4 ms·
Intel have been making balls-out plays (i.e. they could've just sold the fab business and MBA-ed themselves to death) and making good money but their stock is 3
by mhh__ 5y ago
Intel have been making balls-out plays (i.e. they could've just sold the fab business and MBA-ed themselves to death) and making good money but their stock is 30% or so down from last year so I am inclined to agree.
They'll never have a run like they did from Nehalem through to Zen's launch, but I think they're about to prove that they still have it and that they know how to sell chips.
- dmead 5y agoBut they have mba'd themselves to death.
- xadhominemx 5y agoNot really. Intel’s two core issues are engineering failures — process technology and processor architecture
- Symmetry 5y agoAre they having architecture issues? I guess I could criticize them for too-aggressively pursuing small microachitectural advantages leading to failures like Meltdown and making them spend more engineering-years than AMD for products that aren't that much better but, baring Meltdown, the end architectural results have been pretty good. My gripes would all be with the process, management decisions about how to respond to the process problem, or fusing off features for product segmentation reasons.
- xadhominemx 5y agoBy architecture, I’m referring to trade offs then made for single thread performance vs core count and memory channels
- dmead 5y agoI have a basis peak in my desk that says otherwise.
- xadhominemx 5y agoHas nothing to do with Intel’s problems
- dmead 5y agoit was an intel product when it was shut down because of the wrist expositions.
- xadhominemx 5y agoI know what it is, but does that have to do with Intel’s problems? Sohail and Dadi probably did not think about Basis Peak for more than 10 minutes over the entire period Intel operated the brand
- dmead 5y agoI just mention that as a way to illustrate they they were not reinvesting their capital into verification/quality and R&D or focusing on their core competency. this was during the period when intel was riding the IOT hype train and made some dumb purchases. see here for more https://www.businessinsider.com/intel-is-probably-the-worst-aquirer-in-tech-history-2010-9 https://www.businessinsider.com/intel-is-probably-the-worst-...
- xadhominemx 5y agoI am very well aware of the history here. Again, Intels misadventures in IOT have absolutely nothing to do with their challenges today, which are rooted in a handful of poor engineering decisions
- cinntaile 5y agoAMD spun off their fab business, they didn't MBA themselves to death so I'm not sure why that's the only possible end result you see?
- happycube 5y agoThe bad CEO (Hector Ruiz) who probably would have done it left, and AMD eventually got a much much better CEO (Lisa Su).
- scheme271 5y agoGiven how Global Foundries has essentially given up in regards to moving to better nodes, it seems like spinning the fabs off and going to contract manufacturing was absolutely the right call. AMD was already a gen or so behind and falling back further due to lack of investment in it's fabs.
- ho_schi 5y agoMBA-ed to deadth hehe German "Tod durch BWLer". If a company suffered from this it is IBM. They sold they're hardware business with long term earnings and the entry path to many customers was lost. Now there is Red Hat with the IBM-Letter attached to it. At least we see improving support for ThinkPads through Red Hat. Apple, Microsoft, Amazon instead invested in hardware with software. Siemens is another exampled for dead by MBA, thanks for ruining Siemens Nixdorf. How you can even think about focusing a company on one single market with a "Profit Center", you loss the broad base and flexibility. No other part can sustain you till you adapt to a change.