Tuesday, October 19th 2021

Intel's CEO Blames Predecessors for Current State of the Company, Wants Apple Business Back with Better Processors

It's funny how new company CEOs always seem to blame their predecessors for whatever went wrong and it seems like Pat Gelsinger is no different, as he's throwing shade at his predecessors for not having been engineers. At the same time, he's set his mind on winning Apple back as a customer, as all Intel apparently has to do "is create a better chip than they can do themselves", with they being Apple here.

It should be pointed out that Intel hasn't had an engineer at the helm of the company since 2005, so the question is how far back Pat Gelsinger wants to throw the blame, although a guesstimate would be back to at least 2012/2013 when Paul Otellini stepped down. That said, in an interview with Axios, it's stated that "while he acknowledges the need to prove himself, Gelsinger said he will rebuild the company's credibility with its customers so that if they say they need a million of some chip by Monday, the order will be there by Sunday night."
That's a lofty goal during the current circumstances, although it seems like he has an ever bigger goal in mind and that is to get Intel back in with Apple, although technically the company isn't "out" as yet, since the Mac Pro and the 27-inch iMac are still Intel based. Gelsinger said Apple "did a pretty good job" with its new SoCs, although this was before the M1 Pro and M1 Max were announced, so it would be interesting to hear what he thinks about the new chips. It's hard to see Apple going back to Intel, especially in the mobile space, unless Intel can somehow beat Apple's own processors when it comes to both performance and power efficiency.

For those of us that have been around for a while and that have followed Intel, it's hard to see how Intel is going to deliver a competitive product, since the company is infamous for its comparatively poor power efficiency compared to Arm based SoCs and there's a reason why Intel no longer is competing in the smartphone market space. So what does Gelsinger plan to do in the meantime? Well, it looks like he's going to be busy making sure Intel makes better and more appealing products. You can watch part of the interview below.

Sources: Axios, Axios
Add your own comment

74 Comments on Intel's CEO Blames Predecessors for Current State of the Company, Wants Apple Business Back with Better Processors

#1
Nanochip
The real question is whether Intel’s manufacturing arm can keep up with his ambitions. If so, then bring it on! Would love to see Intel come back. Just like I was happy to see AMD come back.
Posted on Reply
#2
HD64G
So, Intel is in a bad state by their CEO's words? For the money they make that was an unexpected but sincere declaration imho. He doesn't speak about the financial status of Intel but of their current tech and the future product expectation status me thinks.
Posted on Reply
#3
windwhirl
TheLostSwedeIt's funny how new company CEO's always seem to blame their predecessors for whatever went wrong
Reminds me of a small tale, that basically went about company CEOs. Each CEO leaves their successor three letters that are to be opened only during crisis and only one letter per crisis. The first one says "blame it all on me [the previous CEO]", the second one says "blame it on the context [socio-political, economical, etc.]", and the last one says "it's time for you to write three letters"
TheLostSwedeAt the same time, he's set his mind on winning Apple back as a customer,
Ha! That ship sailed and it's long gone. It's never coming back.
HD64GFor the money they make that was an unexpected but sincere declaration imho
Well, they do a lot of stuff, not just CPUs, though that is their main profit generator, I guess.
Posted on Reply
#4
TheLostSwede
HD64GSo, Intel is in a bad state by their CEO's words? For the money they make that was an unexpected but sincere declaration imho. He doesn't speak about the financial status of Intel but of their current tech and the future product expectation status me thinks.
Well, I don't have access to the full interview, only what has been released as "teasers", but it doesn't appear to be about the financial state, but just about everything else, which is likely to affect the financial state of the company sooner or later.
Posted on Reply
#5
InVasMani
It would take a lot to get Apple back I don't see it happening. Intel needs to focus on doing things right with it's current and former customer base and pulling people away from what Apple has to offer at the same time. Focus on making Intel appealing again with products people desire and/or pricing that's hard to resist.
Posted on Reply
#6
john_
It should be pointed out that Intel hasn't had an engineer at the helm of the company since 2005
Aha! Since the era where Intel was paying companies to buy only it's CPUs.
Posted on Reply
#7
Operandi
There is a strong correlation for companies like Intel getting a CEO with a engineering background (back) into the role and the company having successful turnaround so I think he'll do good things for the company I do have to have to LOL at the idea of them thinking they are going to get Apple back. Even if Intel came up a better CPU in all metrics Apple controls the entire stack now and there is so many advantages in that they'll never go back.
Posted on Reply
#8
mtcn77
OperandiThere is a strong correlation for companies like Intel getting a CEO with a engineering background (back) into the role and the company having successful turnaround so I think he'll do good things for the company I do have to have to LOL at the idea of them thinking they are going to get Apple back. Even if Intel came up a better CPU in all metrics Apple controls the entire stack now and there is so many advantages in that they'll never go back.
Is this a pun because the joke is there...
Posted on Reply
#9
Lycanwolfen
Reminds me of the days when the athlon 64 was kicking their butts. Intel chips could not compete and was staggering. 2 years later the first core 2 duo came out. Even though it ran a whole GHZ slower than the top AMD at the time the performance was just amazing. Intel really only needs to increase the IPC thats it. This is where intel has been lacking all these years. 8 core 16 core all nice and dandy but if the IPC is low then the output is slow.
Posted on Reply
#10
ZoneDymo
effectively saying "if we start doing well, it was all me baby, YEAH"
Posted on Reply
#11
mechtech
What??!!

