當(dāng)我身在中國(guó)，我常覺(jué)得自己掉進(jìn)一個(gè)平行宇宙；但更糟的是，一旦我回到熟悉的美國(guó)，卻感覺(jué)到更重的失落。這是因?yàn)槲以诋a(chǎn)業(yè)趨勢(shì)、設(shè)計(jì)需求以及市場(chǎng)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)廠商等方面恰好有通常不適用中國(guó)的西方主義偏見(jiàn)；但盡管今日的電子產(chǎn)業(yè)已經(jīng)如此全球化，某些事物還是有區(qū)域上的差異。 平板電腦市場(chǎng)是說(shuō)明這種情況的一個(gè)好例子。根據(jù)市場(chǎng)研究機(jī)構(gòu)IDC的統(tǒng)計(jì)，2013年全球平板電腦出貨量為2.171億臺(tái)；在此同時(shí)，中國(guó)當(dāng)?shù)氐难芯繄?bào)告指 出，2013年中國(guó)平板電腦出貨量達(dá)到9,000萬(wàn)臺(tái)。這意味著中國(guó)在全球平板電腦市場(chǎng)的占有率達(dá)到40%；而中國(guó)也是全球最大的平板電腦市場(chǎng)，中國(guó)在大量生產(chǎn)平板電腦的同時(shí)也消費(fèi)它們。 雖然蘋(píng)果(Apple)的iPad與三星(Samsung)的Galaxy Tab是全球公認(rèn)的兩個(gè)最大平板電腦品牌(不包括中國(guó)市場(chǎng))，但實(shí)際上中國(guó)的OEM / ODM廠商──在西方市場(chǎng)幾乎看不到──才是全球平板電腦市場(chǎng)的主宰；而因?yàn)槿绱?，中?guó)的平板電腦市場(chǎng)為當(dāng)?shù)氐膽?yīng)用處理器供貨商創(chuàng)造了龐大的商機(jī)。 不過(guò)在兩年前，我記得似乎有數(shù)不清的中國(guó)無(wú)晶圓廠芯片設(shè)計(jì)公司都在為平板電腦應(yīng)用設(shè)計(jì)類(lèi)似的ARM核心處理器；但當(dāng)我最近與珠海全志科技 (Allwinner Technology)的市場(chǎng)營(yíng)銷(xiāo)經(jīng)理Eva Wu見(jiàn)面時(shí)，她卻澄清：“在2012年，中國(guó)有十家應(yīng)用處理器供貨商都在競(jìng)逐平板電腦市場(chǎng)；不過(guò)到2014年初，主導(dǎo)平板電腦市場(chǎng)的應(yīng)用處理器供貨商只剩三家──全志、瑞芯微(RockChip)以及聯(lián)發(fā)科(MediaTek)?！? 我總認(rèn)為中國(guó)應(yīng)用處理器供貨商之間的競(jìng)爭(zhēng)淘汰是必然的，遲早會(huì)發(fā)生，但沒(méi)想到這么快就有如此劇烈的變化。從下面根據(jù)中國(guó)業(yè)界數(shù)據(jù)所做成的表格，可以看到中國(guó)應(yīng)用處理器市場(chǎng)的概況；2014年的市場(chǎng)估 計(jì)值顯示來(lái)自臺(tái)灣的聯(lián)發(fā)科有明顯成長(zhǎng)趨勢(shì)，出貨量可增加一倍，進(jìn)一步穩(wěn)固在中國(guó)市場(chǎng)的地位。

中國(guó)平板電腦應(yīng)用處理器供貨商出貨量比較
rgEesmc

西方業(yè)者很容易會(huì)忽視中國(guó)市場(chǎng)發(fā)生的事情，自以為是地認(rèn)為：“那些人都只是二線廠商。”也許是如此，但筆者認(rèn)為，了解你眼中的“二線”競(jìng)爭(zhēng)對(duì)手其實(shí)很重要，這些廠商有的非常有野心，而且往上爬的速度很快，它們并不想一直只待在二線。 全志科技的Wu就很自豪地對(duì)我說(shuō)，該公司是第一家通過(guò)Android 4.4 Google Mobile Service認(rèn)證的應(yīng)用處理器供貨商，這意味著全志應(yīng)用處理器具備全球公認(rèn)的穩(wěn)定性能：“必須要通過(guò)該認(rèn)證測(cè)試，才能進(jìn)入美國(guó)市場(chǎng)；像是 Walmart、BestBuy等大型零售業(yè)者，不會(huì)接受沒(méi)有通過(guò)該認(rèn)證的產(chǎn)品?！?

