美國大部分的產業生產都外移，或是外包給亞洲的製造商，而專注於研發、設計與行銷等高價值的服(勞)務。遠離製造的美商已經很難在製造上有甚麼表現了，管理方式、流程設計、成本的控制等技術都遠不及亞洲國家。然而在研發與創新上，美國依然是執世界之牛耳。
電子業的製造外移歷史很久了，大概是因為產品較為輕巧之故，製造成成品後，運往任何市場包括本土市場都相對容易。而八零年代日本在消費性電子產品上的一支獨秀，加上小汽車廣受歡迎，造成日本歷史上最富裕的十年（decade），口袋飽飽的日本企業大手筆收購夏威夷與加州的土地，美國的房地產與地標建築，...儼然是世界的經濟強權。
相較之下雷根主政的美國，雖然是世界強權，但是面對日本貨大舉銷往美國似乎毫無招架之力，美日的貿易摩擦常上新聞，由以日本開放美國汽車進口一事，最常有摩擦。美國甚至指控日本故意將停車位畫小，好讓人民因停車不便，而不購買美國車。還有聯邦政府發不出薪水的窘境，也是十分令美難堪的事。
可是到了九零年代，資訊產業的時代，日本廠商就風光不再了。美國的電腦大廠，就是全世界的電腦大廠。連日本刻意扶植要成為日本版 IBM 的 NEC 在國際市場上，也端不上檯面來與美系廠商競爭。儘管在八零年代，NEC 就以 C&C (Computer and Communication)作為公司的口號對外宣傳，可見其眼光精確。然而其在IT的功績也僅是在九零年代初期從美商獨佔的記憶體市場(和東芝Toshiba一起)搶了大半的肥肉。當日本的電子廠商仍舊享受著消費性家電產品與記憶體帶來的利潤時，美國與台灣的廠商便一起打下了PC產業的市場(電腦系統與周邊)。美國的研發設計，台灣代工製造。從早期的 Apple, IBM, Digital, Compaq 到後來的 Dell, HP 其產品都有很大的部份是由台灣廠商所製造的。
代工的模式也由 OEM 走向 ODM, 台商的製造能力不斷精進的同時，設計的能力也逐漸累積。但是在價值鍊當中，台商總是從事低價值的組裝，以施振榮先生的微笑曲線來看，就是落在中間。而曲線兩端：新科技與新技術的開發，和通路經營、行銷台商也開始思考如何往微笑曲線的兩端挪移。
以投資矽谷裡新興公司的方式來增加獲利，並取得先進的技術以吸引客戶後續的訂單，就是一種往上游挪移的方式。而 Acer 在美國市場與英邁(Ingram Micro)合作，就是往下游挪移的方式。自己做得來，當然是自己獨立完成可以獲致最大的利益；但是合作也是一種很好的方式，一方面截長補短、各取所需，縮短耕耘的時間，另一方面廣結善緣，有較多的人獲利，生意應該也會較為長久。
雖然這篇紐約時報的報導標題為亞洲國家，但是只提到一家中國的創投公司，並大幅提及廣達電腦，與富士康（鴻海）。不過中國市場廣大，中國廠商口袋裡應該也是滿滿的鈔票，從事高科技的投資應該也不是甚麼難事。
January 6, 2010Asia Gains a Tech Edge by Backing Start-UpsBy ASHLEE VANCESUNNYVALE, Calif. — For years, the process remained relatively static: PC makers like Hewlett-Packard and Apple, with well-staffed research labs and design departments, would dream up their next product and then hire a Chinese or Taiwanese fabricator to manufacture the largest number of units at the lowest possible cost.But lately, this traditional division of labor has been upended. Many of those Asian companies have moved well beyond manufacturing to seize greater control over the look and feel of tomorrow’s personal computers, smartphones and even Web sites.The investment arms of large Taiwanese and Chinese manufacturers have created an investment network in Silicon Valley operating under the radar that pumps money into a variety of chip, software and services companies to gain the latest technology. As a result, some Asian manufacturers have proved more willing than entrenched Silicon Valley venture capitalists to back some risky endeavors.“In the past, the manufacturers would sneak around and get inside information on technology by investing in these companies,” said K. Bobby Chao, the managing partner at DFJ DragonFund China, a business that invests in technology companies in China and the United States. “Now, they’re more involved, more visible and charging after more complex maneuvers.”As manufacturing of electronics in the United States began moving offshore decades ago, some feared the American economy would suffer. But the American companies, as well as economists and policy makers, said that as long as the high-value jobs like research and design remained in the United States, there was little danger.Asian investments in Silicon Valley present some risks for America’s top technology companies, which could lose their connection to top innovations.Asian manufacturers like Foxconn or Quanta, as a result, could wrestle away the edge in research and design.“The manufacturers have gotten more competitive as it relates to innovation, and in some instances they’re already competing directly with their customers,” said Patrick Moorhead, a vice president at Advance Micro Devices, a major PC chip maker.The investments by Asian companies have already started to pay off. At the Consumer Electronics Show this week in Las Vegas, people will see laptops that end sluggish start times and instead boot up instantly and TVs that do not require remotes because they can see the gestures of viewers. These features are a result of strategic investments in technology by Asian manufacturers. One Asian manufacturer turned investor is Quanta, based in Taiwan, which has long been one of the largest manufacturers of laptops and personal computers for major brands like H.P., Acer and Dell.To keep those customers coming back, it needs unique product designs and technologies that give it an edge over competitors. Last October, Quanta invested $10 million into Tilera, a chip start-up based in San Jose, Calif., in the heart of Silicon Valley, that has designed a radical computer processor. Tilera is gambling that it can take business from the major chip makers like Intel and A.M.D.Quanta also joined a group investing $16 million in Canesta, another chip maker based in Silicon Valley. When combined with a digital camera, Canesta’s products let computers, televisions and other devices view objects in three dimensions. That means that a person could move photos or documents around a PC’s desktop or change TV channels simply by waving a hand.
