Intel leadership has been dropping the ball for at least the last 20-years which has allowed the competition to not only catch up, but take the lead in several markets.
For example:
- AMD was first to market with a 64-bit desktop CPU in 2003 with the Athlon 64. At the time, Intel believed that users didn’t need 64-bit capabilities.
- Around 2005 when Apple started designing the first iPhone they approached Intel to design a mobile processor for it. Intel declined because they believed that nobody would be interested in smartphones, so Apple went to ARM which enabled ARM to grow the mobile processor and IOT market and eventually move into the server space.
- TSMC has completely surpassed Intel in fab/process technology. So much so that Intel had to outsource some of it’s chip production to TSMC to remain competitive.
- McAfee…enough said.
- Tablets and phones. Intel tried and utterly failed in this space, millions of dollars wasted.
- AMD was first to market with PCIe GEN 4 products years ahead of Intel.
- Mellanox already has 100Gb Ethernet switches and adapters on the market years ahead of Intel, and were working on 200Gb before Intel even had a 100Gb product release.
- Minnowboard and Edison, Paul Otellini’s attempt to get x86 into the maker space to compete against Arduino and Raspberry Pi was an utter failure mainly due to poor execution. As a maker who has worked with all of the above devices, I absolutely detested Minnowboard and Edison.
This is just a short list of major blunders over the years by Intel leadership that has and continues to cost hard working employees their jobs. Long-term growth just doesn’t seem to be in the cards. The days of charging a premium price are over for Intel because the competition is doing it just as well cheaper, or cheaper and better.
I thought this post by @ihr+1jgnJtwt deserved its own thread. He hit the nail on the head.