If a company intends to continue making products long term, then keeping the same employees and not having to retrain them makes more sense. They settle down, grow roots and a community, and can participate in making the process better.
The main reason "FAST" is brought up, is because Jobs would supposedly make last second changes. (See graphic below from the same source.)
However, not only does that imply a poor design process, but the graphic is incorrect. Glass was not a last minute decision... Jobs went to Corning about six months before the iPhone went on sale... and the glass supplier Corning DID come through, using American workers in Kentucky. (*)
The story about the workers that is probably referred to here, was supposedly that they had to remove the original plastic fronts from a bunch of already produced iPhones and replace it with the glass, but that doesn't make much sense either, if you recall how those sections were glued together.
(*) It's now made mostly overseas, but not back then.
Exactly. The jobs at Foxconn are not jobs that require skilled workers. They're repetitive jobs that don't require a lot of training (one of the reasons you can hire so many in a short amount of time). Some are so simple that they leave them to the "student interns" to handle. Cook saying that Americans aren't skilled enough to perform those jobs is not accurate. Especially if you consider the fact that Americans are accepted by everyone to be skilled enough to do the jobs that require more skill like being a designer or CEO.
That sounds absolutely fantastic! So when you have hired those 200K assembly workers in a couple of months you move on to the eaven easier task of hiring 8700 engineers to oversee those workers. Possibly relocating most of them from all over the country in the process, since I doubt you can tap into that kind of (readily avaliable) talent pool in any one place on the continent.
Luckily, American engineers are just that flexible!
Have you ever, even once, posted anything here that expresses an opinion on a subject, provides any kind of grounds for thought, or uses verifiable data to support or refute an argument? It seems to me like you post only insults.
"It seems to me" is what passes off for "data" for your type.
Yep, skill labor without the Unions, US Human Resource Departments, US Regulations, US Healthcare, US Tax Laws, and basically just the US getting in the way of doing business. That coupled with increasing lazy workers who are increasing less educated.
Heck, Apple retail employees sue over a bag check and you wonder why anyone wants to do business in China? LOL
Hilariously incorrect...China's central government has far more power over the business operations in China than the U.S. government has in the U.S. It's not even close. That's because China is not a democracy, and it has one of the largest centralized bureaucracies in the world. China's government doesn't even need a legal reason to shut something down. They can just do it if they want to. That's why corporations like Apple are willing to apologize for fake "controversies" the Chinese government rigs up themselves in the Chinese media. If Apple had any real legal recourse in China, they wouldn't apologize. They'd go to court like they do in the U.S.
I'm not sure what you're saying that he made up. What he put about Jobs is true and a lot of people know it.
Er..... sorry. Let me spell it out: What I am saying is that Apple (Jobs) is the not the only company that does (CEO that did) it.
For kdarling to make a bombastically big deal out of it in Apple's/Job's case is vacuous. And consistent with his relentlessly negative anti-Apple posts in this pro-Apple forum (check his posting history).
The "companies were seeking to maximize their profits" meme is biased. Companies didn't simply move manufacturing to China in order to maximize profits but also to lower prices. Marketplace domination could be had by a company producing a same or near-same quality item and lower cost. Maybe you keep some of that extra savings for yourself, but the main thing you're doing is just making sure you're the guy getting the sales to a price-conscious public. Government and companies had a role in things moving to China, but a public that didn't want to buy anything except the lowest price item had a bigger role.
Lower prices? Not really. It's more about profit margin. For example, the garment industry moved most shoe and clothing manufacturing to low wage countries decades ago but there was no plunge in retail prices when they did so. It wasn't motivated by passing along the savings to the customer. They simply continued to charge the same prices they always did while pocketing more profit. If it were about lowering prices, companies like Nike wouldn't charge $100+ for shoes that cost them less than $1 in material and labor to manufacture.
Hilariously incorrect...China's central government has far more power over the business operations in China than the U.S. government has in the U.S. It's not even close. That's because China is not a democracy, and it has one of the largest centralized bureaucracies in the world. China's government doesn't even need a legal reason to shut something down. They can just do it if they want to. That's why corporations like Apple are willing to apologize for fake "controversies" the Chinese government rigs up themselves in the Chinese media. If Apple had any real legal recourse in China, they wouldn't apologize. They'd go to court like they do in the U.S.