I thought they were still making record profits??

edit ever time I see his picture it looks more like bill gates every time?!?
Posted on Reply
#12
bonehead123
Just a few thoughts here:

A) In most jobs, you have 90 days to get settled, while being able to legitimately blame your predecessor for anything & everything that is wrong. After that, it is ALL ON YOU & what/how you go about identifying/addressing/fixing the problems...

B) Having an Engineer as CEO/CTO wouldn't hurt, but that won't solve all your problems. It would have to be someone who also has sales, marketing, supply chain, and production expertise all wrapped into one...

C) Foget 'bout the fruity boys, that ship has sailed & aint comin back, not unless you can somehow come up with a gazillion or so dollars to buy them out lock, stock & barrel....... ie finance a hostile takeover.... better yet, buy sammy or qualcrom so you can actually mfgr the stuff you say you can engineer....

D) If you can design a better SOC/cpu/gpu etc, then just friggin do it already, and at a reasonable price too...... your customers (consumers) have been waiting on this for, like, 30 years or so...and stop stringing everyone along year after year after year after year with only baby step miniscule performance increases with each new release....

I guess I could go on & on, but that's enuff for one post......

rant over, returning you to your regularly scheduled programming now, hehehe :)
Posted on Reply
#14
Udyr
If everything works out: "I told you so"

If it doesn't work out as intended in a considerable amount of time: "We're making money. Investors are happy anyway" (and nobody inside the company calls him out on it)
Posted on Reply
#15
Frick
Fishfaced Nincompoop
LycanwolfenReminds me of the days when the athlon 64 was kicking their butts. Intel chips could not compete and was staggering. 2 years later the first core 2 duo came out. Even though it ran a whole GHZ slower than the top AMD at the time the performance was just amazing. Intel really only needs to increase the IPC thats it. This is where intel has been lacking all these years. 8 core 16 core all nice and dandy but if the IPC is low then the output is slow.
There is no way back to Apple for Intel. Apple has tailored their entire ecosystem to a very specific hardware stack, going from CPU to storage. And apart from IPC they would have to be able to run passively and use less power than a light bulb, which ain't happening anytime soon on any decently fast Intel CPU.
UdyrIf everything works out: "I told you so"

If it doesn't work out as intended in a considerable amount of time: "We're making money. Investors are happy anyway" (and nobody inside the company calls him out on it)
These companies are beholden to the investors and the share holders, not their customers.
Posted on Reply
#16
MachineLearning
Mr. Gelsinger seems to often make these dramatic statements, especially lately ("Intel is back," and others). I get the impression that he would really like to parallel Lisa Su, and get similar results and recognition.

I want competition, so Intel actually being back would be great. I just love tech, I'll be interested in a product regardless of if a CPU is AMD or Intel or Qualcomm or Apple. But I really hope that he's not just trying to mirror others, and blazes his own actual path.
Posted on Reply
#17
Bones
FrickThese companies are beholden to the investors, the share holders and their customers.
Fixed that for you.

Yes, they are indeed beholden to their customers too because that's where all the money the investors/shareholders are expecting to see comes from.
If there is no money coming in because they pissed off the customers, the shareholders/investors start to panic and there will be hell to pay.
windwhirlHa! That ship sailed and it's long gone. It's never coming back.
As for a way back, I'm like the rest of you as in I don't see how either but at the same time I also know not to use the word "Never".
Some of the strangest shiite happens when the word used to summon it (Never) is spoken.
Posted on Reply
#18
Operandi
mtcn77Is this a pun because the joke is there...
If I did it was by mistake. I'm terrible at puns, in fact I still don't see it.
Posted on Reply
#19
mtcn77
OperandiIf I did it was by mistake. I'm terrible at puns, in fact I still don't see it.
Right, I mistook him for the previous CEO...
Posted on Reply
#20
windwhirl
BonesAs for a way back, I'm like the rest of you as in I don't see how either but at the same time I also know not to use the word "Never".
Some of the strangest shiite happens when the word used to summon it (Never) is spoken.
True.
Posted on Reply
#21
stimpy88
OK Intel, show us something better than the M1-MAX, and you'll have my attention. Until then, same old, same old...
Posted on Reply
#22
XiGMAKiD
stimpy88...and you'll have my attention.
Intel is a for profit company not a girlfriend offer them your money and they will listen
Posted on Reply
#23
Turmania
If Apple made a x86 cpu, off no more AMD or Intel....and those AMD cpu`s selling for 600 usd suddenly will go down to sub 200...
Posted on Reply
#24
Mistral
TurmaniaIf Apple made a x86 cpu, off no more AMD or Intel....and those AMD cpu`s selling for 600 usd suddenly will go down to sub 200...
First, Apple will never make an x64 CPU. Second, even if they do, it'll be madly overpriced for actual performance.
Posted on Reply
#25
maxfly
The only way Intel gets Apple back is if the Nvidia Arm deal goes through and leather jacket boy locks Apple out(not going to happen). Even then it would likely be several years before Apple came back.
Posted on Reply
Add your own comment