It looks more like it's going to be double those estimates but we'll see.
Because there are an even greater number of people living in complete denial.I'm not sure why some people here are so obsessed with proving that AMD's balance sheet is bad. Hating on the company and technology..ok makes sense. Worrying that the company won't go under fast enough and trying to prove it with every post...this forum sure breeds some strange behavior.
If IBM has managed to hang on this long I doubt AMD is going anywhere.
IBM was at one point mostly a pc maker. They made Intel into what they are today by selecting x86. Throughout the years, IBM constantly reinvented their business to stay relevent. It is admirable. Read and Lisa brought that mentality to AMD.
Every CEO AMD has ever had has made enormous shifts to the company's business.
Sanders, among his many many changes, bought NexGen so he could get the K6 design as well as hired up the DEC Alpha design team so AMD could create the K7/K8 design.
Ruiz bought ATi to create a future of fusion.
Meyer spun-off the fabs and converted AMD into a fabless company.
Rory brought in ARM and the diversification plan.
Lisa has yet to make her mark, but we can be sure one is in the offing.
IBM went from x86 home PCs to all over the place including software.
The PC was a side project for IBM.
the embedded group is hardly business oriented, its console sales. And Consoles have historically been a dead end. Console makers refuse to give margins to chipmakers and have no trouble finding a new supplier every generation.
Last generation was IBM, this generation is AMD, next generation will be someone else.
The embedded group seem to be aimed at everything outside of PC and laptops.
The point is, IBM is great at diversifying whereas AMD couldn't really get it's head out of the home computer until Read showed up.
Given that AMD return right now is negative, if they can become a low return/low profit embedded player, it will be a victory for both management and shareholders.
That's understanding too, but the process is not yet complete. As a matter of fact GPU IP alone isn't enough in a world quickly moving towards integrated SoCs. That said, AMD is still relatively big and has relatively bleeding edge IP. They must find a market brackey to call theirs ASAP or else theybwill shrink, shrink and shrink until they become another VIA.I think that we are witnessing the "Via-ization" of AMD right now. Well, except for the fact that AMD (and before that, ATI), has significant GPU experience as well, something that Via kind of lacks. (Was their chipset IGP for their Nano CPUs, done in-house, or was that IP purchased?)
Meyer spun-off the fabs and converted AMD into a fabless company.
I didn't know this part. Do you think this was a bad move?
Yes, I do.
They were second only to Intel at that point. Had they diversified and opened a foundry division much like Samsung then they could have kept their fabs, their process advantage, and grown revenue to continue paying for R&D.
Yes, I do.
They were second only to Intel at that point. Had they diversified and opened a foundry division much like Samsung then they could have kept their fabs, their process advantage, and grown revenue to continue paying for R&D.
They were second only to Intel at that point. Had they diversified and opened a foundry division much like Samsung then they could have kept their fabs, their process advantage, and grown revenue to continue paying for R&D.
I thought it was Hector that did the fab deal.
Ruiz might have still been acting CEO when the decision was first made, but really I don't remember all that well.
Yes, I do.
They were second only to Intel at that point. Had they diversified and opened a foundry division much like Samsung then they could have kept their fabs, their process advantage, and grown revenue to continue paying for R&D.