Could Huawei founder Ren Zhengfei give up on 5G to keep the company alive?

[FairAndUnbiased]

Interesting ... so China (and everyone else besides TSMC) will be stuck on the 7nm for the foreseeable future.

Basically, for logic/foundry, TSMC is tier 1, Intel/Samsung are tier 2, GloFo/SMIC/UMC are tier 3 (with 14 nm tech).

Then you have non-14 nm fabs like Huahong, STMicro, etc. who are 2 generations behind at 28 nm. TBH, UMC and GloFo would fit in here, if they didn't license 14 nm tech from IBM and Samsung, respectively.

Below that you have trailing edge foundries like TowerJazz, Infineon and STMicro who work at 45+ nm tech.

Finally, you have automotive, IOT, optoelectronics (camera sensor, LED, display), power, etc. fabs like Analog Devices, Texas Instruments, MagnaChip, SK Hynix, Dongbu, X-Fab, Sony, Microchip, etc. who work at low level nodes like 130-350 nm.

You don't need bleeding edge for this stuff; a bunch of industrial hardware runs on 8 bit, 130 nm process Atmel/Microchip stuff from 2005.

The gap between each tier is gigantic. For example, many Analog Devices and Texas Instruments fabs are still around from the 1980's and still work on 200 mm wafers at 350 nm tech.

 

[Figaro]

Basically, for logic/foundry, TSMC is tier 1, Intel/Samsung are tier 2, GloFo/SMIC/UMC are tier 3 (with 14 nm tech).

Then you have non-14 nm fabs like Huahong, STMicro, etc. who are 2 generations behind at 28 nm. TBH, UMC and GloFo would fit in here, if they didn't license 14 nm tech from IBM and Samsung, respectively.

Below that you have trailing edge foundries like TowerJazz, Infineon and STMicro who work at 45+ nm tech.

Finally, you have automotive, IOT, optoelectronics (camera sensor, LED, display), power, etc. fabs like Analog Devices, Texas Instruments, MagnaChip, SK Hynix, Dongbu, X-Fab, Sony, Microchip, etc. who work at low level nodes like 130-350 nm.

You don't need bleeding edge for this stuff; a bunch of industrial hardware runs on 8 bit, 130 nm process Atmel/Microchip stuff from 2005.

The gap between each tier is gigantic. For example, many Analog Devices and Texas Instruments fabs are still around from the 1980's and still work on 200 mm wafers at 350 nm tech.

https://www.techspot.com/news/85974-smic-76-billion-share-sale-reveals-china-ambitious.html

SMIC may be the country's largest chipmaker but it still trails competitors like TSMC and Samsung in several departments. For one, SMIC is only able to produce 14nm chips as of writing, with plans to start 7nm chips by the end of the year -- provided there are no more lockdown-related delays.

Interesting ... it appears SMIC is on track to start 7 nm chips in a couple months? Pretty ambitious I have to admit.

 

[8888888888888]

TSMC is a company that USA can control, better to limit purchase from that company and buy domestic.

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

https://www.techspot.com/news/85974-smic-76-billion-share-sale-reveals-china-ambitious.html

Interesting ... it appears SMIC is on track to start 7 nm chips in a couple months? Pretty ambitious I have to admit.

SMIC is the premier logic foundry in China. It cannot afford to fall behind - it makes most of its money from leading edge or close to leading edge computing applications. For example, SMIC was the premier fab for Qualcomm (!!!) at the 28 nm node back in 2014.

It already has multiple 14 nm customers locked in and anyone interested in 14 nm is likely to be interested in 7 nm.

 

[Dungeness]

Why a "top dog" needs to give up the fight in order to survive? Because Chinese Communists have outdone their Western capitalist counterparts in capitalist games?

 

[antonius123]

Design: nothing. Huawei has proprietary modem and mobile processor chip designs. It controls the full intellectual property ecosystem.

Fabrication: Balong 5000 modem is fabbed on 7 nm TSMC. It may be switched to Samsung (which has a fully non-American production line) 7 nm or SMIC 7 nm. Or, they'll tape out a 14 nm version. I don't think modems are tied to 7 nm process since power efficiency is not critical for them.

