It seems the board did not feel AMD under Meyer would tackle smartphones/tablets. But I don't know if they should get into this field now, at this point. Intel's Atom already under pressure from ARM, why get into the same situation? I think board preferred Stotch's suggestion (license ARM). Alternatively, focus on driving the data center, e.g., addressing the memory bandwidth bottleneck that Mapou pointed out.
The problem for a long time has been Microsoft's monopoly. Microsoft dictates how the hardware will be built and also controls how the hardware capabilities are accessed. In addition, Microsoft's new "programming languages" are going in the exact opposite direction from what is needed for parallel programming. Microsoft, not Intel or AMD, controls the direction of the computing world. One of Microsoft's execs in charge of developments was recently quoted in InfoWeek as saying that Microsoft will approach parallel programming with multiple iterations of their operating system, lanugages, and development environment OVER THE NEXT TEN YEARS! The hundreds of billions of dollars we'll have to spend between now and then on progressive iterations may benefit them, but it is a disaster for the economy.
Seems clear he was forced out. The story we are getting is that the board wanted to find someone else that they had more faith in for charting the long-term direction of the company. I've been hearing a lot of praise for Meyer, about what he did to lead AMD through some very difficult times. But it seems obvious the board didn't believe he was the best leader for AMD's future. I personally have heard nothing credible about possible acquisition.
NASA's Orion Flight Software Production Systems Manager Darrel G. Raines joins Planet Analog Editor Steve Taranovich and Embedded.com Editor Max Maxfield to talk about embedded flight software used on the Mars on EE Times Radio. Live radio show and live chat. Get your questions ready.