What you are seeing is the American version of capitalism killing companies.
Jack Ma of Alibaba has stated clearly that US decline is caused companies focusing on profits for investors rather than profits churned back into production.
Nah. Companies exist and go out of business for many different reasons. The seeming "chaos" and churn of business is actually GOOD. It means capitalism is still working to one degree or other. If businesses never lost money, never fired workers or never grew, that would be a very bad thing. It would indicate fascism and/or corporatism was the norm and markets no longer functioned.
What you are seeing is the American version of capitalism killing companies.
Jack Ma of Alibaba has stated clearly that US decline is caused companies focusing on profits for investors rather than profits churned back into production.
I can't tell you how many US manufacturers went to China for cheap labor and everyone else was forced to follow suit in order to stay competitive. As long as their is cheap manual labor in China there will be companies pursuing it to increase profits. The problem is that almost all if not all companies lose IP going to China and may end up closing the doors of the US company. I am not sure the board could see past the huge stock awards they were going to get as a result and maybe didn't care if the company shut its doors 5 years later. They got theirs. I also don't think that we can overlook the work ethic of most Americans is so weak compared to any 3rd world country where putting food on the table isn't a everyday guarantee. They are so thankful for food for the families and typical American is troubled if they don't have latest phone, game console, car, boat etc. It should be said that this is probably a problem of all first world countries.
Apple sourcing iPhone manufacturing to Foxconn which is a Taiwanese company. Taiwan does not have enough workers to assemble iPhone. Foxconn thought to do this in China. So this is not Apple wants to manufacture iPhone in China. It is the Taiwanese company Foxconn that wants to do this way. Taiwan news today said Foxconn will construct two assembly plants in US, one in Indiana, one in Houston. But you should know US workers have very high demand in salary and benefits.
Which is why I expect those plants to be almost completely robotic. No tens of thousands of jobs. Just Chinese robots assembling things, tended by a few dozen or maybe a hundred techs.
So far, robots can’t do that type of work, which is why there are people doing it. Maybe in ten years it will become possible, but not now. Robots are best at work that’s exactly the same, part to part. Assembling a phone, or other small, complex device, requires a lot of hand work, because it must be picked up, turned around, parts inserted at odd angles, etc. robots aren’t able to handle that yet.
musk found that out at Tesla. He insisted that Tesla would easily meet a 5,000 car a week production by the end of 2017. Every car manufacturing expert said it couldn’t be done. He insisted that his total robotic assembly lines would enable that, but they said that it was that robotic line that would prevent it. They were right, and he was wrong.
What you are seeing is the American version of capitalism killing companies.
Jack Ma of Alibaba has stated clearly that US decline is caused companies focusing on profits for investors rather than profits churned back into production.
I can't tell you how many US manufacturers went to China for cheap labor and everyone else was forced to follow suit in order to stay competitive. As long as their is cheap manual labor in China there will be companies pursuing it to increase profits. The problem is that almost all if not all companies lose IP going to China and may end up closing the doors of the US company. I am not sure the board could see past the huge stock awards they were going to get as a result and maybe didn't care if the company shut its doors 5 years later. They got theirs. I also don't think that we can overlook the work ethic of most Americans is so weak compared to any 3rd world country where putting food on the table isn't a everyday guarantee. They are so thankful for food for the families and typical American is troubled if they don't have latest phone, game console, car, boat etc. It should be said that this is probably a problem of all first world countries.
Tech companies didn't go to China for cheap labor, they went to China because Chinese had the skilled labor to do the job, and the infrastructure and dedication to increase the skills of their people. The US doesn't cut it.
Tim Cook says the reason for going to China is the quality of the people. They have two million app developers. Process engineering and development is of the highest order in China. It is the manufacturing and design prowess of the Chinese people that allow them to make 100M devices with zero defect. US manufacturers going to China are using the IP of the Chinese build quality products. The value of US IP that China might be using without licensing is likely far outweighed by the Chinese IP US companies get to use by building in China. The US can't steal Chinese IP because we don't have the people who could make use of the Chinese IP. The US doesn't value people with knowledge and skill -- we only value people with money and those who entertain us. (I'm not claiming those who entertain are not highly skilled -- they certainly are -- and they often put everything on the line when they do).
