China dominates in the 'jelly bean[1]' chip business. This was the bread an butter for the dozen semiconductor shops in the Bay Area during the 70's through the early naughts. As fabs shut down they became 'fabless' and had their work shipped out to TSMC. Now they exist as a genre in China in much greater numbers than they do here. Companies that will make a couple of wafers of USB + ADC + random logic kinds of things.
And the innovation never comes from the chip companies, it comes from companies that are building the products. They go to the chip companies and say "Can you make a chip that does this?" and then a new jelly bean chip is born and if that product gets traction everyone decides to make one with their own bit of spin.
What is unique to the Chinese scene is that there are thousands of minute variations rather than any sort of ordered discipline. Transistors are free at the jelly bean chip level so there is no incentive to re-use or save on chips.
ARM has become the defacto microprocessor architecture because, in part, ARM will license it to anyone.
In the US all of these folks have coalesced into a few mega companies (TI, NXP, Microchip, Maxim) which don't have much in the way of competition locally. So innovation stops because conservative business practices rule.
This really became clear to me when I started perusing datasheet sites for the Chinese market and realizing there are hundreds if not thousands of chips for which there is no English data sheet. This is a complete reverse from the last century when nearly every data sheet was in English and getting a Chinese version was a challenge.
[1] Jelly Bean chips are those that are made in batches of 1 - 10 million with a set of functions that are fairly specific to their application.
I agree with you.
Eng has really got to stop thinking they are the source of ideas, most good ideas come from customers that have needs that can't be currently met. Eng balances design constraints, as companies grow, hierarchies get stronger and creativity drops. Maximum innovation comes from small companies solving customer (the ones building the products) problems.
The Jelly Bean chip business could get disrupted by the proper mix of analog and digital. The PSoC [1] was almost but not quite there
I did a thought experiement of what it would take to make a 'universal' TTL chip, which was basically a 14 pin, 16 pin, and 18 pin device where all 74xx chips were actually inside of them and through a programming step you bonded one of them to pins on the lead frame. It required a 90nm or better feature size. The trick was you only have (number of pins) number of input stages and output stages (all the "TTL" part of TTL (these are fairly large by their nature). The logic was all internal 1.8v with a simple step down regulator to go from 5V down to 1.8V.
You could cover both the SSI and MSI catalogs. Of course there isn't anyone designing new stuff with TTL any more so it remains a thought experiment only.
In a somewhat related idea, is that of unioning the footprint of alternate parts in a PCB design so that either part could be used. I have never used any high in EDA software, but if you had end to end design, schematic, pcb layout and parts databases with high level machine-readable symbolic pin descriptions, these could be inferred automatically (unioned footprints).
Using your idea, I wonder if you could automatically have "hot standby" components in the same package?
The Chinese company mentioned in the article is only incidental to the story so the article title is kind of a click bait. Sure they decided to buy technology from the Taiwanese fab UMC, which is perfectly legal. UMC as a very large fab itself, could also be expected to provide the technology. For whatever reason, UMC seemed unable to deliver and had allegedly resorted to underhanded tactics instead.
Clearly the solution to prevent them from taking their knowledge back to their home countries is to denigrate them politically and make it harder and more inconvenient for them to live and work here.
They’re not stupid, they look at China and see an economy growing at 6-9% a year while the US is stuck at 1-2% and they know where the growth is for the medium-term. They also see a mature American economy that can be tough to crack even for native white citizens, so its not hard to see how their chances of long-term success are much higher in China than in the US.
The more tradition Chinese students who have been coming here since the 1980s (and don’t have very rich parents) mostly pick STEM majors. On graduating, they would rather work for Google in Mountain View than Tencent in Shenzhen.
"U.S. GDP could top 4% in 2nd quarter, economists say"
https://www.marketwatch.com/story/us-gdp-could-top-4-in-2nd-...