Kirin 910 mobile processor is fabbed on 7 nm TSMC, but they've already taped out Kirin 710A on 14 nm SMIC.

OK, at least Huawei still can survive with 5G equipment and lower end smartphone, except the high end smartphone that require the most advance chip.

But regarding SMIC expansion for 7nm, means they need to buy additional equipment from lithography, wafer surface conditioning, dicing, etc till electronic design automation (EDA) software, that means the expansion is fragile and could be subject to US ban?

Right now, and for the foreseeable future, there is no way around Synopsys, Cadence, or Mentor Graphics EDA software if you want to design modern chips—and all three are US companies, according to this:
https://meet.bnext.com.tw/intl/articles/view/46499

SILICON | China’s design tools conundrum
by Stewart Randall Nov 7, 2019
The first of two articles in a series on electronic design automation tools in China’s semiconductor sector. Read the second part here.

Can China achieve independence in integrated circuits (IC)? It’s a question I get asked a lot, and over the next few months I plan to shed light on where China is doing well and where it is not. It’s a complicated picture, but let’s start by saying this: it’s not going to be independent anytime soon.

One big reason for this is electronic design automation tools (EDA), a critical layer of IC design currently dominated by companies that are either US-owned or at least subject to US export controls. There are home-grown alternatives for a few specialized applications and more are on the horizon, but this category is an Achilles’ heel for efforts at chip independence, especially for Chinese companies with global ambitions.

What are EDA tools?
EDA tools are the software tools used to design ICs and printed circuit boards. Despite only accounting for around $10 billion of the $450-500 billion global chip industry they are essential to the design and creation of semiconductors.

Different EDA tools are required for different tasks and work in a design flow that all chip designers use to not only design but also analyze, verify, and debug semiconductor chips. This is not something that can be done manually, especially given the complexity of modern designs, which can contain tens of billions of transistors. Tools can be broken down into four or five main subcategories: design, simulation, verification, manufacturing prep, and functional safety. It is feasible to mix and match, but people tend to stick to one flow to keep things simpler, faster, and cheaper

Who are the main players?
Although there are many EDA tool companies out there, the industry is dominated by three main players—Synopsys, Cadence, and Mentor Graphics. These were all US companies until recently, when Mentor was acquired by Siemens. It is still based in the US and is a US company in every other way. Together they account for approximately 60 to 70 percent of the global EDA market, with Synopsys alone accounting for over one third.

Personally, I have not met a single fabless chip design company in China that has not said they use either Synopsys or Cadence design flows, or tools from both. There are no local alternatives, and while some may supplement parts of the Cadence or Synopsys flows with tools from other companies, these are usually for niche situations and do not play a main role in their design process.

The back up my anecdotal experience, showing that around 95 percent of EDA sales in China are divided amongst these three companies.

What does this mean for China?
Speaking to my clients, and Chinese in the industry, suggests Synopsys and Cadence are no longer able to work with Huawei, or any other company on the BIS entity list. This was further confirmed during the launch of the Huawei Ascend 910 AI chip when Huawei rotating chairman said Synopsys and Cadence could no longer work with Huawei.

This isn’t a disaster right away. Companies like HiSilicon will no longer receive support from their suppliers, but they already have access to the tools, and they know how to use them. I wouldn’t be surprised if they continue bringing out chips through 2020.

Suppose this becomes the new norm though, and that HiSilicon loses access indefinitely. This would mean competitors have access to support, receive all the latest patches, updates, and improvements. HiSilicon doesn’t. Perhaps current licenses run out and they cannot renew them.

What tools can they use then? How quickly can they re-train engineers who have relied on US tools since their university days to use a whole new set of tools? Designs will come out slower and fall behind competitors.

What about alternatives?
A purely domestic company may be able to secretly use unlicensed/pirated tools. Indeed, this is extremely common in China. Many pure domestic companies I speak with will use pirated tools somewhere in their design flow.

Listed companies, or international players like Huawei, wouldn’t be able to get away with this though. A team of lawyers would be waiting for them.

