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

Intel Honesty

stratechery.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 426 posts

Re: Intel Honesty

#31

Post by bee_rider »

api wrote: post #20
scrlk wrote: post #10

> in the late 2010’s Intel got stuck trying to move to 10nm, thanks in part to their reluctance to embrace the vastly more expensive EUV lithography process TBH, it's easy to say this with the benefit of hindsight. Throughout most of the 2010s, EUV lithography was like the "year of the Linux desktop" - i.e., this year will be the year where EUV was suitable for high volume manufacturing. I don't really blame Intel fo…

> Throughout most of the 2010s, EUV lithography was like the "year of the Linux desktop" - i.e., this year will be the year where EUV was suitable for high volume manufacturing. We need to learn to recognize the difference between something that's never going to happen for either physical or economic/social/structural reasons, and something that is just really difficult and takes a long time. I always think of this w…

The main reason there will never be a “year of Linux on the desktop” is that desktops became irrelevant before Microsoft became… whatever it is now.

Re: Intel Honesty

#32

Post by jjtheblunt »

zelias wrote: post #8

I like the proposed approach of purchase guarantees here. Directly injecting cash into Intel just creates a moral hazard where they spend the money dealing with organizational inertia than innovating in the space. Plus, the government could even turn a profit reselling its purchased semiconductors to various US companies! The US ecosystem badly needs a serious Intel competitor -- because they just ain't it.

> Plus, the government could even turn a profit reselling its purchased semiconductors to various US companies!

No freaking way. How do you think that’s feasible, considering how fast depreciation goes in semiconductors?

Re: Intel Honesty

#33

Post by UncleOxidant »

davidw wrote: post #5

The geopolitical bit of all this is the real wild card. No one really knows what's going to happen there.

Yeah, you've got Apple, Nvidia and AMD heavily exposed to that geopolitical risk, but seemingly not willing to help lessen it by investing in US fabs. Whenever I note this people here and elsewhere say "they're smart to be fabless" but somebody's gotta run fabs and more fabs need to be run in the US and quickly. I realize industrial policy isn't in vogue these days but it might be a good idea for the future of US semiconductor production to arrange some marriages between some of these companies that have a lot of capital and have a lot of need to reduce their geopolitical risk. Our brand of capitalism isn't great at looking ahead more than a quarter or two.

Re: Intel Honesty

#34

Post by timschmidt »

api wrote: post #20
scrlk wrote: post #10

> in the late 2010’s Intel got stuck trying to move to 10nm, thanks in part to their reluctance to embrace the vastly more expensive EUV lithography process TBH, it's easy to say this with the benefit of hindsight. Throughout most of the 2010s, EUV lithography was like the "year of the Linux desktop" - i.e., this year will be the year where EUV was suitable for high volume manufacturing. I don't really blame Intel fo…

> Throughout most of the 2010s, EUV lithography was like the "year of the Linux desktop" - i.e., this year will be the year where EUV was suitable for high volume manufacturing. We need to learn to recognize the difference between something that's never going to happen for either physical or economic/social/structural reasons, and something that is just really difficult and takes a long time. I always think of this w…

Valve sells the SteamDeck and is preparing SteamOS for use on similar handhelds available now from most major vendors.

They may not be traditional laptops or desktops, but they're PCs, and they're being sold with compatibility with a large installed base of Windows games in mind. Moreover, handheld gaming PC users seem to perceive SteamOS as being superior to Windows in this device category.

Re: Intel Honesty

#35

Post by davidw »

SoftTalker wrote: post #28
api wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Throughout most of the 2010s, EUV lithography was like the "year of the Linux desktop" - i.e., this year will be the year where EUV was suitable for high volume manufacturing. We need to learn to recognize the difference between something that's never going to happen for either physical or economic/social/structural reasons, and something that is just really difficult and takes a long time. I always think of this w…

I'd say Linux desktops have been good enough for a long time, but never broke into the mainstream for the reasons you cite. ChromeOS is the closest thing I guess, but outside of schools and a few other institutional uses, Chromebooks are not very popular.