"Baotou in China’s Inner Mongolia Autonomous Region revised its estimated fiscal revenue in 2017 lower by nearly 50% in an annual work report"
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-economy-data/anothe...
"China fake data mask economic rebound"
https://www.ft.com/content/a9889330-f51c-11e7-88f7-5465a6ce1...
Also weighing heavily on people are family and cultural conflict issues. But anecdotally I can say that the majority of Chinese students don’t want to stay in the US for a variety of reasons; and that many feel their prospects are at least as good in China as the US.
I'm afraid you're making assumptions here.
America is not where opportunity is these days, especially in the hardware manufacturing sector.
Yes, but the living standards in the United States are far higher. Sure you may never become a billionaire here like you can in China, but you can breathe the air and the traffic isn't that bad. The schools are better, the houses are bigger. China may get there, but I know where I'd rather be over the next 20-30 years. And they can always move back.
Yeah, I think US living standards are higher for now. But I can totally see China seeing parity in less than 20 years. For one thing, they have made large strides in infrastructure investment, and for another thing, they've been realizing and acting on their need to clean up their environmental act over the last few years.
[1] https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/10/05/climate/trump...
You heard of the (infamous) Gaokao? It's gruelling, and necessitates nothing but continuous study day in and day out to get into a decent Chinese university.
If they could, a lot of Chinese would prefer to study in the US (or any other western country for that matter).
At the undergrad and graduate level, perhaps, and as another poster commented, probably not for very long.
But for the school years before undergrad, I'm sorry to say, America is in a very bad way.
I don't know how it compares to China, but American public primary and secondary school is definitely not where I'd have my children receive an education
That's the old trade-off, and how America got the worlds' talent. But as lives in home countries get better, US would have to do more to make those immigrants feel like home. Or that trade-off would slowly stop making sense, and more people will go back to their home countries. This is not just happening with the Chinese.
For now.
"Just dropped in by accident. I see 80% of them are asian girls, is this recording from Shenzhen?"
The gap is even greater in China, since China has a booming Internet industry, second only to the US, while its semiconductor industry is still in infancy and cannot survive without subsidies. My friend, who graduated with a degree in EE from Tsinghua University, lamented that almost none of her classmates stayed in EE fields. Note that Tsinghua University is the undisputed best Chinese university in engineering schools.
The trend is just reverting to the mean.
Not sure this brain drain has equal intentions for rule of law and democratic societies.
That's a lie. United States get 1M immigrants a year since 2000. There's over 37,000,000 legal immigrants in US. United States gets the creme of the crop from countries around the world. On the other hand, there were approximately 594,000 immigrants living in China in 2010, most from Asia.
If you can live in US and make 300k-400k, you would do that in a heartbeat, vs living in China where the pollution could shorten you and your family's life, a brush with someone in CCP could destroy your life, no way to get the money you make in China out, no ownership of properties, censorship prevents you from doing research in the real internet, etc.
Oh yeah, what do you think will happen to China after additional $400 billion tariffs, when XiJingPing dies, when the massive shadow debt ($12Trillion and counting) causes widespread defaults and 30% devaluation of yuan?
I think China will be fine given that it can simply shut down exports to the US if Trump's tariff pettiness starts to sting. Where, precisely, do you think your phones and computers are manufactured?
I'm curious where you live and wether or not you can actually, personally, witness the effects of legal immigration there. In SoCal, where I've spent the last decade+, what you're saying rings completely hollow, to me. I have seen literal tour buses of mainland Chinese folks touring new developments, inside of my own new development, in fact, as recently as this spring. If what you're saying were true, why aren't these folks getting the message? That they're touring these homes this way is a discussion for another day. But, as far as I can tell, the only morale panic happening about legal immigration to the United States is happening with American citizens.
> I think China will be fine given that it can simply shut down exports to the US if Trump's tariff pettiness starts to sting. Where, precisely, do you think your phones and computers are manufactured?
What does that have to do with anything?
