Intel's disruption is now complete • Hacker News Board

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#191

Post by nradov » Sat, Nov 14, 2020, 6:34 PM UTC

Someone1234 wrote: post #35

SoSoRoCoCo wrote: post #20

As someone who worked on Intel's phone chip: we definitely didn't win it. We fucked it up twelve ways to Sunday. Why: giant egos. There were turf wars between Austin, Santa Clara and Israel over who would design it, and the team that won out had long since lost its best principle engineers and had no clue how to spin the architecture to meet the design win. Otellini's hindsight hedge is pure spin: we knew the landing…

Do you think Intel can come back, or is Intel too dysfunctional/inefficient to recover?

Intel will have a chance to regain relevance in several years when the industry reaches the next disruptive inflection point. That will probably be tied to the arrival of a new hardware form factor like AR goggles or direct neural interfaces or something.

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#192

Post by jodrellblank » Sat, Nov 14, 2020, 6:34 PM UTC

switch11 wrote: post #129

notSupplied wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a theory about why turf wars like this happens: the more successful and wealthy an entity, the greater opportunity there is for a manager to take wealth instead of make it. When you’re scrappy and broke, the only path to success is to make the company successful. When the company is rich and multitudinous, an individual can gain more from politics and turf wars rather than actually trying to push an already hi…

that's a very astute observation having worked at all three of A Trillion Dollar corporation A smaller company that grew quite a bit and sold for $5 billion+ A start up now * People optimize for what will make them rich/wealthy In larger companies, the ENTIRE function of middle management is to extract wealth and not create it In some ways it's a miracle Microsoft managed to get Satya Nadella as CEO. Normally the peo…

What is it that makes you think Satya Nadella is not politically astute?

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#193

Post by feanaro » Sat, Nov 14, 2020, 6:34 PM UTC

emdowling wrote: post #107

m4rtink wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While Intel is indeed losing the performance game, even with the shady management engine shenanigans intel CPUs are still much more open than the locked down proprietary nightmare that apparently are the new Apple ARM SoCs.

So? Consider 3 aspects: 1. Power efficiency (read: battery life) 2. Performance 3. Openness 99% of consumers only care about 2 of those. The more that time goes on, the more it becomes clear that prioritizing openness, in particular for hardware, is a direct trade-off against building a great consumer product.

I think this is simply a consequence of the fact that the technological overlords who wish to oversee all of computing had not had a chance to overly lock down computers just yet (though they certainly wish to do it). Once they inevitably overplay their hand and the average consumer truly loses the ability to run the things he wishes to, you'll start to see a dramatic increase in the consumer's desire for openness.

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#194

Post by whack » Sat, Nov 14, 2020, 6:34 PM UTC

This is a controversial opinion, but I don't agree with the idea that big corporations should make an entry into every single adjacent market. If the company has core expertise and advantages that can deliver a decisive win in a known-lucrative market, then it's a no brainer. But if that's not the case, why run around chasing shadows everywhere, instead of focusing on harvesting the markets where you're already winning.

"But if you don't expand into other markets, you'll eventually die!" Sure, but that's not a bad thing. The purpose of a corporation isn't to continue existing in perpetuity, but rather, to maximize returns for its investors. You found a gold mine? Great, go mine it until it runs dry, then close up shop and call it a day. There's no need to spend half your profits on a wild-goose chase for other gold mines (blackberry investing in self-driving cars anyone?) - if that's what I as an investor want, I can just use my dividends to invest in other companies or startups that are aiming to do exactly that.

I'd rather invest in a company that sticks to the things that it can reliably excel at, and direct its profits back to me, so that I can then invest it in other companies that I trust in other fields. A company that is spending half its profits trying to be something it's not - that's my worst nightmare as an investor.

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#195

Post by intricatedetail » Sat, Nov 14, 2020, 6:35 PM UTC

rwx wrote: post #151

SoSoRoCoCo wrote: post #20

As someone who worked on Intel's phone chip: we definitely didn't win it. We fucked it up twelve ways to Sunday. Why: giant egos. There were turf wars between Austin, Santa Clara and Israel over who would design it, and the team that won out had long since lost its best principle engineers and had no clue how to spin the architecture to meet the design win. Otellini's hindsight hedge is pure spin: we knew the landing…

Why: giant egos. There were turf wars Ex-Intel engineer here that worked in R&D- I saw the exact same situations during my time and was one of the reasons I left. The way that teams in the same org with the same goals couldn't or wouldn't work together was incredibly frustrating and such a massive waste of effort. At the time I thought it was a unique situation with our group, but it's sad to see that it's more of a…

There are the opposites as well, I've seen companies that would send you home for even a hint of ego. Essentially "I" was forbidden as it is not in the "TEAM". I much prefer "we" culture than "I" though.

