# 2 1980's Japanese electronics questions **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [March 1, 2013, 1:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2-1980s-japanese-electronics-questions/651685 "2013-03-01T01:03:56Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Rocketeer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/rocketeer/32/4437_2.png) [@Rocketeer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rocketeer)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 9:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2-1980s-japanese-electronics-questions/651685/21 "2013-03-01T21:40:13Z")
What I read (somewhere) was that if a supplier sends parts that don’t meet the spec, Toyota will reject them and send them back. GM will keep them and hammer the supplier for a reduction in price. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Leaffan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leaffan/32/299_2.png) [@Leaffan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaffan)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 9:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2-1980s-japanese-electronics-questions/651685/22 "2013-03-01T21:46:24Z")
> [@rogerbox](#): > > There is probably some overlap in philosophy that extends to the automotive field too, I’ve heard that the same car is better in Japan (and not just ones where the JDM car uses different and better parts) because all pieces at the Japanese factory have to EXCEED specifications, but at the American factories the parts just have to MEET specification. Well if that’s the case it’s not the parts that are bad; it’s the specification. ---
**Author:** ![rogerbox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/76d3ee/32.png) [@rogerbox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rogerbox)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2-1980s-japanese-electronics-questions/651685/23 "2013-03-01T22:02:57Z")
> [@Leaffan](#): > > Well if that’s the case it’s not the parts that are bad; it’s the specification. Yes but it’s the difference between “mediocre” and “high quality” though which is what the thread is about. Even if the spec changes, as long as the American and Japanese plants retain the same attitudes, the Japanese car will always be superior. ---
**Author:** ![scr4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@scr4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scr4)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2013, 10:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2-1980s-japanese-electronics-questions/651685/24 "2013-03-01T22:23:59Z")
> [@rogerbox](#): > > X68000’s used Human68k developed by sharp, PC-98’s which owned 60% of the PC market in Japan in the 80’s didn’t use DOS until 1990, so I am not sure that it is true that as a general rule Japanese PC’s used American OS’es in the 80’s. FM Towns which used a DOS derivative never dominated Japan. In addition, there were a _lot_ of electronic word processors on the market in Japan. These were basically PCs with proprietary OS/software for word processing. As I recall, at least until the mid-80s these word processors were more affordable _and_ had better output quality & features than PC-based word processor software. Even in the 90s they were very common for home use. ---
**Author:** ![the\_diego](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7bcc69/32.png) [@the\_diego](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/the_diego)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2013, 3:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2-1980s-japanese-electronics-questions/651685/25 "2013-03-02T03:20:53Z")
> [@Nobody](#): > > In the 1980’s, here in America at least, Japanese electronics (I.E. computer, TV, and stereo equipment) were all the rage, and it was usually considered superior to American technology. > > I heard two things about Japanese technology back then, and now, 25 or so years later, I’m wondering if they were true. > > 1. Part of the reason for Japanese success was because after WWII we helped them rebuild or replace damaged factories, so they had newer facilities, while ours were decades older. > > 2. For the most part the Japanese didn’t invent very much. Instead, what they did was take American products, improve up on them, and then sell them back to the US. > > Do these sound about right? Both are true in part but couldn’t be the only reasons for manufacturing and exporting success. It has more to with quickly upgrading one’s process, streamlining, and competitive pricing. And they focused on the export market straightaway, with no attempt to focus only on the domestic market and bar entrants. There is hardly any difference between a new factory and a decades old one, especially back in the days of pure electro-mechanical operations. More critical is upgrading one’s machines and operating at full capacity. Japanese bought cars from the top 3 US makers, along with Swiss watches, American tv’s, cameras and radios. They took them apart, determined how they can be made cheaper and faster, and sold them. Simple as that. So process upgrade and streamlining, demand analysis, competitive benchmarking, and cost control were the catch phrases that business schools picked up from the Japanese. Then came things like just-in-time, flexible manufacturing, etc. Japanese manufacturing philosophy then was easy to understand. Keep the product simple, give the buyer what he needs and nothing more, kill all other products by pricing to a net loss in the first 3 years. This was best exemplified by the Sony Walkman: it can’t record sound, only one guy can use it, it can’t play the radio. All it can do is play a casette and transmit the sound through flimsy earphones. Yet they sold like hotcakes. A bit more swooshy is the German manufacturing philosophy. They believed in putting every feature into a product that the buyer might look for. This was best exemplified by the Mercedes Benz car. But American manufacturing wasn’t that big a loser during the 70s and 80s. They were leaders in several fields because of their own philosophy: durability and reliability —if you’re willing to pay for it. The best examples I can think of are white appliances (GE, Carrier and Maytag) and Caterpillar heavy equipment. These things were priced 40% higher than Japanese and European counterparts but remained market leaders to this day. ---
