在 2012年初，EETimes美國(guó)版發(fā)表了一系列“重建美國(guó)”系列文章，試圖探索復(fù)興美國(guó)制造業(yè)的可能性；在這個(gè)眾家電子業(yè)者為節(jié)省成本紛紛將制造據(jù)點(diǎn)移往亞洲的時(shí)刻，我們也知道這樣的議題恐怕是徒勞無(wú)功。 除此之外，是全球化(globalization)的現(xiàn)實(shí)以及全球性的“生產(chǎn)破碎化現(xiàn)象(fragmentation of production)”；但我們?nèi)哉J(rèn)為，“制造”工程是了解產(chǎn)品設(shè)計(jì)程序不能被忽視的一個(gè)環(huán)節(jié)?？剂康竭@一點(diǎn)，你也許聽(tīng)說(shuō)蘋(píng)果(Apple)打算投資1億美元將部分Mac系列產(chǎn)品制造由中國(guó)移回美國(guó)的消息，并且對(duì)該公司的計(jì)劃深感振奮。 但蘋(píng)果的計(jì)劃還是有一些需要質(zhì)疑的地方。首先，蘋(píng)果的商業(yè)考量何在？將該公司因?yàn)橐陨舷⒍鴱拿绹?guó)媒體贏得的贊譽(yù)放在一邊，我們需要問(wèn)清楚的是，蘋(píng)果在美國(guó)本土生產(chǎn)Mac系列產(chǎn)品，是否真是有道理的？ 我們得先看看成本分析數(shù)據(jù)；美國(guó)本土的人力成本如何？將成品銷(xiāo)往世界各地的運(yùn)費(fèi)成本如何？美國(guó)本土的供應(yīng)鏈?zhǔn)欠袢跃邆涮峁┘皶r(shí)所有Mac所需零件的能力？蘋(píng)果在這條產(chǎn)品線(xiàn)的營(yíng)業(yè)利潤(rùn)率如何？要在美國(guó)營(yíng)運(yùn)一座工廠(chǎng)的成本是多少？ 總之，我們需要了解蘋(píng)果將“部分”生產(chǎn)線(xiàn)移回美國(guó)本土的成本結(jié)構(gòu)；企業(yè)時(shí)常會(huì)以成本做為將工作機(jī)會(huì)移往海外的借口，如果制造職缺回來(lái)了，我們需要理解如此舉動(dòng)的商業(yè)考量。 蘋(píng)果CEO庫(kù)克(Tim Cook)在接受美國(guó)媒體訪(fǎng)問(wèn)時(shí)，并沒(méi)有對(duì)以上的計(jì)劃細(xì)節(jié)透露任何相關(guān)內(nèi)容，包括蘋(píng)果將把哪些產(chǎn)品移回美國(guó)生產(chǎn)，以及產(chǎn)量數(shù)字。他僅含糊地表示，將在美國(guó)本地生產(chǎn)部分Mac計(jì)算機(jī)，而且生產(chǎn)內(nèi)容是超越目前該公司已經(jīng)在本土進(jìn)行的組裝制程。 此外庫(kù)克也含蓄地表示，蘋(píng)果應(yīng)該會(huì)有合作伙伴；舉例來(lái)說(shuō)，他接受《 Businessweek》采訪(fǎng)時(shí)提到，蘋(píng)果的計(jì)劃：”并不意味著蘋(píng)果將自己進(jìn)行制造，我們將與人們合作，并將有金錢(qián)投資?！蹦敲?，所謂的“人們”指的是？ 到目前為止，我們都只看到蘋(píng)果的象征性姿態(tài)──因?yàn)楝F(xiàn)在正是年底圣誕采購(gòu)季。 本文授權(quán)編譯自EE Times，版權(quán)所有，謝絕轉(zhuǎn)載 本文下一頁(yè)：中國(guó)勞動(dòng)力成本提高才是主因

相關(guān)閱讀：
• 蘋(píng)果把生產(chǎn)線(xiàn)搬回美國(guó)的背后
• 科技創(chuàng)業(yè)者應(yīng)如何制造下一個(gè)蘋(píng)果般的傳奇？
• iPhone 5S來(lái)得真快！疑似背蓋照曝光e36esmc

