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

91–100 of 426 posts

Re: Intel Honesty

#91

Post by kbolino »

jyrkesh wrote: post #80
Maken wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Another ad company?

Microsoft is now largely a public cloud company, also supporting a very healthy suite of B2B productivity tools. Which makes the B2C ad stuff they shove into Windows all the more infuriating: it's a drop in the bucket relative to their other product verticals.

I think it's because Windows as a line of business is still expected to turn some kind of a profit, even though operating systems are not profit centers anymore and haven't been for some time. Whereas, Apple and Google view their operating systems as just necessary infrastructure to support profitable ventures.

Re: Intel Honesty

#92

Post by _w1tm »

newsclues wrote: post #72

What happens to the computer and tech industry if Intel fails? The x86 licence still has value to some others in the space, but it seems like Intel could potentially be sold off for parts if it can't sell correct.

ARM wins the instruction set wars and buys the tech. Future ARM processors will have x86 hardware that offers compatibility with legacy software. Eventually the instruction set is forgotten.

Re: Intel Honesty

#93

Post by [deleted] »

psunavy03 wrote: post #36
rowanG077 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

[deleted]

Re: Intel Honesty

#94

Post by ghaff »

lotsofpulp wrote: post #79
amluto wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Some of the issues are way downstream of those NIMBYs: Non-housing costs are quite low in Taiwan. Food and childcare, in particular, are so much cheaper than California that it’s hard to believe. But the NIMBYs aren’t totally in the clear. Rental housing with 3+ bedrooms (for families) is severely lacking in much of the US. Maybe fire codes are to blame. Taiwan is full of very nice new high-rise development that cont…

Part of the equation must be the simple fact that the US is big and has the option to give many people the 0.1+ acre detached single family home with a yard and 2+ car driveway/garage lifestyle (and schools with more exclusive student populations). In smaller places, that simply isn’t an option, so there exists greater demand for family living in high rises.

Yeah, very few people who want and can afford 3-bedroom homes want to be renting apartments. I assume that even in New York City, the number of 3-bedroom condos is pretty minimal as a percentage because most people who want that kind of space just move to West Chester or Connecticut.

Re: Intel Honesty

#95

Post by moffkalast »

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.

The geopolitical bit is that TSMC is building local US and EU fabs in case of a Taiwan invasion. Once those are up and Intel becomes redundant the ad hoc subsidies might just dry up.

Re: Intel Honesty

#96

Post by wing-_-nuts »

sodality2 wrote: post #43
skeeter2020 wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Efficient market hypothesis dictates the price accurately reflects valuations. So if a stock price is down relatively, it's because the wealth of information available on it indicates its decline.

I too, used to be a dyed in the wool boglehead that believed in efficient markets. The missing small cap value / international premium over the past twenty years has me convinced otherwise today.

Re: Intel Honesty

#97

Post by kbolino »

closeparen wrote: post #50

>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 for tsmc in Taiwan than intel in the Bay Area. That’s not a joke. Intel are literally incapable of attracting talent from Taiwan right now. There's some whiplash in hearing constantly how the US is a corporate-dominated oligarchy, and then also seeing trillion-dollar indus…

The federalized nature of American government means both things can be true simultaneously, even though they seem paradoxical when placed together in juxtaposition. The Feds have supremacy in certain matters, but not all.

Moreover, lobbying is more a question of connections and relationships which are lubricated with money than pure spending power, so it can be easier for a large corporation to nudge things its way at the national and state levels while still struggling to curry influence at the local level, and vice versa for small companies.

Re: Intel Honesty

#98

Post by FredPret »

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…

It's grim at INTC but don't forget the CHIPS act and whatever else will follow that. The US government spends 0.5T per month - more than the market cap of all but the top 15 American companies [0] [1]

Not saying it's a good or bad idea, or that it will or won't happen - but if the US government decides to reinvent Intel, they can easily write a cheque that (if spent wisely) might do the trick.

[0] https://companiesmarketcap.com/usa/largest-companies-in-the-...

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget

Re: Intel Honesty

#99

Post by ghaff »

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…

Intel was also being at least a bit disingenuous in public at the time although they probably also thought they could make those frequencies work. But a very senior Intel exec told me, at the time IBM was showering them with a lot of public snark, that of course they new about the upcoming issues but Microsoft was so worried about multicore scalability that Intel had to play along.

Re: Intel Honesty

#100

Post by colechristensen »

amluto wrote: post #65
closeparen wrote: post #50

>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 for tsmc in Taiwan than intel in the Bay Area. That’s not a joke. Intel are literally incapable of attracting talent from Taiwan right now. There's some whiplash in hearing constantly how the US is a corporate-dominated oligarchy, and then also seeing trillion-dollar indus…

Some of the issues are way downstream of those NIMBYs: Non-housing costs are quite low in Taiwan. Food and childcare, in particular, are so much cheaper than California that it’s hard to believe. But the NIMBYs aren’t totally in the clear. Rental housing with 3+ bedrooms (for families) is severely lacking in much of the US. Maybe fire codes are to blame. Taiwan is full of very nice new high-rise development that cont…

>Rental housing with 3+ bedrooms (for families) is severely lacking in much of the US. Maybe fire codes are to blame. Taiwan is full of very nice new high-rise development that contains units with lots of bedrooms. Wandering around those developments and the new 3-story developments in California, the ones in Taiwan are much, much, much nicer, even from the outside. The NIMBYs should take note.

And it's because of zoning. Cities allow density construction but then it's almost exclusively 0 and 1 bedroom apartments because you can charge more per sq ft. Zoning laws should force apartment construction to include multiple bedroom units but that would lower the cost of 1br units. So NIMBYs don't want density construction, and the people who build density don't want big units.

So cities are unlivable if you're not young and single or happy living in relative squalor. So people either don't have children or have to move to have children and you get cities that push out a big chunk of the demographic and then force people to commute.

Post reply on HN