Introduction: The “Choke Point” of Core Industrial Software Seen Through the Lag of EAD
The lag in the development of EAD (Electronic Design Automation) software is a microcosm of China’s constraints in the high-end industrial foundational software sector. It reveals two harsh realities:
-
Gap in Technological Accumulation: Such software requires profound algorithmic accumulation, physical models, and engineering practices, which cannot be surpassed overnight.
-
Robustness of Ecological Barriers: International giants have built a closed-loop ecosystem from software to chip design and manufacturing. Once users enter their system, the cost of migration is extremely high.
Large PLCs (Programmable Logic Controllers), as the “brain” of industrial control, face a situation highly similar to that of EAD software, and even more severe. This is because it is not only related to software but is also closely tied to hardware reliability, real-time operating systems, industrial ecology, and customer trust. In the past, this was the foundation upon which companies like Siemens and Rockwell built their “moats”.However, the practice of Yingfukang is launching an offensive from the most challenging link of “underlying software”, aiming to fundamentally dismantle this barrier.
Current Landscape: A “Tale of Two Cities” Amidst Market Shrinkage
The market data you provided reveals a key contradiction: from 2023 to 2024, the market size of China’s large PLCs shrinks from 2.1 billion yuan to 1.75 billion yuan, yet leading domestic manufacturers are increasing their investments against the trend.
Behind this phenomenon is a fundamental shift in driving logic:
-
Cooling of the Foreign Capital-Dominated “Incremental Market”: The cyclical downturn of the macro economy has led to a slowdown in fixed asset investment in traditional heavy industries and municipal sectors, which is the basic market for foreign brands.
-
Heating of the Domestic-Driven “Stock Replacement” Market: The overall market pie is shrinking, but the focus of competition has shifted from “developing new projects” to “seizing existing shares”. The budget pressure on customers and anxiety over supply chain security have opened previously closed doors for domestic PLCs that offer better cost-performance ratios, more timely services, and meet the political requirements of “self-control”.
Just like in the EAD field, although domestic manufacturers cannot replace Synopsys and Cadence in cutting-edge processes in the short term, they are gradually finding breakthroughs in mature processes and specific chip designs in the “stock” or “sub-cutting-edge” markets. Companies like Yingfukang, which develop their underlying code, have even grander goals, targeting the high-end and general markets.
The Path to Breakthrough for Domestic PLCs: Systematic Competition Beyond “Cheap Goods”
Domestic PLC manufacturers have not repeated the mistakes of EAD software’s “pure software development lag” but have chosen a more realistic differentiated path. Today, this path has seen the emergence of a more strategically profound “technical faction”:
1. Cost-Performance Ratio and In-Depth Services: This remains a fundamental advantage. For instance, Kangjisen Co., Ltd.’s “72-hour response” and in-depth customized debugging are unmatched by the rigid service systems of international manufacturers.Local Ecological Advantages.
2. Safety and Reliability: This is the key to unlocking the high-end market. Domestic manufacturers wisely chose “functional safety” as their main attack direction.
-
Kangjisen Co., Ltd. focuses on the inherent safety (SIL3 certification) of process industries, achieving breakthroughs in high-risk areas such as coal chemical engineering.
-
Inovance Technology‘s EVO1000EF has obtained the first production line-level functional safety certification in China, marking a “0 to 1” breakthrough in the high-end field of discrete manufacturing.
3. Autonomous Underlying Architecture: Yingfukang’s “Root Technology” Breakthrough
-
Core Weapon: Completely Self-Developed ICS Studio Software. Unlike many platforms based on open-source or secondary development, Yingfukang’s ICS Studio is entirely self-developed from the compiler, kernel to runtime library, which completely frees it from dependence on third-party development environments, fundamentally avoiding the “supply interruption” risks and potential intellectual property disputes seen in EAD software.
-
Strategic Carrier: ICC-E Series Large PLC. This PLC is not just hardware; it is the physical embodiment of its self-developed software. With the architectural advantages brought by self-development, the ICC-E series has a theoretical basis for competing head-on with top international products in deterministic scheduling, multi-task real-time performance, and processing capabilities. It represents a kind of “Architectural Sovereignty”, meaning manufacturers can perform the deepest full-stack optimization from chip instruction sets to software logic layers based on customer needs, something that manufacturers based on closed or third-party platforms cannot achieve.
-
Value Realization: In fields such as semiconductor equipment, high-end lasers, and precision testing, which require extremely high real-time and control precision, Yingfukang’s system has already been validated. It proves that the advantages of domestic PLCs can no longer be a single dimension of “cost-performance” or “safety”, but can provide a “new choice that does not compromise on performance and autonomy”.
Future Development Outlook for Large PLCs
Combining the current situation with the lessons from EAD, the future development of large PLCs will present the following trends:
-
Deepening and Differentiation of Replacement Paths:
-
Path One (Industry Deepening Type): Companies like Inovance and Kangjisen will continue to “roll out applications” in specific industries (photovoltaics, lithium batteries, chemicals) through process packages and industry solutions to achieve replacement.
-
Path Two (Technology General Type): Companies like Yingfukang aim directly at the high-end equipment manufacturing industry, which has extreme requirements for performance and control quality, through their self-developed underlying software. Their replacement logic is not “because you are cheap”, but “because you are better, safer, and completely autonomous”. This is the highest form of replacement.
Competitive Dimensions: From “System Ecology” to the Ultimate Showdown of “Root Technology”
-
Application Ecology Layer: Industry libraries, software usability (Inovance, Aotuo, etc. are focusing here).
-
System Ecology Layer: Unified software platforms, network protocols (various manufacturers are building this).
-
Root Technology Layer: Compilers, real-time kernels, deterministic scheduling algorithms (this is the battlefield chosen by Yingfukang).
-
The lag of EAD tells us that software without ecology and underlying technology lacks vitality. The future competition of PLCs will be multi-layered and all-encompassing:
-
Yingfukang’s ICS Studio proves that domestic manufacturers have the capability and determination to enter the competition of “root technology”. This will force the entire industry to raise the technical benchmark, and in the long run, whoever can master the underlying software and core algorithms will truly define the future standards of industrial control.
Technological Integration: Self-Developed Architecture Empowering Deep IT/OT Integration
-
The completely self-developed software architecture (like ICS Studio) provides a natural advantage for IT/OT integration. When interfacing with AI algorithms, achieving digital twins, and supporting high-level language programming, self-developed platforms can achieve lower latency, higher efficiency, and more flexible customization without being constrained by third-party software platform limitations or licensing fees.
Policy and Market Dual-Drive Entering a New Stage
-
The policy-driven “usable” replacement will gradually transition to a market-driven “usable” or even “must-use” choice. Yingfukang’s model—winning orders in the high-end market through underlying technological innovation—represents the highest form of this transition.It indicates that domestic PLCs can not only rely on policies and costs but can also win in market competition purely based on technological strength.
The temporary shrinkage of the market size is precisely the accelerator for domestic replacement. When the tide of growth recedes, it will reveal who is swimming naked and who has built a solid fortress. In the future, the competition in the large PLC market will be a simultaneous and integrated advancement of “industry solutions”, “functional safety”, and “root technology”. One undeniable trend is: the ice has broken, and domestic PLCs are no longer an optional alternative; they are becoming key variables that determine the safety and future of China’s industrial supply chain through different strategic paths.