{pagination} 中國(guó)最大的PC制造商聯(lián)想(Lenovo) 先前已經(jīng)宣布，將在美國(guó)北卡羅萊納州(North Carolina)設(shè)置臺(tái)式與筆記本電腦的小量生產(chǎn)線(xiàn)，以支應(yīng)美國(guó)本地企業(yè)與政府機(jī)構(gòu)訂單。此計(jì)劃與聯(lián)想持續(xù)提升產(chǎn)品自制率的策略相符；根據(jù)業(yè)界消息， 該公司將把產(chǎn)品自制率由2012年的兩成，在2013年提升至五成。 如果蘋(píng)果的動(dòng)機(jī)與聯(lián)想一樣，是為了“更接近市場(chǎng)”，那么該公司打算將部份生產(chǎn)線(xiàn)移回美國(guó)的舉動(dòng)是合理的(就像汽車(chē)廠(chǎng)商會(huì)在接近銷(xiāo)售市場(chǎng)的地方生產(chǎn)汽車(chē))；在地消費(fèi)、在地生產(chǎn)并不只是常識(shí)，而是有經(jīng)濟(jì)意涵的。 另一個(gè)考量點(diǎn)是中國(guó)勞動(dòng)力市場(chǎng)正在改變；根據(jù)《華盛頓郵報(bào)(The Washington Post)》在中國(guó)東莞的報(bào)導(dǎo)，曾被稱(chēng)為“世界工廠(chǎng)”的中國(guó)珠江三角洲地帶，現(xiàn)在出現(xiàn)失業(yè)情況，甚至對(duì)美國(guó)投以羨慕的眼光。雖然很難想象中國(guó)有任何地方的 工廠(chǎng)會(huì)關(guān)閉，但值得注意的是，中國(guó)的制造工作已經(jīng)流向包括越南、印尼等人力成本更低的區(qū)域。 《華盛頓郵報(bào)》的文章引述了中國(guó)國(guó)家信息中心(State Information Center)研究員張茉楠說(shuō)法，指出目前中國(guó)目前掉進(jìn)了“三明治陷阱(sandwich trap)”，也就是被擠在勞動(dòng)成本更低的鄰近國(guó)家以及美國(guó)、德國(guó)等已開(kāi)發(fā)國(guó)家中間，他強(qiáng)調(diào)：“中國(guó)的制造業(yè)者正面臨嚴(yán)峻局勢(shì)?！? 因此，在稱(chēng)贊蘋(píng)果將生產(chǎn)線(xiàn)移回美國(guó)是“做正確的事”之前，我們也許該想想更實(shí)際的因素：蘋(píng)果在美國(guó)本土生產(chǎn)自家產(chǎn)品，可能是個(gè)商業(yè)性考量。 本文授權(quán)編譯自EE Times，版權(quán)所有，謝絕轉(zhuǎn)載 編譯：Judith Cheng 參考英文原文：Yoshida in China: Probing Apple's U.S. manufacturing gambit，by Junko Yoshida

相關(guān)閱讀：
• 蘋(píng)果把生產(chǎn)線(xiàn)搬回美國(guó)的背后
• 科技創(chuàng)業(yè)者應(yīng)如何制造下一個(gè)蘋(píng)果般的傳奇？
• iPhone 5S來(lái)得真快！疑似背蓋照曝光e36esmc

{pagination} Yoshida in China: Probing Apple's U.S. manufacturing gambit Junko Yoshida NEW YORK – At the beginning of this year, we launched a series called "Rebuilding America" in which we attempted to explore the prospects for reviving U.S. manufacturing. We acknowledged at that time that we could be accused of beating a dead horse since many in the electronics industry favor the outsourcing of manufacturing to Asia as a way to reduce costs. Beyond that is the reality of globalization and what has been called the global "fragmentation of production." Still, we argued, the engineering importance of "making stuff" as a way of understanding the product design process can't be underestimated. With that in mind, you have no doubt heard about Apple’s plan to spend more than $100 million to bring back “some production of Mac” to the U.S. from China. If you’re like me, you probably rolled your eyes and said, “Yeah, right!” A healthy dose of skepticism is in order here. First, what’s Apple’s business case? Setting aside the goodwill Apple has already gained from media coverage, we need to ask whether it actually makes sense to manufacture Macs at home. We need to see a cost analysis. What’s the labor cost? What’s the shipping cost for finished products? Do we still have a supply-chain infrastructure capable of bringing all the components necessary to make Macs here and deliver them on time? What’s Apple's operating margin for this product line? How much will it cost to operate a U.S. factory? We need to know the cost structure for moving in-shoring "some" production. Corporations frequently use cost as the alibi to ship jobs overseas. If some manufacturing jobs are returning, we must understand the business case for such a move. Apple CEO Tim Cook, in interviews with Businessweek and NBC's Brian Williams disclosed none of these details. Cook never revealed the actual products Apple will be making in the U.S. or how many Apple expects to make. Cook vaguely suggested producing some Mac computers here "beyond the assembly work" it already does stateside. Cook’s statements implied that Apple will have "partners.". For instance, he told Businessweek that the plan “doesn’t mean that Apple will do it ourselves, but we’ll be working with people, and we’ll be investing our money.” Again, what “people”? So far, all we’re looking at is a symbolic gesture by Apple -- just in time for the holidays. 'Sandwich trap' China’s largest PC vendor, Lenovo Group, has already announced it will establish assembly lines to produce desktops and notebooks in "small volume” in North Carolina in anticipation of enterprise and government orders.The move appears to be in line with Lenovo’s strategy to increase the proportion of in-house production, from about 20 percent in 2012 to 50 percent in 2013, according to Taiwan sources, Digitimes has reported. If Apple's motivation — like Lenovo's — is “to be closer to the market,” Apple’s plan to move “some production" back to the U.S. does make sense. (After all, that’s why automakers build cars close to local markets where they’re sold.) Making stuff where it’s consumed is not just common sense, it makes economic sense. A second data point worth examining is the changing labor market in China. The Washington Post, reporting from Donggun, China, found that "the city on China’s Pearl River Delta, once known as ‘the world’s factory,’ is now losing jobs and eyeing the United States with some envy." While it’s hard to believe that there’s anyplace in China where factories are closing, it should be noted that lower cost regions like Vietnam and Indonesia are taking manufacturing jobs from China. The Post article quoted Zhang Monan of the State Information Center, a government think tank, describing the phenomenon he called "a sandwich trap," as in, China being squeezed between cheaper labor in neighboring countries and competition from developed nations such as Germany and the U.S. Zhang stressed, “China’s manufacturers are in an extremely hard situation.” Before hailing Apple’s decision as “the right thing to do,” we might consider a more pragmatic interpretation: Maybe there is a business case for manufacturing Apple products right here in America.