There is more subtlety to issues you bring up in your statement about weak American work ethic, though you've got the point.
Clayton Christensen, et. al., Harvard Business School prof, and author of the seminal book Innovator's Dilemma (where coined the term "Disruptive Innovation") describes his take on US decline (and other countries) in his newer work Disrupting Class, looking at improving US school systems. His take is motivation to do things that are hard and not "fun" is the key. There are those (of us) who are intrinsically motivated to do the hard stuff (and if the society doesn't block the intrinsically motivated) then we will do the work. Others need to be extrinsically motivated, and in a country like China it's not just putting food on the table, it is the desire to control their own future, and that future is in doing the hard stuff.
What you are seeing is the American version of capitalism killing companies.
Jack Ma of Alibaba has stated clearly that US decline is caused companies focusing on profits for investors rather than profits churned back into production.
I can't tell you how many US manufacturers went to China for cheap labor and everyone else was forced to follow suit in order to stay competitive. As long as their is cheap manual labor in China there will be companies pursuing it to increase profits. The problem is that almost all if not all companies lose IP going to China and may end up closing the doors of the US company. I am not sure the board could see past the huge stock awards they were going to get as a result and maybe didn't care if the company shut its doors 5 years later. They got theirs. I also don't think that we can overlook the work ethic of most Americans is so weak compared to any 3rd world country where putting food on the table isn't a everyday guarantee. They are so thankful for food for the families and typical American is troubled if they don't have latest phone, game console, car, boat etc. It should be said that this is probably a problem of all first world countries.
Apple sourcing iPhone manufacturing to Foxconn which is a Taiwanese company. Taiwan does not have enough workers to assemble iPhone. Foxconn thought to do this in China. So this is not Apple wants to manufacture iPhone in China. It is the Taiwanese company Foxconn that wants to do this way. Taiwan news today said Foxconn will construct two assembly plants in US, one in Indiana, one in Houston. But you should know US workers have very high demand in salary and benefits.
Which is why I expect those plants to be almost completely robotic. No tens of thousands of jobs. Just Chinese robots assembling things, tended by a few dozen or maybe a hundred techs.
You are a dreamer. If this thing is possible in the near future, some other industry will apply it before Apple. Assembling an iPhone is not an easy job.
What you are seeing is the American version of capitalism killing companies.
Jack Ma of Alibaba has stated clearly that US decline is caused companies focusing on profits for investors rather than profits churned back into production.
I can't tell you how many US manufacturers went to China for cheap labor and everyone else was forced to follow suit in order to stay competitive. As long as their is cheap manual labor in China there will be companies pursuing it to increase profits. The problem is that almost all if not all companies lose IP going to China and may end up closing the doors of the US company. I am not sure the board could see past the huge stock awards they were going to get as a result and maybe didn't care if the company shut its doors 5 years later. They got theirs. I also don't think that we can overlook the work ethic of most Americans is so weak compared to any 3rd world country where putting food on the table isn't a everyday guarantee. They are so thankful for food for the families and typical American is troubled if they don't have latest phone, game console, car, boat etc. It should be said that this is probably a problem of all first world countries.
Apple sourcing iPhone manufacturing to Foxconn which is a Taiwanese company. Taiwan does not have enough workers to assemble iPhone. Foxconn thought to do this in China. So this is not Apple wants to manufacture iPhone in China. It is the Taiwanese company Foxconn that wants to do this way. Taiwan news today said Foxconn will construct two assembly plants in US, one in Indiana, one in Houston. But you should know US workers have very high demand in salary and benefits.
Which is why I expect those plants to be almost completely robotic. No tens of thousands of jobs. Just Chinese robots assembling things, tended by a few dozen or maybe a hundred techs.