Perhaps they could use third party design services? This would get around the problem, but would mean outsourcing the design. It would also mean a significant number of employees were no longer needed. For HiSilicon, the jewel in China’s IC design crown, it would be impossible to admit it was no longer designing chips, at least not the whole design. To get around this problem, China will need its own EDA solutions. In the next installment, we’ll see why this is not as easy it sounds.

Tagged: Chips, Features, Huawei, silicon

Stewart Randall
Stewart Randall is Head of Electronics and Embedded Software at Intralink, an international business development consultancy which helps western tech businesses expand in East Asia. You can connect with... More by Stewart Randall

(Image credit: TechNode/Shi Jiayi)

https://technode.com/2019/11/07/silicon-chinas-design-tools-conundrum/

 

[FairAndUnbiased]

OK, at least Huawei still can survive with 5G equipment and lower end smartphone, except the high end smartphone that require the most advance chip.

But regarding SMIC expansion for 7nm, means they need to buy additional equipment from lithography, wafer surface conditioning, dicing, etc till electronic design automation (EDA) software, that means the expansion is fragile and could be subject to US ban?

Right now, and for the foreseeable future, there is no way around Synopsys, Cadence, or Mentor Graphics EDA software if you want to design modern chips—and all three are US companies, according to this:
https://meet.bnext.com.tw/intl/articles/view/46499

Lithography is the bottleneck but US doesn't have it either. Now it's pretty much ASML tier 1 (EUV), Nikon tier 2 (Immersion Ar-F, 7 nm capable), and SMEE/Canon competing at tier 3 (~90 nm ArF dry etch) with SMEE moving up to tier 2 with Nikon soon. AMAT and Lam compete in roughly the same sectors (deposition/etch), but there they also compete with AMEC and Naura in China, and TEL in Japan. They have KLA Tencor for metrology, but there's also Hitachi and Zeiss.

What do you think is going to happen if they ban US EDA from being used in China? Chinese companies are going to stop paying for US EDA software. They're not going to stop using it. The lawyers referenced won't be able to do jack shit if the companies aren't listed or have assets overseas, and most Chinese semiconductor companies are purely domestic focused with the exception of Huawei and ZTE. They don't want to play this card, they have much more to lose.

 

[kankan326]

OK, at least Huawei still can survive with 5G equipment and lower end smartphone, except the high end smartphone that require the most advance chip.

But regarding SMIC expansion for 7nm, means they need to buy additional equipment from lithography, wafer surface conditioning, dicing, etc till electronic design automation (EDA) software, that means the expansion is fragile and could be subject to US ban?

Right now, and for the foreseeable future, there is no way around Synopsys, Cadence, or Mentor Graphics EDA software if you want to design modern chips—and all three are US companies, according to this:
https://meet.bnext.com.tw/intl/articles/view/46499

SILICON | China’s design tools conundrum
by Stewart Randall Nov 7, 2019
The first of two articles in a series on electronic design automation tools in China’s semiconductor sector. Read the second part here.

Can China achieve independence in integrated circuits (IC)? It’s a question I get asked a lot, and over the next few months I plan to shed light on where China is doing well and where it is not. It’s a complicated picture, but let’s start by saying this: it’s not going to be independent anytime soon.

One big reason for this is electronic design automation tools (EDA), a critical layer of IC design currently dominated by companies that are either US-owned or at least subject to US export controls. There are home-grown alternatives for a few specialized applications and more are on the horizon, but this category is an Achilles’ heel for efforts at chip independence, especially for Chinese companies with global ambitions.

What are EDA tools?
EDA tools are the software tools used to design ICs and printed circuit boards. Despite only accounting for around $10 billion of the $450-500 billion global chip industry they are essential to the design and creation of semiconductors.

