high quality and high yielding breeds of wheat.

Currently, China's super wheat breeds are still restricted in small areas because of poor adaptability and high input.

He said the super wheat project will significantly promote China's food safety. So far, related scientific research institutes have had necessary reserves of materials, technologies and methods, and a joint effort by different research teams will help raise China's innovative capacity in wheat breeding, he said

Education and R&D gap between China and India

This is a good article published on IndianExpress. It lists and points out the huge gap between China and India in the education and science and technology R&D.

The source of the article: http://www.indianexpress.com/story/12493.html

We need the best for the brightest

Arun Shourie
Posted online: Wednesday, September 13, 2006 at 0000 hrs IST

An inverse snobbery is afoot. We are lectured every other day: “What is needed is universal, free, primary education.” From this comes the unstated inference: “Institutes of higher learning - the IITs, IIMs - are institutions of, and for the elite. They must be bent to serve the poor, suffering, excluded backwards.”

No one can deny that we must spread primary education at the fastest pace possible. That China has achieved near universal literacy and just about 60 per cent of us are literate - and that too only on our definition of “literacy”, that is that a person is able to sign his name - must account for some of the difference between China and India today. Nor does one need much argumentation to see that we must wholly reorient our school education: it consists almost entirely of imparting information, and then trapping the student in the exams into revealing what he does not know; when she can get the information at the click of a mouse, of what significance is it that she has or hasn’t memorised the date of the Battle of Plassey? Contrast what our NCERT textbooks’ controversies, with the report in the International Herald Tribune the other day [1 September, 2006] about the textbook that has been put out in China’s Shanghai region: Bill Gates and JP Morgan get prominence while Mao is mentioned in just one sentence - it explains that when flags are flown at half-mast when a person like Mao dies. That’s it.

Nor can anyone dispute that one of the things we must expand is vocational education. Seventy per cent of those who graduate have degrees in Arts. One, they don’t want to do the sorts of jobs that are available. Two, employers have little use for them. Third, you can’t find a plumber¿ Krishan Khanna, an alumni of IIT, Kharagpur, an evangelist for vocational education, points to the telling contrast: India has about 5,000 ITIs (under the Ministry of Labour) and about 7,000 vocational schools (under the Ministry of HRD; and never the twain shall meet!); China has about 500,000 secondary vocational schools.

There can be no dispute about the need for expanding primary and vocational education, nor for the need to reorient them totally. It is the inference that is drawn, “IITs and IIMs are for the elite, higher education is for the elite,” which is errant nonsense. Higher learning, and the Research and Development work that can follow only from such higher learning are just as necessary. Not “Either/or”, as Vinoba would say, but “And also”.

The growing gap

We often pride and comfort ourselves with the observation, “We have one of the largest pools in the world of scientific and technical manpower.” But clearly, the numbers, large in absolute terms, are not large enough: look at the way salaries, even starting salaries have shot up in the last five years in IT, ITES and similar professions: they speak to a grave shortage.

Even if the absolute figures of engineers and scientists are taken at face value, numbers by themselves don’t go far. While celebrating the impressive jump in enrollment in higher education - the 1991 Census had counted 20 million with graduate and higher degrees, and 53 million by 2003; while pointing out that enrollment in science and engineering courses had risen faster than overall enrollment: 2.7 times in science and 10 times in engineering; the NCAER’s India Science Report, sets out some telling figures that give pause. Almost 30 per cent of those who have finished 12th class or higher in science are not working in jobs requiring scientific learning: they are either unemployed or are housewives. The figure is 20 per cent in the case of science graduates, and 14 per cent for those with Ph. Ds in science. Of science graduates, only a third are employed in “professional and technical” assignments. And on the other side, many employed in science-centered jobs turn out not to be sufficiently qualified. Of post-graduates who are unemployed, two-thirds have studied science. Of Diploma Holders who are unemployed, 53 per cent belong to the science stream.

