许多跨国芯片公司会选择低调地将部份工作转移到中国，然而，也有一些业界领导公司选择更加深入中国市场，而且，他们从不避讳谈论其中国策略。
德州仪器(Texas Instruments, TI)，就是一个很好的例子。
德州仪器上海微控制器(MCU) 设计中心最近刚完成了首款本地设计的芯片tape out案例。虽然TI并不透露其上海设计中心团队规模，但TI微控制器副总裁Scott Roller在最近的一次接受本刊采访时表示，“上海MCU设计中心是一个规模颇大的团队，有许多设计正在进行。”
TI的上海MCU设计中心是在2011年初开始运作，除了TI位于德国、邦加罗尔和达拉斯以外，上海是目前最新一个设计中心。
值 得注意的是，TI在中国的工厂并不只是为了支持现有的MCU产品而存在。相反地，它主要负责一些来自中国的MCU产品线开发工作。“在中国，我们开发专门 为中国市场而设计的微控制器，”Roller说。这个设计中心聚集了所有必要的工作人员，包括销售、应用软件开发、系统和处理器设计工程师，以及现场应用工程师等。“我们包含了前端到后端的完整流程，”Roller说。
德州仪器微控制器副总裁Scott Roller |
为何在中国设计？
当被问及为何选在中国设计时，Roller给了我两个理由：“首先，你可以更灵活，速度更快。其次，选择在本地进行设计，将大幅减少因误解而出错的机率。”
尽管理论上来说，此举可能深具意义，但并不是每一家跨国公司都愿意公开承诺他们将在中国进行设计。
月前，在美国德州San Antonio举办的飞思卡尔技术论坛(Freescale Technology Forum)上，飞思卡尔新任总裁暨CEO Gregg Lowe 指出，中国市场正在从低成本的电子产品制造基地，转变为具备设计能力，可为当地广大内需市场开发所需产品的真正高科技枢纽。
想在中国销售产品的芯片供货商，就必须在当地扎根，Lowe说。IC供货商并不一定要在中国设计产品，但他们必须在当地设有应用工程师和系统工程师，他表示。
然而，ARM中国总裁吴雄昂说，中国的根本区别就在于中国的速度。就他观察，一般在中国的SoC设计周期会更短。“从设计开始到真正tape out，有时只需要五到六个月。中国公司做决定的速度非常快，对市场的反应速度更迅速。”
而在进行一款特殊设计时，跨国公司通常要回报总部做决定，这种做法并不适合中国本地市场，吴雄昂说。
TI的Roller强调，出于成本考量，TI过去并没有在中国建立MCU设计中心。他指出，中国的工程技术人才可能会“便宜一点，但你不会真的省下很多钱。”而今，TI在中国成立设计中心的主因，是因为“我们希望能设计和生产出更贴近本地需求的产品。”
对TI来说，现阶段中国MCU市场中一个最关键的领域，就是中国正在发展的国家电网计画所带动的智能电表。TI已经推出了首款产品，目前已提供样品，Roller说。“这对我们来说，是非常庞大的商机。”
TI在中国销售的两款主力MCU产品分别是超低功耗16位微控制器 MSP430，以及32位的C2000微控制器。
当问到还有哪些跨国公司也大力投入中国MCU市场时，Roller提到了飞思卡尔(Freescale)和瑞萨(Renesas)。
飞思卡尔已进军中国多年，TI的Roller说。但他也表示，在新的CEO上任后，情况可能会改变。Roller口中的新任CEO指的是从TI跳到飞思卡尔的Lowe。
飞思卡尔的Lowe任职于TI时，曾带领TI位在达拉斯的模拟事业部。而TI已经在中国设立了数个模拟设计中心。
在飞思卡尔技术论坛中，飞思卡尔的Lowe在接受采访时承认，“设计决策将会逐渐转移。”他表示，“你不能只待在硅谷，还有其它重要的地方得去，但你必须了解客户的需求，才能设计出真正贴近客户的芯片。
距我首次踏上中国土地已经有一个月了。这段时间以来，我陆续把我对中国的一些观察写成报告，分享给读者们。接在，也在网站我文章的留言评论版上，看到很多朋友、同事和读者对这一系列中国报导的反映。事实上，每一则留言所揭露的信息，都比我的报导要多得多。
不过，我完全没有被冒犯的感觉，因为我深有同感。
本文授权编译自EE Times，版权所有，谢绝转载
本文下一页：中国功夫，唯快不破
相关阅读：
• 联发科：让千元智能机拥有iPhone 4S的功能
• 本土无晶圆厂业者们真正需要的策略
• http://www.esmchina.com/ART_8800121647_1100_2700_0_4300_dde103af.HTMtQCesmc
{pagination}
写在上文之后
今天早上，我收到一位现居北京的前同事来信：“我很欣赏因为妳的中国系列报导而在网站上出现的所有留言。这些留言有些很有趣，但也有些令人不安......而令人感到可怕的，是双方对彼此的了解程度竟然这么低。”
我完全同意。
对包括我在内的大多数人来说，中国在很大程度上仍然是相当神秘的。我知道的非常少，尽管我采访了很多人，虽然我知道他们的真实故事，但我对他们的认识程度仍然有限。
同样，我也感觉到中国人对我们的认识是有限的，尤其是在谈到美国工程师们感受到对中国的恐惧时。
双方对彼此都抱持着先入为主的观念，将传闻(特别是对自己有利的消息)当作加强自己认为足够了解对方的左证。
现在，是我们深呼吸，各退一步的时候了。
我先举几个例子。每当我写到有关中国的设计和生产速度时──我一直认为这是中国获胜的关键──此时，我就会接到读者的响应，大多是批评中国产品的品质。这类 批评非常多，我得到许多的反馈，不只是在网站留言，甚至在不经意的对话间，都会有人说出谁才刚刚在中国买了一部 Android 手机，但却故障了….诸如此类的评论。
当我在北京拜访一位美国芯片公司的工程部副总裁时，他对我说：“顺子，这些手机的品质并不好。但这不是因为他们不能做好，而是因为他们不想。”
我对我听到的话有点难以理解，因此，我问他：“你是说，他们是故意做出品质不大好的手机吗？”
不，他说。“他们只对如何更快速地卖出更多手机感兴趣。因而他们并不想花时间做出一只完美的手机。”
他接着以苹果产品为例指出：“你想我的 iPhone 来自哪里？它们都是由富士康(Foxconn)在中国的工厂所生产的。所以，中国人并不是不知道如何制造品质优良的产品。”
今天下午，我又收到一封来自ARM中国区总裁吴雄昂的电子邮件。他是因为我上文中的报导给我写信。他对我说：“我对你的“中国速度”一说完全同意。产品不一定要在中国设计，但企业必须有能力响应“中国速度”，才能在这个市场获得成功。”特别是在中国已然成为芯片产业的关键市场之际，他解释道。
吴雄昂指出，“如果你去观察硅谷的新创公司，我会说除了热情和承诺等要素以外，“速度”、快速做出决策以便对市场需求做出反应，也是他们决胜的关键。”
吴雄昂的结论是，硅谷原则同样能在中国赢得市场，不仅赢得市场，也赢得员工的心。总结起来，“中国速度”可归纳为因应本地市场和环境而调整的能力。