中國(guó)的二線平板電腦應(yīng)用處理器供貨商
rgEesmc

Wu并指出，全志的應(yīng)用處理器也獲得一線平板電腦品牌的采用，例如Sony的平板電腦投影機(jī)，以及三星為打印機(jī)所設(shè)計(jì)的平板電腦。 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)的機(jī)頂盒芯片平行宇宙

相關(guān)閱讀：
• 可穿戴產(chǎn)品市場(chǎng)規(guī)模將超過(guò)平板電腦？
• 2014年2月國(guó)產(chǎn)平板電腦市場(chǎng)調(diào)查分析
• 2014年2月中國(guó)Android平板電腦市場(chǎng)現(xiàn)狀分析rgEesmc

{pagination} 中國(guó)的機(jī)頂盒芯片平行宇宙 中國(guó)的機(jī)頂盒市場(chǎng)也是另一個(gè)平行宇宙；在中國(guó)，所謂的OTT (over-the-top)機(jī)頂盒市場(chǎng)在阿里巴巴等網(wǎng)絡(luò)業(yè)者積極推廣在線視頻服務(wù)而發(fā)展蓬勃，這一切要回溯到去年第三季。全志的Wu表示，OTT機(jī)頂盒市場(chǎng)成長(zhǎng)快速，中國(guó)當(dāng)?shù)劁N(xiāo)售量一個(gè)月最多可達(dá)到200萬(wàn)臺(tái)。 對(duì)中國(guó)消費(fèi)者來(lái)說(shuō)，有三種方法可接收數(shù)字視頻服務(wù)：一是透過(guò)智能電視，但一臺(tái)要價(jià)約1萬(wàn)元人民幣(約1,630美元)；二是透過(guò)OTT機(jī)頂盒，價(jià)格在200~300元人民幣(約33~49美元)之間；另外一種則是透過(guò) 可插在電視機(jī)上的Android平臺(tái)USB電視 棒，售價(jià)約100~200元人民幣(約16~33美元)。 在平板電腦SoC與IP機(jī)頂盒SoC之間做比較，顯然包括CPU與GPU等關(guān)鍵子系統(tǒng)已經(jīng)是共享的；全志就是在中國(guó)芯片供貨商中，利用原有的平板電腦芯片進(jìn)軍蓬勃OTT機(jī)上盒市場(chǎng)的例子之一。而當(dāng)然，回到美國(guó)，有線電視機(jī)頂盒芯片供貨商如博通(Broadcom)，對(duì)機(jī)頂盒市場(chǎng)會(huì)有非常不同的看法。 筆者不久前與博通資深技術(shù)總監(jiān)Stephen Palm見(jiàn)面，他就指出今日西方市場(chǎng)上的機(jī)頂盒對(duì)芯片的需求，并不是目前移動(dòng)設(shè)備處理器有能力因應(yīng)的。號(hào)稱擁有機(jī)頂盒芯片所需的各種變量條件接取系統(tǒng)以及硬件安全密碼：“我們的機(jī)頂盒SoC支持85種安全通訊協(xié)議；”P(pán)alm表示：“對(duì)內(nèi)容提供商來(lái)說(shuō)，提供訂戶安全且獨(dú)特的視頻內(nèi)容是非常重要的?！睓C(jī)頂盒芯片必須要通過(guò)安全技術(shù)供應(yīng)商提出的強(qiáng)力規(guī)則。 再者，Palm表示機(jī)頂盒SoC需要支持各種不同的視頻編碼規(guī)格，從 MPEG2、MPEG4到H.265：“這對(duì)移動(dòng)設(shè)備芯片來(lái)說(shuō)并不是必備功能。”這雖然有道理，但該類(lèi)功能強(qiáng)大且安全性高的機(jī)頂盒芯片，對(duì)中國(guó)等地似乎認(rèn)為視頻服務(wù)應(yīng)該是免費(fèi)的消費(fèi)者來(lái)說(shuō)，有點(diǎn)“功能過(guò)剩”。 那博通是否想過(guò)針對(duì)中國(guó)市場(chǎng)推出“精簡(jiǎn)版”的機(jī)頂盒芯片呢？針對(duì)這個(gè)問(wèn)題，Palm禮貌地回避了，只表示：“我們不討論博通要不要進(jìn)軍某個(gè)市場(chǎng)的問(wèn)題?！憋@然，對(duì)于某些在版權(quán)保護(hù)問(wèn)題上“比較不那么關(guān)注”的區(qū)域，這個(gè)問(wèn)題是很敏感的；這些區(qū)域有如存在于另一個(gè)平行宇宙，傾向于忽視西方對(duì)版權(quán)保護(hù)的敏感度。 我明白西方芯片供貨商為何要回避那些低利潤(rùn)的市場(chǎng)，因?yàn)橛螒蛞?guī)則似乎是大不相同；但我所疑惑的是，當(dāng)兩個(gè)平行宇宙之間的隔膜出現(xiàn)裂縫，技術(shù)開(kāi)始往兩個(gè)不同方向滲流時(shí)，那些西方芯片業(yè)者將何去何從？ 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：China's Parallel Universe，by Junko Yoshida

相關(guān)閱讀：
• 可穿戴產(chǎn)品市場(chǎng)規(guī)模將超過(guò)平板電腦？
• 2014年2月國(guó)產(chǎn)平板電腦市場(chǎng)調(diào)查分析
• 2014年2月中國(guó)Android平板電腦市場(chǎng)現(xiàn)狀分析rgEesmc

