[vertex-four]

Probably that they were trying to chase one or two major clients, who turned out to be uninterested.

[__d]

Or ended up going with Cavium's ThunderX2 instead?

[igravious]

bit of history here: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2018/05/08/cavium_thunderx2/

First Broadcom, now Qualcomm – if neither of those two can't crack the server market I don't hold out much hope for anyone else.

[baybal2]

I's say that nobody really tried hard enough. All of them can make a true killer product. And Intel has little defence against defeat in details, other than "being Intel." Many, many niches are not being hold tight by Intel, and they can't spare resources to fight them all.

[larschdk]

Or they are trying to push them to commitment

[ekianjo]

signaling you are about to give up is a rather counter productive strategy.

[gaius]

Worked for Airbus

[ekianjo]

Worked is a strong word. The A380 is rather on life support since it's basically only serving very few customers. On the whole this is a strategic loss for Airbus.

[Const-me]

Disagree about the strategic loss.

It essentially killed passenger versions of B747. Because there was no competition in that niche of the market, before A380 Boeing was able to earn very nice profits making them. 747-8I is more than 3 times more expensive than B737 MAX.

[ekianjo]

Yeah but since then the 747 model has fallen out of fashion, since the market is now linking smaller airports to each other rather than relying on very few large hubs - and regulations have also made it possible for bi-reactors to fly much longer distances than before, accelerating the transformation of the whole routes model.