Thread regarding Intel Corp. layoffs

Also why would Intel be worth 5x with zero growth in PCs?

It’s exactly where is should be. Flat for 10-15 years due to market saturation.

Intel needs new markets. They’re just really bad at them. Also due to the innovators dilemma since almost all new markets don’t have golden 60% gross margins.

PCs are tapped out.

Loss of manufacturing leadership is a direct result of missing mobile phones. One needs growth to sustain leading edge fab investments. PCs have been flat for over a decade.

Mobile would have propelled the fab virtuous cycle. That cycle was broken due to PC market saturation.

That is why Intel is pursuing foundry.

@2qba+1k9hMNfQ. Totally agree with you. There is ZERO accountability at Intel. When Kaizad Mistry (who was the most arrogant self centered person leading the disaterous 10nm program) is still employed by Intel, you know there is no accountability. Not sure what culture Pat is trying to build, but the old Intel culture had accountability at its foundation. No accountability and you have failure... or in Intel's case, continued failure.

@1kmy+1k9hMNfQ a lot of things could have been covered up if LTD didn’t fail so spectacular at 10nm and 7nm. Products would have been launched and Intel would have held off AMD at a minimum and all their success and growth would be Intel’s.

But what happens was two generations of products and too many other products canceled due to the arrogant and broken culture in LTD and lack of a transparent culture or any competence outside of LTD.
Now technology leadership and scale gone. Leadership may reach parity but never one generation ahead so without scale never competitive again.

From the BoD down thru all the senior VPs total FUBAR.

All the seeds were obvious a decade ago before it became obvious but total lack of competence and accountability and integrity.

The same problem and culture still permeates the company and most organizations.

Innovator’s dilemma is ONE of the results of the true high level cause of Intel’s demise: Success/Market Dominance.

I can argue that if Intel was still executing on its core business ( client, data center), it would be a very solid business footing. Yes, not a trillion $ company, but easily worth 5x what it is now and no need for mass layoffs.

Even more important than coming up with a solution for the ARM threat was, it’s loss of semiconductor manufacturing leadership which had nothing to do with innovator’s dilemma.

Ah the debates I had and getting reprimanded for not understanding how x86 paid the bills and shut up about caring what customers wanted or comparing to what TSMC offered.

All those people got of fly the Titanic, me too BTW

Innovator's Dilemma. EXACTLY

and the most damning thing is that Intel recognized the threat / opportunity of ARM and bought StrongARM from Digital Equipment Corp. (along with their fab, ha ah) circa 97. Anyway Intel starts making application processors but by '08 Intel was stinjing from many failed acquisitions and XScale (Intel's ARM application processor) was struggling to gain traction. So, PSO shut it down.

Well now the chickens have come home to roost. The ARM architecture is winning in mobile (Apple processor), winning in data center (home grown ARM chips along with Ampere, the startup in Portland). It's a brush fire consuming each adjacent field.

Intel just could not stick with the strategy and see it through. It's a damn shame.

Classic innovator’s dilemma.

Intel could never just justify replacing high margin PC silicon with low margin mobile silicon. Managers were acting rationally.

The innovator’s dilemma is basically unsolvable due to economic incentives. It is the fate of many technology companies.

Read the book. It’s very enlightening.