Save energy. Save money. THDJapanese engineers trash MacBook Air
Japanese engineers were quick to pour scorn on the MacBook Air. This critique comes courtesy of Nikkei Electronics, a major Japanese electronics monthly, which did a teardown of the Air.
Here's the seeming challenge: The Japanese PC industry must come up with a reason why their own PC suppliers--NEC, Toshiba, Sony, Fujitsu--don't have a riveting 0.75-inch-thin notebook design on the market in the U.S. The answer, for them, is simple: a Japanese company would never approve of the design.
(Credit: Apple)(Actually Mitsubishi did design an Air-thin notebook called the Pedion back in 1997, but the shallow keyboard was almost unusable--and no one bought it. IBM Japan and Sharp, among others, have made ultrathin notebooks but none that wowed consumers like the Air.)
So, let's do a teardown of the Nikkei Electronics teardown piece.
Though the English is here, let me dissect some of the original Japanese (I worked, reluctantly, as a part-time translator at a Japanese communications company in Tokyo for close to four years.) The article headline uses the phrase "muda nashi" to refer to the exterior, and "muda darake" to refer to the inside of the Air. In short, the exterior of the Air is clean, with no waste (muda nashi), but the internals are a complete waste (muda darake). My (not literal) translation: the Air looks good on the outside but is a piece of junk on the inside. This criticism seems beyond constructive to me and borders on spite. (I will explain why below.)
Let's look at another part. "Sugoi to kanjiru tokoro wa hitotsu mo nai." Translation: "There is not one thing (about the Air) that impresses." Then the engineer adds: "If it was us, we could make it cheaper." This sentiment (that the Air doesn't have even one redeeming technological quality) shows that the person making the statement almost holds an animus toward the Air.
My question. If this guy's company (NEC, Toshiba?) could make a cheaper, better Air, why hasn't it done it?
Other alleged shortcomings: an engineer asserts that the keyboard has too many screws and alludes to possibly less-than-perfect hinges. The team also hazards a guess that the Air was made by HonHai Precision Industry of Taiwan.
That's not to say the article is all gratuitous criticism. An engineer speculates that there wasn't enough feedback from the factory (or factories) that made the Air. And, along these lines, another engineer said the design indicates that Apple's main focus is on software and user interfaces, not the particulars of system manufacturing. These may be valid observations. By definition, any PC company that uses a contract manufacturer is removed from the manufacturing process. Certainly more than, let's say, Compaq was in 1994 when it made its PCs within the same building complex in Houston that housed its executives. But all PC makers today outsource manufacturing, including the Japanese.
That said, the problem with the Nikkei Electronics article is that the engineers are from major Japanese PC makers (though their affiliations are never revealed). It seems clear that at least some of the team may have a vested interest in poking holes in the Air's design because they work for companies that directly compete with Apple and are likely archrivals of Apple. Imagine asking a team of AMD engineers about an Intel chip design. The response would be nothing short of libel.
Also, the Japanese press never targets a domestic manufacturer in this way. In other words, it is not politically correct (in Japan) to tear down a device from Sony or Fujitsu or Sharp and subject it to open disdain (though I'm sure this is done internally at Japanese companies). This kind of hypercritical analysis is reserved for foreign manufacturers: Amercian, Korean, Chinese, and others. The upshot: this assessment by the Nikkei team may contain some valid points, but the premise of the article seems bogus.
Author's note: Though I translated extensively (as part of my job) in Japan for a number of years, in this case, I have consulted with native Japanese speakers too. In short, the dynamics of pairing "muda nashi" with "muda darake" changes the combined meaning. Muda darake alone means "a lot of unnecessary waste" or an "excess" of waste. But, in my opinion, the implication is more harsh, i.e., the outside is nice but the inside is junky.
Brooke Crothers is a former editor at large at CNET News.com, and has been an editor for the Asian weekly version of the Wall Street Journal. He writes for the CNET Blog Network, and is not a current employee of CNET. Contact him at mbcrothers@gmail.com. Disclosure.
- Tags:
-
Nikkei Electronics,
-
Japan,
-
Apple,
-
MacBook Air
- Bookmark:
- Digg
- Del.icio.us
I suspect that in the online-version there was less editorial control and the reporter put in more literally what the Japanese engineers said. As such the on-line article gives more insight into the 'honne' (what you really think) of the Japanese engineers. They are jealous of foreign companies beating them at their own game of minituarization and so is much more critical of Apple than they would be to other Japanese companies.
However, as I am a Japanese with engineering background, I do agree with some of the things in the article. The Japanese engineers have been much better at optimizing design to take out cost while satisfying other features. Lexus is a great example of a luxury car with minimum waste in design. I sense strong envy from the Japanese engineers who are always forced to focus on cost reduction. Apple on the other hand has created an aura by creating products which really focuses on user experience (design, user interface, ease of use, sensory factors etc.) which sets their products apart and have consumers pay more for such products. Japanese companies are usually very bad at this game and therefore always have to come up with a product with great features and low cost. The remark by the Japanese engineer 'this design would never have been approved in my company' is what I have read in many articles on Apple products. Japanese companies have been attuned so much to cost reduction and products with too many bells and whistles that any bold product plan that increases cost or cut out some significant features never pass through their risk averse corporate culture and management. The analysis about the sub-optimal design was due to the fact that manufacturing was outsourced is totally missing in the print version. This is another cliche that the Japanese still believer. That you have to do everything in-house to optimize design. Most of Japan is still shrouded in this myth and do not understand the new dynamics of a fabless company like Apple free to use the most efficient and capable partner being more nimbile than their Japanese competitors.
But you realize that you are reviewing another review...not a product, right? Are Mac lovers becoming that paranoid? Just chill, it'll be alright...jeez.