But sub-optimal utilisation is just one aspect. A presentation of Dr. R.A. Mashelkar points me to two studies and the indices of output they sketch - Science and Engineering Indicators, 2006, Volumes I and II, National Science Board, Arlington, VA; and R.N. Kostoff, D. Johnson, C.A. Bowles and S. Dodbele, Assessment of India’s Research Literature, Office of Naval Research and Northrop Grumman, Arlington, VA. These show an alarming slippage - of effort, of attainments, of standards.
Consider one index: the number of papers that are being published by China and India in high-calibre journals - ones that are accessed by Science Citation Index and Social Science Citation Index. The Kostoff study indicates that in 1980, papers from China were one-fifteenth of the papers produced from India. In 1995, they became about equal. By 2005, papers originating from China had become almost thrice those from India. Between these dates, papers from India increased by 2.5, China’s ten times. Kostoff and his associates point out that the scientific output of South Korea already exceeds that of India, and that of Taiwan and Brazil is catching up fast.

As part of the dramatic growth in Chinese research output may be caused by the multiplication of journals, Kostoff and his colleagues turned to three high Impact Factor journals - the Journal of the American Chemical Society, the Physical Review Letters, and the Journal of Biological Chemistry. “India had noticeably more publications in the three journals prior to about 2000,” they note. In 2005, their figures show, Chinese researchers published more than five times the number of papers than Indian researchers in the Journal of the American Chemical Society. Mashelkar points to his own field, Chemistry: every eighth paper published in Chemical Abstracts is now from China; every fortieth Indian.

Nor is this accidental. The US National Science Board’s Science and Engineering Indicators shows the focused effort behind China’s leap. In 1991, China was spending around $ 12 billion on R&D, $ 85 by 2003. Our total R&D expenditure is around $ five billion. Over this period, China’s academic R&D expenditure increased ten-fold. “China’s R&D expenditures are rapidly approaching those of Japan, the second largest R&D performing nation,” the study notes. “OECD data show China’s investment at 17% of Japan’s in 1991 but at 74% of Japan’s in 2003.” The National Science Board’s analysts observe, “such a rapid advance on the leading R&D performing countries and regions would still be unprecedented in recent history.”
This emphasis on R&D is bearing results. Focusing on five high-technology industries, Science and Engineering Indicators shows that “In 2003 China had surpassed Japan as a producer of high-technology goods¿ China’s rise from a mere $ 23 billion in 1990 to $ 224 billion in 2003, remarkable both for its speed and consistency, moved its share of world high-technology exports to 12%, beyond Japan’s share,” which by then had been pushed down to 9%. Not just papers by Chinese researchers are now such an important proportion of high-impact publications, their work is being translated into products. And many of these high-technology industries add sinews to military prowess.

This effort of China has only accelerated with each passing year. While we are on a course to undermine the few islands of excellence that have survived, the IITs and IIMs, China has set itself a target at the opposite end: one hundred world-class universities. Mashelkar points out how it has already begun pursuing this target. It is giving each of its ten leading universities $ 125 million - around Rs. 550 crore each. The two foremost universities - Beijing and Tsinghua - are being given $ 225 million each - around Rs. 1,200 crore each! In the second phase, China has decided to allocate similar grants to thirty more universities.

I leave the task of collecting comparable figures about our universities as an exercise for you, dear reader!

Another article on indianexpress has some data: For detail, please visit: http://www.indianexpress.com/story/12640.html

• There are 10.5 million students enrolled in all higher-education institutions. This is way below what’s needed — total enrollment forms only about 11 per cent of the relevant age-group (17-23) population. Even South-east Asian countries show much higher enrollment: Philippines (31%), Thailand (19%), Malaysia (27%) and China (13%).

• On public expenditure on higher education, India lags way behind at $406 per student, just a fraction of countries like China (US $2,728), Brazil (US $3,986) and Malaysia (US $11,790).

China Builds a Better Internet

This is a interesting article about IPV6 internet development. To see the full article from here.

In research labs throughout China, engineers are busy working on another project that the Chinese government plans to unveil at the Olympics: China's Next Generation Internet (CNGI), a faster, more secure, more mobile version of the current one.