Agreed, but that does not negatively impact the quality of work, whereas the control in the US, and the laziness and uneducated workforce does. Workers in China are less likely to sue over a bag check or demand outrageous benefits, and time off.
Lower prices? Not really. It's more about profit margin. For example, the garment industry moved most shoe and clothing manufacturing to low wage countries decades ago but there was no plunge in retail prices when they did so. It wasn't motivated by passing along the savings to the customer. They simply continued to charge the same prices they always did while pocketing more profit. If it were about lowering prices, companies like Nike wouldn't charge $100+ for shoes that cost them less than $1 in material and labor to manufacture.
Actually, it IS about lower prices, as well. A number of companies have been forced by Walmart, Target, et al to drive their prices lower and lower and lower - which led to the decision to either go overseas for production or go out of business. So, there has been a huge drive to lower prices in the market place for consumer products - which is part of the reason that inflation has been so reasonable in recent years.
"It seems to me" is what passes off for "data" for your type.
Pretty much says it all.
My "type?" what does that mean?
I carefully chose the phrase "It seems to me" exactly because I do not have verifiable data to support my position and am positing based on an impression. It's an honest approach to finding real answers as opposed to pushing an agenda or sating a starving ego. Not surprising that the concept is unfamiliar to you.
Who came up with THAT designation? I've searched the site high and low and can find no reference to the intention for either AI as a whole or the forums in particular to be "pro" anything. News about and discussion of issues and events related to Apple.
Being a cheerleader is only one way to enjoy Apple products. One may also be a critical consumer and even be less than completely satisfied yet still choose Apple because the positives outweigh the negatives. That doesn't mean there are no negatives though.
If anything, this should be a safe place to admit there are things we wish Apple would change.
Re: "The period to hire 8,700 engineers to manage 200,000 factory workers is..."
I wonder what the period to reprogram 1,000 American factory robots is. I'd guess about 1 week or so. Faster than hiring 208,700 employees in any country.
Because if and when Mac manufacturing ramps up in the US, robots will be doing the work. American labor, union or not, has priced itself out of the world market.
I've searched the site high and low and can find no reference to the intention for either AI as a whole or the forums in particular to be "pro" anything. News about and discussion of issues and events related to Apple.
It's in the effing URL, and you just said it yourself. Come on.
If anything, this should be a safe place to admit there are things we wish Apple would change.
It's in the effing URL, and you just said it yourself. Come on.
No, it effing ISN'T. Show me where it says "Pro-Apple remarks only." Some of the articles to which we respond are overtly critical of Apple.
What none of the zealots seem to get is that one can have a complaint about something Apple does or makes and still be pro-Apple. Objections and complaints do not automatically equal h8ter.
No, it effing ISN'T. Show me where it says "Pro-Apple remarks only." Some of the articles to which we respond are overtly critical of Apple.
What none of the zealots seem to get is that one can have a complaint about something Apple does or makes and still be pro-Apple. Objections and complaints do not automatically equal h8ter.
I agree. There are certain things I'm not thrilled with, but I try to have valid reasons. Some people don't.
I actually hope to God Apple releases a large screen iPhone, but I'm not holding my breath for the Sept 10 announcement. I think it might be more of a first or second quarter of next year, especially if they haven't decided what size screen to use.
Re: "The period to hire 8,700 engineers to manage 200,000 factory workers is..."
I wonder what the period to reprogram 1,000 American factory robots is.
I'd guess about 1 week or so. Faster than hiring 208,700 employees in any country.
Because if and when Mac manufacturing ramps up in the US, robots will be doing the work.
American labor, union or not, has priced itself out of the world market.
Robotics has changed dramatically, manufacturing practices world-wide and this combined with 3D technologies and others will transform industry out-of-sight. However, the 'number 1' reason given in the graphic is hiring and other practices. Japan started the transformation in manufacturing by reducing or eliminating middle management. Companies gave much greater control over a particular workplace to workers on the floor, who reported directly to management higher up the chain of responsibility. The west was stuck with a middle management mind set that both slowed operations and introduced a disconnected management layer in which change might occur only slowly. Of course, modern practice was also adopted in forward thinking US companies, such as HP (in the 1970s) with the introduction of 'just-in-time' manufacturing.
