Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

erosram t1_j631rv1 wrote

I like intel, but after seeing them drag their feet, play games with gatekeeping technology, buying up small companies and running their technologies into the ground, having intentionally confusing terminology and nomenclature and product lines that are meant to extract as much money from each product segment and customer as possible, and taking innovative technologies like optane and kicking them to death, I can’t say I mind it too much.

I want them to climb back in the ring, but I also want them to learn a lesson or two.

224

DanielPhermous t1_j63c8tf wrote

> I like intel

Having read the entire comment, I am bound to ask... why?

74

erosram t1_j63cuve wrote

Because I know every company is made up of good people and bad. But for most of intels life, there’ve been a lot of good people advancing computers for everybody. Recently it’s all the MBAs and shareholders who are running the company.

89

Zalbag_Beoulve t1_j63jeu1 wrote

Totally, that's why they lost a massive anti trust lawsuit nearly 20 years ago. The shitty behavior is definitely new. 100%.

27

Mr-Logic101 t1_j659uvp wrote

They have not been competitive because they did not contract out there chip manufacturing. They manufacture in-house. That is why reason AMD advanced quickly.

The ultra Capitalist MBAs would have contracted out production to minimize liability and increase flexibility.

3

sub-merge t1_j63u8sq wrote

I worked for intel in Vancouver from an acquisition they made for AR glasses called “Vaunt”. They flew us around the world, wasted billions then scrapped the project before launch about 5 months after announcing it. To this day, it was one of the most exciting and confusing projects I’ve ever worked on. I still wonder to this day what happened.

31

katieberry t1_j64zxlr wrote

I heard a lot of this fell on BK’s terrible decision making (I’m also ex-Vaunt, though not by acquisition).

My favourite part was when they planned a PR blitz, backed out of announcing anything at the last minute, then details leaked, and The Verge had exclusivity rights so was able to publish their whole article as a result. The one time I haven’t been angry that something I was working on leaked.

16

sub-merge t1_j65sylz wrote

Ah I remember working with you actually when they flew us and the Israeli team down to Santa Clara to basically have a 48 hour coding hackathon. Hope all is well!

7

renlewin t1_j67grqm wrote

It definitely started with BK. I was in HR at Intel at the time, and the talk was there was a special team just to deal with him and his issues.

3

skatecrimes t1_j64c9bt wrote

Probably research came back no one would buy them. Vr/ar is a huge money sink with little demand. Its got a few more generations before its small enough and good enough for mass usage.

6

SpecificAstronaut69 t1_j633ie4 wrote

> having intentionally confusing terminology and nomenclature and product lines that are meant to extract as much money from each product segment and customer as possible

This is why I haven't had an Intel processor in over a decade.

Just...could not be arse figuring out the difference between the 1234K, the 1324, the 1243, and the 1342K, even though they've got the same clocks and cores, and then wondering if that motherboard I want is the right motherboard for it.

26

mb2231 t1_j63lgxh wrote

I don't know, I never really thought intel's processor naming was that hard to understand....

13 - Generation

7 - Processor SKU/Line (i.e. i7)

00

K/F/S - Unlocked/No Graphics/Special Edition

23

MaximumPlume t1_j63n5cn wrote

Same. I’m not sure if it’s the blue cool-aid that I’m drinking or what, but their naming schemes aren’t that confusing.

Not to mention each of my builds gets researched as I’m figuring out what components I’ll be using – so I never really had any issues with guaranteeing that everything works once I get all the hardware together.

However if the objective is to head to the store, grab a bunch of parts off the shelf, and have everything just fit together when building at home, then yeah I guess it’s currently not so straightforward.

15

Actually-Yo-Momma t1_j64ma4k wrote

TV naming conventions was hard for me until i googled “Samsung naming conventions”. Most of this info for any company is one 5 second search away lol

2

SparkStormrider t1_j63e1tv wrote

Seems like every processor needs its own mobo for it when it comes to Intel and their mobos, regardless who makes them, are expensive. There were like 5 generations of cpus on the AMD side that used one socket and didn't see any degrading of performance when upgrading to newer processors.

17

SpecificAstronaut69 t1_j63g3wk wrote

I loved when they simply removed a single pin - 1156 to 1155 - just to fuck over backwards compatibility, while still being able to use the same tooling for the processors and saving themselves money...while ensuring the consumer has to upgrade more than just his CPU.