CNGI is the centerpiece of China's plan to steal leadership away from the United States in all things Internet and information technology.

The strategy, outlined in China's latest five-year plan, calls for the country to transition its economy from one based almost entirely on manufacturing to one that produces its own scientific and technological breakthroughs—using a new and improved version of today's dominant innovation platform, the Internet. "CNGI is the culmination of this revolutionary plan" to turn China into the world's innovation capital, says Wu Hequan, vice president of the Chinese Academy of Engineering and the chairman of the CNGI Expert Committee, the group overseeing the project. "We will use it as a way to break through and be competitive in the global economic market."

According to Chinese and U.S. sources familiar with the project, the Chinese government has already invested close to $200 million in CNGI and has created a special office of the State Council dedicated solely to the project. China's major telecommunications companies, each of which is responsible for building a portion of the network, have also spent hundreds of millions of dollars so far. Today, CNGI connects 100 universities, 100 research institutes and 100 companies in 20 cities. At the Beijing Olympics in 2008, China plans to use CNGI for everything from broadcasting the events to controlling the Olympic facilities.

Actually, China has invested in IPV6 projects for long time according to this article,

Main IPv6 projects in China
1998 China Education and Research Network (“CERNET”) starts research on IPv6.
1999 BII Group begins R&D for commercialization of IPv6
2000 BII Group runs the test-bed for commercialization of IPv6, interconnects with 6BONE and others.
2001 BII Group and Beijing University of Posts and Telecommunications start a joint trial project.
2002 March RITT and BII Group start 6TNet (IPv6 Telecom Trial Network) project.
2002 May China Telecom Hunan Province starts IPv6 trial network.
2002 October China Telecom starts IPv6 trial projects in Beijing, Shanghai, and Guangzhou.
End of 2002 China Netcom, China Mobile, China Unicom prepare for IPv6 trial project
2003 March Beijing IPv6 area network project starts.

_ IPv6 address procurement organizations in China (as of March 2003)
China Education and Research Network CERNET-CN-20000426 2001:0250::/32
China Education and Research Network CERN/CH-20001217 3FFE:8120:: /28
China BII Group BII/CN-20010410 3FFE:81B0::/28
China Academy of Sciences CSTNET/CN-20020123 3FFE:8330::/28
China BII Group BIIV6-CN-20020704 2001:/03FB::/32
China Telecom CHINANET-20020830 2001:OC68::/32
China Academy of Sciences CNNIC CSTNET-CNNIC-20021015 2001:OCCO::/32

China put a large scale backbone network CERNET2 in operation in 2004. This nestwork CERTNET2 is purely based on the Internet Protocol Version 6 (IPv6) technology, which the organization claims was the first and would soon become a standard for others to follow. CERTNET2 was called the biggest network running the next generation Internet since it connected 25 universities in about 20 cities. Tests had proven that the network was capable of reaching speeds of about 40 gigabits per second, setting a record for real-world applications, while the average speeds were about 2-10 gigabits for universities. It was planned that 100 universities would be connected by the network. (source)

Indians Are Good at R&D, Hype Again!

Even many Indian and western media boasted that India has a knowledge-based economy and China has a manufacturing ecomony. These kind of hype is of pure propaganda based on no truth.

Here is a article by Sunil Jain. For the convienience, I select some data from it:

Indians' publications rose 2.5 times in the past 25 years, while Chinese increased more than 100 times during the same period!

In 1995, Indians published five articles in the prestigious Journal of American Chemical Society (JACS) versus just 2 for China, it was 34 versus 14 in the Physical Review of Letters (PRL) and 9 versus 2 in the Journal of Biological Chemistry (JBC).
So far this year, it's 4 versus 22 in JACS, 8 versus 28 in PRL and 2 versus 13 in JBC.

Technolog-intensive exports are just 5 per cent of India's total manufactured exports basket versus 23 per cent for China

By World Bank's Knowledge Assessment Methodology (KAM), China's score on the Knowledge Index has risen from 3.03 in 1995 to 4.21 today, India's has fallen from 2.76 to 2.61 -- that is, India has slipped even relative to itself!

