Incoming Intel CEO Derides Company's Inability to 'Deliver Better Products' Than Apple's M1 Chip

[MacBH928]

This guy talks the talk but can he walk the walk. I am tired of people making claims. The signs are already not favourable, this guy comes from VMware which is software to lead CPU making?

He describes Apple as "lifestyle company". I guess he is new to the tech world and mistakes Apple for a "Gucci" label. Apple design all kind of software and hardware. Their hardware is better than YOUR hardware.

MacOS, iOS, iSuite, Safari, WebKit, HomeKit, WatchOS, ARM processors, iPod, iPhones, iTunes, iTunes Store, App Store, Macbooks, iPads, iMessage, iCloud..."lifestyle company" , yes.

 

[Michael Scrip]

this guy comes from VMware which is software to lead CPU making?

His last job was with VMware...

but...

"Gelsinger, 59, spent 30 years at Intel and was among its top engineers and top Oregon executives when he left the company in 2009. He became VMware’s CEO in 2012."

 

[I7guy]

[...]He describes Apple as "lifestyle company".[...]

I don’t think he’s wrong, but I don’t like apple products any less in spite of any labels.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

Of course CEO would have to say that.. You couldn't just abandon your fellow customers and say "This is the end of the road, we have no future'."

That would take HUGE balls. Maybe they should be looking for a buyout or merger. The last president of Novell appeared to run the company like it had no future. I think he was the same guy that ran Sun Microsystems like it had no future too. And wasn't he also at Netscape?

But a real president of a company that has stumbled like Intel has almost has to come in and slam the past to give the investor class a signnal that they are going to shake things up and not reproduce the past. The investor class needs to feel they will be rewarded for sticking with, or investing in, Intel.

I remember, back in their glory days, I was in 'The Valley', and stopped for the tour of their museum, and even got a couple samples. Intel had a future, a clear future. Now? Cloudy, their future is. They need someone to come in and force the onnce behemoth to focus on the future again, or they will be sold like the last cow at the cattle show. Dismembered and soon only a memory.

 

[PinkyMacGodess]

I don’t think he’s wrong, but I don’t like apple products any less in spite of any labels.

Apple IS a lifestyle company. No doubt about it. *shrug*

 

[cmaier]

Of course CEO would have to say that.. You couldn't just abandon your fellow customers and say "This is the end of the road, we have no future'."

No. he could have said “we have some real tough competitors out there. We haven’t kept the promises we made to the industry about our fab progress, and we are going to see, increasingly, our former customers deciding they are better off going it alone. And, the future is that we aren’t going to be guaranteed business just because we are Intel or just because we are x86. With that all in mind, here’s what we are going to have to do to return to glory. And if we all do our jobs and execute, we will do so....”


I worked at AMD during a lot of lean years, when our market share was 5 percent or so, and heard a lot of these speeches. If management had said “i can’t believe we are getting beaten by Intel, of all companies!” not much progress would have been made. Don’t underestimate your competition. Have a realistic view - they’re good, they have certain advantages over you, they don’t need what you have been trying to sell them, and here’s why we lost them as a customer. Only then can you come up with an honest plan to solve your problem.

(By the way, at Sun i heard speeches more akin to what gelsinger said. A lot of “we are better at chip design than these other companies, so don’t allow yourself to be beat by them.” That didn’t work out very well for Sun.)

 

[stringParameter]

We'll see. But it sounds like some dinosaur is severely out-of-touch with reality.

There is no need to bring ageism into this discussion. It really doesn't belong on MacRumors forums especially considering the industry was founded by people you would call dinosaurs.

 

[jz0309]

The worst days of Intel (the Skylake forever era) are behind, but even Alder Lake probably won't compete too great against the M2.

probably true, but Intel chips don't have to "compete" against apple's M chips as Apple does not and imho never will sell chips, and Intel is well aware that they lost Apple as a customer. Now, if let's say AMD jumps and create a Arm based desktop/notebook CPU and it catches on, then Intel has to compete, but that is nowhere the case, yet

 

[cmaier]

probably true, but Intel chips don't have to "compete" against apple's M chips as Apple does not and imho never will sell chips, and Intel is well aware that they lost Apple as a customer. Now, if let's say AMD jumps and create a Arm based desktop/notebook CPU and it catches on, then Intel has to compete, but that is nowhere the case, yet

True, though I disagree with the conclusion - they do need to compete. Because if Apple continues to beat Intel, Intel’s customers will begin to lose *their* customers, and they will begin to think “maybe we should use our own chips too.” And Microsoft will be more than willing to help them. Won’t happen quickly, but Intel can’t afford for Macs to blow away PCs in speed and thermals for too many years before it’s a real problem for them.

