Foxconn is installing high-tech robots to help build the iPhone 6

[Shawn Knight]

During a recent shareholders meeting, Foxconn chief executive Terry Gou revealed the company is replacing some of its staffers with robots. Apple, one of Foxconn's largest clients, will reportedly be the first to use the new robotic assembly techniques.

Each "Foxbot" will cost between $20,000 to $25,000 to build with each unit capable of building an average of 30,000 devices. Gou said Foxconn plans to deploy around 10,000 robots across its factories initially before a larger rollout begins. The robots are said to be in their final testing phase as we speak and could be the same ones that Google is reportedly helping to build.

For Foxconn, the robots could be one of the few bits of good news to come down the pipe in quite some time. The installation is expected to help the largest private employer in China cope with rising labor costs, underage workers and even repair its tarnished record of tough working conditions and employee suicides.

With Apple being the first customer to use the service, it's almost a given that the human replacements will be helping to build the upcoming iPhone 6 or perhaps even the iWatch. Earlier this year, rumors surfaced suggesting robots would be used to build iPhone batteries which would free up manpower to focus on other sections of the assembly line.

While Apple may be one of Foxconn's largest clients, the contractor also builds millions of devices for the likes of BlackBerry, Microsoft, Nintendo and Sony, just to name a few.

Permalink to story.

https://www.techspot.com/news/57328-foxconn-is-installing-high-tech-robots-to-help-build-the-iphone-6.html

 

[Jad Chaar]

I think this is a good move. As long as it replaces the dangerous work, I am cool with that.

 

[Ranger12]

I think this is a good move. As long as it replaces the dangerous work, I am cool with that.

Just the dangerous work?

 

[davislane1]

I think this is a good move. As long as it replaces the dangerous work, I am cool with that.

Dangerous or not, that eliminates a position that would otherwise generate income for a worker. I have no objections to automation, but that doesn't change the fact that every job a machine performs is one that a human doesn't. This goes quadruple for high volume manufacturing.

 

[captaincranky]

It boggles my mind to think the average Chinese worker earns so much, that Foxconn will be replacing them with machines....

What happened, did the minimum wage in China spike all the way up to a dollar fifty an hour or something?

Oh well, to the upside, perhaps they'll be able to take their suicide news down....

 

[hahahanoobs]

Dangerous or not, that eliminates a position that would otherwise generate income for a worker. I have no objections to automation, but that doesn't change the fact that every job a machine performs is one that a human doesn't. This goes quadruple for high volume manufacturing.

It's a double edged sword, because what about the people making the robots? They don't deserve jobs? We as consumers should get used to higher prices, because companies stick with manual labour to save jobs?

It's a touchy subject. Robots are the future and we will have to adapt. There is no way around it. Money is everything.

 

[VitalyT]

Quote from I, Robot:

Detective Del Spooner: [to the head of USR] Um, look, this isn't what I do, but I've got an idea for one of your commercials. You see... a carpenter, making a beautiful chair. And then one of your robots comes in and makes a better chair twice as fast. And then you superimpose on the screen, "USR: Shittin' on the Little Guy". That would be the fade-out.

 

[davislane1]

It's a double edged sword, because what about the people making the robots? They don't deserve jobs? We as consumers should get used to higher prices, because companies stick with manual labour to save jobs?

It's a touchy subject. Robots are the future and we will have to adapt. There is no way around it. Money is everything.

We can go up and down the labor chain all day in the quest to figure out who benefits from X or Y. My only point was that replacing a worker has the same direct economic impact on the worker regardless of whether his job is safe or not.

I do agree with you on needing to adapt. Most of the low-skilled positions people have allowed themselves to become dependent on over the decades will be vanishing to automation over the next 20-30 years. Higher skill jobs will be replaced as well. The only way people will survive the purge is by staying ahead of the curve or starting their own businesses.

 

[Jad Chaar]

It's a double edged sword, because what about the people making the robots? They don't deserve jobs? We as consumers should get used to higher prices, because companies stick with manual labour to save jobs?

It's a touchy subject. Robots are the future and we will have to adapt. There is no way around it. Money is everything.

Great point.

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

It's a double edged sword, because what about the people making the robots? They don't deserve jobs? We as consumers should get used to higher prices, because companies stick with manual labour to save jobs?

It's a touchy subject. Robots are the future and we will have to adapt. There is no way around it. Money is everything.

We can go up and down the labor chain all day in the quest to figure out who benefits from X or Y. My only point was that replacing a worker has the same direct economic impact on the worker regardless of whether his job is safe or not.

I do agree with you on needing to adapt. Most of the low-skilled positions people have allowed themselves to become dependent on over the decades will be vanishing to automation over the next 20-30 years. Higher skill jobs will be replaced as well. The only way people will survive the purge is by staying ahead of the curve or starting their own businesses.

The bigger impact is that when we don't need the low-paid worker anymore we can close the plant and move it back to the US and save on the shipping costs of the finished products. Those robots will cost the same to run back here in the US, and perhaps even less to maintain and support.

There's going to be a break-even point; where once they replace enough workers with robots, then the whole plant can be moved.

Honestly it's all speculation. I'd say all we can really be sure of is that some hard working Chinese are going to lose their jobs. And since they often live at the plant, they'll be moving too.

 

[davislane1]

The bigger impact is that when we don't need the low-paid worker anymore we can close the plant and move it back to the US and save on the shipping costs of the finished products. Those robots will cost the same to run back here in the US, and perhaps even less to maintain and support.

There's going to be a break-even point; where once they replace enough workers with robots, then the whole plant can be moved.

Unfortunately, the situation doesn't simplify so easily. While in theory you remove shipping expenses, cost of operation doesn't necessarily translate as cleanly across borders. Regulatory (compliance) fees, energy costs, and special arrangements they have with Chinese government offices and other members of their supply chain can easily outweigh the shipping expense. More importantly, there is the exchange rate to consider.

The U.S. will become more attractive under a devalued dollar, but I find it difficult to believe they'd move production from China to the U.S. ceteris paribus. There will have to be a significant external factor.

 

[MilwaukeeMike]

The U.S. will become more attractive under a devalued dollar, but I find it difficult to believe they'd move production from China to the U.S. ceteris paribus. There will have to be a significant external factor.

Oh, I'm sure Apple has already done a very comprehensive cost-benefit analysis. And I doubt any of the things we can think up here can compete with probably the biggest and most complicated factor in finding a home for a plant... Taxes.

 

[captaincranky]

It's a double edged sword, because what about the people making the robots? They don't deserve jobs? We as consumers should get used to higher prices, because companies stick with manual labour to save jobs?.

Picture, if you will, a mall being built. The politicians will blow a bunch of sunshine up the town folk's behinds to the tune of, "look at all the construction jobs this will create. Yeah for the new mall!

So, the mall gets built, the construction jobs dry up, and all that remains are minimum wage jobs, for people selling Chinese goods.

Oh wait, I almost forgot. Everybody's real estate tax doubles with five miles of the new white elephant.

Basically the same thing might hold true for the people that build the robots. They move on, and the new fab is peopled with a few robot repairmen, and a janitor or 3.

It seems to me that continued building of these machines, could turn on a dime, and be as unpredictable as your average defense contract.........(wait for it)........without the "accidental cost overruns".