Different EDA tools are required for different tasks and work in a design flow that all chip designers use to not only design but also analyze, verify, and debug semiconductor chips. This is not something that can be done manually, especially given the complexity of modern designs, which can contain tens of billions of transistors. Tools can be broken down into four or five main subcategories: design, simulation, verification, manufacturing prep, and functional safety. It is feasible to mix and match, but people tend to stick to one flow to keep things simpler, faster, and cheaper

Who are the main players?
Although there are many EDA tool companies out there, the industry is dominated by three main players—Synopsys, Cadence, and Mentor Graphics. These were all US companies until recently, when Mentor was acquired by Siemens. It is still based in the US and is a US company in every other way. Together they account for approximately 60 to 70 percent of the global EDA market, with Synopsys alone accounting for over one third.

Personally, I have not met a single fabless chip design company in China that has not said they use either Synopsys or Cadence design flows, or tools from both. There are no local alternatives, and while some may supplement parts of the Cadence or Synopsys flows with tools from other companies, these are usually for niche situations and do not play a main role in their design process.

The back up my anecdotal experience, showing that around 95 percent of EDA sales in China are divided amongst these three companies.

What does this mean for China?
Speaking to my clients, and Chinese in the industry, suggests Synopsys and Cadence are no longer able to work with Huawei, or any other company on the BIS entity list. This was further confirmed during the launch of the Huawei Ascend 910 AI chip when Huawei rotating chairman said Synopsys and Cadence could no longer work with Huawei.

This isn’t a disaster right away. Companies like HiSilicon will no longer receive support from their suppliers, but they already have access to the tools, and they know how to use them. I wouldn’t be surprised if they continue bringing out chips through 2020.

Suppose this becomes the new norm though, and that HiSilicon loses access indefinitely. This would mean competitors have access to support, receive all the latest patches, updates, and improvements. HiSilicon doesn’t. Perhaps current licenses run out and they cannot renew them.

What tools can they use then? How quickly can they re-train engineers who have relied on US tools since their university days to use a whole new set of tools? Designs will come out slower and fall behind competitors.

What about alternatives?
A purely domestic company may be able to secretly use unlicensed/pirated tools. Indeed, this is extremely common in China. Many pure domestic companies I speak with will use pirated tools somewhere in their design flow.

Listed companies, or international players like Huawei, wouldn’t be able to get away with this though. A team of lawyers would be waiting for them.

Perhaps they could use third party design services? This would get around the problem, but would mean outsourcing the design. It would also mean a significant number of employees were no longer needed. For HiSilicon, the jewel in China’s IC design crown, it would be impossible to admit it was no longer designing chips, at least not the whole design. To get around this problem, China will need its own EDA solutions. In the next installment, we’ll see why this is not as easy it sounds.

Tagged: Chips, Features, Huawei, silicon

Stewart Randall
Stewart Randall is Head of Electronics and Embedded Software at Intralink, an international business development consultancy which helps western tech businesses expand in East Asia. You can connect with... More by Stewart Randall

(Image credit: TechNode/Shi Jiayi)

https://technode.com/2019/11/07/silicon-chinas-design-tools-conundrum/

From my limited knowledge about EDA, I think it's like Android operating system for phones. All the feedbacks from worldwide phone users make Android more mature. As long as China has enough semiconductor fab factories, feedbacks from them can also help China to build domestic EDA

 

[JustAnotherPerson]

When is SMIC 7nm going to start? Also, how is China going to progress below 7nm if it does not have ASML's EUV tech?

OK, at least Huawei still can survive with 5G equipment and lower end smartphone, except the high end smartphone that require the most advance chip.

But regarding SMIC expansion for 7nm, means they need to buy additional equipment from lithography, wafer surface conditioning, dicing, etc till electronic design automation (EDA) software, that means the expansion is fragile and could be subject to US ban?

Right now, and for the foreseeable future, there is no way around Synopsys, Cadence, or Mentor Graphics EDA software if you want to design modern chips—and all three are US companies, according to this:
https://meet.bnext.com.tw/intl/articles/view/46499

SILICON | China’s design tools conundrum
by Stewart Randall Nov 7, 2019
The first of two articles in a series on electronic design automation tools in China’s semiconductor sector. Read the second part here.

Can China achieve independence in integrated circuits (IC)? It’s a question I get asked a lot, and over the next few months I plan to shed light on where China is doing well and where it is not. It’s a complicated picture, but let’s start by saying this: it’s not going to be independent anytime soon.

