http://www.fool.com/investing/general/2016/01/20/exclusive-the-troubling-story-behind-intels-chip-m.aspx
5 replies (most recent on top)
All the shareholders/board of directors has to do is demand to see the unadulterated reports of the internal independent comparative studies by the engineers from various design groups within Intel. See for yourselves how our leakage, die area, cost, and speed measures up with the similar process nodes offered by our competitors. Do it soon before all these evidence are destroyed and the engineers leave, and the leadership at Intel go unpunished again.
We, the engineers who worked hands-on, knew for years that our process technology is not competitive. There are at least 4 or 5 independent competitive studies to benchmark against competitors. This has gone on for at least 5 years. Feedback was given to TMG but no action taken. Recently a VP shed some light in QGS as to why TMG does not heed these warnings. He said, the feedback has to come from big business group and the changes has to be significant for TMG to take notice, feedback from small players are simply ignored.
How can such arrogance ensure us to hold leadership position in such competitive business?
ps: and I bet those people who dared to question TMG have received ISP/VSP
It is interesting that all major groups have hired senior people from outside except for TMG, yet TMG is the largest and most expensive of groups and was late and will be late again, very odd indeed.
TSMC develops tick tock and takes the lead while Intel gives up on tick tock because Intel is internally focused. And it is getting worse. All this talk about silos is talk about dealing with a SYMPTOM of the real problem.
Sohail and Krzanich are ultimately behind this muck up. The technology leadership loss is monumental in the history of the company. So sad. These two need to be fired.