<p>The RoHS Directive was introduced in order to restrict hazardous substances in Electrical and Electronic Equipment, EEE. It currently restricts the use of six hazardous substances/compounds; cadmium, lead, mercury, hexavalent chromium, PBB, and PBDE. The RoHS Directive currently includes category 1-7 and 10 in the categories of EEE listed in Annex 1A to the WEEE-Directive (Waste of EEE). The aim with the report is to investigate and elucidate prospects and obstacles to increase the scope of RoHS. This report mainly considers the inclusion of product categories 8 (Medical Devices) and 9 (Monitoring and Control Instruments). </p><p>In order to fulfil the aim eight questions were formulated, that shall be answered in the report. In order to find the knowledge of and attitude towards RoHS of manufacturers, retailers, and importers of products falling under category 8 and 9, a questionnaire was sent to 80 companies, of which 25 answered. The answers showed that many of the companies did not know of RoHS before the questionnaire was sent out. The majority did not consider that their product category needed a longer time period to find alternatives for the applications where any of the in RoHS restricted substances were used, compared with the other categories in annex 1A to WEEE. Of the companies that answered on the questionnaire the majority had less than 50 employees. The companies in the study had limited knowledge of the contents of their products, they bought the function rather than the contents. </p><p>One important conclusion in this report is that only a few of the companies in category 8 and 9 are likely to keep using non compliant components for a long time if they use standard electronic equipment irrespective if they intend to readjust their production according to the RoHS Directive or not. The reason is that most subcontractors will be forced by the customers, mainly the larger ones, to readjust their production. They certainly will not keep two production lines. A paradox problem that can arise for small and medium sized companies, the majority of those answering the questionnaire were, is to get access to compliant components before the RoHS Directive is put into force. These companies order such small batches that it is unrealistic to order them from the original manufacturer, who usually is located in Asia. The small and medium sized companies usually buy their components from middlemen/grossists in Europe and Sweden. These grossist in many cases have large stocks with non-compliant components that they want to sell out before RoHS Directive is put into force from the 1st July 2006. </p><p>The RoHS Directive has been critized for restricting lead, but different studies show that the alternatives to e.g. Lead gives only slightly worse results, which by way of introduction can be expected from a new technology compared with an old, more investigated. The work with the report has also revealed a lack in communication and cooperation not only between the different stakeholders in electronic industry: retailers, importers, manufacturers and subcontractors, but also between industry, customers and authorities. The RoHS Directive may improve the communication and cooperation between these different actors.</p>

The RoHS Directive was introduced in order to restrict hazardous substances in Electrical and Electronic Equipment, EEE. It currently restricts the use of six hazardous substances/compounds; cadmium, lead, mercury, hexavalent chromium, PBB, and PBDE. The RoHS Directive currently includes category 1-7 and 10 in the categories of EEE listed in Annex 1A to the WEEE-Directive (Waste of EEE). The aim with the report is to investigate and elucidate prospects and obstacles to increase the scope of RoHS. This report mainly considers the inclusion of product categories 8 (Medical Devices) and 9 (Monitoring and Control Instruments). In order to fulfil the aim eight questions were formulated, that shall be answered in the report. In order to find the knowledge of and attitude towards RoHS of manufacturers, retailers, and importers of products falling under category 8 and 9, a questionnaire was sent to 80 companies, of which 25 answered. The answers showed that many of the companies did not know of RoHS before the questionnaire was sent out. The majority did not consider that their product category needed a longer time period to find alternatives for the applications where any of the in RoHS restricted substances were used, compared with the other categories in annex 1A to WEEE. Of the companies that answered on the questionnaire the majority had less than 50 employees. The companies in the study had limited knowledge of the contents of their products, they bought the function rather than the contents. One important conclusion in this report is that only a few of the companies in category 8 and 9 are likely to keep using non compliant components for a long time if they use standard electronic equipment irrespective if they intend to readjust their production according to the RoHS Directive or not. The reason is that most subcontractors will be forced by the customers, mainly the larger ones, to readjust their production. They certainly will not keep two production lines. A paradox problem that can arise for small and medium sized companies, the majority of those answering the questionnaire were, is to get access to compliant components before the RoHS Directive is put into force. These companies order such small batches that it is unrealistic to order them from the original manufacturer, who usually is located in Asia. The small and medium sized companies usually buy their components from middlemen/grossists in Europe and Sweden. These grossist in many cases have large stocks with non-compliant components that they want to sell out before RoHS Directive is put into force from the 1st July 2006. The RoHS Directive has been critized for restricting lead, but different studies show that the alternatives to e.g. Lead gives only slightly worse results, which by way of introduction can be expected from a new technology compared with an old, more investigated. The work with the report has also revealed a lack in communication and cooperation not only between the different stakeholders in electronic industry: retailers, importers, manufacturers and subcontractors, but also between industry, customers and authorities. The RoHS Directive may improve the communication and cooperation between these different actors.

