broadsword
Brigadier
Unfair competition on their part is also their part of their policies.
Chinese semiconductor industry
- Thread starter Hendrik_2000
- Start date
- Status
Unfair competition on their part is also their part of their policies.
D
Deleted member 15949
Guest
The FTC doesn't deal in foreign trade.
Believe it or not, that's actually what has been happening over decades and it is for that reason that software providers try to get universities to use their software to teach their students. Look at AutoCad/AutoDesk, MatLab, Mathematica, etc. How did these softwares become mainstays in most universities? Why are they leaders in their fields? It's NOT simply because they are better, it's also because they have a ready cadre of users who know their product who list their use on their resumes, who are "experts" with it. The resulting profits fuel the continuing development of those products and put other products in the same field at a disadvantage. This is how monopolies are maintained and you are advocating this for a strategically important sector like EDA software for China where America is actively sanctioning their EDA software.
You have got to be kidding? Using this logic, why not continue buying ASML DUV lithographs after 2022 even though there are imminent alternatives from SMEE and CETC? Afterall, ASML, Nikon and Canon lithographs are still superior in performance and we must all learn and experience from the best right? Forget about the sanctions and attempts to destroy China's high technology industries because China should use and learn from the best,....so they can improve....right?
The reason those foreign software solutions was used was because they were mature. No one is going to hamstring their own process using untested solutions. There’s nothing wrong with that. If there were no tech bans there would be no necessity to use domestically produced software, and that’s fine. The point is if there is a ban it’s not actually that restrictive because ramp up for domestic alternatives doesn’t take that long. The freak out over EDA is nonsensical. You’re all just biting the bait of media sensationalism.
D
Deleted member 15949
Guest
Universities try to be on the technological frontier and that means using industry-leading software programs.
In a general case, there is no reason to buy anything from SMEE or CETC unless they can outcompete foreign products on the cost/performance parameters. Since the political dynamics are different, then China should make indigenization a priority but generally, autarky is inefficient and should be eschewed.
broadsword
Brigadier
Ok, I need your clarification what FTC has got to do with our discussion.
You're talking about pre-sanction times. Right now, any China based fab that willingly continues supporting these sanctioned products are basically committing suicide. EDA software is one of the pillars of semiconductor development. It's nowhere near as straight forward and easy as you're making it seem. If you don't even have access to the most advanced fabs and their equipment to help develop your EDA softwares, you cannot support the leading edge processes, it's as simple as that. Your speech about the virtues of free market product development is straight out of American liberal economic theory and it's against the strategic interests of China because following that nonsense condemns China to remaining technology behind permanently, in a strategic field nonetheless.
D
Deleted member 15949
Guest
I should really spend my evening doing else but alas, no. As long as downstream industries can use foreign intermediaries, they should while simultaneously supporting domestic equivalents. EDA is a software product. All software products are straight forward. You can optimize the software for a particular line but that's not a particularly difficult problem, just standard SWE. You can broadly support state-support for innovation while at the same time, also supporting markets. They aren't exclusionary.
There’s nothing wrong with Chinese companies using American EDA post sanction either. These companies are not dumb. They will balance their risk profile between foreign and domestic options, sanction resilience and performance, as needed.
If the bottleneck for EDA that you’re concerned about is the application for advanced equipment, worry about the advanced equipment not the EDA.
My “speech” is not about “free market” software development. It’s just how software development works, everywhere. It’s not ideological, and the fact that you seem to project ideology onto it says a lot about how much you know about this industry. If I’m telling you how an industry works and you read that as enforcing an ideology then you’re tough out of luck understanding anything about these technologies and I seriously hope you never get to run anything touching China’s software development policies.
I think you need to read this article to get the idea that this is no longer the Chinese government but all major Chinese companies are on board and would try to advance Chinese semiconductor industry without American component even if it meant they would need to take some risks.
- Status