Did you see a recent report in Bloomberg about robotics at Boeing? (Sorry, flash.)
Re: "The period to hire 8,700 engineers to manage 200,000 factory workers is..."
I wonder what the period to reprogram 1,000 American factory robots is.
I'd guess about 1 week or so. Faster than hiring 208,700 employees in any country.
Because if and when Mac manufacturing ramps up in the US, robots will be doing the work.
American labor, union or not, has priced itself out of the world market.
Why don't you tell us how long it takes to buy, assemble, install, and program 1000 factory robots and how much it costs. And then scrap them when the new design isn't compatible with the existing robots.
Robotics has changed dramatically, manufacturing practices world-wide and this combined with 3D technologies and others will transform industry out-of-sight. However, the 'number 1' reason given in the graphic is hiring and other practices. Japan started the transformation in manufacturing by reducing or eliminating middle management. Companies gave much greater control over a particular workplace to workers on the floor, who reported directly to management higher up the chain of responsibility. The west was stuck with a middle management mind set that both slowed operations and introduced a disconnected management layer in which change might occur only slowly. Of course, modern practice was also adopted in forward thinking US companies, such as HP (in the 1970s) with the introduction of 'just-in-time' manufacturing.
Did you see a recent report in Bloomberg about robotics at Boeing? (Sorry, flash.)
Sure robotics is definitely taking over in certain industries, but in some, they just aren't there. Most computers are still assembled by hand, but PCBs are stuffed using automation systems and then put on a wave soldering machine and then if they go through a testing process, they have automatic testers, but assembly? Most couldn't be done by robotics yet.
The last time the US produced products was no later than the mid 1960's.
So all of manufacturing of Macs done by the robotic factory in Fremont, CA in the 80s didn't happen? NUMMI in the same city didn't put out Corollas in the 90s and Model S Teslas today? And that's only ONE American city, and not a big one to boot.
Comments
Quote:
Originally Posted by KDarling
If a company intends to continue making products long term, then keeping the same employees and not having to retrain them makes more sense. They settle down, grow roots and a community, and can participate in making the process better.
The main reason "FAST" is brought up, is because Jobs would supposedly make last second changes. (See graphic below from the same source.)
However, not only does that imply a poor design process, but the graphic is incorrect. Glass was not a last minute decision... Jobs went to Corning about six months before the iPhone went on sale... and the glass supplier Corning DID come through, using American workers in Kentucky. (*)
The story about the workers that is probably referred to here, was supposedly that they had to remove the original plastic fronts from a bunch of already produced iPhones and replace it with the glass, but that doesn't make much sense either, if you recall how those sections were glued together.
(*) It's now made mostly overseas, but not back then.
So full of yourself aren't you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DroidFTW
Exactly. The jobs at Foxconn are not jobs that require skilled workers. They're repetitive jobs that don't require a lot of training (one of the reasons you can hire so many in a short amount of time). Some are so simple that they leave them to the "student interns" to handle. Cook saying that Americans aren't skilled enough to perform those jobs is not accurate. Especially if you consider the fact that Americans are accepted by everyone to be skilled enough to do the jobs that require more skill like being a designer or CEO.
That sounds absolutely fantastic! So when you have hired those 200K assembly workers in a couple of months you move on to the eaven easier task of hiring 8700 engineers to oversee those workers. Possibly relocating most of them from all over the country in the process, since I doubt you can tap into that kind of (readily avaliable) talent pool in any one place on the continent.
Luckily, American engineers are just that flexible!
"It seems to me" is what passes off for "data" for your type.
Pretty much says it all.
Originally Posted by Povilas
So full of yourself aren't you.
Well, he's full of something.
I've never understood that phrase in particular. Of course he's full of himself. He is himself. The proportion of BS to self is what really matters.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Getz
Yep, skill labor without the Unions, US Human Resource Departments, US Regulations, US Healthcare, US Tax Laws, and basically just the US getting in the way of doing business. That coupled with increasing lazy workers who are increasing less educated.