**Author:** ![Leaffan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leaffan/32/299_2.png) [@Leaffan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaffan)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2013, 4:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2-1980s-japanese-electronics-questions/651685/26 "2013-03-02T04:03:31Z")
> [@rogerbox](#): > > Yes but it’s the difference between “mediocre” and “high quality” though which is what the thread is about. Even if the spec changes, as long as the American and Japanese plants retain the same attitudes, the Japanese car will always be superior. You’re not making sense. The definition of quality is “conformance to requirements.” If I order a part from a supplier and it conforms to the specified requirements it is a quality part by definition. If you’re stating that a part must exceed these specifications then the specification is incorrect. If the part needs to conform to a tighter specification then change the specification; don’t expect the supplier to be a mind-reader and centre his process to always give you parts that meet the ideal target. ---
**Author:** ![rogerbox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/76d3ee/32.png) [@rogerbox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rogerbox)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2013, 4:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2-1980s-japanese-electronics-questions/651685/27 "2013-03-02T04:58:00Z")
> [@Leaffan](#): > > You’re not making sense. The definition of quality is “conformance to requirements.” If I order a part from a supplier and it conforms to the specified requirements it is a quality part by definition. > > If you’re stating that a part must exceed these specifications then the specification is incorrect. If the part needs to conform to a tighter specification then change the specification; don’t expect the supplier to be a mind-reader and centre his process to always give you parts that meet the ideal target. You are being a pedant. To the consumer quality is NOT “My tires will last exactly 3 years or 100,000 miles according to spec” is is “my tires will last a long time”. So if the tires on the Japanese models will last longer than the tires on the American model, the Japanese one will be considered “higher quality”. So if there are two models of car that are identical but one is made by a plant that exceeds the specs in all parts re: durability, strength etc and one just meets them, which car do you choose? ---
**Author:** ![casdave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/c6cbf5/32.png) [@casdave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/casdave)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2013, 9:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2-1980s-japanese-electronics-questions/651685/28 "2013-03-02T09:34:11Z")
In manufacturing, you have to define in some meaningful way what the consumer means by ‘quality’, then you come up with a specification that meets that expectation. Quality is not a happy accident, it is just as much engineered into a product as any other attribute. ---
**Author:** ![Leaffan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leaffan/32/299_2.png) [@Leaffan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaffan)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2013, 10:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2-1980s-japanese-electronics-questions/651685/29 "2013-03-02T10:03:59Z")
> [@rogerbox](#): > > You are being a pedant. To the consumer quality is NOT “My tires will last exactly 3 years or 100,000 miles according to spec” is is “my tires will last a long time”. > > So if the tires on the Japanese models will last longer than the tires on the American model, the Japanese one will be considered “higher quality”. > > So if there are two models of car that are identical but one is made by a plant that exceeds the specs in all parts re: durability, strength etc and one just meets them, which car do you choose? I don’t think you understand manufacturing or supplier relations. ---
**Author:** ![Crafter\_Man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crafter_man/32/458_2.png) [@Crafter\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crafter_Man)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2013, 3:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2-1980s-japanese-electronics-questions/651685/30 "2013-03-02T15:53:14Z")
> [@Leaffan](#): > > You’re not making sense. The definition of quality is “conformance to requirements.” If I order a part from a supplier and it conforms to the specified requirements it is a quality part by definition. This is certainly the definition of quality according to The Quality Gurus. But it is _not_ the definition according to the average Joe. So I agree with \*\*rogerbox \*\*on this. ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2013, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2-1980s-japanese-electronics-questions/651685/31 "2013-03-02T17:01:06Z")
