←back to thread

331 points giuliomagnifico | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
ndiddy ◴[] No.45377533[source]
Fun fact: Bob Colwell (chief architect of the Pentium Pro through Pentium 4) recently revealed that the Pentium 4 had its own 64-bit extension to x86 that would have beaten AMD64 to market by several years, but management forced him to disable it because they were worried that it would cannibalize IA64 sales.

> Intel’s Pentium 4 had our own internal version of x86–64. But you could not use it: we were forced to “fuse it off”, meaning that even though the functionality was in there, it could not be exercised by a user. This was a marketing decision by Intel — they believed, probably rightly, that bringing out a new 64-bit feature in the x86 would be perceived as betting against their own native-64-bit Itanium, and might well severely damage Itanium’s chances. I was told, not once, but twice, that if I “didn’t stop yammering about the need to go 64-bits in x86 I’d be fired on the spot” and was directly ordered to take out that 64-bit stuff.

https://www.quora.com/How-was-AMD-able-to-beat-Intel-in-deli...

replies(11): >>45377674 #>>45377914 #>>45378427 #>>45378583 #>>45380663 #>>45382171 #>>45384182 #>>45385968 #>>45388594 #>>45389629 #>>45391228 #
kstrauser ◴[] No.45377914[source]
"If you don't cannibalize yourself, someone else will."

Intel has a strong history of completely mis-reading the market.

replies(4): >>45378417 #>>45380495 #>>45386139 #>>45394743 #
1. cowmix ◴[] No.45386139[source]
When I ran the Python Meetup here in Phoenix -- an engineer for Intel's compilers group would show up all the time. I remember he would constantly be frustrated that Intel management would purposely down-play and cripple advances of the Atom processor line because they thought it would be "too good" and cannibalize their desktop lines. This was over 15 years ago -- I was hearing this in real-time. He flat out said that Intel considered the mobile market a joke.