S
server
Guest
On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 09:04:11 -0700 (PDT), Whoey Louie
<trader4@optonline.net> wrote:
Not so much odd as sad. IBM picked the wrong cpu for the PC.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
Science teaches us to doubt.
Claude Bernard
<trader4@optonline.net> wrote:
On Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 10:11:59 AM UTC-4, jla...@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Wed, 29 Jul 2020 04:01:42 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 7/28/2020 9:43 PM, jlarkin@highlandsniptechnology.com wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 20:13:54 -0400, bitrex <user@example.net> wrote:
On 7/28/2020 7:52 PM, John Larkin wrote:
On Tue, 28 Jul 2020 16:40:08 -0700 (PDT), Whoey Louie
trader4@optonline.net> wrote:
https://theprint.in/world/intel-corps-plan-to-outsource-manufacturing-is-the-end-of-an-era-in-us-tech/467936/
\"Intel Corps plan to outsource manufacturing is the end of an era in US tech
When most other US chip companies shut or sold domestic plants years ago, Intel held out, a strategy that is now in tatters, with the companys factories struggling to keep up.\"
CEO Bob Swan made the stunning announcement on Friday, during an earnings
call. It sent Intel down 16%, AMD up 16%. Bottom line, Intel first screwed
10nm, they are only now recovering and catching up on that. Meanwhile
Swan announced that 7nm is all screwed up, yields are terrible, it has
slipped another 6 months on top of at least six months earlier. Intel
won\'t be in production until 2022/23. MEanwhile AMC is producing 7nm
via TSMC right now. By the time Intel is on 7nm, TSMC will be on 3 nm.
In short, Intel has gone from being a node ahead to a node behind.
And Swan says the answer is Intel is considering outsourcing production
to other companies!
I remember discussing this here a couple years ago, warning that this is
what happens when you let accountants take over high tech companies.
I remember the usual suspects here arguing it was no big deal, it\'s just
\"managing\". Well, the idiot bean counter from Ebay that somehow would
up running Intel sure has screwed this up really badly. It\'s unlikely
Intel will ever recover. And it validates AMD being apparently right
and early to get out of fabs years ago and Apple choosing to ditch Intel.
It\'s a sad day for the future of high tech in America.
Intel screwed up the transition to EUV somehow. I think the problem
was mostly technical.
That said, Intel\'s management seems to be very rigid.
Intel\'s other problem is that x86 is ancient and buggy, and biggies
like Apple and Google can roll their own Arm-based chips and come out
ahead on price and performance.
I think Samsung is going to drop $1e10 or something amazing on a new
EUV-based fab too.
They tried making an x86 low-power derivative to compete with the ARM
market segment at one point, it was called Atom and it kinda sucked
Intel\'s value has always been superb lithography cranking out bad
architectures, and now they don\'t have the lithography.
I think a solid argument could be made that x86 has been a kludgy dog
since about 1988. Or at least since the last major opportunity they had
to not double down on it, on the Pentium.
It\'s always been a klugey dog. It evolved directly from 4004, 8008,
and 8080. When x86 was evolved (not invented) there were much better
architures around, like PDP-11 and 68K and others.
x86 has always been weak on hardware protections, and the ones that it
has are rarely used. So we get buffer overflow exploits, cache
exploits, all those crashes and viruses and trojans and ransomware and
patch-fests.
IF true, then it\'s odd that so much of the internet and modern computing
runs so successfully on it.
Not so much odd as sad. IBM picked the wrong cpu for the PC.
--
John Larkin Highland Technology, Inc
Science teaches us to doubt.
Claude Bernard