Or are they investors who will stay in China?
edit/ Having said that, it's not very different from what you'd see in the San Gabriel valley in recent years, either. If they're living here full-time, or not, is any ones guess. I suppose I could find out if I really wanted to, but it'd probably take weeks.
Vietnam, which now produces more Samsung phones than China does.
"Samsung has invested $17.3 billion in eight factories and one research and development center in Vietnam, turning the country into its largest smart phone production base, the government said. ... Exports from Samsung Electronics’ factories in Vietnam totaled $54 billion last year" [1]
US trade with Vietnam has massively exploded higher over the last decade. The US now imports as much from Vietnam as it does France (an economy 12 times larger). That trend will continue.
China's low value manufacturing is too easy to replace.
The US can move its manufacturing to any number of about two dozen other low cost countries. Just as US capital and the vast US consumption machine built China (and Japan + South Korea before that), it can next build up numerous other nations. The US has no permanently fixed need for China, there's nothing they contribute that can't be manufactured elsewhere (as witnessed by the way clothing manufacturing rapidly fled China on cost, and now eg Samsung's smart phone manufacturing).
Most of what China is looking to do is copy and then compete with what the US already does, from Boeing planes to military tech to semiconductor tech to software to biotech, medtech & pharma. China is a giant clone machine, nothing has changed about that at all. Accordingly, China has nothing novel that the US doesn't already have access to elsewhere or otherwise.
[1] https://www.reuters.com/article/us-samsung-elec-vietnam/sams...
Fixed it for ya. (I tease)
China is not fine. China is trying to balance its shadow debts (12T, 170% corporate debt to gdp), prop up stock market (lost 15% this year), prop up real estate (decline in 1st tiered cities, 25.96x House price to income ratio), and prop up yuan (4% loss this year).
There are numerous attempts at fixing the problem, but all of them ring hollow as the big ASIC design shops basically are all relying on ancient languages.
Another thing that IMO has dealt a grave blow to the whole scene is a cultural one: people in the hardware business still haven't understood and digested the lessons of open source and sharing. The whole industry still operates on notions of "industrial secrets" and spends tremendous amounts of energy trying to hide how what they build works.
I mean if you need a example of how bad it still is, the dominant word still used to describe a chunk of functionality in that world is "IP".
Who in their right mind in the software industry would call a piece of code they wrote "intellectual property", as in "just download my IP and use it in your project" ?
My point is that it's a little silly to evaluate hardware engineering through the lense of software engineering.
In hardware engineering the part that looks like "software" (what a HW engineer may refer to as the behavioral RTL) is a small component of the total design effort. The tradeoffs are all completely different.
Computer hardware engineering is much closer to designing a bridge than it is to writing a software application. Debating the best hardware-descriptor language is similar to debating whether bridge designers should use No. 1 or No. 2 pencils.
Perhaps you’re an FPGA guy? The tradeoffs are different in that world.
You have also entirely ignored my second point :)
Again this is evaluating HW through a SW prism. Where’s github for bridge designers? rocket scientists? brain surgeons?
HW engineers share info in pretty much the same way that every other industry in the world does (except SW). The concepts are made available through patents, conferences, journals, and press releases. More detailed info is often made available through purchaseable IP.
Maybe it could be better, but there are good reasons that HW IP can’t be shared as easily as SW source code.
I mean, it wasn't even made for chip synthesis.
(I had trouble with the continuous math once we reached steady-state analysis. Besides, I wanted to just get through all that to the fun stuff: discrete math, logic design, and programming.)
We won't decline in absolute numbers but comparatively. We will never produce as many engineers as china because they outnumber us by more than a billion people.
China's short term goal is clearly to reach parity so these students can enter a mature semiconductor industry. Give these students ~5-15 years to gain expertise from the American academic system and industrial research base and I think we'll start seeing China innovate.
American expertise will naturally decline because we don't have students studying EE. To many good full-stack jobs that pay ~40% more.