So far, robots can’t do that type of work, which is why there are people doing it. Maybe in ten years it will become possible, but not now. Robots are best at work that’s exactly the same, part to part. Assembling a phone, or other small, complex device, requires a lot of hand work, because it must be picked up, turned around, parts inserted at odd angles, etc. robots aren’t able to handle that yet.
musk found that out at Tesla. He insisted that Tesla would easily meet a 5,000 car a week production by the end of 2017. Every car manufacturing expert said it couldn’t be done. He insisted that his total robotic assembly lines would enable that, but they said that it was that robotic line that would prevent it. They were right, and he was wrong.
I heard that the robot created cars in Tesla is of poorer quality. Isn't that ironic? Will iPhone buyers accept poor quality?
Bah! That’s nonsense. It’s popular to make statements like that as a faceless comment. If you don’t understand Intel’s business, which apparently you don’t, then refrain from commenting like this.
Mr. Mel aka Face, I actually do understand Intel’s business. They invented the CISC microprocessor, but then they got greedy & sat on their laurels... with small iterative advancements (yes, I said that, Mr Moore), rather than evolutionary, sweeping changes. Intel held back innovation to capitalize on a captive market, they illegally shut out competitors (The original RISC processor innovators - remember DEC Alpha & Power, didn’t think so) using monopolistic practices. They only let AMD survive to appease the government regulators. Their lumbering, hot running, inefficient chips helped destroy the ozone. Now they are holding back Apple (and Wintel makers) with delays, chip flaws, and now security vulnerabilities, because we’re stuck with their lousy instruction set. Intel squandered their market position, let the businessmen make decisions, and played dirty rather than aspiring to be the best. The new generation RISC players (ARM) plus the explosion in smartphone usage finally made Intel wake up and need to compete, and it is grossly unprepared to do so (I.e. their radio chips and GPUs just suck). There is no love lost for Intel - but if the scientists & researchers ran Intel we may even be a few decades ahead of where we are today, have even greater innovation in chip making (gallium arsenide and quantum chips) and have saved billions of barrels of burned oil!
You'd think that Intel with its massive revenues would have money to recruit talented engineers but they have come up with dismal results. It's time for them to re-evaluate their team of engineers.
There are lots of scientists that have created smaller dies in the lab, with a transistor gate even down to a single atom in width, but that is completely different than manufacturing chips on a commercial scale. The main problem is as they continue to shrink the node size, the costs increase astronomically and there is a limited market for those chips. There are several fabs being built currently in China that are using conventional node scales for which there is a much broader market. Shrinking the nodes to 5nm or even 3nm is not going to be commercially profitable anytime soon if ever. There are just so few applications that would require such a small chip.
I have to call baloney on this one. IT is only a manner of when the process becomes cost effective for the wider market. 7nm is cost effective for Apple apparent and their ramp up will drive costs down and expand manufacturing at that node. Besides that it isn't the size of the chi so much as what you can put on the chip that matters. Cell phone technology should be driving this home to everybody, what we have today in cell phones would not be even possible ten years ago on the large power hungry processes. Frankly cell phones and tables have a ways to go before they reach the types of capabilities I'd like to see in them.
You'd think that Intel with its massive revenues would have money to recruit talented engineers but they have come up with dismal results. It's time for them to re-evaluate their team of engineers.
There are lots of scientists that have created smaller dies in the lab, with a transistor gate even down to a single atom in width, but that is completely different than manufacturing chips on a commercial scale. The main problem is as they continue to shrink the node size, the costs increase astronomically and there is a limited market for those chips. There are several fabs being built currently in China that are using conventional node scales for which there is a much broader market. Shrinking the nodes to 5nm or even 3nm is not going to be commercially profitable anytime soon if ever. There are just so few applications that would require such a small chip.
I have to call baloney on this one. IT is only a manner of when the process becomes cost effective for the wider market. 7nm is cost effective for Apple apparent and their ramp up will drive costs down and expand manufacturing at that node. Besides that it isn't the size of the chi so much as what you can put on the chip that matters. Cell phone technology should be driving this home to everybody, what we have today in cell phones would not be even possible ten years ago on the large power hungry processes. Frankly cell phones and tables have a ways to go before they reach the types of capabilities I'd like to see in them.
