this post was submitted on 04 Dec 2024
95 points (97.0% liked)
Technology
60102 readers
2144 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related content.
- Be excellent to each another!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If disagreement about strategy was the cause for Intel's decline you'd have to ask yourself just how effective the board of the company is/was.
From where I'm looking strategy doesn't account for the ongoing engineering issues with fundamental bugs in their chips, or the never ending parade of "more of the same".
Right now there's an Intel CPU available at every single price point between expensive and absurd and very little to distinguish between them other than price.
An "Intel Inside" sticker used to be advertising, now it's a warning label.
There's also very little evidence that whatever Tan's strategy may have been was any better. Just evidence that they clashed about strategy. It doesn't mean his would have done any better at all.
His own strategy could have turned out the same or worse just as much as it could have turned out better, since we have no knowledge of what his actual strategy was.