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

Intel appoints Lip-Bu Tan as its CEO

reuters.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 154 posts

Re: Intel appoints Lip-Bu Tan as its CEO

#91

Post by usr1106 »

alecco wrote: post #23
markus_zhang wrote: post #20

There will be a all-hands in the next few weeks, supposedly. I hope whoever sees this reply, if you are in a position to do so comfortably, ask him straightforwardly whether he has or has heard about a plan to knife and sell INTC in the next 18 months.

Intel employees are at high risk of losing their jobs. I don't think cornering the new CEO at an all-hands is a good idea. And I wouldn't even trust his answer, anyway.

Of course you cannot trust it. If you are working in a publicly traded company (as an ordinary employee) you never hear strategic changes first from your management. They have to make a filing to the stock exchange before they tell you.

Re: Intel appoints Lip-Bu Tan as its CEO

#92

Post by Veserv »

signatoremo wrote: post #82
Veserv wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I know, right? John Sculley ran the, at the time, most successful computer maker, Apple, for 10 years. Brian Krzanich ran the, at the time, largest chip maker, Intel, for 6 years. They were the authorities; their decision-making and abilities running businesses in those industries must have been impeccable to do so for so long.

Did you know that Jensen Huang has been running Nvidia for 30 years? Anyone can pick examples to prove their point.

Thank you for agreeing with me that “years experience in industry” has numerous examples both ways for efficacy and is thus insufficient support for snide assertions of fitness for position as the person I was responding to was making.

Re: Intel appoints Lip-Bu Tan as its CEO

#93

Post by missedthecue »

brookst wrote: post #89
missedthecue wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unfortunately, index funds and mutual funds own about 68% of the Intel, with Vanguard retirement funds being the biggest. These passive custodian investor companies just vote along with the board's recommendation rather than making opinionated or activist decisions.

I’m with you except “unfortunately”. I don’t think we really want Vanguard trying to be an activist investor in all the companies they have major positions in.

It's a huge downside of passive investing. We lose a democratic element of corporate America by surrendering our votes to a couple big custodians that really don't care either way. I agree that I don't think Vanguard trying to make opinions on 1000s of company votes is the fix.

Re: Intel appoints Lip-Bu Tan as its CEO

#94

Post by branko_d »

missedthecue wrote: post #49
beambot wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes, and I'm sure all those public shareholders are mighty unhappy with the current board's stewardship.

Unfortunately, index funds and mutual funds own about 68% of the Intel, with Vanguard retirement funds being the biggest. These passive custodian investor companies just vote along with the board's recommendation rather than making opinionated or activist decisions.

> These passive custodian investor companies just vote along with the board's recommendation

I know that's true, but I'm wondering - why? Why wouldn't they just withhold their vote and let the remaining (active) investors make decisions?

Re: Intel appoints Lip-Bu Tan as its CEO

#95

Post by arunabha »

Alupis wrote: post #39
Galanwe wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The current CEO was supposed to be a down to earth, technical, no bureaucracy guy as well.

> The current CEO was supposed to be a down to earth, technical, no bureaucracy guy as well. Turning a ship the size of Intel is a super power in it's own right. Especially one with such a large entrenched bureaucracy as Intel has. Politics aside for a moment - we're seeing the death bellows of many large, entrenched bureaucracies right now with DOGE - the main difference is the fight is in full public view instead o…

> we're seeing the death bellows of many large, entrenched bureaucracies right now with DOGE

That's one interpretation, sure. I hope you'll concede that another equally valid one is that we're hearing the deliberate shattering of the only institution in the country capable of standing up to the oligarchs.

So far the verifiable cuts made by DOGE are less than a tenth of a percent of the federal budget. However, a lot of has been cut so far has been very favourable to the ultra rich. The most obvious ones being cutting the IRS enforcement budget and gutting the CFPB.

It's possible to argue that all of that is good policy, but the facts make it very to claim that all of the destruction being wrought is going to make a meaningful dent in the government's spending.

Re: Intel appoints Lip-Bu Tan as its CEO

#96

Post by branko_d »

alterom wrote: post #61
tester756 wrote: post #3

What does he bring over Pat or Michelle?

>What does he bring over Pat or Michelle? Understanding everything it takes to design a chip, after spending 15 years leading the company that makes software tools for chip design, perhaps. Cadence Design Systems, that is. I worked there for a couple of years on computational lithography/optical proximity correction software that we licensed to TSMC and Micron. If you don't know about Cadence, well, you don't know ab…

> Some of the biggest EDA tools come from companies that use them for a reason (NX by Siemens, CATIA by Dassault, ...).

What do you mean? NX and CATIA are mechanical CAD systems, not EDA tools.

Re: Intel appoints Lip-Bu Tan as its CEO

#97

Post by branko_d »

ChrisArchitect wrote: post #7

Remaking Our Company for the Future: A message from Lip-Bu Tan, who has been named Intel CEO, to company employees. https://newsroom.intel.com/corporate/lip-bu-tan-remaking-our...

> Together, we will work hard to restore Intel’s position as a world-class products company, establish ourselves as a world-class foundry and delight our customers like never before.

Sounds like he wants design and foundry to stay together.

Re: Intel appoints Lip-Bu Tan as its CEO

#98

Post by brewdad »

UncleOxidant wrote: post #44
gkanai wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It doesn't feel right. Who would you have as CEO?

Gelsinger. Should've kept Pat and gotten rid of (at least some of) the board.

His problem was that he had a vision, possibly the correct one, with absolutely no clue how to execute it. That is unforgivable in a CEO.

Re: Intel appoints Lip-Bu Tan as its CEO

#99

Post by pengaru »

netsharc wrote: post #53
pertymcpert wrote: post #48

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why is that?

I agree with grandparent commenter that it's shocking a lot of people (also here) think DOGE is a serious endeavour and not some slapstick bunch of people. The realization is that even in here, plenty of people's emotions cloud their ability to think.

My assumption is intelligent people generally have better things to do with their time than chat on HN....

Re: Intel appoints Lip-Bu Tan as its CEO

#100

Post by alecco »

alterom wrote: post #58
alecco wrote: post #21

Sounds like the guy to trim Intel to be sold in in parts. Intel engineers: thank you for these amazing machines, for all these years. They shaped many lives. We salute you.

What? He's led Cadence for many years. You know, making tools to design silicone. As a former Cadence employee, I really don't have any complains about his leadership, looking back at my time there. He's been on Intel's board for a long time too. I have no idea where you'd get that impression, so please elaborate.

On the contrary, because he was leading Cadence it looks like he will at least spin off the fabs. The major card Intel had against competitors was the integration. The tick-tock model.

The failure of Intel is in the board and terrible middle-managers. If Intel becomes fabless like AMD it will be left with the worse parts. They will make money in the sale but there will be nothing left.

Intel had a lot of cool tech recently like Optane and QAT. The failure to get market adoption lies squarely in management. Can you believe they put in-chip yearly licenses to enable QAT, that's INSANE (what if they 10x the license price next year?). And of course, almost zero reach out to open source. Only a PoC and calling it a day.

IMHO, Intel should concentrate in their core strengths. Fire most of the managers, get rid of the toxic board. Open all they can and invest heavily in documentation and software, guided by the community. But this is not going to happen. The board is firmly in place.

Post reply on HN