Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Intel's disruption is now complete

jamesallworth.medium.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

381–390 of 638 posts

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#381

Post by martin1975 »

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…

this is sad.. sounds like a lot of good talent went wasted. Based on what you said here, sounds like the problem was not engineering talent but lack of vision/leadership :(.

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#382

Post by BoorishBears »

Miraste wrote: post #327
BoorishBears wrote: post #291

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The idea it's recommending a 3600 over a 10600k for a thousand dollar build tells me there's a slant...

The 10600k is $100 more expensive and they're putting that money into the gpu instead. That makes sense to me.

The cheapest 3600 in stock is $80 cheaper than the cheapest 10600k from the same retailer.

And they've has offered the 10600k with a $20 rebate on motherboards for months now...

$50 should come straight the case which is totally overshooting for a budget PC (I recommend the 300L here)

That leaves you with a 10 dollar difference for an CPU that competes with the i9 in gaming...

-

And by the way, even the next build up chooses a 3600X over the 10600K despite the former even beating the 3700X in gaming benchmarks.

The 10600K is an insane value for gaming, and still fast enough for non-gaming tasks. Seeing as they're listing "heavy gaming" as a measurement on these builds it doesn't make any sense for at the very least the i5 to make an appearance.

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#383

Post by tjoff »

pjmlp wrote: post #348
tjoff wrote: post #263

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So let's all make sure, for apples sake, that is fixed then. Not really, PC laptops and hybrids are pretty standardized. A slim case doesn't really make it vertical integration.

Try to use anything other than Windows or ChromeOS on such laptops, with 100% support of underlying hardware.

Many of us are? And we can replace parts from third parties.

It is getting more and more integrated though which makes it hard to replace parts. But that has more to do with greed and size requirements than vertical integration, a soldering iron can amend some of that. Driver situation isn't by any means something new or necessarily an indication of vertical integration either.

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#384

Post by tonyarkles »

dmix wrote: post #371
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…

As I've linked to many times on HN: The Iron Law of Bureaucracy > Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people": > First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers and launch technicians and scientists at NASA, even some agricu…

You may have posted this many times, but this is my first time seeing and it explains so much about what is going on right now in my life. It doesn’t give me hope, but it gives some clarity around what otherwise seems like dysfunction. Thank you!

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#386

Post by tobmlt »

dmix wrote: post #371
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…

As I've linked to many times on HN: The Iron Law of Bureaucracy > Pournelle's Iron Law of Bureaucracy states that in any bureaucratic organization there will be two kinds of people": > First, there will be those who are devoted to the goals of the organization. Examples are dedicated classroom teachers in an educational bureaucracy, many of the engineers and launch technicians and scientists at NASA, even some agricu…

Thanks for making me aware of this. I’m interested in finding the derivation of this law. Intuitively it sounds sort of like Grisham’s law were bad money drives out good, but it can’t be quite that simple, can it? Is it more of an empirical thing? I know I am being lazy just asking but a quick search turns up only statements of the law. I can make up my own thinking behind it but I’d like to get it from Pournelle if possible. (Aside: Rothbard was great at this sort of logic chaining I think) Also nice rabbit hole generally here!

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#387

Post by vslira »

systemvoltage wrote: post #231
hapless wrote: post #227

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Fabrication is where Intel is falling down. They have fresh new chip designs that would be perfectly adequate, but they are still hobbled by 14nm. They have now released three? four? iterations of x86 design on the same 14 nm process, because 10nm is that troubled If you spun off the fabrication, as AMD did, you would have a much smaller, but more-competitive fabless business, and the fabricator would implode. (Which…

I am afraid, they're going to be using US gov as their wheelchair to survive a few more decades: https://newsroom.intel.com/news/intel-wins-us-government-adv...

The Boeing of semiconductors

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#388

Post by eecc »

chaboud wrote: post #139
eecc wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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

I completely agree with this. I’ve been in software since ‘98, but many of the valuable tools I apply to interpersonal interaction were learned on the path of raising my 5 year old. Natural consequences, timely feedback, parallel modeling, Socratic questioning, mirroring... If you want to know how to handle the politics of a large organization, try interacting with children. The parallels are amazing.

Yup, I'm considering offering to help with programming extracurriculars at what will become his school just to get a sneak peek at how the older children deal with unfamiliar abstractions. I've been living in a bubble of tech savviness and contempt for as long as I remember, I need to reset.

And he's actually 3, so I can't really sit around and wait another 5-6 years before I get to figure out the perfect "business customer" :D

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#389

Post by pavlov »

“The Innovator’s Dilemma” has a rather terrible track record as a handbook for tech corporations.

Nokia’s leadership was also big fans of this book in 2000-2010. They saw themselves as the nimble disrupters, eventually eating away all computing markets with their cheap plastic phones and a smartphone OS derived from embedded systems. If Nokia would just keep adding features, the Christensen theory promised that they’ll one day own the upscale markets too, like in all those case studies in the book.

Instead Nokia’s business was destroyed by actual innovation: Apple combined a new kind of mobile UI with an OS derived from high-end PCs. It didn’t fit on the ladders of innovation shown in the book. It wasn’t a cheaper thing becoming good enough, but an expensive thing that was nearly impossible to manufacture initially. And that’s why Nokia thought they could safely ignore it, until it was too late.

Re: Intel's disruption is now complete

#390

Post by 01100011 »

yesimahuman wrote: post #50
screye wrote: post #13

I am not sure what Intel can do to come back to a strong position. Afaik, all of Nvidia, Apple and Qualcomm (dunno about AMD) pay significantly higher wages than Intel. If Intel is starting off on the back foot and cannot get top talent, then their decline is all but guaranteed.

Reminds me of when I went to visit Intel a few years ago. I was shocked at the bare bones amenities and that employees had to pay for everything (snacks/drinks/etc.). That might sound insignificant but in the talent war in SV that stuff mattered a lot back then. It was a stark contrast from nearly every other fast-growing tech company in the area.

Hardware companies, and even some legacy software companies, have very different cultures than recent software companies. The 'recent' upstarts like Google, Facebook, Twitter, etc are either powered by massive profit engines or endless VC/investment money. Those places can set standards that aren't achievable by older companies that have lower margins and need to actually show profits.

There is also a cultural difference between hardware engineers, who are usually more 'serious engineers' who actually engineer things vs software engineers who are often less rigorous in their architecture and design. HW folks deal with long lead times and can't usually fix errors after production, so that creates a vastly different culture.

Post reply on HN