[alterom]

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.

[alecco]

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.