Intel's gross incompetence has a price...

The is the one downside of seeing that rotten, corrupt company get
what it deserves, less market share.

Intel to lay off 16,000 employees - sources | Tom's Hardware UK and
Ireland
http://tomshardware.co.uk/2006/05/31...lay_off_16000/

What gross incompetence. They're merely a business researching their future.
They have always been an excellent employer.
Old Bob

Intel isn't going anywhere.
While AMD has increased market share there is no gloom or doom forecast for
Intel. Intel's real problem is that its stock price has been stalled for too
long in the $17-$18/share range and it pays a very low dividend.
This has large investors p.o.'d and pushing management to do something to
move share price so they can dump their portfolios. A stock is of no value
to a professional investor, regardless of the company's actual performance,
if the stock price is static.
An all too common way to increase apparent profitability and create the
image of change in a large company is to lay off employees: short term there
is less financial obligation. However in many instances a large percentage
of that laid off work force is replaced by temporary hires, new workers
hired at lower wages and benefits or jobs exported to the lowest third world
bidder. The basis of the Chinese economy, for example, is millions of people
working dead end jobs for around $1/day with no hope for change--with 1
billion people it is merely a statistical blip for China to maintain a
permanent chunk of a tamed poplulation in this quasi slave labor sector with
which first world workers cannot compete on cost.
A company like Intel is measured not by the quality of its products but the
perception of profitability and future expansion prospects. It is perception
that sells stock, not its actual value.

Intel has lost its technological leadership (a few years ago). It used
to be that AMD just copied and tried to sell cheaper. This is no longer
the case. AMD is now the technology leader (as born out by almost every
head to head performance comparison, mostly because AMD has their
memory controller on board and has a more sophisticated dual core
architectore than Intel) to the point where Intel essentiall copied
AMD's 64 bit architecture, (and left a few things out on the way).
Unless Intel works to restablish their tech leadership, I think things
will slowly continue to change to the point where most people will
think that AMD is what you want in your computer and Intel will be a
'has-been'. AMD has already announced quad-core chips for next year,
what's Intel doing?


bmoag wrote:
Intel isn't going anywhere.
While AMD has increased market share there is no gloom or doom forecast for
Intel. Intel's real problem is that its stock price has been stalled for too
long in the $17-$18/share range and it pays a very low dividend.
This has large investors p.o.'d and pushing management to do something to
move share price so they can dump their portfolios. A stock is of no value
to a professional investor, regardless of the company's actual performance,
if the stock price is static.
An all too common way to increase apparent profitability and create the
image of change in a large company is to lay off employees: short term there
is less financial obligation. However in many instances a large percentage
of that laid off work force is replaced by temporary hires, new workers
hired at lower wages and benefits or jobs exported to the lowest third world
bidder. The basis of the Chinese economy, for example, is millions of people
working dead end jobs for around $1/day with no hope for change--with 1
billion people it is merely a statistical blip for China to maintain a
permanent chunk of a tamed poplulation in this quasi slave labor sector with
which first world workers cannot compete on cost.
A company like Intel is measured not by the quality of its products but the
perception of profitability and future expansion prospects. It is perception
that sells stock, not its actual value.

W (winhag) wrote:
Intel has lost its technological leadership (a few years ago). It used
to be that AMD just copied and tried to sell cheaper. This is no longer
the case. AMD is now the technology leader (as born out by almost every
head to head performance comparison, mostly because AMD has their
memory controller on board and has a more sophisticated dual core
architectore than Intel) to the point where Intel essentiall copied
AMD's 64 bit architecture, (and left a few things out on the way).
Unless Intel works to restablish their tech leadership, I think things
will slowly continue to change to the point where most people will
think that AMD is what you want in your computer and Intel will be a
'has-been'. AMD has already announced quad-core chips for next year,
what's Intel doing?

Gee it almost sounds like you guys are talking about the American car
industry.


Eric

Rich wrote:
The is the one downside of seeing that rotten, corrupt company get
what it deserves, less market share.

Intel to lay off 16,000 employees - sources | Tom's Hardware UK and
Ireland
http://tomshardware.co.uk/2006/05/31...lay_off_16000/

I am not at all sure what this has to do with digital photography.

I also don't quite understand why a company is a "that rotten, corrupt
company" because it may "lay off 16,000 employees"

Rich did edit the actual announcement which was "may lay off or
"re-deploy" up to 16,000 employees." That editing did change the meaning
somewhat. and he neglected to note the line in the report he referenced
"Intel, of course, is one of those very few companies that never have laid
off workers"

It would seem to me that Intel has been and is trying to be a
responsible company and Rich has intentionally or un-intentionally distorted
the story by selective quotes.

Note: I may well have also selectively quoted in such a way as to
distort, I did not bother to read the whole thing. If I did not present a
fair response, I will apologize now.

--
Joseph Meehan

Dia duit

On 3 Jun 2006 13:51:50 -0700, "bluezfolk" wrote:


W (winhag) wrote:
Intel has lost its technological leadership (a few years ago). It used
to be that AMD just copied and tried to sell cheaper. This is no longer
the case. AMD is now the technology leader (as born out by almost every
head to head performance comparison, mostly because AMD has their
memory controller on board and has a more sophisticated dual core
architectore than Intel) to the point where Intel essentiall copied
AMD's 64 bit architecture, (and left a few things out on the way).
Unless Intel works to restablish their tech leadership, I think things
will slowly continue to change to the point where most people will
think that AMD is what you want in your computer and Intel will be a
'has-been'. AMD has already announced quad-core chips for next year,
what's Intel doing?

Gee it almost sounds like you guys are talking about the American car
industry.


Eric

No, the Japanese never got a handle on the processor market.
They tried though.
-Rich