One big reason for this is electronic design automation tools (EDA), a critical layer of IC design currently dominated by companies that are either US-owned or at least subject to US export controls. There are home-grown alternatives for a few specialized applications and more are on the horizon, but this category is an Achilles’ heel for efforts at chip independence, especially for Chinese companies with global ambitions.

What are EDA tools?
EDA tools are the software tools used to design ICs and printed circuit boards. Despite only accounting for around $10 billion of the $450-500 billion global chip industry they are essential to the design and creation of semiconductors.

Different EDA tools are required for different tasks and work in a design flow that all chip designers use to not only design but also analyze, verify, and debug semiconductor chips. This is not something that can be done manually, especially given the complexity of modern designs, which can contain tens of billions of transistors. Tools can be broken down into four or five main subcategories: design, simulation, verification, manufacturing prep, and functional safety. It is feasible to mix and match, but people tend to stick to one flow to keep things simpler, faster, and cheaper

Who are the main players?
Although there are many EDA tool companies out there, the industry is dominated by three main players—Synopsys, Cadence, and Mentor Graphics. These were all US companies until recently, when Mentor was acquired by Siemens. It is still based in the US and is a US company in every other way. Together they account for approximately 60 to 70 percent of the global EDA market, with Synopsys alone accounting for over one third.

Personally, I have not met a single fabless chip design company in China that has not said they use either Synopsys or Cadence design flows, or tools from both. There are no local alternatives, and while some may supplement parts of the Cadence or Synopsys flows with tools from other companies, these are usually for niche situations and do not play a main role in their design process.

The back up my anecdotal experience, showing that around 95 percent of EDA sales in China are divided amongst these three companies.

What does this mean for China?
Speaking to my clients, and Chinese in the industry, suggests Synopsys and Cadence are no longer able to work with Huawei, or any other company on the BIS entity list. This was further confirmed during the launch of the Huawei Ascend 910 AI chip when Huawei rotating chairman said Synopsys and Cadence could no longer work with Huawei.

This isn’t a disaster right away. Companies like HiSilicon will no longer receive support from their suppliers, but they already have access to the tools, and they know how to use them. I wouldn’t be surprised if they continue bringing out chips through 2020.

Suppose this becomes the new norm though, and that HiSilicon loses access indefinitely. This would mean competitors have access to support, receive all the latest patches, updates, and improvements. HiSilicon doesn’t. Perhaps current licenses run out and they cannot renew them.

What tools can they use then? How quickly can they re-train engineers who have relied on US tools since their university days to use a whole new set of tools? Designs will come out slower and fall behind competitors.

What about alternatives?
A purely domestic company may be able to secretly use unlicensed/pirated tools. Indeed, this is extremely common in China. Many pure domestic companies I speak with will use pirated tools somewhere in their design flow.

Listed companies, or international players like Huawei, wouldn’t be able to get away with this though. A team of lawyers would be waiting for them.

Perhaps they could use third party design services? This would get around the problem, but would mean outsourcing the design. It would also mean a significant number of employees were no longer needed. For HiSilicon, the jewel in China’s IC design crown, it would be impossible to admit it was no longer designing chips, at least not the whole design. To get around this problem, China will need its own EDA solutions. In the next installment, we’ll see why this is not as easy it sounds.

Tagged: Chips, Features, Huawei, silicon

Stewart Randall
Stewart Randall is Head of Electronics and Embedded Software at Intralink, an international business development consultancy which helps western tech businesses expand in East Asia. You can connect with... More by Stewart Randall

(Image credit: TechNode/Shi Jiayi)

https://technode.com/2019/11/07/silicon-chinas-design-tools-conundrum/

No necessarily, Hisilicon says they have their own inhouse EDA tools and workflow, EDA is just software, math, there is not extreme tolerance physical parts that you need to fabricate like in a lithography machine.

