That seems pretty crazy to me. Apple is such a ridiculously wealthy company, it surely can't be that hard for them to design and establish the manufacturing capabilities themselves in the US?...
That seems pretty crazy to me. Apple is such a ridiculously wealthy company, it surely can't be that hard for them to design and establish the manufacturing capabilities themselves in the US? Especially for how controlling they tend to be over their products, I'm really surprised they're not making more of an effort to protect themselves against the current political instability.
This isn't a "just throw money at it" type of problem though. Sure, Apple can establish the factories/etc in the states, but a skill gap exists in the labor market—you just can't get the number of...
This isn't a "just throw money at it" type of problem though. Sure, Apple can establish the factories/etc in the states, but a skill gap exists in the labor market—you just can't get the number of people required with sufficient tools experience at Apple's specific tolerances to man the machines/etc. Tim's even gone on record with this:
“In the U.S., you could have a meeting of tooling engineers and I’m not sure we could fill the room,” he said. “In China, you could fill multiple football fields.”
I don't think the idea of "manufacturing in the US" means bringing planes of people from China over. I think the intent of establishing Mac Pro manufacturing in the states, among other things (like final assembly for iMac CTO products), was to help increase the skill present here by natural supply/demand, but that is not sufficiently happening at apple-scale.
I think you hit this screw right in the head. The people who should be in charge of bridging the skills gap is not the government or individuals, it's the people who are hiring. The term "skills...
I think you hit this screw right in the head. The people who should be in charge of bridging the skills gap is not the government or individuals, it's the people who are hiring. The term "skills gap" is almost exclusively used by figureheads representing corporations too cheap to provide proper job training, and is often used as a red herring to distract from the real reason why foreign labor is so common - because it's cheap.
It's not just that China has robust integrated supply chains, it's that they have nearly four times the working-age population of the U.S. (1 billion vs. 250 million). Even though 30% of China's...
It's not just that China has robust integrated supply chains, it's that they have nearly four times the working-age population of the U.S. (1 billion vs. 250 million). Even though 30% of China's population is still in agriculture, there's a much larger pool of workers, and they work longer hours using a broadly more modern manufacturing infrastructure.
As noted in the article, many U.S. manufacturers have specialized up the value chain, where they have modernized - they're not well-equipped to return to making low-value components like screws.
They probably are, aren't they? Most internal decisions are just that—internal. It's rare that we hear about the internal actions of companies unless they're either publicised by PR or a news...
I'm really surprised they're not making more of an effort to protect themselves against the current political instability
They probably are, aren't they? Most internal decisions are just that—internal. It's rare that we hear about the internal actions of companies unless they're either publicised by PR or a news article is published with whistleblower/leaker information.
In terms of supply chain finance, the general principle is to take advantage of economies of scale from other companies that specialise in making their particular products. The per-screw cost of Apple spinning up their own screw production line would likely exceed the cost of designing a screw and having it fabricated by a company which already has tooling available.
It mentions in the article that they had invested in specialized tooling and I figured that they had meant that they were producing the screws themselves. To be honest, I'm not really sure that...
It mentions in the article that they had invested in specialized tooling and I figured that they had meant that they were producing the screws themselves.
To be honest, I'm not really sure that the lack of screws demonstrates a problem with America's economy so much as it demonstrates a failure to design a realistic product based on available materials.
I agree. It seems bizarre to me that they need custom screws at all. In the article it says that this held up development at one point?? There are plenty of ANSI and ISO standards to choose from,...
I agree. It seems bizarre to me that they need custom screws at all. In the article it says that this held up development at one point?? There are plenty of ANSI and ISO standards to choose from, especially for a prototype or early development. Something is missing here.
They may have needed a custom screw to fit within several of their design constraints. They probably consider dozens of different variables. Does the screw material provide enough shear resistance...
They may have needed a custom screw to fit within several of their design constraints. They probably consider dozens of different variables. Does the screw material provide enough shear resistance while also fitting within a tight space? Does it expand and contract with the machines thermal cycles, causing stresses on the surrounding structure? Is it able to machine-handled at a rate compatible with the production line?
There's probably a thousand different reasons to use non-standardised screws in a highly complex product.
That seems pretty crazy to me. Apple is such a ridiculously wealthy company, it surely can't be that hard for them to design and establish the manufacturing capabilities themselves in the US? Especially for how controlling they tend to be over their products, I'm really surprised they're not making more of an effort to protect themselves against the current political instability.
This isn't a "just throw money at it" type of problem though. Sure, Apple can establish the factories/etc in the states, but a skill gap exists in the labor market—you just can't get the number of people required with sufficient tools experience at Apple's specific tolerances to man the machines/etc. Tim's even gone on record with this:
I don't think the idea of "manufacturing in the US" means bringing planes of people from China over. I think the intent of establishing Mac Pro manufacturing in the states, among other things (like final assembly for iMac CTO products), was to help increase the skill present here by natural supply/demand, but that is not sufficiently happening at apple-scale.
I think you hit this screw right in the head. The people who should be in charge of bridging the skills gap is not the government or individuals, it's the people who are hiring. The term "skills gap" is almost exclusively used by figureheads representing corporations too cheap to provide proper job training, and is often used as a red herring to distract from the real reason why foreign labor is so common - because it's cheap.
It's not just that China has robust integrated supply chains, it's that they have nearly four times the working-age population of the U.S. (1 billion vs. 250 million). Even though 30% of China's population is still in agriculture, there's a much larger pool of workers, and they work longer hours using a broadly more modern manufacturing infrastructure.
As noted in the article, many U.S. manufacturers have specialized up the value chain, where they have modernized - they're not well-equipped to return to making low-value components like screws.
They probably are, aren't they? Most internal decisions are just that—internal. It's rare that we hear about the internal actions of companies unless they're either publicised by PR or a news article is published with whistleblower/leaker information.
In terms of supply chain finance, the general principle is to take advantage of economies of scale from other companies that specialise in making their particular products. The per-screw cost of Apple spinning up their own screw production line would likely exceed the cost of designing a screw and having it fabricated by a company which already has tooling available.
It mentions in the article that they had invested in specialized tooling and I figured that they had meant that they were producing the screws themselves.
To be honest, I'm not really sure that the lack of screws demonstrates a problem with America's economy so much as it demonstrates a failure to design a realistic product based on available materials.
I agree. It seems bizarre to me that they need custom screws at all. In the article it says that this held up development at one point?? There are plenty of ANSI and ISO standards to choose from, especially for a prototype or early development. Something is missing here.
They may have needed a custom screw to fit within several of their design constraints. They probably consider dozens of different variables. Does the screw material provide enough shear resistance while also fitting within a tight space? Does it expand and contract with the machines thermal cycles, causing stresses on the surrounding structure? Is it able to machine-handled at a rate compatible with the production line?
There's probably a thousand different reasons to use non-standardised screws in a highly complex product.