Its spelled Akrion. Their office is 5 min from mine. I visited them once - they wanted to invest in my solar nanomaterial technology.
Chinese semiconductor industry
- Thread starter Hendrik_2000
- Start date
- Status
So China has domestic alternatives to whatever this Akrion does, correct? If so, it's just a corporate issue with NAURA, not a national security issue.
Looking at the bidding data its doesn't seem they sell a lot of cleaning equipment in china, compared wit ACM shanghai and PNC or even CETC.
does seem that the issue has nothing to do with Akrion and more about this magnetoelectric company of theirs, maybe naura wants to enter the MRAM bussiness. either way for some reason caught the attention of the Americans.
Cz
China will welcome and reward well any skilled professionals in areas of advanced technology to come to China, regardless of their nationality and even their species. But China is DEFINITELY going to do its utmost to ensure that ALL supply chains for any item worth producing, are located within China. Japan and European countries have not yet implemented the extensive sort of technology trade and citizen restrictions that the United States has on China and likely will not do so out of their own volition, because they see their interests lying in ensuring that their high tech goods have access to the world's largest market and as such it is commercially beneficial for them to do so. But the United States might be able to persuade them into implementing such restrictions, even at great cost to them. They CANNOT be trusted.For once SCMP had its editorial right and YES China is the only country that can realized a full spectrum indigenization thanks to America of course.
Editorial by SCMP Editorial
Tech war a sign of US weakness not strength
- China should not overreact to Washington’s ill-thought-out moves to restrict access to products and talent and instead embrace an open and inclusive approach to boost the development of technology
Published: 12:50am, 24 Oct, 2022
Semiconductor chips on a circuit board. Photo: Reuters
Short term, the latest measures by the United States to restrict Chinese access to US semiconductor technology will hurt China at the core of its tech development. Longer term, however, they are short-sighted and are likely to cause problems for the US.
Meanwhile, they do nothing to relieve serious bilateral tension. A ban on US passport-holders or entities working with Chinese chip producers without specific approval can only exacerbate it.
The US Department of Commerce has imposed systematic export licensing controls on dozens of Chinese companies and research institutions. Companies worldwide are barred from selling super computing and artificial intelligence chips to China that were made with US software, machinery or technology.
The measures also limit exports to China of chip manufacturing tools and technology that Chinese companies could put to their own use.
They reveal the depth of a sense of insecurity that American technology hegemony may be challenged by China, already reflected in the US$52.7 billion Chips and Science Act passed recently by Congress to subsidise R&D and manufacturing.
However, in the longer term it will be difficult for one player to exercise dominance over everything, with different countries enjoying an advantage in developing certain components of the technology chain.
Sharing them can accelerate the technological revolution. Beijing will find it difficult to re-create that alone. But, over time, cutting the second-largest economy out of the chain and isolating China technologically will be a tall order.
If this resulted in fragmentation of the global technology sector, US companies would suffer, since they benefit most from it. So while the latest measures will cause problems for China, ultimately the negative impact may outweigh any gain for the US in consolidating a dominant position.
The passport ban further undermines the perceived values of the US as an emigrant society that attracts the best and brightest. But China needs to be wary it does not boost a rise of nationalism which, if it were to become dominant, could only self-harm. Indeed, Beijing should adopt an open approach and not take any action to deny people the opportunity to come to China.
People keep going on with the refrain that it makes no economic sense for any country to locate the supply chains for producing any high tech product commercially, and especially semiconductor and IC chip related products. That might be true, especially initially, as the initial costs will be great. But short term and medium term costs, as great as they may be, are much less than the magnitude of the value that comes from having supply chains for high tech products located entirely domestically and free from interference by any hostile state actor. With China's huge domestic market and additionally, the rest of the non-US aligned world ready to purchase Chinese products as long as they are of good quality and competitively priced, China is assured of a boon that will eventually recover the costs of full spectrum localization of technology and make profits eventually. That is why those who insist on China striving to be capable of producing any item of technology worth producing, be it commercially or not, are right.
