Intel had technology and people, they just didn’t have the guts to take the plunge in operating profit.

1/ Intel had technology and people, they just didn’t have the guts to take the plunge in operating profit.

What Intel’s Former Finance Officer Said

2/ It wasn’t just Grove CEO’s harsh management that brought Intel back to life in the 1980s.

3/ Optimization of the manufacturing process played an important role in Intel’s success, but combining manufacturing capacity with industry-leading chip design was also an important factor.

4/ Intel called it the “TikTok” method, which combines more efficient chip design (“TikTok”) with every improvement in the manufacturing process (“Tik”).

5/ The close interaction of manufacturing, software, and system design allowed Intel to remain at the top of the PC processor market for 30 years.

6/ When Grove left in 2005, Intel began to drift back. According to interviews with former Intel employees, the company’s discipline-oriented culture began to gradually falter as PC chip production, which had long been a key business, made significant profits.

7/ The long-term gains have weakened the grove obsession that was spread across the company.

8/ Longtime Intel employees have seen the number of people wearing white shirts grow at executive level as the financial department’s influence grows and chemical and physical engineers weaken over the years.

9/ A company that was a symbol of American high-tech has faced a ‘lost decade’.

10/ After Grove left, Intel made no bold investments that took risks.

11/ Once the world’s most cutting-edge chipmaking capabilities lagged behind TSMC and Samsung.

12/ TSMC and Samsung can now produce chips with higher precision than Intel.

13/ Intel failed to take appropriate action at a critical juncture because it did not foresee the advent of smartphones or artificial intelligence.

14/ “Intel had technology and people. I just didn’t have the guts to take the plunge in operating profit,” a former Intel finance executive told me.

m.mt.co.kr/renew/view_amp…

15/ Why did Samsung Electronics lag behind SK Hynix in mass production of HBM. 

16/ Industry sources believe that Samsung Electronics was delayed in developing HBM than SK Hynix due to a combination of strategic priorities and factors such as cooperation and risk management. 

17/ Kim Yang-peng, a semiconductor researcher at the Korea Institute of Industrial Economics and Trade, said in a phone call with on the 22nd, “It is known that Samsung Electronics temporarily stopped developing HBM because it was not yet available at the time of 2019.”

18/ “There will be some delays in the process of moving to HBM2 and 3, and when the HBM market opened in earnest, we were a little less prepared to prepare for the market,” he said. 

19/ “NVIDIA is the company that uses HBM the most right now. Of course, AMD is also placing orders little by little, but the loss of the largest and most important first customer to SK Hynix seems to be the decisive factor,” he added.  

20/ Researcher Kim also said, “HBMs are close to on-demand production. Therefore, HBM2 and 3rd generation are not important, but what specifications customers who use HBMs need.

21/ When Nvidia said it needed HBM, SK Hynix supplied it in time, he said. “In securing future HBM customers, it will be more important what products are supplied (in a timely manner) tailored to customers than whether companies are ahead.”

ekoreanews.co.kr/news/articleVi…