Domestic PLCs cannot replace foreign brands like Siemens and Mitsubishi not because of their performance and functionality, but fundamentally because brands like Siemens have stood the test of time and earned the trust and reliance of a large customer base through long-term practice and engineering. Factors such as brand, ecosystem, user habits, application technology environment, and end customer choices mean that the inability of domestic PLCs to replace Siemens PLCs is not a matter of functionality. The core issue remains the cost of trial and error.
Using Siemens PLCs provides high added value; after all, there is no limit to competition, and improving product positioning is key. End customers care most about the PLC brand, while for IOs, users are not as concerned because they may not even know what it is, leading to low differentiation. The brand recognition of PLCs is very high.
The rise of domestic IOs is driven by the need for equipment manufacturers to reduce costs and increase efficiency, as well as the functional positioning of IOs within the entire control system. If PLCs are the brain of the control system, then IOs are the limbs. The brain’s influence is significant, and the technical requirements are also high. On the other hand, the maturity of domestic IO technology and ecosystem makes it very difficult to replace the brains of Siemens and Mitsubishi. Overall, it can be quite a thankless task. However, being a downstream provider for Siemens and Mitsubishi is relatively simple, but this raises a problem: IOs are heavily competing on price.
Friends interested in the remote IO market can add WeChat 1845635074 for discussion.