他也指出，用速度来驱动中国和硅谷是不错，但也有导致失败的可能。我赶紧同意。
不过，就我观察，中国和硅谷还是存在着不同。中国的速度要快上好几倍，主因是中国有着自己的“生态系统”──从零件供货商、软件开发商到合约制造商都包含在内。而他们所生产的产品也能以最快速度上市。
我们会继续探讨更多有关“中国速度 vs. 中国品质”的故事。当然，随时欢迎你提供意见或分析──甚至包括你听到的传闻──任何消息都非常欢迎。但是，在我们更了解彼此之前，让我们都学着，别太过在意对方的评断。
编译： Joy Teng
本文下一页：参考英文原文：Why TI does MCU designs in Shanghai，by Junko Yoshida，Dylan McGrath; China speed vs. China quality ，by Junko Yoshida
相关阅读：
• 联发科：让千元智能机拥有iPhone 4S的功能
• 本土无晶圆厂业者们真正需要的策略
• http://www.esmchina.com/ART_8800121647_1100_2700_0_4300_dde103af.HTMtQCesmc
{pagination}
China speed vs. China quality
Junko Yoshida
It’s been only a month since I first traveled to China, and have started reporting on tidbits about China and things Chinese from the ground up. Many of my friends, colleagues and readers told me that a flood of comments posted by EE Times community members’ after each of my China stories is actually more revealing than my reporting.
I take no offense, because I feel the same way.
A former colleague of mine, now resident in Beijing, wrote to me this morning: “I am enjoying the comments your China stories are eliciting almost as much as the stories. Some are funny and some disturbing… A bit frightening is how little both sides understand each other.”
I couldn’t agree more.
China remains largely a mystery to most of us – me included. I still know very little, and the more people I interview, the less I feel as though I know their real stories.
Similarly, I find Chinese people’s understanding is limited, especially when it comes to how fearful the U.S. engineering community is about China.
Both sides remain caught up in pre-conceived notions of what the other side is like; they cherry-pick anecdotal evidence (which is often a valuable piece in a bigger picture), and use it to reinforce what they think they know.
I think it’s time to take a deep breath and step back – for all of us.
Here are a few good examples. Every time I write anything about China’s speed of design and production – which to me is one of the vital elements of Chinese success, I get reactions from our readers about the poor quality of China’s products. And this is a salient criticism. I get a steady flow of feedback – not just on our site, but in casual conversation – about an Android phone someone just bought in China; and already it’s going haywire.
When I met in Beijing a vice president of engineering who works for a U.S. chip company, he was emphatic: “Junko, the quality of some of those phones is bad. But this isn’t because they can’t get it right; it’s because they don’t want to.”
A little stumped by what I thought I heard him say, I asked, “What do you mean? Are you saying that they are intentionally making bad phones?”
No, he said. “They are more interested in turning out more phones they can sell -- quickly. It’s just that they don’t want to take the time to make a perfect phone.”
