Forbes: Only the Paranoid Resurge
The above link is a very interesting article on Forbes (beware popups, sliding animated ads, and all other sorts of crappy stuff) about Intel’s recent difficulties (losing marketshare to AMD, etc.). The title is a play on a famous Andy Grove quote, “only the paranoid survive”, which I really dislike. Paranoia and closedness are what I’m fighting against by evangelizing blogging and open conversation. But that’s neither here nor there - the article is really about what Intel says it’s going to do to overcome recent blows, and come back to dominance.
The most interesting part of the article, to me, describes how Andy Grove kept Pat Gelsinger after a meeting and “tore into him”. He “beat the tar” out of Gelsinger for not being confrontational enough, for sitting through head-nodding meetings. Grove lamented the change from the yelling, challenging, dramatic meetings of Intel past, and the article cites a “creeping mellowness” to blame for recent Intel missteps.
Later in the article, talking about what we’re going to do about it, Gelsinger says “We’re more focused and more angry”. Forbes author David Whelan says “Intel is bringing a rocket launcher to AMD’s knife fight.” Nice imagery, if nothing else. 
Sounds good to me. I’m ready to see the company make some dramatic changes, and start kicking butt and taking names, like the old days. That’s going to take some pretty big changes, and I don’t pretend to know what they need to be. I’m not an excecutive, with an executive point of view on the company and its strategy. I’m just a low level geek, trying to make some changes for good within my sphere of influence and expertise - blogging, wikis, podcasting, etc. But if Pat Gelsinger says Intel is angry, then that includes me. We’ve made some mistakes, and we can do a whole lot better. So let’s do it.
Disclaimer: I work for Intel, but these thoughts and opinions are my own. They’re not endorsed, sanctioned, or otherwise approved by Intel as a company. They might even be contrary to what some people think. But this is my blog, and I write what I think. Disagree with me? Tell the world about it on your blog! That’s the beauty of this little thing called conversation. 
TinyScreenfuls Feed (this blog)
Josh… posting at 2:13 AM? Do you ever sleep? Or is that the secret of your geekness? Anyway, interesting post; I appreciate your perspective.
“Constructive confrontation” for its own sake (i.e. more yelling, namecalling, loud challenging) isn’t going to change Intel’s fortunes in the marketplace.
Rather, the following things will:
a) a stronger understanding of the marketplace and what customers want. Intel too long has had the “we build it and they will come” mentality, fostered by MHz gains in chip frequencies. This doesn’t work anymore. Despite what the company says about his it is changing, and going to a platform orientation, the simple fact is that most people in the company are still thinking using the old mentality.
b) better and stronger marketing. Intel never compares itself directly nor indirectly to the competition. It needs to start doing this, touting the features and benefits of its silicon and platforms (also leveraging its considerable ecosystem and industry influence) to compare itself to AMD. Once this is laid out there, the superiority of Intel to the competition is easy for anyone to see.
c) Intel, which currently has around 105,000 employees worldwide, needs to fire around 30,000 of them and streamline itself. The company has WAAAYYY too much beauracracy, process, rules, guidelines and so on that absolutely kill any sort of innovation or entrepreneurial spirit inside the company. This needs to change.
d) Intel needs to have superior products to the competition. This is the biggest deficiency that Intel has had in the last 5-6 years — the products have been ho-hum, even me-too compared to AMD’s. Phrases like “OGA” were lip service. None of Intel’s major platforms or silicon, save perhaps for Centrino as a concept, were “OGA”. EVen the first versions of Centrino didn’t utilize Intel WLAN components — they were sourced from third parties.
e) Intel execs need to stop the hype and putting a pretty face on everything. Stop trying to put lipstick on a pig. Our products have been less good than in the past, and now our market share reflects that. Things are going to continue to slide before they get better. AMD now has enough industry leverage that we won’t be able to put them back in their place as easily as we have done in the past.
I’ve seen Paul O “angry” at things, but anger is not effective unless there is some constructive action too. I think you could say Andy got angry when people wasted his time or did not do what they were expected to do. This set expectations. Just being generally angry is not a prescription for success.
It almost seems that the current execs are confusing confrontation with anger. I know I saw Don McDonald make statements reeking of anger and bravado, but did that mean he was an effective leader at following through and making the right changes? Talk is cheap. Anger is cheap. Action is precious.
I have found it interesting that one message constantly repeated in executive internal speeches, blogs, webcasts, etc. is always “We’ve got to do better…we can do better…we WILL do better” as if they can just make it happen through mental telepathy.
Another message is “we’ve been here with AMD before and come out of it stronger” etc.
