Quote from: The Werewolf on Yesterday at 22:16:51If this is mainly in middle and upper management, then this is a good thing.

Intel has been distracted by the most bizarre things of late, especially their terror at Apple's switch to ARM when Apple represents a small fraction of Intel sales and doesn't license or sell their hardware to other OEMs.

At the same time, Intel literally ignored AMD (as did a LOT of tech writers) who quietly designed new CPUs that blew away Intel and come close to tying with ARM, but at lower prices. Intel also gave up the NUC market, handing it to ASUS (literally) and tried fitfully to compete with Nvidia with their ARC GPUs - but have no clear direction there.

Having Intel run more by engineers than marketing people seems a much stronger position.

It will definitely be management layers that go. Tan was highly critical of Gelsinger's previous cuts that targeted engineers and said it needed to be middle-management that was cut.

While I alwasy feel sorry for those that will lose their jobs, these are decisions that are a decade overdue and the management layer should never have been allowed to grow so much in the first place.

If this is mainly in middle and upper management, then this is a good thing.

Intel has been distracted by the most bizarre things of late, especially their terror at Apple's switch to ARM when Apple represents a small fraction of Intel sales and doesn't license or sell their hardware to other OEMs.

At the same time, Intel literally ignored AMD (as did a LOT of tech writers) who quietly designed new CPUs that blew away Intel and come close to tying with ARM, but at lower prices. Intel also gave up the NUC market, handing it to ASUS (literally) and tried fitfully to compete with Nvidia with their ARC GPUs - but have no clear direction there.

Having Intel run more by engineers than marketing people seems a much stronger position.