First person to comment that isn't trying to sell sunglasses and handbags! I am actually more positive that this will happen than some of these folks on the panel. That said, I see the growth of the China semiconductor industry as being somewhat different to that of TI. Several companies are aligning to key OEMs in China first, developing a solution there and then rolling that out more broadly across the world. Granted, it is still early, but if those companies are committed to listening to the feedback from those companies (i.e. developing stronger strategic and marketing skills), then they will succeed. If you look at the system level, Huawei went from nothing to being a significant $30B force worldwide (with limited engagement in the US market for well covered reasons). There is no reason why this cannot happen at the semiconductor level too.
I too think this will happen as there is a political will behind it. The Chinese Government is pending huge money on R&D, and this will pay off in the mid to long term, I believe. That said, they should aim higher than TI IMHO.
The development of semi-conductor industry in China has gone a really fast pace. With the concentration of foundry companies, the relevant R&D activity will move in a reasonably fast pace. Who knows when the next TI is born in China. The likelihood is the next semiconductor R&D company born in China is not going to be the same kind as TI is.
The Chinese are very good at copying and replicating inexpesive devices, but can anyone name one "China" exclisive device that had not already been designed and developed else where?
Creating a climate of innovation requires a management thought process willing to take losses for unsuccessful new devices. The Chinese punish failure. Until they change, they will never reach the levels of innovation and product process of a TI.
Just my opinion.
Indeed, the Chinese government offers some financial support, but many startups I talked to here in China aren't getting that big an incentive from the government.
Sure, in the end, the government's support in growing companies (like Huawei and ZTE) could make a difference, but I think the struggle Chinese fabless companies face now is that they need to figure out by themselves how to get over the first hump -- from a run-of-the-mill small startup to be a slightly bigger player with global recognition.
The same could have been said of Japan in the 1950's; they just copied transistor radios designed in the west. But then came giants like Sony and Toshiba. What may come out of China will look nothing like TI, but I'm sure a giant will come.
No. 8: all chinese experts sucks.
I read through all the items , if that's all these experts could imagine, they are idiots.
No. 9. the true reason, chinese so far lacks trust and common value in general.
when you put 3-5 capable chinese VPs together, they .. wont cooperate, they will fight. that's the biggest difference between TI and most of chinese companies. and that 's what's keeping them under.
like SMICs big internal warfare last year, it ended up with a group of taiwan top management take over. The chinese top dog ie simon yang etc are just morally incapable of staying in such kind of position.
TI's real foundation and secret sauce is .. . sourthern baptist church, that's how to keep people trust one another and won't leave the game if they don' t like their PPI...
Drones are, in essence, flying autonomous vehicles. Pros and cons surrounding drones today might well foreshadow the debate over the development of self-driving cars. In the context of a strongly regulated aviation industry, "self-flying" drones pose a fresh challenge. How safe is it to fly drones in different environments? Should drones be required for visual line of sight Ė as are piloted airplanes? Join EE Times' Junko Yoshida as she moderates a panel of drone experts.