The fact of the matter is, that we haven’t been here before with AMD.
Visit a retail store, say a CompUSA or a BestBuy. See the ratio of Intel to AMD based PCs for sale, and ask the salespeople which computers they recommend. To a person it will be AMD based computers. And the salespeople, however accurate, will tout the price/performance/heat/cost of the AMD chips as being superior to Intel.
First we lost the gamers, the performance freak uber-users who demand the latest and greatest technology, to AMD. AMD processors were easier to mod and overclock, and cheaper to boot. Then they became higher performing than Intel product.
Next we lost the retail stores. something like 70-80% of market share of computers sold at retail to consumers are NON-INTEL-BASED PCs. We used to PWN retail. WTF happened? Why did we just let our market share at retail slide? Then the execs just explained it away (similar to the lipstick on a pig / spin argument that the employee above mentioned) as retail being non profitable nor high volume like enterprise products.
Now AMD is kicking our ass in the server market, and they’re at 20+% market share where they were below 5% just a couple of years ago. People, these are our highest-margin processors!!! We are LOSING, hard.
Remember, that busienss buyers buy PCs for their homes and families too. Now that we’ve lost the retail market, we are starting to see the implications in the business market. People buy AMD based PCs for their homes, and realize “Hey, these work just fine and cost less than Intel…and I remember that Intel is a very arrogant company who don’t really care about me anyway. So since this works so well, I’ll consider AMD clients and servers for my business next purchase cycle”
And so the story goes.
People, we’ve got a VERY tough road to hoe in the coming months and years. I don’t care how much yelling and rhetoric and anger and spin is put on things. We’re going to have to fight, and fight HARD through having the right products to meet CUSTOMER NEEDS (assuming we’re actually listening to them), to regain share.
I’m not sure we as a company are up to it.
What are your feelings?
Awesome discussion. I’m happy to see this many comments in such a short period of time.
Like most of you, I also see that we’re in trouble as a company. I don’t know the magic trick that it will take to fix it. I don’t think there IS one.
We need to do some serious self-examination, and stop doing the non-productive, bureaucratic things that we’ve always done. Or we’ll continue to get the same results.
Denise, I didn’t actually post at that time - my blogging software, Performancing for Firefox, seems to screw up the timestamp of my posts.
Being angry doesn’t change the fact that for the past few years our product line has been suffering; and we will pay for that for some considerable time. Just look at your sunday circulars and you see the ratio of AMD to intel Desktops (even laptops) that you see. This is causing the average joe to have this perception that AMD is faster/better than Intel; and that perception may be too hard the longer we wait.
What will be interesting is to see whether Intel IT allows Macintosh computers inside of the walls of the company.
We as an employee base could increase our corporate productivity by at least 20% if we migrated to the Mac platform. And we could lose a lot of ITSG overhead (employees, costs) at the same time. I’d bet it could be a multi-billion-dollar benefit to the bottom line of the company.
But it will never happen, simply because people need to justify their jobs and empires. Nobody thinks in these terms, but you HAVE to look at all aspects of a company’s operations to improve the bottom line.
Yes, I do not believe that Intel has the will to truly change. It is so different than it was 5, 7, 8 years ago. Back in the days when Intel was respected as an industry leader, back when our stock reflected our value to the industry, back when “Intel Inside” meant something to end customers rather than an advertising subsidy to our OEMs.
I pine for those days, and truly fear we will never (as a corporation) see the likes of anything close to them again. We are sliding down the slippery slope of becoming a commodity processor vendor. Albeit one that has a lot of fabs and does the R&D for the rest of the industry.
AMD is here to stay. We’ll see if there is any official executive reaction to this discussion, posted to this blog. Bet not.
OK, back to the hive now.
This blog has great potential to become what “Mini-Microsoft” has become for Microsoft. Do you read that blog? If not Google it up. Particularly the posts about their version of “FOCAL”. You think we have it bad…..
-A.I.D.
I love the anonymous names you guys are leaving (Drone, etc.). Speaks volumes, I think.
WRT Macs at Intel, there are some, and I bet we’ll see more, now that the taboo of a non-Intel CPU is gone. I have a Mac Mini that I use for podcast production (and most everything else, with the exception of a few tools that are Windows only for now). I know of several others.
It would be interesting to see what impact on productivty Macs in the environment would have.
A.I.D., I’m a big Mini Microsoft fan, and I’d say that we have similar goals - trying to make the company better (though I don’t necessarily want to see a smaller Intel).
Have you seen the “Unofficial Intel Blog” - http://unofficialintelblog.blogspot.com/. Great stuff there, too. And people seem to think it’s me, writing anonymously.