Cognitive epistemic systems are reasoning structures that promote an individual's categorization of group members through processes known as cognitive epistemic essentialist entitativity (EEE). The propensity of these processes to become stagnant is known to lead to stereotyping and prejudiced behaviors when individuals are presented with ambiguous information about outgroup members. Educational materials about the contributions, cultural patterns, and social customs of ethnic and cultural groups can reduce stereotyping and prejudiced behaviors. However, whether being presented this material through multicultural psychosocial education in a formal setting is an effective strategy to influence the malleability of EEE processes has not been addressed as a means to shift xenophobic and prejudice discourse. The purpose of this quasi-experimental study was to determine whether malleability of EEE processes resulted from the presentation of multicultural psychosocial educational material in a college classroom. The epistemic need for closure theory, intergroup contact theory, and essentialist theory of race provided the framework for the study. The Essentialist Entitativity Scale was used to compare the malleability of EEE processes of 67 college students who completed an 8-week course based on multicultural psychosocial educational material and 67 college students who did not. An ANCOVA analysis of pre- and posttest data revealed that students who received the culturally rich educational material reported significantly greater malleability of EEE processes than those who did not. Findings may be used to inform educators, educational leaders, and social activists about the malleability of EEE processes, and may provide a strategy to reduce racism, stereotyping, xenophobia, and prejudice.

The increasing complexity with the decrease in size of EEE – components (Electronic, electric and electromagnetic) raises the question on how higher energy frequencies will affect the components and their continuous development. The most common vibration testing equipment currently in use within the automotive industry and SCANIA CV AB are the electrodynamic shaker (ED system). This thesis covers the characteristics of different vibration testing equipment while analysing their strengths and weaknesses, not only for the automotive industry but also including equipment more commonly handled within the aero and space industry. The project aims to find a complement for the ED system and study the possibility for its replacement in the automotive industry.In particular, experiments are carried out and documented on a so-called “Repeatable shaker system” (RS system) for the purpose to get a better understanding on the functions of the equipment and its overall differences compared to the electrodynamic system when it comes to random vibration testing.It became clear that complementing or replacing the ED system is difficult and that the RS system work fundamentally different in comparison. Accordingly, the RS system is not a potential replacement for our purpose and it cannot perform at the same level of precision but instead is able to achieve higher energy frequencies overall, making it still ideal for its intended purposes, but not as a replacement of the ED system.

Le but principal des réseaux mesh sans fil (Wireless Mesh Networks-WMNs) est de fournir une dorsale de communication pour un grand nombre d'utilisateurs, car les WMNs doivent supporter un trafic énorme. Dans cette thèse, nous visons la maximisation d'utilisation et la répartition équitable de la bande passante dans les WMNs. Nous considérons deux environnements : WMN utilisant la norme IEEE 802.11 MAC, qui est caractérisée par son déploiement répandu et peu cher, et WMN utilisant les antennes directionnelles, qui représentent une technologie clé pour la réutilisation spatiale dans les réseaux sans fil. Pour les WMMs basés sur IEEE 802.11, nous concevons NICC, un protocole de contrôle