3 ms·

If you don't cannibalize yourself, someone else will. Intentionally limiting Atom performance, selling of their ARM division, etc. was all done in order to not

by Rezo 10y ago

If you don't cannibalize yourself, someone else will. Intentionally limiting Atom performance, selling of their ARM division, etc. was all done in order to not harm their main cash cow. By the time they woke up and really tried to push for x86 on Android it was too little too late. Just from an engineering perspective it was always going to be a monumental task. Because guess what, that small dev shop with the hit-of-the-month mobile game is not going to bother cross-compiling or testing on the 1% of non-ARM devices. And if "Ridiculous Fishing" or whatever doesn't work flawlessly, your device is broken from the consumer perspective. But what should really have Intel pissing their pants is the recent AMD x86 license deal with Chinese manufacturer's to pump out x86 server class chips. I'l love to hear if they're taking it seriously at all, or dismissing it as usual.

BooneJS 10y ago
Paul Otellini came up on the x86 marketing side. He fully believed that Intel Architecture was the ultimate, therefore everything else was no better than 2nd place. BK came up through the fabs, and therefore is more open to fabbing others' designs (Intel Custom Foundry) because it drives volume. However, he has overseen one hell of an awkward reduction in force (I'm ex-Intel, but still have many friends there). Small offices were told they were closing, and a few weeks later they were told where they should relocate to keep their jobs, and a few weeks later they might learn about the relocation package. It's almost as if they drew a line on a spreadsheet filled with numbers and now they're struggling to figure out how it affects the stuff they still want to keep. Odd.
- AndyNemmity 10y ago
  I wish it was odd, if anything it sounds pretty normal when companies change top line strategy in a broad scale, and then have to spend the next year figuring out what the hell that even means, and how to do it.
  - r00fus 10y ago
    I think this is more symptomatic of larger, more conglomerated organizations. I doubt this would apply to say, Apple or Google which have, respectively, 95% & 50%+ of their revenues coming from one product line.

by Rezo 10y ago

BooneJS 10y ago

Paul Otellini came up on the x86 marketing side. He fully believed that Intel Architecture was the ultimate, therefore everything else was no better than 2nd place. BK came up through the fabs, and therefore is more open to fabbing others' designs (Intel Custom Foundry) because it drives volume. However, he has overseen one hell of an awkward reduction in force (I'm ex-Intel, but still have many friends there). Small offices were told they were closing, and a few weeks later they were told where they should relocate to keep their jobs, and a few weeks later they might learn about the relocation package. It's almost as if they drew a line on a spreadsheet filled with numbers and now they're struggling to figure out how it affects the stuff they still want to keep. Odd.

AndyNemmity 10y ago
I wish it was odd, if anything it sounds pretty normal when companies change top line strategy in a broad scale, and then have to spend the next year figuring out what the hell that even means, and how to do it.
- r00fus 10y ago
  I think this is more symptomatic of larger, more conglomerated organizations. I doubt this would apply to say, Apple or Google which have, respectively, 95% & 50%+ of their revenues coming from one product line.