Quote: A bit more swooshy is the German manufacturing philosophy. They believed in putting every feature into a product that the buyer might look for. This was best exemplified by the Mercedes Benz car. This I find hard to believe. M-B makes fine cars, but their automatic transmissions were not so good, their air conditioning stank, and their radios were complex beyond belief. Plus, the German design philosophy seemed to be “lets make it as complicated as possible”. Good cars, but cost a fortune to maintain.:smack: ---
**Author:** ![rogerbox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/76d3ee/32.png) [@rogerbox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rogerbox)\ **Post date:** [March 2, 2013, 9:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2-1980s-japanese-electronics-questions/651685/32 "2013-03-02T21:12:03Z")
> [@Leaffan](#): > > I don’t think you understand manufacturing or supplier relations. You’re right I couldn’t care less about supplier relations and I wasn’t even talking about it. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2013, 1:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2-1980s-japanese-electronics-questions/651685/33 "2013-03-03T01:56:46Z")
> [@rogerbox](#): > > You are being a pedant. To the consumer quality is NOT “My tires will last exactly 3 years or 100,000 miles according to spec” is is “my tires will last a long time”. > > So if the tires on the Japanese models will last longer than the tires on the American model, the Japanese one will be considered “higher quality”. > > So if there are two models of car that are identical but one is made by a plant that exceeds the specs in all parts re: durability, strength etc and one just meets them, which car do you choose? It depends. First, is the price the same? Second, what is consumer expectation? If your consumer is going to keep a car for five years, having tires that last ten is not much of an advantage. Old Bell System phones last 20 years, but when the market got deregulated and people bought new phones for reasons of features or style, their quality in terms of lifetime was decreased. I actually went to a talk about this. Computer chips these days are so reliable that they last far longer than their effective life - that is people toss their computer to get faster ones long before the chips die because of reliability issues. Real quality strongly depends on customer requirements, which any quality training tells you. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2013, 2:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2-1980s-japanese-electronics-questions/651685/34 "2013-03-03T02:01:33Z")
> [@Leaffan](#): > > I started working in electronics full time in 1985. We had a board tester, that is a machine that used a bed of nails to 100% electrically test (or as close to it as you could get) every single bare board we received, because we couldn’t rely of the board makers to do that for us. Bizarre to think like that now. > \ > > We had to test the crap out of everything since we had no other way of determining whether or not we were shipping reliable product. I haven’t looked at the board test flow for a few years (I was heavily involved in it for a while) but it is still pretty much the same. The big difference is that no one does their own board manufacturing any more - it is all outsourced to people like Solectron and Celestica. Test isn’t just for screening, it is also for providing information for process improvements. There were even cases where feedback to the soldering process improved yields so much that they could scrap in-circuit test for a certain board type. ---
**Author:** ![rogerbox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/76d3ee/32.png) [@rogerbox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rogerbox)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2013, 6:56am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2-1980s-japanese-electronics-questions/651685/35 "2013-03-03T06:56:08Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > It depends. First, is the price the same? Second, what is consumer expectation? If your consumer is going to keep a car for five years, having tires that last ten is not much of an advantage. > Old Bell System phones last 20 years, but when the market got deregulated and people bought new phones for reasons of features or style, their quality in terms of lifetime was decreased. I actually went to a talk about this. Computer chips these days are so reliable that they last far longer than their effective life - that is people toss their computer to get faster ones long before the chips die because of reliability issues. > Real quality strongly depends on customer requirements, which any quality training tells you. What is interesting too is that the Japanese cars exceed spec, but Japanese car owners get new cars MUCH more often than Americans: The average American car on the road in 2007 was 9.4 years according to wiki. I know for a fact that cars are kept much less long in Japan, both because their culture generally shies away from old and used more than American culture and also because registering a car gets ridiculously expensive the older it gets. Having a “classic” car in Japan is prohibitively expensive except for the fabulously wealthy, 10 year old+ Japanese cars get sent overseas to Australia and around asia. (For some reason car frames have to be cut in half before they can be imported to AUS, I have no idea why?) But back to electronics, it is interesting because I have seen some seriously overbuilt Japanese electronics before. The best capacitors (one of the biggest failure points in electronics, especially as they age) tend to be Japanese capacitors like Nichicon, and you can get the gold and black