"Headquartered in Shenzhen, China, HiSilicon has over 7,000 employees in offices and research centers in Beijing, Shanghai, Chengdu, Wuhan, Singapore, South Korea, Japan, Europe and other regions across the world. After 20 years of research and development, HiSilicon has built up a strong portfolio of IC design and verification technologies, developed an advanced EDA design platform, and is responsible for the set up of several development processes and regulations. Over the years, HiSilicon has successfully developed more than 200 Models with proprietary IPR and filed over 8,000 patents. HiSilicon has also established strategic partnerships with global leaders in the ecosystem, specifically for engineering (wafer manufacturing), packaging, and testing within a reliable supply chain."

 

[antonius123]

No necessarily, Hisilicon says they have their own inhouse EDA tools and workflow, EDA is just software, math, there is not extreme tolerance physical parts that you need to fabricate like in a lithography machine.

"Headquartered in Shenzhen, China, HiSilicon has over 7,000 employees in offices and research centers in Beijing, Shanghai, Chengdu, Wuhan, Singapore, South Korea, Japan, Europe and other regions across the world. After 20 years of research and development, HiSilicon has built up a strong portfolio of IC design and verification technologies, developed an advanced EDA design platform, and is responsible for the set up of several development processes and regulations. Over the years, HiSilicon has successfully developed more than 200 Models with proprietary IPR and filed over 8,000 patents. HiSilicon has also established strategic partnerships with global leaders in the ecosystem, specifically for engineering (wafer manufacturing), packaging, and testing within a reliable supply chain."

That means they have anticipated long time ago.

 

[casual]

https://www.scmp.com/tech/big-tech/...under-ren-zhengfei-give-5g-keep-company-alive

Huawei founder Ren Zhengfei speaks during an interview at the company’s campus in Shenzhen in this file photo dated Aug. 20, 2019. Photo: AP

Huawei Technologies founder Ren Zhengfei told the Post earlier this year that he
hopes to be forgotten after retiring from the company.

But standing between Ren and those anonymous visits to coffee shops is probably the biggest decision of his career.

In May, the Trump Administration announced a new direct product rule (DPR) that effectively blocks Huawei's access to advanced semiconductors – the brains inside all of its products. While Huawei was able to survive Washington’s first attempt to deny it access to US core tech in May last year, this time it has no wriggle room left.

Huawei’s short term strategy has been to take advantage of a two month grace period to stockpile chips from its key silicon supplier TSMC. After September, TSMC and other companies that use US chipmaking equipment (including China’s SMIC) will need a waiver from Washington to supply Huawei.



A Jefferies report earlier this week said Huawei has enough inventory of 5G base station chips to last until the end of next year, but after that the situation was “highly uncertain”.

If Huawei is hiring lawyers and consultants to find loopholes in the new ruling it is very likely wasting money. “We reaffirm that we will implement the rule aggressively and pursue any attempt to evade its intent,” US Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross was quoted as saying by Reuters last month.


So what is the long term solution for Huawei? There has been speculation that it could find an alternative wafer fabrication partner to TSMC – one that can supply chips made using equipment from Europe and Japan instead

Even if that were feasible, it is unlikely Japan, The Netherlands and Germany – the main suppliers of non-US chip making gear – would openly defy Washington by making it possible for Huawei to continue buying 5G chips.

Earlier this year Dutch company ASML was blocked from shipping the latest generation EUV lithography machine to Chinese foundry SMIC under pressure from Washington.

With its 5G chip stockpile set to run out sooner or later, Huawei doesn’t have many options. It could take a decade or more to come up with a viable alternative to US chipmaking technology, and the billions of dollars Beijing has vowed to spend to upgrade China’s domestic chip industry may not help either because in many instances that needs US equipment, so is still subject to the new ban.

But there is one way Ren might be able to save his company.


Although Huawei’s relationship with the US has soured over a host of issues dating back many years, 5G is at the core of the current confrontation. And Trump is winning.

The tide has turned against Huawei in the international 5G markets, especially after Boris Johnson’s decision earlier this month to ban the company from Britain’s 5G roll out. However, this is all moot because when its stockpile of 5G base station chips runs out, Huawei won’t be able to provide the same products anyway – including to its domestic Chinese telco customers.