de congestion qui reconnaît la congestion comme un problème lié au voisinage, et non pas au lien. NICC gère la congestion par une collaboration entre les nœuds d’un voisinage sans fil. En faisant usage de certains champs sous-exploités dans l'en-tête IEEE 802.11, NICC fournit un retour de congestion implicite et multi-bit. Ceci assure un contrôle précis du trafic sans affecter la bande passante. Pour les WMNs utilisant les antennes directionnelles, nous concevons FreeDMAC, un protocole MAC basé sur la technologie TDMA. FreeDMAC garantit que chaque nœud est conscient de toutes les transmissions dans son voisinage, ce qui évite les problèmes MAC causés par les antennes directionnelles, et ainsi, améliore l'utilisation de la bande passante. En outre, FreeDMAC est capable de fournir deux niveaux d’équité: équité entre les liens et équité entre les flux / The main purpose of Wireless Mesh Networks (WMNs) is to provide a communication backbone for a high number of end-users, thus WMNs have to support heavy traffic load. In this thesis, we intend to maximize utilization and achieve fair allocation of the bandwidth resources in WMNs. We consider two WMN environments: WMN using the IEEE 802.11 MAC standard, which is characterized by its cheap devices and widespread deployment, and WMN using directional antennas, which are emerged as an attractive technology to enhance the spatial reusability in wireless networks. For WMM based on IEEE 802.11, we design NICC, a congestion control scheme that recognizes congestion as neighborhood-related problem, and not a link-based one. Indeed, complex interference among neighboring nodes is the main starvation cause in WMNs. Therefore, NICC handles congestion using mutual cooperation within a wireless neighborhood. NICC makes use of some underexploited fields in the IEEE 802.11frame header in order to provide an implicit multi-bit congestion feedback, and thus ensure accurate rate control without generating overhead, making efficient use of bandwidth. For WMN with directional antennas, we design FreeDMAC, a TDMA-based MAC scheme with contention-free scheduling. FreeDMAC guarantees that each node is aware of all ongoing transmissions in its neighborhood, and thus avoids directional-related problems such as deafness, making efficient use of bandwidth. Moreover, FreeDMAC presents a link-slot assignment that provides two levels of fairness: Per-link and per-flow fairness

2007年6月，華碩電腦發表Eee PC精簡式筆記型電腦，此創新產品俟後由臺灣資訊工業策進會市場情報中心（MIC）統稱為精簡型小筆電，簡稱小筆電，英文名稱則採用美商英代爾對於這款產品的統稱：Netbook。 Eee PC所設定的目標市場著眼於消費性市場，將產品定位於已開發國家使用者的第二臺電腦以及開發中國家使用者的第一臺電腦。產品上市後掀起銷售高潮，由於小筆電的加入，筆記型電腦在2008年第三季出貨量首度超越桌上型電腦，比先前2007年預估提早兩年，Eee PC因而被譽為臺灣電腦廠商價值創新的一大步。 本研究主要的探討問題有四：核心技術能耐發展策略對於產品創新的影響為何？ 品牌與ODM廠商在創新產品開發上的合作與分工為何？ 品牌廠商因應競爭者之破壞性創新的作法為何？ 核心技術能耐為基礎的產品創新在市場上所需具備的成功條件為何？ 在研究設計上以策略與組織、技術、市場三構面做為主要分析架構。策略與組織構面由領導者企圖心、核心競爭優勢、企業文化、組織架構、企業網絡定位等變項構成；技術構面上由產品研發經驗、內部知識傳遞、外部資源網絡、產品開發管理等變項構成；市場構面由品牌效益、顧客需求、產品行銷、產業合作網絡等變項組成用以探討對於破壞性創新產品構思及開發階段的影響。研究方法上採用「個案研究法」，以領導廠商華碩與宏碁為研究對象。在資料上透過企業訪談與次級資料蒐集的方式來了解個案公司在創新產品的發展過程，並結合核心競爭力、產業價值鏈、破壞性創新、新產品開發程序、吸收能耐與知識傳遞、技術面競爭策略等學理加以分析，本研究所獲得的研究發現如下： 一．建立核心競爭能耐的方向及重點決定了企業在產業價值鏈的位置與所從事的價值活動。 二．企業基於核心技術能耐發展策略而對產品創新方向做出技術領導者與技術追隨者的不同策略選擇。技術領導者著重產品的破壞性創新設計，技術追隨者著重於產品成熟技術的市場性。 三．品牌廠商與ODM的研發製造合作關係上，考量中心點在於顧客對企業的認知價值。品牌廠商並以平均分配（Allocation）與相互制衡（Leverage）為策略，取得各家資源之長為己用。 四．設計代工廠從OEM經營模式進入ODM經營模式，在逐步接手研發價值活動後，ODM設計製造廠開始投入自主研發，成為個人電腦產品技術提供者。但在缺乏通路品牌下，所創造的產品創新價值只能透過品牌廠技術採用將創新價值傳達至消費者。 五．企業發展破壞性創新產品時，原價值網絡上具產業主導地位的供應商透過關鍵技術的掌握，並經由品牌行銷掌握終端使用者，形成不易突破的慣性，對於廠商產品創新產生鉗制作用。 六．企業發展破壞性創新產品若無法取得市場客戶對產品的價值認同，則雖有技術成就，但難以成為產品的競爭優勢。 七．企業在發展破壞性創新產品過程中，若缺乏行銷業務部門參與，將可能造成產品上市後的市場資訊掌握失準。 八．破壞性創新產品所設定於原價值網絡的目標市場，往往因為高科技產業的不確定性因素，在實際執行時意外產生新應用，產品因而進入新價值網絡的新市場。 九．破壞性創新產品進入新市場時不確定因素多，廠商因需求不易掌握而經常發生嘗試錯誤的探索行為，但市場晚入者觀察先驅者經驗，往往能立即掌握正確資訊而迅速反應市場需求。 十．企業發展破壞性創新產品，若未造成有效技術差距，技術領導者與市場先驅者將不易維持首動者優勢。技術追隨者與市場晚入者藉由學習領導者經驗將有機會快速超越。 本研究最後並提出一些實務上建議，以做為產業界發展核心技術能耐策略與發展破壞性創新產品的參考。 / In June, 2007, Asus Computer announced her Eee PC in Computex Taipei, Taiwan International Computer Exhibition. The simplified notebook then named “Netbook” due to its lightweight design and focused internet application. Eee PC was aimed on consumer market of developed countries, targeted as “Secondary Computer” for existing computer users, as well as first computer to the user of the developing world, the name “Eee” derives from "the three Es", an abbreviation of its advertising slogan for the device: "Easy to learn, Easy to work, Easy to play". By third quarter of 2008, notebook shipped quantity including netbook, had exceeded desktop computer, two years advance from prior market research report’s estimation made before netbook product rollout in 2007. Eee PC was praised as stride-out of value innovation of Taiwan computer industry. Problem discoveries and definitions in this research are: first of all, what is the influence of core technology development strategy toward product innovation? Second, how brand owner works with ODM suppliers on innovative product development? Third, how brand owner reacts to disruptive innovation? Last, what are market successful factors of an innovative product which based on core technology competence? Analysis framework of this research consists of three aspects: strategy and organization, technology, marketing. As an exploratory study, research design is qualitative research and case study over certain firms: Asus and Acer, with 90% market shares of netbook in year 2008. For data gathering, primary data came from interviews to firms’ management team members, specifically R&D and PM Directors, secondary data studies came from varies sources: research reports, annual reports, and so on. To explore the influence of core technology competence toward product innovation in idea generation and product development stage, study of related theories in advance is necessary: core competence, value chain, disruptive innovation, new product development procedure, absorptive capability, knowledge transmission, and competitive strategy of technology. Discoveries of this research are: 1.Direction and focus of establishing core competence decides the firm’s position in value chain and the value activities firm engaged. 2.Core technology competence development strategy directs firm’s choice of technology leader or follower, leader focuses on innovative product design, follower focuses on mature technology’s market taking. 3.Customers perceive value is the key consideration that brand owners work with ODM suppliers. “Allocation and Leverage” are strategy that brand owners manage multiple ODM suppliers. 4.From OEM to ODM business model, ODM firms start to develop own independent research projects, this trend leads ODM to be technology supplier in foreseeable future. But, research results can only go through brand owners to consumer market. 5.Key technology suppliers of existing value network will obstruct disruptive innovation products through market’s inertia. 6.Technology based innovative products can’t have competitive advantage in the market without customer’s perceive value. 7.Sales marketing team’s participation is important for disruptive innovation during product development stage. 8.Unexpected new value network will emerge due to uncertainty of high-tech industry, new application out of target market leads to new value network which is different from existing one. 9.Pioneer frequently tries and error for disruptive innovation product due to uncertainty of market, late entrant learned from pioneer’s experience, and react to market demand efficiently. 10.Innovative product without technology gap, firm can’t maintain first mover advantage too long, technology follower have chance to transcend in short period. Conclusions of this research are summarized from above discoveries, and suggestions to industry firms made by this research can be reference to firms’ development strategy of core technology competence as well as product development of disruptive innovation.

No description available.