You are too old. You don’t know what you are talking about.
At a certain point smaller nodes will actually use more power to push electrons down skinny wires. To advance that technology they need to move away from silicon to other materials like carbon or graphine.
Unless you are designing nano medical robots to inject into the blood stream there is limited market capitalization for such small chips.
What you are seeing is the American version of capitalism killing companies.
Jack Ma of Alibaba has stated clearly that US decline is caused companies focusing on profits for investors rather than profits churned back into production.
I can't tell you how many US manufacturers went to China for cheap labor and everyone else was forced to follow suit in order to stay competitive. As long as their is cheap manual labor in China there will be companies pursuing it to increase profits. The problem is that almost all if not all companies lose IP going to China and may end up closing the doors of the US company. I am not sure the board could see past the huge stock awards they were going to get as a result and maybe didn't care if the company shut its doors 5 years later. They got theirs. I also don't think that we can overlook the work ethic of most Americans is so weak compared to any 3rd world country where putting food on the table isn't a everyday guarantee. They are so thankful for food for the families and typical American is troubled if they don't have latest phone, game console, car, boat etc. It should be said that this is probably a problem of all first world countries.
Apple sourcing iPhone manufacturing to Foxconn which is a Taiwanese company. Taiwan does not have enough workers to assemble iPhone. Foxconn thought to do this in China. So this is not Apple wants to manufacture iPhone in China. It is the Taiwanese company Foxconn that wants to do this way. Taiwan news today said Foxconn will construct two assembly plants in US, one in Indiana, one in Houston. But you should know US workers have very high demand in salary and benefits.
Which is why I expect those plants to be almost completely robotic. No tens of thousands of jobs. Just Chinese robots assembling things, tended by a few dozen or maybe a hundred techs.
So far, robots can’t do that type of work, which is why there are people doing it. Maybe in ten years it will become possible, but not now. Robots are best at work that’s exactly the same, part to part. Assembling a phone, or other small, complex device, requires a lot of hand work, because it must be picked up, turned around, parts inserted at odd angles, etc. robots aren’t able to handle that yet.
musk found that out at Tesla. He insisted that Tesla would easily meet a 5,000 car a week production by the end of 2017. Every car manufacturing expert said it couldn’t be done. He insisted that his total robotic assembly lines would enable that, but they said that it was that robotic line that would prevent it. They were right, and he was wrong.
I heard that the robot created cars in Tesla is of poorer quality. Isn't that ironic? Will iPhone buyers accept poor quality?
That’s what other auto makers found. There are some things that are just too complex for current robots to manage, and people are needed. What some don’t seem to understand, is that if robots could do this work, they would already be doing it.
i can tell you that as having previously been an employer in a business with a lot of expensive machinery, that employers would always rather have a machine do a job than an employee. In the long run, it’s much cheaper. But we still see billions of workers in the world, because right now, they can’t be replaced in their specific Jobs. Some day, most will.
Bah! That’s nonsense. It’s popular to make statements like that as a faceless comment. If you don’t understand Intel’s business, which apparently you don’t, then refrain from commenting like this.
Mr. Mel aka Face, I actually do understand Intel’s business. They invented the CISC microprocessor, but then they got greedy & sat on their laurels... with small iterative advancements (yes, I said that, Mr Moore), rather than evolutionary, sweeping changes. Intel held back innovation to capitalize on a captive market, they illegally shut out competitors (The original RISC processor innovators - remember DEC Alpha & Power, didn’t think so) using monopolistic practices. They only let AMD survive to appease the government regulators. Their lumbering, hot running, inefficient chips helped destroy the ozone. Now they are holding back Apple (and Wintel makers) with delays, chip flaws, and now security vulnerabilities, because we’re stuck with their lousy instruction set. Intel squandered their market position, let the businessmen make decisions, and played dirty rather than aspiring to be the best. The new generation RISC players (ARM) plus the explosion in smartphone usage finally made Intel wake up and need to compete, and it is grossly unprepared to do so (I.e. their radio chips and GPUs just suck). There is no love lost for Intel - but if the scientists & researchers ran Intel we may even be a few decades ahead of where we are today, have even greater innovation in chip making (gallium arsenide and quantum chips) and have saved billions of barrels of burned oil!
