> More correct would be that Intel has a low tolerance to risk for things that are way outside of their core competencies which have traditionally been designin

> More correct would be that Intel has a low tolerance to risk for things that are way outside of their core competencies which have traditionally been designing X86 CPUs and fabbing them, and that's mostly it. As a former Intel-er myself (during Craig Barrett, Paul Otellini times) I would disagree. Intel took bold and foolish bets bying DiaLogic, selling Xscale, betting on WiMAX mobile technology while fighting LTE backed by all telcos. I would characterize Intel's risk management as "passive-aggressive".