 

[jz0309]

True, though I disagree with the conclusion - they do need to compete. Because if Apple continues to beat Intel, Intel’s customers will begin to lose *their* customers, and they will begin to think “maybe we should use our own chips too.” And Microsoft will be more than willing to help them. Won’t happen quickly, but Intel can’t afford for Macs to blow away PCs in speed and thermals for too many years before it’s a real problem for them.

totally agree, I worded that poorly, absolutely Intel has to compete TODAY (AMD in both desktop/notebook and server, plus the likes of Ampere and others in server)

 

[Osamede]

Speaking at an Intel all-hands meeting yesterday, Gelsinger derisively implied that Apple is merely a "lifestyle company," so Intel must be able to surpass its technology:

"We have to deliver better products to the PC ecosystem than any possible thing that a lifestyle company in Cupertino. We have to be that good, in the future."

The jibe at Apple comes after the launch of Apple Silicon last year....



"Jibe"? What jibe?

Whomever decided to write this as a "battle" article, is indulgign in a shameless exercise in fake news.

First the Intel guy actually clearly pays respect to Apple, saying "we have to be that good"!

Second, in this day and age being a company that is relevant to consumer lifestyle is the holy grail - it's the only way to actually generate consumer value from your underlying technology.

There was no "jibe" at all - the guy is saying to Intel that they have to start playing ball with their head up, because that's the only way to win in this day and age. And he is completely correct.

It's also inconceivable that the leader of Intel would not respect Apple's technology capabilities especially having just seen them release the M1, which Intel could only wish it had. He obviously has the utmost respect and is using Apple as a positive example.

Please just write the news as it happened and stop this pathetic MIS-paraphrasing of facts and statements.

 

[chucker23n1]

Speaking at an Intel all-hands meeting yesterday, Gelsinger derisively implied that Apple is merely a "lifestyle company," so Intel must be able to surpass its technology:


The jibe at Apple comes after the launch of Apple Silicon last year....



"Jibe"? What jibe?

“Lifestyle company”.

Second, in this day and age being a company that is relevant to consumer lifestyle is the holy grail

Perhaps, but that is not at all the vibe here.

 

[Osamede]

Intel would be nowhere if computing had never reached the point where everybody had a couple computers in their home, some 3 or 4. Lifestyles generate demand and volume.

 

[cmaier]

Speaking at an Intel all-hands meeting yesterday, Gelsinger derisively implied that Apple is merely a "lifestyle company," so Intel must be able to surpass its technology:


The jibe at Apple comes after the launch of Apple Silicon last year....



"Jibe"? What jibe?

Whomever decided to write this as a "battle" article, is indulgign in a shameless exercise in fake news.

First the Intel guy actually clearly pays respect to Apple, saying "we have to be that good"!

Second, in this day and age being a company that is relevant to consumer lifestyle is the holy grail - it's the only way to actually generate consumer value from your underlying technology.

There was no "jibe" at all - the guy is saying to Intel that they have to start playing ball with their head up, because that's the only way to win in this day and age. And he is completely correct.

It's also inconceivable that the leader of Intel would not respect Apple's technology capabilities especially having just seen them release the M1, which Intel could only wish it had. He obviously has the utmost respect and is using Apple as a positive example.

Please just write the news as it happened and stop this pathetic MIS-paraphrasing of facts and statements.

“Merely a lifestyle company” is certainly a jibe.

 

[Rigby]

“Merely a lifestyle company” is certainly a jibe.

But he didn't say "merely".

 

[Shirasaki]

The sheer number of people thinking intel is downplaying the threat and not taking Apple seriously baffles me. At this point intel is in a terrible spot being sieged by AMD and got hammered by Apple silicon. Boosting employee morale would not be a bad call by doing things like that. Do you guys really think Intel is not valuing their opponent seriously behind the scene?

 

[cmaier]

But he didn't say "merely".

The original post says he implied it. And we actually don’t know exactly what he said.

 

[cmaier]

The sheer number of people thinking intel is downplaying the threat and not taking Apple seriously baffles me. At this point intel is in a terrible spot being sieged by AMD and got hammered by Apple silicon. Boosting employee morale would not be a bad call by doing things like that. Do you guys really think Intel is not valuing their opponent seriously behind the scene?

Yes i do.

 

[Rigby]

The original post says he implied it. And we actually don’t know exactly what he said.

I do actually. The quote in the Macrumors article is accurate, and it was the only sentence he said that was related to Apple.

