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

Intel posts largest loss in its history as sales plunge

tomshardware.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 293 posts

Re: Intel posts largest loss in its history as sales plunge

#141

Post by 0zemp2c »

itsoktocry wrote: post #12
0zemp2c wrote: post #2

hard to feel sorry for Intel here they're still tied to Windows which is increasingly weaker and more rotted over time, losing market share every year for a decade (Microsoft doesn't even seem to care afaict) the Apple M1 laptop is an incredible value, offers 10x the performance the average person will need, with good battery life, a better OS/ecosystem...and its priced right! Intel needs to seriously look at Linux..…

> losing market share every year for a decade (Microsoft doesn't even seem to care afaict) Of course they care. Windows, at one point, had 95% market share. Do you believe that to be sustainable? Do we want that? No, in both cases. They are still dominant in desktop computing. > offers 10x the performance the average person will need Why is buying something 10x more powerful than you'd need at 2x the price "good valu…

> Of course they care.

for the last ten years Microsoft has pushed all of its effort into Azure, which is coincidentally based on Linux (!)

accept it, they gave up on Windows. Windows 11 is my proof...a lame re-skinning which can't even displace Windows 10

> You should have a look at Windows' desktop market share and get back to us. They still own the space.

no one under 25 uses Windows! Go look at any college classroom and get back to us! Windows has been in decline for ten years, the stats aren't a fluke

seriously...just walk into any college classroom in America...

go see what ecosystem anyone under 25 is invested in...now tell me what the future looks like

Re: Intel posts largest loss in its history as sales plunge

#142

Post by rjsw »

bdcravens wrote: post #117
itsoktocry wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> losing market share every year for a decade (Microsoft doesn't even seem to care afaict) Of course they care. Windows, at one point, had 95% market share. Do you believe that to be sustainable? Do we want that? No, in both cases. They are still dominant in desktop computing. > offers 10x the performance the average person will need Why is buying something 10x more powerful than you'd need at 2x the price "good valu…

I think normal people (ie non-developers) are less concerned about the performance, as the battery life and the need to almost never need a fan (and keep it on your lap comfortably). You can commonly find Macbook Airs at $800, and I doubt many are buying sub-$400 laptops, unless they are going with low-end Chromebooks, in which the Chromebook vs Windows is a reverse spin on whether consumers are overpaying vs what th…

I'm just back home from a long vacation. My computer while I was away was my $250 Pinebook Pro, it worked fine for everything that I wanted to do, that included a fair bit of development work.

Re: Intel posts largest loss in its history as sales plunge

#143

Post by qbasic_forever »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #138
qbasic_forever wrote: post #128

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Let's hope it actually gets built and that the state isn't Foxconned like happened to Wisconsin. A company with rapidly declining profits does not give me a lot of confidence in starting or finishing big capitol projects even if they've committed to them. Nothing is set in stone until the last brick is laid and the factories are open.

Unlike foxconn, the federal government has a huge interest in that fab being built.

Like I said, I'll believe it when I see it. At the end of the day capitalism rules supreme and trumps jingoistic nationalism. If it's cheaper for Apple and others to build chips overseas then all your devices will continue to have chips made there. I don't see any fundamental change to make labor in America competitive with overseas labor costs. Intel can build as many fancy fabs as they want in Ohio but they will be useless if the cost of living, cost of healthcare, median home price, rent, inflation, etc. continues to skyrocket. It's still too expensive for workers in America and building factories doesn't fix that problem.

Re: Intel posts largest loss in its history as sales plunge

#144

Post by chasd00 »

RyanShook wrote: post #120

I think Intel is a buy because they’re going to be too important to fail for US in the chip war. Anyone else buying?

When they get on the verge of bankruptcy then i'll buy. They're too "big/important to fail" and will be bailed out by US taxpayers as usual.

Re: Intel posts largest loss in its history as sales plunge

#145

Post by sho_hn »

bane wrote: post #116

Intel and Google share surprisingly similar problems: an almost pathological inability to grow lines of business with new products because they kill them off too early. In Intel's case, it's even worse, they kill them off right before the market would have made them successful. They should own the "things with semiconductors" market, but instead financially engineered their way to focus only on higher profit core chi…

> Intel will contract TSMC to make their chips?

"Intel Battlemage, Celestial GPUs Are Booked in at TSMC: Report"

https://www.tomshardware.com/news/intel-battlemage-celestial...