27

SparkStormrider t1_j63jcbm wrote

Yeah, fucking greed at its finest. This isn't something new with Intel either. They tried to do do away with the socket years ago saying sockets have gone as far as the technology would allow, and introduced Slot 1. Luckily that bullshit died real fast.

12

Sylanthra t1_j647sr9 wrote

If you find that confusing, than I guess you haven't upgraded your computer at all in over a decade huh?

3

SpecificAstronaut69 t1_j65ru0k wrote

Nope, 2019 was the last major upgrade.

I'm just not the sort of guy who jerks off over learning model names, and, at any rate, my time is worth a lot more than yours.

1

Sylanthra t1_j65wa1k wrote

Well mister moneybags, I guess, it was an AMD processor and AMD is well known for their clear naming schemes that don't involve numbers like the Ryzen 7 3700x.

1

SpecificAstronaut69 t1_j6664rt wrote

I like how you called me "Mr. Moneybags" when you know I bought AMD.

1

Sylanthra t1_j66qy2k wrote

You are the one saying you are worth more than me, I am simply acknowledging your superiority.

1

SpecificAstronaut69 t1_j68iylj wrote

Where did I say that?

And saying I'm superior to you isn't that big a deal. Pretty much everything on the planet is superior to you. I've run over stuff on then highway that's superior to you.

1

CitySeekerTron t1_j67d9m8 wrote

For fun add the Atom, Celeron, and Pentium line. Do you want a Celeron 5125j, or a Pentium gold?

Or maybe you want a CPU with AVX512... Here's some options... And they're gone!

1

Zerksys t1_j64bpwm wrote

I feel like this is the fate of a lot of large companies whose core business, at one point, revolved around innovation and engineering. Over time, good engineering and creative innovation take a back seat to the company being run more like a hedge fund or a bank than a technology company. This is when the fall from grace usually starts.

5

PatternMachine t1_j65gif2 wrote

The term for this is 'financialization' and it is endemic across all industries. The assets generated from the core business are used to continue generating money through investments and other financial tools. Even (maybe especially) cultural institutions like museums or even universities fall prey to it.

2

phoenix0r t1_j668i2b wrote

Because no one wants to invest in a company that has stopped growing and increasing demand and profits. So to have these optics, these companies do this MBA BS to basically hide the fact that they don’t have any other new groundbreaking IP. If you lose investors, your company is basically sunk, even if you have a fantastic core product and dedicated customer base.

1

EmotionalGuarantee47 t1_j63o1dn wrote

Intel could have pushed opencl to compete with cuda. But they botched it and I believe it was on purpose. There was just one person working on beignet for so long.

They could not let go of their x86 compatibility and “ecosystem” as a talking point and wanted to kill any advancement in heterogeneous computing. They shot themselves in the foot.

I don’t blame amd for not trying hard enough. Things might be good for them now but back when opencl could have used some investment they were busy putting fires.

So yeah. Screw intel and screw apple for their neglect of opencl. And screw them if they say don’t use cuda because it’s not open source.

3

ericneo3 t1_j66mlmd wrote

Sounds a lot like ADOBE, DELL, HP, CISCO and LENOVO.

It seems like these companies get big then fire the product people to hire cheap overseas and marketing people, only to find out they cannot do the job then have to take their millions and use it to gobble up all new tech because they can no longer produce it.

2

_MoveSwiftly t1_j63nk06 wrote

Pat Gilsinger is good at marketing. That's it.

1

pmotiveforce t1_j65hxi2 wrote

He pretty much just started, and inherited this mess. And his bona-fides are actual engineering of the old school variety. So I don't know how you can say he's just "good at marketing" based on anything.

2

_MoveSwiftly t1_j65phvr wrote

"Intel 7" but it's actually 10nm
"Intel 4" but it's actually 7nm

That's marketing, and he keeps lying about how well they're doing and refusing to acknowledge AMD because they're too high and mighty, until he got his nose bloodied a bit.

0

pmotiveforce t1_j65xpeg wrote

Rubbish. Formerly Intel's 10nm was e.g. closer to TSMC's 7. Feature sizes are not as simple as "Xnm, derp!"". Intel's new naming scheme more closely aligns with what TSMC/Samsung are using.

4

trevize1138 t1_j64c6we wrote

> Every great cause begins as a movement, becomes a business, and eventually degenerates into a racket.

Eric Hoffer

1