He pointed out the glaring exception to the stereotype: “Guess where all the iPhones are coming from? They are made by Foxconn in China. It’s not like Chinese don’t know how to manufacture good quality products.”
Meanwhile, I received an e-mail this afternoon from Allen Wu, ARM China’s president. Referring to my story, "Why TI does MCU design in Shanghai," Wu wrote to me: “I fully agree with your comments on ‘China Speed.’ Products don’t necessarily need to be designed in China, but companies needs to respond in ‘China Speed’ to be successful,” especially as China becomes one of the leading markets for the chip industry, he explained.
Wu noted, “If you look at the start-up culture in the Valley, I would put ‘speed,’ fast decision-making and response to market, as one of the clear top reasons for success --along with passion, commitment, etc.”
Wu’s conclusion is that the principles of Silicon Valley work equally well in China, from winning markets to winning the hearts and minds of employees. It really comes down to the ability to adjust execution to local markets and environments in ‘China speed.’
His point that China and Silicon Valley are driven – perhaps to a fault -- by “speed” is well taken. I hasten to agree.
What’s different, though, in my observation is that China’s speed is multiplied several times now, largely because China has elements in its ‘ecosystem’ – ranging from component suppliers to software developers and contract manufacturers – who can accelerate even further. Their end products eventually get to the market faster, too.
The story of China speed vs. China quality is something we’re going to keep probing at EE Times. Your comments and analysis – even the anecdotal stuff – are always welcome. But let’s hold off, on both sides, being too judgmental about each other — until we’ve all learned a little more.
Why TI does MCU designs in Shanghai
Junko Yoshida
SHANGHAI – Multinational chip companies who’ve consigned some of their design work to China tend to do so as quietly as possible; but a few leading companies are clearly making deeper inroads in China, and they’re not especially shy about it.
Texas Instruments is a good example.
Its newest MCU design center based in Shanghai recently saw its first locally designed device successfully taped out. While TI is not disclosing the size of its team, Scott Roller, vice president of TI Microcontrollers, in a recent interview with EE Times, described the MCU design center in Shanghai as “a sizeable team, with multiple designs going on.”
TI’s Shanghai-based MCU design center, whose operation started in early 2011, is the newest addition to the company’s three others worldwide. They include design centers in Germany, Bangalore and Dallas.
It’s important to note that TI’s facility in China is not there just to support existing MCU products. Rather, it actually executes some MCU product line development from China. “This is to develop MCUs – built in China for China,” said Roller. The design center performs every job – ranging from sales, application developers to system and processor designers and application field engineers – necessary to do the design work in one place. “We cover everything -- from front to back end,” said Roller.
Scott Roller, vice president of microcontrollers at Texas Instruments
Why design in China?
Asked why design in China, Roller gave two straightforward reasons: “First, you can move much faster. Second, by designing it locally, there will be less room for misinterpretation.”
Although in theory, that may make sense, not every multinational has gone that far in their public commitment to designing in China.
Earlier this month at the Freescale Technology Forum in San Antonio, Texas, Gregg Lowe, Freescale Semiconductor's new president and CEO, said the China market is in transition from a low-cost manufacturer of electronics products designed in the West to a true high-tech hub with the design capability to create products for its massive domestic market.
Chip vendors who want to sell products in China need a strong presence there, Lowe said. IC vendors don't necessarily need to design their products in China, but they need to have applications engineers and system engineers right there to be successful there, Lowe said.
The fundamental difference in China, however, is China’s speed, said Allen Wu, president of ARM China. Design cycles for SoCs in China are generally much shorter, he observed. “From design starts to tape-out, sometimes it takes only five to six months. [Local companies] make decisions much more quickly and they react to the market very fast.”
So, by the time multinationals finally reach a decision on a specific design back at headquarters, that may have already become irrelevant on the local Chinese market, explained Wu.
TI’s Roller stressed that TI did not build its MCU design center in China “because of the cost.” He said that engineering talents may be “a bit cheaper but you don’t really save money.” TI has done this “because we want to design and produce products closer to where the demand is.”
One of the biggest MCU market segments TI is after in China is a smart metering device based on China’s state grid program. TI taped out the first product and is sampling it now, said Roller. “This is a huge opportunity for us.”
TI’s two key MCUs used in China include MSP430 ultra-low-power 16-bit microcontrollers and C2000 32-bit microcontrollers.
Asked which other multinationals are commanding a strong presence in the MCU market in China, Roller mentioned Freescale and Renesas.
Freescale – with a long history in China – may be pulling back a little, TI’s Roller said. But he quickly added: “That may change with the new CEO,” referring to Freescale's Lowe who was ex-TI executive.
Freescale’s Lowe, while at TI, most recently led the Dallas-based company’s analog business. TI has already established several analog design centers in China.
At the interview held at the Freescale Technology Forum, Freescale’s Lowe acknowledged "Design decisions will move." He said, "You can't just go to Silicon Valley anymore. That's still a very important place to go, but you need to be in all of the places where chips are being designed into systems to be close to customers and understand customer requirements."
责编：Quentin
扫码分享到好友
