How did Intel fall so hard?In early 2000's intel missed a chance to take over smartphone chip market which is worth 100$ billion due to its arrogant manageme...
  • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
    1·
    2 months ago

    They focused on cost cutting and stock buybacks instead of, you know, the extremely advanced R&D that making new integrated circuit technologies and incorporating them into products at scale requires.

  • darvocet@infosec.pubEnglish
    1·
    2 months ago

    Speculation on my part but i think it’s the same thing as Boeing really. They didn’t have any real competition for so long and they started cutting out the engineers who innovated to improve stock price.

    • Starbuck@lemmy.worldEnglish
      1·
      2 months ago

      There used to be a saying that Intel had a vault where they paid out the next ten years of CPU tech, so when they invented something new they put it there so they could make profits and control the advancement.

      Now, I’m not sure which thing they got wrong, but if it was true, I think Intel was probably caught off guard by all the speculative execution security issues and the GPU revolution (blockchain and AI).

    • magic_lobster_party@kbin.run
      1·
      2 months ago

      Nokia is another example. They were leading in mobile tech, only to struggle keeping up with smart phones.

      They’re so heavily optimized in old tech they can’t adapt to new tech.

      • Teknikal@lemm.eeEnglish
        1·
        2 months ago

        I’d say they just didn’t go touchscreen in time I remember a friend having the first iPhone and another had a Nokia n95 The N95 was way ahead in features and technology but people wowed over the Apple screen…

        • magic_lobster_party@kbin.run
          1·
          2 months ago

          They also did other weird decisions like focusing on Symbian, and then move all their attention on Windows. Nobody cared about Symbian or Windows. Everything was on Android and iOS.

          They were too slow to adapt to the new market, and when they adapted they did so in the wrong way.

  • resetbypeer@lemmy.worldEnglish
    1·
    2 months ago

    This happens when a MBA CEO ran an engineering company. Where did we hear that before?.. Something something Boeing.

      • resetbypeer@lemmy.worldEnglish
        1·
        2 months ago

        He is a supply chain guy. He did a tremendous job on making sure you need for every single thing on an apple device either an adapter or a repair that cost more than the device itself. Since Tim took over, the only noticable succeful disruption from a technological perspective is Apples M silicon. The rest is old wine in new bottles. For the rest its upselling and people that are crazy enough to put 1200 dollar/euro down for a phone or an 8gbyte RAM Mac. And to be straight, I have no problems with that. But there might be a time where Apple ends up in that same corner.

        • iopq@lemmy.worldEnglish
          0·
          2 months ago

          They did an attempt at VR, just because it didn’t sell doesn’t mean they didn’t make technically the most capable VR set

          • ikidd@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            2 months ago

            At that price, they weren’t going to sell much. What jackass thought people other than the most rabid fanbois was going to spend $3500 on a beta version of tech that hasn’t got a killer app yet?

          • demonsword@lemmy.worldEnglish
            1·
            2 months ago

            They did an attempt at VR

            but it was a me-too attempt, almost a copycat of existing hardware… hardly innovative