By that stage, Huawei's other products would also be starved of semiconductors. That is, unless Ren cuts 5G loose and refocuses on his other businesses, such as smartphones, where it is No 2 behind Samsung Electronics.

Huawei’s carrier business, which includes 5G, is about one third of total company revenue. Walking away from 5G would be a bitter pill to swallow – not just for the loss of revenue. Huawei is viewed by the Chinese government as a global tech champion and bulwark against US dominance in tech.


Amid deteriorating relations with Washington last year, Ren himself offered to share Huawei’s 5G technology with a major western company for a one-time fee. His motive seemed to reflect a preference to battle a US competitor in the market than fight the US government.

If US-China relations were not so toxic, such an offer might have helped, but not now. In the current geopolitical environment, any Chinese tech company with perceived links to Beijing is a target, with ByteDance’s TikTok short video app also in the Trump Administration’s cross hairs. There has been media speculation that ByteDance could sell TikTok to a buyer to head off its problems.


If Huawei withdrew from the 5G business altogether it would still earn royalties from its patents. Or the company could consider selling its 5G patent portfolio outright, which might provide a face saving exit for Ren.

This is, assuming Washington hardliners don't want to kill Huawei outright – regardless of what business it operates in.

Since he founded Huawei more than 30 years ago, Ren has fought many battles in the marketplace. The former PLA engineer likes to invoke military slogans to motivate the company troops, especially during difficult times.


That mindset has alarmed some in Washington, including FBI director Christopher Wray. In a widely reported speech on China to the Hudson Institute on July 7, Wray was perturbed after reading the military language used by Ren in a speech to employees, as reported in The Wall Street Journal last month.

“He reportedly told employees that to ensure the company’s survival, they need to – and I quote – ‘surge forward, killing as you go, to blaze us a trail of blood’,” Wray said. “He’s also reportedly told employees that Huawei has entered, to quote, ‘a state of war’.”

It doesn't sound like Ren intends to mount a tactical retreat on 5G so he can live to fight another day. But Huawei will soon run out of “ammunition” in the form of 5G chips. And that could mean the loss of thousands of highly skilled jobs.

After this battle is over, Ren may find it even harder to go unnoticed in coffee shops in retirement.

Where do they get this funny idea that huawei is in trouble? Even if they don't export anything, the domestic market is more then big enough to profit and grow

 

[IblinI]

give up on 5G then us/west will spared you?
Looked at Rus during early 90s, lied under the us feet and what did they get?

 

[S10]

Interesting ... so China (and everyone else besides TSMC) will be stuck on the 7nm for the foreseeable future.

Maximum China can do domestically is 28nm at the moment, not counting SMIC. We still got to move into 14nm, then 12nm, 10nm before considering 7nm. I would say I don't see China reaching 7nm until 2030, given US sanction.

 

[maverick1977]

https://www.scmp.com/tech/big-tech/...under-ren-zhengfei-give-5g-keep-company-alive

Huawei founder Ren Zhengfei speaks during an interview at the company’s campus in Shenzhen in this file photo dated Aug. 20, 2019. Photo: AP

Huawei Technologies founder Ren Zhengfei told the Post earlier this year that he
hopes to be forgotten after retiring from the company.

But standing between Ren and those anonymous visits to coffee shops is probably the biggest decision of his career.

In May, the Trump Administration announced a new direct product rule (DPR) that effectively blocks Huawei's access to advanced semiconductors – the brains inside all of its products. While Huawei was able to survive Washington’s first attempt to deny it access to US core tech in May last year, this time it has no wriggle room left.

Huawei’s short term strategy has been to take advantage of a two month grace period to stockpile chips from its key silicon supplier TSMC. After September, TSMC and other companies that use US chipmaking equipment (including China’s SMIC) will need a waiver from Washington to supply Huawei.



A Jefferies report earlier this week said Huawei has enough inventory of 5G base station chips to last until the end of next year, but after that the situation was “highly uncertain”.