Heck, Apple retail employees sue over a bag check and you wonder why anyone wants to do business in China? LOL
Hilariously incorrect...China's central government has far more power over the business operations in China than the U.S. government has in the U.S. It's not even close. That's because China is not a democracy, and it has one of the largest centralized bureaucracies in the world. China's government doesn't even need a legal reason to shut something down. They can just do it if they want to. That's why corporations like Apple are willing to apologize for fake "controversies" the Chinese government rigs up themselves in the Chinese media. If Apple had any real legal recourse in China, they wouldn't apologize. They'd go to court like they do in the U.S.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Irving Muller
I'm not sure what you're saying that he made up. What he put about Jobs is true and a lot of people know it.
Er..... sorry. Let me spell it out: What I am saying is that Apple (Jobs) is the not the only company that does (CEO that did) it.
For kdarling to make a bombastically big deal out of it in Apple's/Job's case is vacuous. And consistent with his relentlessly negative anti-Apple posts in this pro-Apple forum (check his posting history).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ronbo
The "companies were seeking to maximize their profits" meme is biased. Companies didn't simply move manufacturing to China in order to maximize profits but also to lower prices. Marketplace domination could be had by a company producing a same or near-same quality item and lower cost. Maybe you keep some of that extra savings for yourself, but the main thing you're doing is just making sure you're the guy getting the sales to a price-conscious public. Government and companies had a role in things moving to China, but a public that didn't want to buy anything except the lowest price item had a bigger role.
Lower prices? Not really. It's more about profit margin. For example, the garment industry moved most shoe and clothing manufacturing to low wage countries decades ago but there was no plunge in retail prices when they did so. It wasn't motivated by passing along the savings to the customer. They simply continued to charge the same prices they always did while pocketing more profit. If it were about lowering prices, companies like Nike wouldn't charge $100+ for shoes that cost them less than $1 in material and labor to manufacture.
Quote:
Originally Posted by foregoneconclusion
Hilariously incorrect...China's central government has far more power over the business operations in China than the U.S. government has in the U.S. It's not even close. That's because China is not a democracy, and it has one of the largest centralized bureaucracies in the world. China's government doesn't even need a legal reason to shut something down. They can just do it if they want to. That's why corporations like Apple are willing to apologize for fake "controversies" the Chinese government rigs up themselves in the Chinese media. If Apple had any real legal recourse in China, they wouldn't apologize. They'd go to court like they do in the U.S.
Agreed, but that does not negatively impact the quality of work, whereas the control in the US, and the laziness and uneducated workforce does. Workers in China are less likely to sue over a bag check or demand outrageous benefits, and time off.
Actually, it IS about lower prices, as well. A number of companies have been forced by Walmart, Target, et al to drive their prices lower and lower and lower - which led to the decision to either go overseas for production or go out of business. So, there has been a huge drive to lower prices in the market place for consumer products - which is part of the reason that inflation has been so reasonable in recent years.
If this article is about iPhones, why is there a picture of a trash can on the front page?
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
"It seems to me" is what passes off for "data" for your type.
Pretty much says it all.
My "type?" what does that mean?
I carefully chose the phrase "It seems to me" exactly because I do not have verifiable data to support my position and am positing based on an impression. It's an honest approach to finding real answers as opposed to pushing an agenda or sating a starving ego. Not surprising that the concept is unfamiliar to you.
Quote:
Originally Posted by anantksundaram
in this pro-Apple forum
Who came up with THAT designation? I've searched the site high and low and can find no reference to the intention for either AI as a whole or the forums in particular to be "pro" anything. News about and discussion of issues and events related to Apple.
Being a cheerleader is only one way to enjoy Apple products. One may also be a critical consumer and even be less than completely satisfied yet still choose Apple because the positives outweigh the negatives. That doesn't mean there are no negatives though.
If anything, this should be a safe place to admit there are things we wish Apple would change.
I wonder what the period to reprogram 1,000 American factory robots is.
I'd guess about 1 week or so. Faster than hiring 208,700 employees in any country.
Because if and when Mac manufacturing ramps up in the US, robots will be doing the work.
American labor, union or not, has priced itself out of the world market.