Remember, “Only the Paranoid Survive”
If I used my real name or work IP address, I’d be sliding down NW 25th St. toward Evergreen on my ass so fast your head would spin.
I’ve got plenty to discuss and comment upon. Many many years worth.
Where do you want to take the discussion, my friend?
HA! Yes AID nailed it right on the head. This discussion is getting better and better.
I’m a Grade 9 ‘Droid and have actually considered getting my employee number, combined with the barcode on the outside of my cube, tattooed on my forearm as a cruel joke. Seriously.
Synonyms for ‘droid from Webster: bot, automaton, cyborg, robot, etc. All seem pretty appropriate.
Hive? Naah…you mean the [Borg] Collective rather.
Let’s have the discussion here.
I respect your privacy and anonymity - that’s not an obstacle to conversation about Intel.
Or, you could start your own anonymous blog.
Well, how about a thread/blogpost on the continual reduction of employee benefits to Intel employees as a starter. And the “positive spin” that our HR folks and execs put on the reduced benefits.
Sort of like eating broccoli dipped in nacho cheese sauce. Tastes good for a second, but the real taste starts to come through….
>Sort of like eating broccoli dipped in nacho >cheese sauce. Tastes good for a second, but >the real taste starts to come through…
God I hate the taste of that cheese sauce! Even Wonder-broccoli can’t save it.
Oh.. Jack… What the heck you doing here
Anyway, I love to see insider views! not RANTS! mini intel? oh pleassssssssssssseeee…..
we heard SO much after this & that, so don’t just complaint, give suggestion or even best, go influence and act on it!
I love this one - “Don’t tell me the problem, give me the solution!”
I think there would be a lot more discussion if we had a neutral space to discuss all of this. I know several people at Intel who have a lot to contribute and are itching to do so, but they would much rather do it in a place where it’s not all about you. No offense, but their goal is to try to make Intel better, not to further your intentions to become the next Internet famous person.
That Unofficial blog could be a good start, but there’s a heavy hand on it as well.
How about a message board somewhere, with a minimal amount of moderation? (just to delete confidential information and spam)
Mikael-
I think a neutral place would be great. I don’t WANT my blog to become the place for disgruntled Intel folks to come and talk. That’s part of the discussion I want to be a part of, and encourage, but in the end, as you note, this is my blog, and I write what I want here.
The good news is that it’s so easy for anyone who has something to say to start a blog, anonymous or not. That would be my suggestion - I’m more than willing to help anyone who’s interested to start their own blog, and add their own voice to the blogosphere. That’s kind of the whole point that I’m driving at.
I think Andy Grove’s constructive confrontation is the reason why Intel is in the position it’s in now. Constructive confrontation is easier said than done, and virtually useless if the person you’re “confronting constructively” is your manager or someone with a higher pay grade than you. I know from firsthand experience.
Nowadays constructive confrontation means not questioning authority and just shuttnig the hell up and doing what they say do. Unfortunately that is what launched Intel’s crazy rush to MHz which resulted in the promulgation of the inferior NetBurst microarchitecture, which led to our getting beat by a company that we could have put out of existence 10 years ago.
I think the silver bullet policy Intel has is a cynnical reaction to problem created by its ugly treatment of diverse employees. I also think the response that I’ve observed within Intel to this policy is particularly disappointing (though not surprising) and indicative of a presupposition that diverse candidates are somehow unqualified by default for jobs within Intel.
I think Intel needs to do benchmarks. They’ll find that diverse populations at other tech companies are much different (larger) than theirs, yet they are just as qualified as the diverse population inside of Intel.
I think if Intel was more involved in retaining the diverse population it had, it wouldn’t have any trouble finding diverse candidates. The word is out on diverse employees’ experiences at Intel and it is not appealing to “silver bullet” candidates.
I’d ask everyone to rethink before criticizing Intel or Microsoft. These are the two giants who shaped the modern computing world as we see today. They were responsible for computers to reach common person’s reach. I’d always stick with the leaders and I’d never go for products from other companies. If not for these two great firms I or YOU might not be blogging on this site now. You Bet!!
By the way how many of you are NOT using an Intel or Microsoft Product!!! ??
BEWARE GUYS….I SEE THAT THERE ARE MANY DUMMIES ON BLOGS ALL ACROSS THE NET PRETENDING TO BE INTEL EMPLOYEES AND COMMENTING AGAINST THEIR OWN COMPANY. YOU CAN GUESS WHO THESE DUPES WILL BE!!! USE UR OWN JUDGEMENT!!