SAN FRANCISCO—Texas Instruments Inc. said Wednesday (Nov. 14) it will cut about 1,700 jobs worldwide as part of a previously disclosed plan to re-target R&D for its OMAP product line at the embedded systems market, away from smartphones and tablets.
The announcement that TI would refocus OMAP caught many off guard because the product had notched a number of high-profile design wins. But analysts, particularly Will Strauss of Forward Concepts, said the trend in smartphones is toward integration of the applications processor and baseband processor—a trend TI can't keep up with because it began phasing out its baseband technology years ago.
At the time, TI also noted that Apple Inc. and Samsung Electronics Co. Ltd.—which together dominate the smartphone and tablet markets—design their own applications processors, leaving less of an available market for OMAP to compete in.
In an interview following TI's announcement Wednesday, Strauss said he was expecting TI to cut jobs after changing course with OMAP.
"We knew the hatchet was coming down. It had to," Strauss said. "They had a bloated operation there for the reduced market that they were facing."
But Strauss—who said he was certain TI explored the possibility of selling all or part of the OMAP division prior to Wednesday's announcement—said he was surprised by the number of jobs eliminated. "TI's way is usually more subtle," Stauss said. "But then again, we've got an overall market that is headed down right now."
@eewiz, my point is there is lot of redundancy in work force because of TI-National merger. For example insted of 1x not TI has 2X designers and it would be hard to maintain the extra workforce when there is slow down.
@shub, may be you are right. This is failure on part of TI that it didn't invest wisely in 2007. But you can't undo things which you did earlier. All I am saying is in this current environment TI has taken the correct decision.
@sprite0022, kodak business is totally different from semiconductor business. Semiconductor is very huge market. It includes wireless, it includes MCU, it includes embedded. Failure in one domain will not impact the revenue stream.
I might not be the one under the axe (as a TI employee) but they had to cope with the probability of losing out on a market without the baseband business they phased out. There is no fighting in a world when you do not have the right weapons/tools. TI rather do well in an arena where we not only have the right weapons but in which currently we are the strongest. Is this a dangerous move to play just with a few cards: SURELY but having made its decision on dropping baseband a few years ago, coping in a world where integration of the applications processor and baseband processor is going to happen was/is going to be difficult. Tough on everyone involved but in the context required. Losing a cancered limb to save the body.
exactly. all the "high margin" analog mixed signal components will be integrated into an app processor sooner or later. Then TI will have no option other than to shoot themselves.
National acquisition has nothing to do with OMAP closing down. OMAP is not overlapping with any of National's product line. Again who's pessimistic abt what? IMO its TI whos pessimistic about their ability to compete.
Please check facts TI Wireless revenue in 2006 = 4.35B after that they never invested in it and all other compition did so they where overthrown.This was clearly written on wall from 2007, only people who called fooled where i think WS.
TI quits OMAP , TI left baseband a while ago...
Nvidia is doing Tegra well, is trying hard to integrate baseband into it.
yes it's a tough fight, so TI just quit and ran, while others, including many other companies, are fighting for this very same market?
No CEO is going to call this a loser attitude, they always call it a strategic move, for long term growth, blahblah
So long Texas-India(TI)
David Patterson, known for his pioneering research that led to RAID, clusters and more, is part of a team at UC Berkeley that recently made its RISC-V processor architecture an open source hardware offering. We talk with Patterson and one of his colleagues behind the effort about the opportunities they see, what new kinds of designs they hope to enable and what it means for today’s commercial processor giants such as Intel, ARM and Imagination Technologies.