Daring Fireball★ Andy Grove Was Right
https://daringfireball.net/2024/12/andy_grove_was_right
https://daringfireball.net/2024/12/andy_grove_was_right
Jake Miller@daringfireball Yeah, it’s sort of shocking that Intel got hit by a textbook case of Christensen’s disruptive innovation, when Andy Grove is the guy who really popularized the concept and got it on front pages.
tylercheung@daringfireball the mirror sentiment is in tae kim’s write-up of nvidia, where the prevailing sentiment is “intel is out to kill us, must kill intel”. Paranoid indeed. Albeit not sure nvidia won’t end up getting disrupted by low power mobile gpus (apple) eventually…
thomasaw@tylercheung @daringfireball I think this is bound to happen, but for the short term Nvidia is in the lead.
Bob Peterson@daringfireball It’s the same story over and over. Successful behemoth pooh-poohs tiny “toy” competitors, to be sidelined by them. DEC’s PDPs slid into IBM’s tent, weeny 8080 micros slid into DEC’s tent, and now weeny mobiles slid into PC’s tent. It’s all well and good to be in the high end market but is Apple paranoid enough?
Paul McGrane@daringfireball And as we all well know, Intel nearly badly stumbled like this about 20 years ago! But their savior came from within when the Celeron team created a simpler and faster CPU than the grotesque Pentium 4 or Itanium. And that's what convinced Apple to use them for fifteen years. Again, from the bottom up!
Kazrak@daringfireball The absolute stupidest part of this is that Intel used to make the best ARM SoC on the market.
Intel's XScale processors were the chips you wanted in your PDA back in the early 2000s. Palm used them in their high-end devices. But Intel sold the line to Marvell in 2006, so they could focus on x86.
Stuart &c.@daringfireball Really glad you wrote this: I had exactly the same response to ‘arguably’ in the Verge’s story & your piece brings really useful context & history to that (small proofreading suggestion, think there is a missing ‘not’ before ‘blithe’).