Order recently deferred to late 2024, though.

Re: Intel posts largest loss in its history as sales plunge

#146

Post by allie1 »

rqtwteye wrote: post #113
wslh wrote: post #16

Only the paranoid survive [1] I don't think Intel passed Andy Grove's wisdom to the organization. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrew_Grove

It seems they may be at an inflection point where they should move away from x86 and create the next big thing. Pretty much what Grove describes in his book.

I disagree. They need smaller, more efficient chips, they just fell behind.

Intel was the major driver of EUV in its inception. They funded ASML, only to sell their share later to keep the semis ecosystem open (oh the irony...).

They are making all the right moves now, but the semis cycle is ridiculously long. 5-6 years from planning to delivery.

x86 is what keeps them in the running for now, as there's so much software built on it, but if they don't stick to their roadmap and start leading with their products, that edge will also degrade.

Re: Intel posts largest loss in its history as sales plunge

#147

Post by Workaccount2 »

0zemp2c wrote: post #2

hard to feel sorry for Intel here they're still tied to Windows which is increasingly weaker and more rotted over time, losing market share every year for a decade (Microsoft doesn't even seem to care afaict) the Apple M1 laptop is an incredible value, offers 10x the performance the average person will need, with good battery life, a better OS/ecosystem...and its priced right! Intel needs to seriously look at Linux..…

Until linux devs can get through their head that common users never want to even see something that represents a CLI, linux isn't going anywhere.

The biggest problem with linux is that it's made by people who like linux.

Re: Intel posts largest loss in its history as sales plunge

#148

Post by ethbr0 »

bane wrote: post #116

Intel and Google share surprisingly similar problems: an almost pathological inability to grow lines of business with new products because they kill them off too early. In Intel's case, it's even worse, they kill them off right before the market would have made them successful. They should own the "things with semiconductors" market, but instead financially engineered their way to focus only on higher profit core chi…

Intel is the poster child that if you want to run a giant business long term -- have independent, well-supported teams that deliver a profitable product on their own... and are insulated from being fucked with by anyone in the management chain.

Modern Intel would have shut down the Haifa team, which would have been an existential problem when Netburst reached the end of the line unexpectedly early.

At that scale, you need to keep teams/options around simply to retain expertise and hedge your tech bets.

Re: Intel posts largest loss in its history as sales plunge

#149

Post by allie1 »

tbyehl wrote: post #53
0zemp2c wrote: post #2

hard to feel sorry for Intel here they're still tied to Windows which is increasingly weaker and more rotted over time, losing market share every year for a decade (Microsoft doesn't even seem to care afaict) the Apple M1 laptop is an incredible value, offers 10x the performance the average person will need, with good battery life, a better OS/ecosystem...and its priced right! Intel needs to seriously look at Linux..…

> Intel needs to seriously look at Linux What should Intel be doing with Linux that they haven't already been doing for like 20 years?

Better gaming drivers, better drivers all around. Their own linux distro for hosts that they keep optimizing for web, AI, compiling, testing.

Re: Intel posts largest loss in its history as sales plunge

#150

Post by lesuorac »

qbasic_forever wrote: post #143
Workaccount2 wrote: post #138

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unlike foxconn, the federal government has a huge interest in that fab being built.

Like I said, I'll believe it when I see it. At the end of the day capitalism rules supreme and trumps jingoistic nationalism. If it's cheaper for Apple and others to build chips overseas then all your devices will continue to have chips made there. I don't see any fundamental change to make labor in America competitive with overseas labor costs. Intel can build as many fancy fabs as they want in Ohio but they will be…

> capitalism rules supreme and trumps jingoistic nationalism.

I'm not so sure about that. At an individual level sure but we're talking about the USG not a bunch of individuals at a national level. The government has made many decisions to subsidies/backstop local companies in the interest of nationalism.

There's no way it's cheapest for Boeing to make its airplanes in the US.

Janitors for the USG get security clearances.

Farmers (even by state governments) get subsidized to ensure local supply.

If something like the "Freedom Phone" actually used USA parts and was assembled in the USA I could see it becoming the governments defacto corporate phone. Sure, they might become a "Government Contractor" as opposed to an actually competitive company but they would still exist with real buildings and real employees doing real activies which is strictly what we're arguing about. The USG will backstop an inefficient business; Foxconn has no problem not building an inefficient factory.

Post reply on HN