Yahoo Article
 
That's a pretty significant layoff for Intel.

They're just managers not like they do anything anyway ... they tell everyone else to do the work while they go play golf.
 
btw this is post 2999 and for the sake of my ego i'm going to save post 3000 for some lucky fellow who deserves a post from someone as awsome as me. (i'm kidding)
 

Just part of the restructuring that is going on right now. When you operate as a virtual monopoly for so long you tend to get fat and lazy.

All true!!! Intel has gotten too big for innovation, and that's why we saw AMD to be the first with 64bit, HyperTransport, On Die memory controller.
 
Intel has become very lazy and all they worried about was money, but when they saw AMD eating their marketshare away, they started to fight back. even though they did fight back, they still want to make money LOL!... for example they are still using the legendary FSB thing, and why ??? so they could see more chipsets which means more money for them!
 
Without AMD or more like competition we would be still dreaming abuot the 10GHZ Netburst Intel promised in 2010 lol!

If you believe AMD isn't in it for the money, you're blind and it's a miracle you're using a computer.  For that matter, any large company/corporation is in it for the money.  That's how they survive and prosper.

 
capitalism anyone ?  well if you reversed the positions and AMD was the bigger company that Intel is now, and you’d get very similar results.  They are a corporation first and foremost generating wealth been the first goal.  AMD or Intel, or any other company for that matter.  
 
i think it was good for comsumers that AMD did bring such an architecture that they did, it has created a situation where Intel now wants to regain ground, and they are doing this by deploying a very good CPU architecture at comparatively low prices.  but of course how could they do this without R&D and the investment with capital they have been able to generate in the first place?
 
my rant for the day, i'll return to my cave.

Except for the fact AMD has not excatly prospered...

If you believe AMD isn't in it for the money, you're blind and it's a miracle you're using a computer.  For that matter, any large company/corporation is in it for the money.  That's how they survive and prosper.
 
AMD is for the money too, but Intel wants to win every single business and they dont want competition, as for as the consumers that is not good. keeping prices low and making a fair and open competition is always good.

When it's time to cut the fat managers should be the first to go.

They're cutting payroll so they can cut processor pricing to beat AMD.

 
Don't kidd yourself, if AMD could support Intel's market share, they would in a heartbeat.

If you believe AMD isn't in it for the money, you're blind and it's a miracle you're using a computer.  For that matter, any large company/corporation is in it for the money.  That's how they survive and prosper.
 
AMD is for the money too, but Intel wants to win every single business and they dont want competition, as for as the consumers that is not good. keeping prices low and making a fair and open competition is always good.
I agree, it's great for consumers, but villafying Intel for doing the same thing AMD would do given the chance is very short-sighted.  No big corporation wants competition.  The ideal situation, in the eyes of the big wigs, for any corporation would be to control 100% of the market.  The good thing about this is, in the attempt to control the market, that's where we get great prices on products, like the new Conroes.

 
I wonder though...is this merely to help soften the blow of let's say 10,000 non-managers being layed-off?
 
Mr. Otellini is charged with reducing expenses by 1 billion dollars per year.  I would say 1,000 managers and 10,000 normal employees should get close to that (at least half!).

 
I wonder though...is this merely to help soften the blow of let's say 10,000 non-managers being layed-off?
 
Mr. Otellini is charged with reducing expenses by 1 billion dollars per year.  I would say 1,000 managers and 10,000 normal employees should get close to that (at least half!).
No more office pizza parties too.