Ummm... it's this handful of Japanese engineers who think they could have done better in terms of reducing cost, which is obviously not Apple's focus. Also, when was the last time a team of engineers decided what product a company should make? I think in most companies, it's the other way around.
It is somewhat hypocritical of the engineers to profess how they could make the Air cheaper, I'm sure the Apple engineers could also do that, but they were required to make something other than the most cost-efficient product.
"Brooke Crothers", it should be Crooke Brothers.
Just ask any native born Japanese to translate; "daijobu" without the "it depends on the situation".
Regarding Brooke's intent of his review, I say fair enough. Sugoi
I am a native Japanese (and write for both CNet Japan and Nikkei BP which is the publisher of Nikkei Electronics).
My interpretation of "muda" in that web article is closer to cyde01.
In any case, I don't think they meant it in a serious or heavy tone.
I find this argument very interesting because this is just another case of Japanese not being able to or being interested in coming up with original idea but is rather being interested in perfecting something invented somewhere else. Cars, TVs were all invented in the US but Japanese did good job in making some improvement; don't catch me here, I am no expert on cars and TVs, and this is not my points.
But I think the more serious problem for the Japanese is, Apple asked Taiwanese company to manufacturer it.
I am just writing this without extensive research/knowledge, but what if the Taiwanese manufacturer didn't have the same ability as the Japanese engineers to manufacture them.
Maybe, Apple did leave the 'muda' intentionally so the skill required to manufacture would be lower and the yield rate for the product will be higher.
Of course, the alternative option would be to ask Japanese manufacturer to make MacBook Air with less 'muda' but then, the cost for MacBook Air can go up and thus can fail the product.
I think Apple is one company which does this kind of research extensively; they found many Japanese less known parts manufacturers, etc. and partnered with them.
I think this is the matter of balance.
These are the sort of the question, I want to address to Apple, but never get answered.
The Apple Air, just like most Apple products is not much more than aesthetics and physical appearance. For apple, a thin computer is more important than a functional one. They totally forget about technology to focus in how thin and pretty the device should be.
Fortunately for Apple, there is still a lot of consumers out there, that choose looks over technology...
If someone can choose to buy a Lincoln (Ford), or a Cadillac (Chevy) over let's say, a Lexus, one shouldn't be surprised to see that some people prefer an Apple instead of a REAL computer.
Stick with the ipod, Apple; that's what you know best...
I've been writing this on several other places, but I think one thing we should note about MacBook Air is not the fact that Apple tried to remove the needs for optical drive, FireWire and USB before they actual removed the drives/ports; i.e. Remote Disc, IEEE 802.11n, etc.
I think if Apple had not removed the serial port and SCSI from the original iMac, many of us were still stuck with those legacy technologies. Sometime,in order to advance, we have to leave the legacy technologies behind.
When this is written down in print, the phrasing and body language that indicates whether it was serious, ironic, causal, self-deprecating or whatever is lost. And a lot of the time it is just a verbal process of brainstorming.
It is also universal for journalists to write a contrarian opinion of something successful or glamorous, and portray it as being signficant, to get cheap eyeballs.
-
by peter.mortensen
February 24, 2008 6:37 PM PST
- This is a very interesting topic. I'm working as manager in R&D and have worked in several well known companies both Japanese, Chinese, European and American. Also I've been in Japan numerous times.
-
Reply to this comment
-
-
See all 26 Comments >>I've found this to be true...
Japanese CE engineering:
You can find quite similar patterns no matter the company. Focus is on cost reduction, design for manufacturing (e.g. reduction of screws), production yields, miniturization and quantity of features. Japanese engineers are usually very strong in these areas. But an industrial designer working for a Japanese company most often suffers from having little influence on the end-result. I know quite a few of these designers in Japan and they all express the same frustration. The focus is more on internal values than the external values of the product. Decisions are often driven from bottom up with technologies turned into features. When the designer is done with his idea and it's crunched through the engineering department, what comes out might be a very different product in the end! But clearly their strenght is the ability to develop cost efficient designs optimal for reliable mass production with competitive features.
European/American CE engineering:
There is a lot more diversity among CE companies in Europe and the USA than within Japan in terms of the values in focus.
What Europe/USA have that Japan seems to lack is the very use case and design driven type of R&D in at least some of the CE companies. Starting the idea phase with a strong emphasis on actual use cases and industrial design is quite lacking in Japanese CE R&D. Japanese CE engineering often starts with "here we have a new cool technology - let's find a way to make use of it" while a company like Apple would start with "here we have a use case - let's find a way to service it best".
In Europe and USA you can find companies like Bose, Sonos, Bang & Olufsen and others that are somewhat in the same category of Apple having high focus on use cases, design and simplicity throughout the entire product development (the externally visible values).
When you look at the industrial designers in companies like Apple, Bose and Bang & Olufsen you will quickly find that they have a very different mandate in the organisation of actually being able to realize and push the idea from the early stage of defining a concept to the end-result and often also push engineering to exceed the traditional limitations that wouldn't allow the original concept to reach mass production.
Japan is seriously lacking companies with very strong emphasis on the external values of ease of use and design. The fact that Japanese engineering has enabled a revolution in consumer electronics is perhaps because the first many years of this industry has been very bottom-up technology driven. But in the end it's a matter of how the organisation is defined. Instead of hiring the designers to provide their input only in the early stages of a project, they need to allow them to maintain a strong mandate in all concept critical decisions throughout the projects where the original concept get compromised.
In the end it has nothing to do with being Japanese or non-Japanese engineer. It's all about how the company vision, mission, culture and organisation are defined. And although Apple is leading a new trend, the majority of CE products are still sold through the traditional CE values of low cost and technical buzz words.
And likewise, the MacBook Air is appealing to some consumers but not all...