{pagination} China's Parallel Universe Junko Yoshida, Chief International Correspondent Tablets and set-top markets remain regional SHENZHEN, China — When I'm in China, I often feel as though I've dropped into a parallel universe. But worse, once I get back to the good old US of A, I feel even more lost. This is because I run smack-dab into Western-centric preconceived views on market trends, design requirements, and market leaders that don't often apply to China. As global as the electronics industry has become today, certain things remain distinctly regional. In my mind, the tablet market is a good example. For the full calendar year 2013, worldwide tablet shipments totaled 217.1 million units, according to IDC. Meanwhile, China's tablet shipments during the same period are said to be 90 million units, according to China's local reports. That, in fact, translates into China holding a staggering 40 percent share. China is in fact the world's biggest market for tablets. China makes 'em, China consumes 'em. While Apple's iPads and Samsung's Galaxy tablets are the two most recognized brands everywhere (including China), the truth is that Chinese OEMs and ODMs -- almost invisible in the Western markets -- are dominating the global tablet market. The dominance of Chinese OEMs and ODMs is, in turn, creating a huge opportunity for China's application processor companies in the tablet market. I remember just a short two years ago, a seemingly countless number of China fabless chip companies were all designing similar ARM-core based apps processors for tablets. When I recently sat down with Eva Wu, marketing manager of Allwinner Technology in Zhuhai, she set the record straight. "Yes," she told me, "there were 10 apps processor vendors in China, all competing for the tablet market in 2012. But by early 2014, those dominating the tablet market are now pretty much down to only three companies -- Allwinner, RockChip, and MediaTek." I have always felt that a winnowing-down among China's apps processor vendors was necessary and would happen sooner or later. But I didn't expect such a drastic change so quickly. The following table, compiled by Chinese industry sources, is a snapshot of China's tablet apps processor market. The 2014 market forecast shows a clear upward trend for Taiwan's MediaTek, doubling shipments and holding its own in China. Tablet Application Processor Vendors for Chinese Tablets Source: Compilations of China's industry data It's easy for the Western players to dismiss what's happening in China, on the presumption that "those guys are playing only in the Tier 2 market." Know your tier 2 players Maybe so, but I find that knowing your Tier 2 players (the guy below you on the ladder) is vitally important. Some of those players are very ambitious and climbing fast. They have no intention to remain Tier 2 forever. Allwinner's Wu proudly told me that Allwinner was the first AP vendor to achieve the Android 4.4 Google Mobile Service certification. Noting that the certification tells the world the stability of Allwinner's apps processor, Wu said, "You have to pass the certification test in order to play in the US market. US retailers like Walmart or BestBuy wouldn't accept the products without it." Know your Tier 2 players in China's tablet market. Wu noted that Allwinner's apps processors are getting designed into Tier 1 tablets -- such as Sony's tablet projectors and Samsung's tablet designed for printers. Next page: Parallel universe for STB SoCs Parallel universe for STB SoCs Meanwhile, the same parallel universe characterizes the set-top box world. Over here in China, the so-called over-the-top (OTT) market has exploded as Internet companies like Alibaba have gone whole-hog with video services over the Internet. This dates back to the third quarter last year. The OTT market is growing fast, according to Wu, with as many as 2 million OTT boxes sold in a month at its peak. For Chinese consumers, there are three ways to receive digital video services. They're available on smart TVs, which cost around 10,000 RMB (US$1,630). Another route is OTT boxes, priced between 200 and 300 RMB ($33 to $49). The last option is an Android USB stick that you can plug into a TV, selling for between 100 and 200 RMB ($16 to $33). To Chinese vendors comparing tablet SoCs with IP set-top SoCs, it's clear that key subsystems -- including CPU and GPU -- are already common. Allwinner is among many Chinese vendors leveraging their tablet SoCs to enter the exploding OTT market. Of course, back in the USA, leading cable set-top chip vendors like Broadcom have a very different view of the set-top box market. When I chatted with Stephen Palm, senior technical director at Broadband Technology Group, this week, he pointed out that requirements in today's set-tops in the West are nothing like what current mobile SoCs are capable of handling. With all the variant conditional access systems and hardware security keys required in the set-top SoC, "Our set-top box SoC is supporting 85 security protocols," Palm said. "For content owners, it's vitally important that their content is safely and uniquely delivered to subscribers' homes." STB SoCs are required to pass robustness rules imposed by security vendors. Further, STB SoCs need to support a number of different video codecs ranging from MPEG2 to MPEG4 and H.265, Broadcom's Palm pointed out. "That's not necessarily the case with mobile SoCs." Point well taken. But such robust and secure STB SoCs are still overkill for regions like China where every consumer seems to believe video services are free. Does Broadcom ever think about selling a stripped-down version of its chips in China? Palm politely declined to answer the question, saying, "I'm not going to get into the discussion of which market Broadcom will or won't enter." Obviously, "regions that seem to care a little less" about copy protection represent a touchy subject. Because such regions exist in a parallel universe, they tend to overlook Western sensibilities about copyright and copy protection. I certainly understand why chip vendors in the West avoid these low-margin markets where the rules of the game seem so different. But I wonder what will happen to Western chip companies when the membrane between our parallel universes springs a leak, and technologies start to trickle in both directions.