Josh Haner/The New York Times
James Spare, left, and Cyrus Bamji, executives of Canesta. Quanta, of Taiwan, provided the start-up with financing.
Elton Yang, a vice president at Quanta, said there was a high likelihood that the technology could make its way into laptops in 2010. Eventually all makers of personal computers will have a chance to buy Canesta’s technology, but Quanta’s investment gives it a temporary design lead.“The PC companies are looking for a new future, and we want to attract them to our machines,” Mr. Yang said. Over the last 10 years, Canesta has made its pitch to more than 100 venture capitalists in Silicon Valley — only to be rejected time and again. James Spare, the chief executive of Canesta, praised the willingness of companies like Quanta to back risky start-ups needing many years to turn ideas into products.“It’s no secret that these companies make most of the devices we use in our daily lives,” Mr. Spare said. “And they’re only becoming more and more influential when it comes to innovation and guiding technology choices.”Foxconn, one of the largest electronics makers, has found technology investments, too. It has backed Innovation Works, an investment and incubation company started last year by the former president of Google’s Chinese operations, Kai-fu Lee.With $115 million at its disposal, Innovation Works, based in Beijing, has pledged to “build dream teams to collect, analyze, prioritize and execute on the most promising ideas” in the Internet and mobile computing markets.Ambitious Taiwanese manufacturers are now talking to influential component makers like Intel and A.M.D. to help shape what tomorrow’s chips and hard drives will do.“They do have a much bigger voice in what companies are doing on the chip level than before,” said Mr. Moorhead. “We are interfacing more with them than we ever have.”Some former manufacturers have already made the transition and are gaining global brand recognition. Acer and Asustek are Taiwan’s most prominent computer brands, but both companies were contract fabricators for major American companies. Some of their executives steeped in this manufacturing tradition now run the investment arms of the companies.For example, the Silicon Valley start-up DeviceVM has developed software that lets computers boot up in about five seconds, rather than the minutes many computers can take to start. Both Asustek and Acer, through its investment arm called iD Innovation, have put money into DeviceVM, and the company’s software now appears on computers from a variety of makers including the world’s largest PC company, H.P.The Asian companies often back projects that Silicon Valley’s financial heavyweights pass on because pay offs are too low and take too long. The Asian companies are “thinking that they didn’t get their fair share of the technology pie in the past,” Mr. Chao said. “Now they have money and will take the risks needed to build up new levels of expertise.”For entrepreneurs in Silicon Valley, the money flowing from Taiwan and China represents a blessing.“It’s great,” said Mr. Spare of Canesta, “to have another pool of money to go after.”A version of this article appeared in print on January 6, 2010, on page B1 of the New York edition.Copyright 2010 The New York Times Company
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/06/technology/personaltech/06valley.html?ref=world
The story was taken from The New York Times. The copyright remains with The New York Times Company. The author of the story and The New York Times are not involved with, nor endorse the production of this blog.
文章定位：
