% | $
Quotes you view appear here for quick access.

Intel Corporation Message Board

  • backbay_bstn backbay_bstn Mar 22, 2013 10:10 PM Flag

    It becoming clear Paul O. was the problem

    More & more evidence coming out that he couldnt work with either Cook or Ballmer. New CEO needs to know how to form partnerships & close deals. Paul O. was the worst thing to happen to Intel shareholders. Good riddance.

    SortNewest  |  Oldest  |  Most Replied Expand all replies
    • You are a genuine IDIOT!

      Sentiment: Buy

    • "By the end of the walk, Jobs would be haggling over price, Isaacson writes"

      Samsung offered Apple a package deal ...
      you buy ALL NAND and DRAM from us and we throw in AP at cost - something like this.
      A greedy, short term view that escalated in law suits -
      of course the fools underestimated Samsung

    • You are correct sir.

    • Paul O. has done just fine although he did miss the mobile market boom, he has quickly pointed them in the right direction.

      Not sure anyone could work with Cook or Ballmer. Cook is dry as summer grass and doesn't seem to have the motivation to do much except collect a paycheck. Ballmer is reportedly very difficult to work with and his personality is a bit eccentric.

      Sentiment: Strong Buy

      • 2 Replies to bjaythebear
      • More from Jobs autobio. Remember that Intel fabs had been running at capacity for 10 years and wafers had been on allocation. The Netbook volumes were increasing exponentially. ....

        Isaacson includes Otellini’s rebuttal to this account. The real issue, Intel’s CEO told him, is that Apple and Intel couldn’t agree on chip pricing. The companies also disagreed on who would control the design–another example, the author concludes, of Jobs’s compulsion to control every aspect of a product.

        Elsewhere in the biography, Isaacson recounts how Jobs and Otellini had gotten to know each other in the 1990s when Jobs was struggling to sustain his second company, NeXT, and “his arrogance had been temporarily tempered,” as Otellini put it. Later, at Apple, Jobs pushed for the pivotal move in 2005 to start using Intel chips for the Macintosh, after years using the PowerPC technology promoted by IBM and Motorola.

        Chip pricing in those days was also a key issue, with Jobs wanting better terms than other computer makers, the biography discloses. Jobs and Otellini would take walks together above the Stanford University campus, starting with broad pronouncements by Jobs about the evolution of computing. By the end of the walk, Jobs would be haggling over price, Isaacson writes.

      • Paul did not miss the boom. He did not want to transfer "ownership" of the Intel fabs to Apple.

        From Jobs autobiography.

        The episode is one of many anecdotes in Walter Isaacson’s biography of Apple’s late CEO. He writes that Jobs pushed for the use of Intel chips when Apple was developing its tablet computer, betting on the same technology that powered his company’s Macintosh desktop and laptop computers.

        Intel at the time was developing its low-powered Atom chip, which Jobs favored, Isaacson writes. Intel CEO Paul Otellini was pushing hard to work with Apple on the tablet, and Jobs was inclined to trust him.

        But Tony Fadell–then a key leader of Apple’s design efforts, now at the startup Nest Labs–was adamant that the iPad needed the even lower power consumption of chips based on designs from ARM Holdings. He felt so strongly about the matter that, during one meeting, he placed his Apple badge on the table and threatened to resign over the matter, according to the biography.

        Jobs eventually relented. Indeed, Apple became such a zealot for ARM that it began designing its own chips based on the technology, using an engineering team acquired by buying the startup P.A. Semi.

        The biography also includes some sharp criticism by Jobs of Intel, at least beyond its high-performance microprocessors for PCs. Intel, Jobs said, had wanted to do a “big joint project” with Apple to do chips for future iPhones but was not selected.

        “There were two reasons we didn’t go with them,” Jobs said, according to the book. “One was that they are just really slow. They are like a steamship, not very flexible. We’re used to going pretty fast. Second is that we just didn’t want to teach them everything, which they could go and sell to our competitors.”

    • The sudden announcement of his departure without naming a successor suggests that the board and him weren't keyed in either.

    • "More & more evidence coming out that he couldnt work with either Cook or Ballmer. New CEO needs to know how to form partnerships & close deals. Paul O. was the worst thing to happen to Intel shareholders. Good riddance."

      [Otellini brought the company to the point where Intel has the technology, manufacturing and capacity to dominate not just mobility but all of the processor markets. He presided over the bold development of FinFET and brought it to market. Now that we have reached the tipping point and the end of the ARM era, I'd say that the genius of Paul Otellini is clear. Are you really too blind to see it? I hope Intel keeps him on...]

      [Ballmer and Cook both seriously lack vision. Ballmer is more than a little nutty and suppresses innovation. Cook is killing Apple's cool factor. Cook moves with deadly slow deliberation, if he in fact is moving at all. Neither has ever been much of a deal maker in the past. Both are lessor versions of the people they replaced. Otellini is a superior strategic thinker to both. Otellini was slow to react to mobility but he has done the hard work not just to get back in the game but to control the game. Hats off to Mr. Otellini for his achievements and career...]

36.90+0.25(+0.68%)11:37 AMEDT