3 ms·
> This 50 per cent “yield” fares badly compared with Apple’s goal for zero defects Q1: Is Apple QCing everything before shipping to assembly? Q2: Surely quali
by logifail 4y ago
> This 50 per cent “yield” fares badly compared with Apple’s goal for zero defects
Q1: Is Apple QCing everything before shipping to assembly?
Q2: Surely quality issues should be the supplier's problem, not [just] Apple's, and hence a zero defects target should be the supplier's goal, not [just] Apple's?
- traceroute66 4y ago> Q1: Is Apple QCing everything before shipping to assembly? Maybe they (seemingly justifiably) had sufficient upfront concerns about quality that they are sampling at a much higher rate than they would normally.
- Espressosaurus 4y agoWhen first qualifying a supplier, I expect IQC to fairly exhaustively test every incoming part. As the supplier gets better at OQC you can start dialing back your IQC. This is all fairly normal for large scale manufacturing in my experience. You want everything to meet spec, but the spec won't cover everything, and especially at the beginning the supplier may or may not even be able to meet spec in volume.
- logifail 4y ago> This is all fairly normal for large scale manufacturing in my experience Indeed. So why does the original article claim that the "problem" is due to differing attitudes of Indian vs Chinese suppliers? EDIT: Wouldn't the "problem" likely also occur if you were to switch from one Chinese supplier to another [completely unrelated] Chinese supplier?
- Espressosaurus 4y agoIt depends on how good their process control is. A low yield rate indicates poor process control, and that will vary from supplier to supplier.