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#196

Post by petra » Sat, Nov 14, 2020, 6:35 PM UTC

ksec wrote: post #141

supernova87a wrote: post #127

Maybe this is a bit of a side topic, and I'm a layman, but I'm interested to know why the M1 chip is able to perform so surprisingly better? And why Intel or others can't just come up with a similar design, if it's clear from the specs/die images what's being done? Is it years of work to figure out the placement of CPU/GPU/memory units on the die, routings, and come up with new instruction sets? I imagine this wasn't…

Intel's current design are 1-3 years late depending on which roadmap and sector you are counting. Caused by their 10nm delay. Intel had Tigerlake / WillowCove Design but they cant ship it. They also have Golden Cove. If you have put the design they were suppose to be using now, on a IPC basis Intel might still be in the lead.

So basically given the same process, all companies have almost a similar offering?

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#197

Post by sjansen » Sat, Nov 14, 2020, 6:36 PM UTC

switch11 wrote: post #129

notSupplied wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have a theory about why turf wars like this happens: the more successful and wealthy an entity, the greater opportunity there is for a manager to take wealth instead of make it. When you’re scrappy and broke, the only path to success is to make the company successful. When the company is rich and multitudinous, an individual can gain more from politics and turf wars rather than actually trying to push an already hi…

that's a very astute observation having worked at all three of A Trillion Dollar corporation A smaller company that grew quite a bit and sold for $5 billion+ A start up now * People optimize for what will make them rich/wealthy In larger companies, the ENTIRE function of middle management is to extract wealth and not create it In some ways it's a miracle Microsoft managed to get Satya Nadella as CEO. Normally the peo…

> Normally the people who rise up the ranks are the politically astute

Don't discount Nadella's political astuteness. I think it would be more accurate to say he is not merely politically astute, but instead able to combine his skill at internal politics with customer empathy and technical intelligence.

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#198

Post by unkulunkulu » Sat, Nov 14, 2020, 6:36 PM UTC

eecc wrote: post #72

lgessler wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Indeed, for we computer geeks are known for our lack of ego...

Absolutely, not. Seeing my 4 years old son experiment with social skills I’m learning soo much about the most inexplicable conflict situations I’ve been through in 15 years of IT

Totally, children are a wonderful display of human nature and a chance to understand ourselves better, I’m feeling amazed by my interactions with a niece, 1.5 years old. She so cunning already, for example she accidentally puts a toy on a side of the bed so it falls over, I get it and she immediately starts to again put it juuuuust on the edge so it would look like she did it accidentally and it fell over. I think I finally stopped getting microgrudges towards people behavior that day :) We just like to play

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#199

Post by romanoderoma » Sat, Nov 14, 2020, 6:36 PM UTC

rmk wrote: post #176

romanoderoma wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm on the opposite side on this I don't need snacks and drinks at work, just water and the occasional coffe, which I get at the bar anyway so I can have a little walk and clear up my mind Workplaces that looks like a teenage dream party give me the chill When I need to relax I stop working entirely and go out I consider more money or more free time (or both) an incentive I appreciate solid forniture, a comfortable s…

Snacks and other tchotchkes have become de rigueur in SV: I haven't had to buy my own lunch or snack for 8+ years now. With the pandemic in force and the prospect of going into an office itself coming into question, companies will have to stop relying on the (lazy but admittedly effective) lure of free snacks and lunch. Good times. On the whole, I agree with you: when I see people crumpled up in bean bags and picking…

To be fair with my employers, they usually paid for my lunches or had a cafeteria, usually not free, but very affordable.

It's good to have the option, it's not what drives my decisions.

I have no problem with people that see it as a bonus, to each his own, it simply doesn't matter much to me.

But maybe SV corporate culture has gone a little bit too far on it.

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#200

Post by f6v » Sat, Nov 14, 2020, 6:36 PM UTC

ksec wrote: post #141

supernova87a wrote: post #127

Maybe this is a bit of a side topic, and I'm a layman, but I'm interested to know why the M1 chip is able to perform so surprisingly better? And why Intel or others can't just come up with a similar design, if it's clear from the specs/die images what's being done? Is it years of work to figure out the placement of CPU/GPU/memory units on the die, routings, and come up with new instruction sets? I imagine this wasn't…

Intel's current design are 1-3 years late depending on which roadmap and sector you are counting. Caused by their 10nm delay. Intel had Tigerlake / WillowCove Design but they cant ship it. They also have Golden Cove. If you have put the design they were suppose to be using now, on a IPC basis Intel might still be in the lead.

What about other ARM chips?