In terms of innovation, which includes the articles published in scientific journals, apart from the number of R&D personnel and the number of patents, India's score has improved from 3.51 to 3.72 -- China, however, has improved from 3.94 to 4.74, another instance of that country's stupendous progress.

I had another articles on comparing the truth of India and China's R&D.

Based on the above facts and truths, China was and is doing much better than India in scientic R&D and innovation.

It is very wrong to say "India is good in R&D and China in manufacturing". The correct sentences to correctly describe the situation in these two countries should be "China does much better in R&D, innovation and manufacturing than India".

Of course, China, as a developing country, still lags behind the countries like US and Japan etc. China government and Chinese should pay more attention on the R&D which stands for the future.

Chinese University Released UNIX-like C++ OS

UnixLite, a small UNIX-like operating system written in C++, was released by Nanjing University of Aeronautics and Astronautics (NUAA) in China.

Accoding to UnixLite website, this lightweight system is more modular and easily understood because of its small size (the kernel is made up of about 20000 lines of code) and the object oriented programming using the c++ language.

Technical Features of UnixLite System:
Support paging and flat memory model, nearly same as linux
Implements about 80 posix compliant system call
Binary compatible with linux
Able to run bash/gcc, and some other common UNIX tools
Very rudimentary TCP/IP support, able to run a simple http server
Very small, about 20000 lines of code
Written in c++, highly modular and extensible
Minix's 32-bit file system

Websites for reference:
UnixLite Website
News from linuxdevices

IC Design in Mainland China are Cataching up with S Korea and Taiwan

Annual Survey of Integrated Circuit (IC) Design Houses shows mainland China firms are catching up with their counterparts in Taiwan and South Korea in terms of both annual revenue and design complexity.

The average size of the mainland China IC design house is 163 personnels with 49 IC design engineers. The average revenue for each design house were 5.4 million in 2005 and will be increased to 7.8 million in 2006. 86% of the design houses use foundry services, among wich 60% use local fountry services. 90% of the design houses have their own brands. 72% of the design houses utilize 0.25um or smaller technology in the digital design, 49% in the anolog design, 57% in the mixed-signal design.

For more detail, please visit http://www.eetasia.com/ART_8800418957_480100_c60157f3200605_no.HTM

FiberHome Build 3.2 T DWDM System Between Shanghai and Hangzhou

According to the chinatechnews report, FiberHome Technology, a Chinese domestic company successfully built a transmission system 3TNetDWDM with feature of 80x40G DWDM transmission capacity between Shanghai and Hangzhou. This system was built jointly by FiberHome and China Telecom (CHA) as a key project of the State's 863 Plan.

FiberHome said this is a great breakthrough for China in the field of optical communications.

FiberHome, headquartered in Wuhan, is a company of more than 4000 staffs. It is the holder of 3 IP communication standards (ITU-T X.85, ITU-T X.86, ITU-T X.87)adopted by ITU.

China to build world's largest bio-technology incubator

This could show China's effort for the development of biotech industry.

Source

Press Trust of India
Beijing, May 29, 2006

China, aiming to be the global leader in bio-technology, on Monday started constructing Asia's largest incubator in the western part of Beijing.
The Ministry of Science and Technology's proposed China Bio-tech Research Centre is a 250,000-square metre building with lab and office space for at least 500 research groups and about 100 intermediaries.

The building will include offices for representatives from government departments who will provide administrative support for bio-tech start-ups, research entities, incubators and branches from financial institutes and offices of global venture capitals.

Wang Hongguang, director of the China Centre for Bio-technology Development which is under the ministry, said, "We're going to provide a world-leading platform for bio-technological research and development, which could be used by hi-tech start-ups and even individual researchers".

Statistics show almost half of China's senior-level biologists are working in the Great Beijing Area on 40 per cent of the country's total national biological research programmes.

Research academies based in Beijing are also given about 40 per cent of public funds for studying biological trends.