That was quite the overwrought post. Fun to read though.
You'd think that Intel with its massive revenues would have money to recruit talented engineers but they have come up with dismal results. It's time for them to re-evaluate their team of engineers.
There are lots of scientists that have created smaller dies in the lab, with a transistor gate even down to a single atom in width, but that is completely different than manufacturing chips on a commercial scale. The main problem is as they continue to shrink the node size, the costs increase astronomically and there is a limited market for those chips. There are several fabs being built currently in China that are using conventional node scales for which there is a much broader market. Shrinking the nodes to 5nm or even 3nm is not going to be commercially profitable anytime soon if ever. There are just so few applications that would require such a small chip.
I have to call baloney on this one. IT is only a manner of when the process becomes cost effective for the wider market. 7nm is cost effective for Apple apparent and their ramp up will drive costs down and expand manufacturing at that node. Besides that it isn't the size of the chi so much as what you can put on the chip that matters. Cell phone technology should be driving this home to everybody, what we have today in cell phones would not be even possible ten years ago on the large power hungry processes. Frankly cell phones and tables have a ways to go before they reach the types of capabilities I'd like to see in them.
You are too old. You don’t know what you are talking about.
At a certain point smaller nodes will actually use more power to push electrons down skinny wires. To advance that technology they need to move away from silicon to other materials like carbon or graphine.
Unless you are designing nano medical robots to inject into the blood stream there is limited market capitalization for such small chips.
We know that as line widths get narrower, quantum effects become bigger, and that at some point, electronics, as we know it, will freeze at that size, and not go lower. They’ve been able to hold this off since it first began as a serious issue at 90nm, with very clever concepts, and designs. But we’re getting to the point where no clever designs or new materials can allow a continued shrink. 5nm is going to be a real bear, and the proposed 3nm hardly seems possible, despite stated roadmaps. Several years ago, AMD stated that 14nm cost more per transistor, and that cost/size relationship was going to get worse as size went down. They were right.
th problem is that no new, proposed, technology is anywhere near close enough for commercial exploition. It could take another 10 years, if we’re lucky, for that to happen.
Comments
Falling short of demand? Shouldn't that read 'falling short of capacity (production)". Or am I reading it wrong?
I think you’re misinterpreting what capitalism is all about. Look up ‘creative destruction.’
musk found that out at Tesla. He insisted that Tesla would easily meet a 5,000 car a week production by the end of 2017. Every car manufacturing expert said it couldn’t be done. He insisted that his total robotic assembly lines would enable that, but they said that it was that robotic line that would prevent it. They were right, and he was wrong.
There is more subtlety to issues you bring up in your statement about weak American work ethic, though you've got the point.
Clayton Christensen, et. al., Harvard Business School prof, and author of the seminal book Innovator's Dilemma (where coined the term "Disruptive Innovation") describes his take on US decline (and other countries) in his newer work Disrupting Class, looking at improving US school systems. His take is motivation to do things that are hard and not "fun" is the key. There are those (of us) who are intrinsically motivated to do the hard stuff (and if the society doesn't block the intrinsically motivated) then we will do the work. Others need to be extrinsically motivated, and in a country like China it's not just putting food on the table, it is the desire to control their own future, and that future is in doing the hard stuff.
At a certain point smaller nodes will actually use more power to push electrons down skinny wires. To advance that technology they need to move away from silicon to other materials like carbon or graphine.
Unless you are designing nano medical robots to inject into the blood stream there is limited market capitalization for such small chips.
i can tell you that as having previously been an employer in a business with a lot of expensive machinery, that employers would always rather have a machine do a job than an employee. In the long run, it’s much cheaper. But we still see billions of workers in the world, because right now, they can’t be replaced in their specific Jobs. Some day, most will.
That was quite the overwrought post. Fun to read though.
th problem is that no new, proposed, technology is anywhere near close enough for commercial exploition. It could take another 10 years, if we’re lucky, for that to happen.