They're pretty incredible machines for the price. I bought one a year and a half ago in an emergency, as the networking on my laptop died over the course of a few days and I needed something for browsing and email. I got the Linux dev environment set up on the Chromebook and I actually kept it instead of getting a new expensive laptop.

Re: Intel Honesty

#36

Post by psunavy03 »

rowanG077 wrote: post #12
knightfall21 wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I'll gladly take another Elon for siliconX. Hell I'd take 10. The good Elon has done in terms of his companies vastly outweigh the few bad tweets he slings into the world once in a while.

I don't get how some people struggle with the idea that he may simultaneously be a gifted businessman (in certain sectors, obviously Twitter was a disaster) and also simultaneously be a raging asshole.

Bill Gates was a raging asshole. Steve Jobs was a raging asshole. Larry Ellison was a raging asshole. It's not ideal, but it also doesn't preclude success.

Re: Intel Honesty

#37

Post by [deleted] »

zelias wrote: post #8

I like the proposed approach of purchase guarantees here. Directly injecting cash into Intel just creates a moral hazard where they spend the money dealing with organizational inertia than innovating in the space. Plus, the government could even turn a profit reselling its purchased semiconductors to various US companies! The US ecosystem badly needs a serious Intel competitor -- because they just ain't it.

[deleted]

Re: Intel Honesty

#38

Post by skeeter2020 »

nightski wrote: post #30
AnotherGoodName wrote: post #11

Intel is trapped. Its debt repayments alone are massive. The poor performance in stock has encouraged 20years of wage stagnation to the point where you can literally earn over 50% more at amd or nvidia or even an startup for equivalent roles so they aren’t hiring the best. Their pay in the Bay Area is double tsmc in taiwan for equivalent roles in raw dollar terms but the ppp differences means your better off working…

I'm not saying you are wrong but personally I'd view the stock as an attractive perk right now since it is so low. Whereas if I were joining a company such as Nvidia I'd honestly be kind of worried. Historical performance isn't really a great indicator here.

sotck can be low because it's undervalued by the entire market and going to jump once they catch up to the future value potential, or it can be low because it accurately reflects the decline and limited value. If you only see the "attractive perk" from being so low you're the one using historical performance as the indicator, thinking Intel's only a few quarters or years away from former glory days.

Re: Intel Honesty

#39

Post by AnotherGoodName »

nightski wrote: post #30
AnotherGoodName wrote: post #11

Intel is trapped. Its debt repayments alone are massive. The poor performance in stock has encouraged 20years of wage stagnation to the point where you can literally earn over 50% more at amd or nvidia or even an startup for equivalent roles so they aren’t hiring the best. Their pay in the Bay Area is double tsmc in taiwan for equivalent roles in raw dollar terms but the ppp differences means your better off working…

I'm not saying you are wrong but personally I'd view the stock as an attractive perk right now since it is so low. Whereas if I were joining a company such as Nvidia I'd honestly be kind of worried. Historical performance isn't really a great indicator here.

You can trade your stock for intel stock when working at any company. Stock grants really should be swapped for income and reinvested how you see best. So ultimately the total take home income is what should matter for any new hire. Take the higher paying and job and buy intel stock if you believe it’ll rise.

Re: Intel Honesty

#40

Post by packetlost »

nightski wrote: post #30
AnotherGoodName wrote: post #11

Intel is trapped. Its debt repayments alone are massive. The poor performance in stock has encouraged 20years of wage stagnation to the point where you can literally earn over 50% more at amd or nvidia or even an startup for equivalent roles so they aren’t hiring the best. Their pay in the Bay Area is double tsmc in taiwan for equivalent roles in raw dollar terms but the ppp differences means your better off working…

I'm not saying you are wrong but personally I'd view the stock as an attractive perk right now since it is so low. Whereas if I were joining a company such as Nvidia I'd honestly be kind of worried. Historical performance isn't really a great indicator here.

I mean, I have a lot more confidence that nvidia will continue to deliver products to a market that wants to pay for them over Intel at this point in time, even if the stock is likely to come crashing back down to earth soon. As an employee, I wouldn't really factor in stock performance necessarily, but the overall image and outwardly visible struggles Intel is going through tells me the internal struggles are probably far worse than the public or shareholders know.
Post reply on HN