Originally Posted by v5v
I've searched the site high and low and can find no reference to the intention for either AI as a whole or the forums in particular to be "pro" anything. News about and discussion of issues and events related to Apple.
It's in the effing URL, and you just said it yourself. Come on.
If anything, this should be a safe place to admit there are things we wish Apple would change.
This ain't no therapy session.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
It's in the effing URL, and you just said it yourself. Come on.
No, it effing ISN'T. Show me where it says "Pro-Apple remarks only." Some of the articles to which we respond are overtly critical of Apple.
What none of the zealots seem to get is that one can have a complaint about something Apple does or makes and still be pro-Apple. Objections and complaints do not automatically equal h8ter.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallest Skil
This ain't no therapy session.
That's good! I like that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by v5v
No, it effing ISN'T. Show me where it says "Pro-Apple remarks only." Some of the articles to which we respond are overtly critical of Apple.
What none of the zealots seem to get is that one can have a complaint about something Apple does or makes and still be pro-Apple. Objections and complaints do not automatically equal h8ter.
I agree. There are certain things I'm not thrilled with, but I try to have valid reasons. Some people don't.
I actually hope to God Apple releases a large screen iPhone, but I'm not holding my breath for the Sept 10 announcement. I think it might be more of a first or second quarter of next year, especially if they haven't decided what size screen to use.
Quote:
Originally Posted by SockRolid
Re: "The period to hire 8,700 engineers to manage 200,000 factory workers is..."
I wonder what the period to reprogram 1,000 American factory robots is.
I'd guess about 1 week or so. Faster than hiring 208,700 employees in any country.
Because if and when Mac manufacturing ramps up in the US, robots will be doing the work.
American labor, union or not, has priced itself out of the world market.
Robotics has changed dramatically, manufacturing practices world-wide and this combined with 3D technologies and others will transform industry out-of-sight. However, the 'number 1' reason given in the graphic is hiring and other practices. Japan started the transformation in manufacturing by reducing or eliminating middle management. Companies gave much greater control over a particular workplace to workers on the floor, who reported directly to management higher up the chain of responsibility. The west was stuck with a middle management mind set that both slowed operations and introduced a disconnected management layer in which change might occur only slowly. Of course, modern practice was also adopted in forward thinking US companies, such as HP (in the 1970s) with the introduction of 'just-in-time' manufacturing.
Did you see a recent report in Bloomberg about robotics at Boeing? (Sorry, flash.)
http://www.bloomberg.com/video/making-a-boeing-777-inch-by-super-hi-tech-inch-affbN4hKQkG~FhIz8zhlMw.html
Why don't you tell us how long it takes to buy, assemble, install, and program 1000 factory robots and how much it costs. And then scrap them when the new design isn't compatible with the existing robots.
Quote:
Originally Posted by IQatEdo
Robotics has changed dramatically, manufacturing practices world-wide and this combined with 3D technologies and others will transform industry out-of-sight. However, the 'number 1' reason given in the graphic is hiring and other practices. Japan started the transformation in manufacturing by reducing or eliminating middle management. Companies gave much greater control over a particular workplace to workers on the floor, who reported directly to management higher up the chain of responsibility. The west was stuck with a middle management mind set that both slowed operations and introduced a disconnected management layer in which change might occur only slowly. Of course, modern practice was also adopted in forward thinking US companies, such as HP (in the 1970s) with the introduction of 'just-in-time' manufacturing.
Did you see a recent report in Bloomberg about robotics at Boeing? (Sorry, flash.)
http://www.bloomberg.com/video/making-a-boeing-777-inch-by-super-hi-tech-inch-affbN4hKQkG~FhIz8zhlMw.html
Sure robotics is definitely taking over in certain industries, but in some, they just aren't there. Most computers are still assembled by hand, but PCBs are stuffed using automation systems and then put on a wave soldering machine and then if they go through a testing process, they have automatic testers, but assembly? Most couldn't be done by robotics yet.
Quote:
Originally Posted by waldobushman
The last time the US produced products was no later than the mid 1960's.
So all of manufacturing of Macs done by the robotic factory in Fremont, CA in the 80s didn't happen? NUMMI in the same city didn't put out Corollas in the 90s and Model S Teslas today? And that's only ONE American city, and not a big one to boot.