ones that are even more expensive. When I rebuild electronics with new capacitors I usually use Nichicon to guarantee worry free operation for decades… ---
**Author:** ![Leaffan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leaffan/32/299_2.png) [@Leaffan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaffan)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2013, 7:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2-1980s-japanese-electronics-questions/651685/36 "2013-03-03T07:05:00Z")
> [@Voyager](#): > > I haven’t looked at the board test flow for a few years (I was heavily involved in it for a while) but it is still pretty much the same. The big difference is that no one does their own board manufacturing any more - it is all outsourced to people like Solectron and Celestica. > Test isn’t just for screening, it is also for providing information for process improvements. There were even cases where feedback to the soldering process improved yields so much that they could scrap in-circuit test for a certain board type. The company I worked for did the exact same thing; used in-circuit test to drive front end process improvements to eliminate in-circuit test for some board types. I’d be surprised to learn that burn-in is still used. Reliable HAST and other qualification data from IC manufacturers should have eliminated that years ago. I’ve been out of the industry for over 4 years, but out of the high-volume high reliability stuff for 13 years. ---
**Author:** ![Leaffan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/leaffan/32/299_2.png) [@Leaffan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Leaffan)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2013, 7:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2-1980s-japanese-electronics-questions/651685/37 "2013-03-03T07:11:30Z")
> [@Crafter\_Man](#): > > This is certainly the definition of quality according to The Quality Gurus. But it is _not_ the definition according to the average Joe. So I agree with \*\*rogerbox \*\*on this. Then you’re both wrong. If I give you (my supplier) a specification and you meet that specification, then you have delivered a quality part. If it turns out that exceeding the specification is what is really required, then the specification has to be changed. You can’t hold suppliers accountable for meeting specifications if your specifications are wrong. Maybe supplier A always hits the process centre and his parts are therefore deemed better than supplier B. Well then change the damned specification. You can’t tell supplier B he is making an inferior part if he is meeting your specification. ---
**Author:** ![Cerowyn](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/82dd89/32.png) [@Cerowyn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cerowyn)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2013, 9:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2-1980s-japanese-electronics-questions/651685/38 "2013-03-03T21:49:53Z")
> [@Chefguy](#): > > Japan was also able to dump its money into infrastructure and manufacturing, since their military was not (and is still not) a priority. Japan is #6 in the world for military spending. ---
**Author:** ![Voyager](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/voyager/32/133_2.png) [@Voyager](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Voyager)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2013, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2-1980s-japanese-electronics-questions/651685/39 "2013-03-03T21:55:22Z")
> [@Leaffan](#): > > The company I worked for did the exact same thing; used in-circuit test to drive front end process improvements to eliminate in-circuit test for some board types. > > I’d be surprised to learn that burn-in is still used. Reliable HAST and other qualification data from IC manufacturers should have eliminated that years ago. I’ve been out of the industry for over 4 years, but out of the high-volume high reliability stuff for 13 years. Burn-in is still used for chips that need to be highly reliable, but my impression is that most boards only do sampling now. I was peripherally involved in a stress test effort that started when our board supplier was sending us crap, and I think the data eventually showed that burning in everything doesn’t make sense. But I no longer get to roam the rows of ICT. ---
**Author:** ![rogerbox](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/76d3ee/32.png) [@rogerbox](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/rogerbox)\ **Post date:** [March 3, 2013, 10:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2-1980s-japanese-electronics-questions/651685/40 "2013-03-03T22:10:32Z")
> [@Leaffan](#): > > Then you’re both wrong. If I give you (my supplier) a specification and you meet that specification, then you have delivered a quality part. If it turns out that exceeding the specification is what is really required, then the specification has to be changed. You can’t hold suppliers accountable for meeting specifications if your specifications are wrong. > > Maybe supplier A always hits the process centre and his parts are therefore deemed better than supplier B. Well then change the damned specification. You can’t tell supplier B he is making an inferior part if he is meeting your specification. I like how we can describe two cars and one will last longer than the other and you’re telling the consumer he’s wrong for thinking the longer lasting car is the higher quality one. It’s a very GM like attitude to have. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2-1980s-japanese-electronics-questions/651685.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/2-1980s-japanese-electronics-questions/651685.md?page=3)