Earlier quoted context omitted.
> the consensus seems to be that Intel tried to pile up too many new improvements, which backfired. TSMC took a more incremental and safe approach Can you point to some industry literature that explains this? If this is true, it is a lot more surprising that Intel is talking about going fabless. You build a lot of expertise by rolling the dice on new techniques that don't pan out on the first iteration. People wouldn…
>People wouldn't be so pessimistic about Boeing if they had just been overly aggressive in a new airframe design, rather than failing to safely mount new engines on an old design. Unfortunately Boeing doesn't have a huge list of customers that are willing to spend what it costs to switch to a new airframe. They sell to airlines what airlines want to buy. Airlines wanted a 737 with higher bypass engines and that's exa…
so a nefarious moneygrabbing measure?