If Huawei is hiring lawyers and consultants to find loopholes in the new ruling it is very likely wasting money. “We reaffirm that we will implement the rule aggressively and pursue any attempt to evade its intent,” US Commerce Secretary Wilbur Ross was quoted as saying by Reuters last month.


So what is the long term solution for Huawei? There has been speculation that it could find an alternative wafer fabrication partner to TSMC – one that can supply chips made using equipment from Europe and Japan instead

Even if that were feasible, it is unlikely Japan, The Netherlands and Germany – the main suppliers of non-US chip making gear – would openly defy Washington by making it possible for Huawei to continue buying 5G chips.

Earlier this year Dutch company ASML was blocked from shipping the latest generation EUV lithography machine to Chinese foundry SMIC under pressure from Washington.

With its 5G chip stockpile set to run out sooner or later, Huawei doesn’t have many options. It could take a decade or more to come up with a viable alternative to US chipmaking technology, and the billions of dollars Beijing has vowed to spend to upgrade China’s domestic chip industry may not help either because in many instances that needs US equipment, so is still subject to the new ban.

But there is one way Ren might be able to save his company.


Although Huawei’s relationship with the US has soured over a host of issues dating back many years, 5G is at the core of the current confrontation. And Trump is winning.

The tide has turned against Huawei in the international 5G markets, especially after Boris Johnson’s decision earlier this month to ban the company from Britain’s 5G roll out. However, this is all moot because when its stockpile of 5G base station chips runs out, Huawei won’t be able to provide the same products anyway – including to its domestic Chinese telco customers.

By that stage, Huawei's other products would also be starved of semiconductors. That is, unless Ren cuts 5G loose and refocuses on his other businesses, such as smartphones, where it is No 2 behind Samsung Electronics.

Huawei’s carrier business, which includes 5G, is about one third of total company revenue. Walking away from 5G would be a bitter pill to swallow – not just for the loss of revenue. Huawei is viewed by the Chinese government as a global tech champion and bulwark against US dominance in tech.


Amid deteriorating relations with Washington last year, Ren himself offered to share Huawei’s 5G technology with a major western company for a one-time fee. His motive seemed to reflect a preference to battle a US competitor in the market than fight the US government.

If US-China relations were not so toxic, such an offer might have helped, but not now. In the current geopolitical environment, any Chinese tech company with perceived links to Beijing is a target, with ByteDance’s TikTok short video app also in the Trump Administration’s cross hairs. There has been media speculation that ByteDance could sell TikTok to a buyer to head off its problems.


If Huawei withdrew from the 5G business altogether it would still earn royalties from its patents. Or the company could consider selling its 5G patent portfolio outright, which might provide a face saving exit for Ren.

This is, assuming Washington hardliners don't want to kill Huawei outright – regardless of what business it operates in.

Since he founded Huawei more than 30 years ago, Ren has fought many battles in the marketplace. The former PLA engineer likes to invoke military slogans to motivate the company troops, especially during difficult times.


That mindset has alarmed some in Washington, including FBI director Christopher Wray. In a widely reported speech on China to the Hudson Institute on July 7, Wray was perturbed after reading the military language used by Ren in a speech to employees, as reported in The Wall Street Journal last month.

“He reportedly told employees that to ensure the company’s survival, they need to – and I quote – ‘surge forward, killing as you go, to blaze us a trail of blood’,” Wray said. “He’s also reportedly told employees that Huawei has entered, to quote, ‘a state of war’.”

It doesn't sound like Ren intends to mount a tactical retreat on 5G so he can live to fight another day. But Huawei will soon run out of “ammunition” in the form of 5G chips. And that could mean the loss of thousands of highly skilled jobs.

After this battle is over, Ren may find it even harder to go unnoticed in coffee shops in retirement.

Rofl!!

 

[Figaro]

Maximum China can do domestically is 28nm at the moment, not counting SMIC. We still got to move into 14nm, then 12nm, 10nm before considering 7nm. I would say I don't see China reaching 7nm until 2030, given US sanction.

It says here SMIC is starting 7nm at the end of this year.
https://www.tomshardware.com/news/c...t-7nm-production-in-the-fourth-quarter-report