Not that if you do not own the tools the work that you made with the tools belongs to the US government.
Taiwanese and Korean IC chip manufacturing companies that purchase lithography scanners and equipment for etching, ion implantation, deposition, metrology etc from US companies to from other foreign companies that make such equipment with US content do own those tools that they purchased. It is just that if they do not abide by US geopolitical terms, the United States will decide not to supply them with those tools anymore. And they might decide not to purchase the chips made by American made and American-content possessing tools, which will also hurt them because the US and US companies over which the US government has full jurisdiction are a significant portion of their market.
And I fully agree with you with regards to it being much more important to actually be able to make the semiconductor and IC chip manufacturing equipment than it is to just be able to use foreign supplied equipment and be able to make IC chips with them much better than the tool makers themselves could do. That is why I deem it extremely arrogant when people here scoff at Japan not commercially producing less than 40 nm node logic chips, when Japan integrates the production of semiconductor and IC chip manufacturing equipment, largely or entirely free of foreign content, and also makes chips using their own equipment better than any other country.
It is Japan that has the best integration of the domestic supply chain for semiconductor substrates, IC chips materials, making-equipment, and IC chips themselves than any other country. Saying that fact does not make on a lover of the Imperial Japanese Army or a weaboo. It is just a matter of fact. China itself actually decently integrates that supply chain, certainly much better than Taiwan and Korea does, and China could definitely make IC chips as well as they could if China had access to EUV equipment. But due to US domineering interests at keeping China down, they have ensured that ASML does not supply EUV machines, and they are trying to ensure that as much as possible that NO American company and those of American allies supply any chip manufacturing equipment and materials to China that China doesn't itself produce that is comparable quality or better than what the US and its allies produce.
As I and others have said as nauseum and will keep reminding people periodically in this forum, faced with these realities, being that China's geopolitical interests and stature are so much larger than South Korea (no disrespect to South Korea and Koreans), China must ensure that the entirety of supply chains to produce semiconductors and IC chips and their equipment and special materials be located within China, and the same applies for any item of technology that is worth producing - China must at least demonstrate the capability of producing them. From this forum, I have been well informed that the greatest weakness with regards to China is lithography scanners and steppers. If China can replicate or come close to replicating the most advanced DUV machines that ASML produces qualitatively, it is GAME OVER FOR THE UNITED STATES as far as the semiconductor and IC chip containment policy of China.
The article described successful creation of 2-4 inch "homoepitaxial" gallium oxide wafers. These are basically gallium oxide only as opposed to heteroepitaxial which typically uses MBE. Given that CETC was able to create these 2-4 inch gallium oxide wafers, I speculate they have successfully developed domestic MOCVD equipment comparable to Agnitron and Taiyo/Sanso. If so, then those American Gallium Oxide trade sanctions are going to fail right out of the gate.
So with SMIC N+3 5nm chip coming in to play in late 2023, we will be a generation behind the leaders and ahead of the American Company by 2 generation (Intel 14nm). Now we know the reason for their hysteria, They thought Xi don't have the Chinaman's chance to succeed....lol
2 hours ago — Both TSMC and Samsung Electronics are seeing their production scale for 3nm chips constrained due to difficulty in having good control of ...
2 hours ago — Both TSMC and Samsung Electronics are seeing their production scale for 3nm chips constrained due to difficulty in having good control of ...
I've deleted several Taiwan related posts here. Let's keep the discussion from shifting into anything invasion related and just stick to discussions on semiconductor. And please let's lower the Chinese grievances too.
You know things are serious when gradualists, internationalists, and trade liberals in China advocate domestic substitution. This advice would have come more handy after some event with a certain memory company happened. An event that foreshadowed things to come, being more careful establishing alliances with companies subject to the will of unreasonable politicians.
- Status