Slashdot Mirror


The Laptop Supply Chain

Carl Bialik from the WSJ writes "When a U.S. consumer orders a laptop from HP or other big sellers, how does the machine get made? Often via a complex supply chain in Taiwan and China, shaped by rocky cross-Strait relations, according to the Wall Street Journal: 'Outsourcing to low-cost, high-quality Taiwanese manufacturers has helped make Dell and H-P the world's top two PC companies in terms of sales...But the relationship between U.S. computer firms and their third-party manufacturers can be tricky. In the struggle to retain an element of control over their suppliers, H-P, Dell and others play contract manufacturers against each other to keep prices falling and ensure no supplier gains too much leverage.'"

6 of 232 comments (clear)

  1. Lower price... by ID000001 · · Score: 4, Insightful

    means at least the saving are pass onto the consumer. Admittedly though, there are not a whole lot of choices when you buy a laptop. More often then not you will not be told where the laptop are made unless you can see the underside of it.
    Since customer perfers price over quality in general, it is not really the companies fault to find the cheapest supplier.

  2. Imagine the effects of a Chinese attack on Taiwan. by Infinite+Entropy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I always worried about the effect that any Taiwan-China conflict could have on the supply of computers. It seems almost all motherboards are made in Taiwan and a whole lotta RAM.

  3. Taiwan: Laptops are just the tip... by Nova+Express · · Score: 5, Insightful
    ...of Taiwan's importance to the Gloval High tech economy. Even more important are the roles of Taiwan semiconductor foundry houses like TSMC and UMC. Taiwan dominates the foundry business (IBM and Singapore's Chartered have significantly lower volumes), and with more and more chip design firms going fabless, an ever-greater percentage of cutting-edge chip designs flow through Taiwan. Indeed, it would be hard to find a computer or MP3 player sold today which didn't have a part fabbed in Taiwan.

    Now, imagine what would happen to America's high tech industry if Communist China invaded...

    --
    Lawrence Person (lawrencepersonh@gmailh.com (remove all "h"s to mail)

    http://www.lawrenceperson.com/

    1. Re:Taiwan: Laptops are just the tip... by WhiteWolf666 · · Score: 3, Insightful
      Consquences of a China threatening to invade Taiwan?

      The U.S. moves the seventh fleet towards Taiwan.

      For those who don't know; The seventh fleet is the world's largest naval armada, and its currently stationed at a port in Japan.

      I believe it constitutes *multiple* aircraft carrier battle groups, as includes nuclear armaments. That fleet alone would be enough to level most of Asia, let alone China.

      China, although it may threaten, and although it has a nuclear arsenal, does *NOT* have the capability to invade Taiwan. China's *entire* navy consists of the following:

      http://www.navyleague.org/seapower/chinas_navy_tod ay.htm

      he acquisition of these technologies resulted in China's production of more advanced surface combatants during the past decade-- including a single 6,000-ton Luhai-class guided-missile destroyer (DDG), two Luhu-class DDGs (4,200 tons), and nine Jiangwei-class frigates (2,250 tons). These units are equipped with the HQ-7 or HQ-61 short-range air defense systems that likely will be replaced by a longer-range vertical-launch system within the next three to five years. These ships also have integrated tactical data systems, an improved antisubmarine warfare suite that includes embarked helicopters, and gas turbine propulsion.

      Notwithstanding these improvements, the backbone of the PLA surface fleet remains its 16 aging Luda-class destroyers (3,250 tons) and 30 Jianghu-class frigates (1,425 tons) that are largely inadequate to meet the requirements of modern warfare. The planned acquisition of two 7,940-ton Russian-built Sovremenny-class DDGs in the 2000 to 2001 period will improve the PLAN's surface-combatant capabilities. These units are likely to be equipped with an advanced SAN-7 air-defense system, the KA-28 Helix Helicopter, and SSN-22 cruise-missile technology. The PLAN's HQ-61 and HQ-7 systems are based on the French Crotale land-based surface-to-air missile system, and they do not provide surface units with an effective area-defense capability. This deficiency makes PLAN surface units extremely vulnerable to air attack.


      Furthermore, China's airfore consists of 20-30 year old Russia planes in various states of maintenance.

      Taiwan's airforce consists of the latest and greatest American military hardware that their economy can purchase. Consider that Taiwan spends about 1/6 of the amount China spends on their military. This is to defend a small island, while the Chinese expenditure must go towards the entire nation.

      This is in addition to the U.S. unofficial military support.
      List of Taiwanese naval ships: http://www.fas.org/man/dod-101/sys/ship/row/rocn/

      As of right now, I would not be certain that China had naval superiority over Taiwan *alone*, ignoring that the U.S. navy makes both look incredibly puny. Considering the following facts:
      1. No Naval superiority for China
      2. Air superiority for Taiwan
      3. Massive naval superiority of the U.S.
      4. ~$120 billion in trade between TaiwanChina
      5. Reluctance of China to employ nuclear weapons

      I'd say its *extremely* unlikely that China will seriously consider invading Taiwan over the next 50 years. Saber rattle? Perhaps. Let loose the people's army? No way.
      --
      WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
  4. The ongoing pattern.. by Registered+Coward+v2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

    What I found interesting was the move to manufacturering the more expensive components in China - that is the next place to look for cost reductions. It'll take a while, but it will happen - leaving Tiawan to do higher end engineering and component fab, with the commodity stuff outsourced (much like we do today).

    China's also developing the engineering talent to do the design work - Siemen's already does cell phone work their; China certainly has the talent to develop into a major player. Of course, political challenges - how do you keep such diverse country in one piece if you lessen the central control.

    If I were India, I'd be worrying about the Chinese developing enough English speakers to capture the call center business.

    --
    I'm a consultant - I convert gibberish into cash-flow.
  5. The big picture: American industrial/tech decline by intnsred · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Having our laptops and PCs made this way may seem great -- for as long as the Chinese keep funding our ever-increasing trade deficit by taking our declining dollars and purchasing our treasury bonds.

    Dell and HP are at least keeping some design and marketing jobs in the US. :-/

    But if they follow the lead of many other American companies (e.g. GE), that design will be out-sourced overseas. American corporations are being destroyed by their own greed and shortsightedness. Many American companies are now only shells -- they're a brand name with a US-based sales and marketing force and everything else done overseas.

    Fool yourself if you want, this is not a sustainable way of doing business. Consumers may think they've got it great now, with prices going down. But those same consumers are transferring wealth overseas and we're only able to do it now because the rest of the world allows the US to get into debt that no developing country could -- we can do it only because of the dollar's dominance.

    Eventually that dollar dominance will evaporate and we'll realize that we transferred huge amounts of wealth and industrial power to foreign countries, all based on an ideology of greed and "free" trade.

    Now, none of these are my own ideas; this is seen clearly by those on the political left and also by "traditional" conservatives. People like Reagan's Asst. Sec. of the Treasury and former Wall St. Journal editor Paul Craig Roberts have written extensively on this foolish but deliberate economic suicide. The mainstream corporate mass media avoids this -- it may upset people, cause them to question the conventional wisdom, or, worse in their view, impact their short-term profits.

    Laugh and enjoy it while we can; things that can't go on forever don't.