 

[cmaier]

I do actually. The quote in the Macrumors article is accurate, and it was the only sentence he said that was related to Apple.

So you are an Intel employee.

 

[Rigby]

So you are an Intel employee.

Nope.

 

[Alan Wynn]

"Jibe"? What jibe?

I have explained this before, so here is the re-cap. When he said “we are being beaten by lifestyle company” the statement would only be meaningful and impactful if one would not expect “a lifestyle company“ to beat intel.

If he was the coach of an NCAA second division college football team trying to motivate his players, he would not say: “We are getting beaten by the Super Bowl Champions”, nor “We are getting beaten by the Division I National Champions”, but something like: “We are losing to high school football teams!”

That is the point of the statement “We are getting beaten by a lifestyle company.” They should not be any good at this, as all they care about is marketing.

Second, in this day and age being a company that is relevant to consumer lifestyle is the holy grail - it's the only way to actually generate consumer value from your underlying technology.

That is not what the phrase “lifestyle company“ means. Presuming he meant a company that is a lifestyle brand (rather than arguing that he meant the first $2 trillion company was a lifestyle business, meaning one that made just enough money for its core team to keep them in a certain lifestyle without having to do much work), he was saying that they are mostly focused on marketing. It is the same thing as all the people who argue that Apple is a cult or a religion, or that their customers are sheep. It denies that they make products that people want to own because of their quality and the user experience they offer.

It's also inconceivable that the leader of Intel would not respect Apple's technology capabilities especially having just seen them release the M1, which Intel could only wish it had. He obviously has the utmost respect and is using Apple as a positive example.

I have no idea what he thinks about Apple in his heart of hearts, but I do know that his statement was not about taking them seriously as a technology company. Again, @cmaier gave an example of what he could have been said that would have shown he took them seriously.

 

[rkuo]

I have explained this before, so here is the re-cap. When he said “we are being beaten by lifestyle company” the statement would only be meaningful and impactful if one would not expect “a lifestyle company“ to beat intel.

If he was the coach of an NCAA second division college football team trying to motivate his players, he would not say: “We are getting beaten by the Super Bowl Champions”, nor “We are getting beaten by the Division I National Champions”, but something like: “We are losing to high school football teams!”

That is the point of the statement “We are getting beaten by a lifestyle company.” They should not be any good at this, as all they care about is marketing.

That is not what the phrase “lifestyle company“ means. Presuming he meant a company that is a lifestyle brand (rather than arguing that he meant the first $2 trillion company was a lifestyle business, meaning one that made just enough money for its core team to keep them in a certain lifestyle without having to do much work), he was saying that they are mostly focused on marketing. It is the same thing as all the people who argue that Apple is a cult or a religion, or that their customers are sheep. It denies that they make products that people want to own because of their quality and the user experience they offer.

I have no idea what he thinks about Apple in his heart of hearts, but I do know that his statement was not about taking them seriously as a technology company. Again, @cmaier gave an example of what he could have been said that would have shown he took them seriously.

I don't think it's about not taking Apple seriously. It's a factual statement that if you are microprocessor company (like Intel), then you must be better at microprocessors than other companies, and especially you must be better at it than your customers! Otherwise you have no reason to exist in the market.

 

[Alan Wynn]

I don't think it's about not taking Apple seriously.

Again, I have no idea what he thinks, I just know that the his statement diminishes Apple as a competitor. He did not say: “We are getting beaten by the largest, most focused, technology company in the world.”

It's a factual statement that if you are microprocessor company (like Intel), then you must be better at microprocessors than other companies, and especially you must be better at it than your customers!

No it is not a factual statement. It should surprise no one, that a company as large and resource rich as Apple should be able to build a specialized family of microprocessors that is better than those built to serve a wide variety of customers. Again, the perfect example of this is the Apple Silicon hardware support for reference counting that is needed only by Objective-C and Swift. That has a huge impact on the processor’s performance for Apple’s languages, but would have no impact for Windows-based systems.

Otherwise you have no reason to exist in the market.

It would be great if they were able to make general purpose chips that were better than those specialized ones that Apple makes for its own use, but that is not their only (or even primary) reason to exist. There are a large number of smaller customers who also need chips and Intel could have a great business serving their needs. Its problem is that it has not be doing that well either.

It is not my point that Apple should be offended by his statements, nor that I as an Apple customer should offended. What is my point is that by denigrating Apple in this statement it makes me concerned that he does not understand what his real challenge is.

 

[George Dawes]

Apple hit the ground running with the Apple silicon, just imagine the power in a few years times.

No wonder intel are worried, I would be too