one more interesting fact is in general Stanford graduate don't have trouble in hiring SJSU graduate to work together but not vice versa.
just like ugly girls don't want to hangout with pretty ones.
so we will observe a downward spiral at intel with more and more SJSU/ community college/ high school diplomas occupying top positions. intel will be transformed to a low tech sth eventually.
I worked with Krzanich for 6 months when we both were at Cray Research - Gallium Arsenide Advanced Products Group, both of us coming from Intel in mid 80s. Brian is sharp, focused, perceptive and talented.
You have no idea how good he really is, and I'd say he is both a brilliant manager, and focused sharp technologist and superb at operations. Low key and all substance.
He gets implicitly that Intel's challenge of the decade is to capture mobile in all forms. And I'd bet he will do that to a level that will exceed expectations.
I would never disparage his education nor talents. You have no idea how good he actually is.
I will remark that degrees from top flight institutions do not always correlate well to actual skills level.
Past a certain level of technical expertise, there is an aspect to pragmatic hands on smarts, analytical skills that is hard to teach.
And Brian is in every way a technologist, hands on and very skilled. In a word he knows yield improvement like few other, and he understands sufficiently the imperatives needed to recapture mobile.
I think the 7-10w Haswell i7's might hint at what might throw ARM cpus for a loop, and you can bet SOC on a chip power envelopes vs compute power, will soon shock many who think Intel won't come back.
Intel's ability to integrate SOC features might give you a feel for what will play out in the next 2 yrs. ARM will begin to feel the heat in more ways than 1.
I wish Brian all the luck, and he will make plenty for himself & for Intel.
Bachelors in chemistry from SJSU ? That's it, I am dumping me stock. Intel founders were from MIT, Caltech and Berkeley. There has been a steady decline since Andy Grove in the quality of Intel CEOs (Otellini and Barrett were miserable failures). Google, Microsoft, Broadcom, Qualcomm have CEOs from the top schools. This guy is most likely not a genius and must have used other techniques to rise up.
It is clear that this is what the shareholders wanted to hear, and the CEO who ignores what those demanding short term profits ask for is likely to be replaced. Fortunately he is smart enough to understand that being a leading seniconductor producer is still a very good place to be. Mobile computing is very fickle, PC processors may or not continue to be a smaller market and getting smaller, and data centers do need some ways to use less power. So the other three make some sense as long as he does not waste resources.
kodak, hp, qualcomm, apple, amd ... which one to buy, hold, sell?
what on earth makes them rise or fall?
special viewpoint by analysing high level's bkground, IQ, motivations, vision, ethics, the real drive force behind a company...
Intel has had its share of missteps, but is probably the only Silicon Valley pioneer (along with Apple) that is still at the forefront of its core technology - witness the state of HP, Sun, Fairchild (remember them). Intel sets the industry benchmark for advancing Semi fabrication technology (Samsung and TSMC still play "follow the leader")and shows the world that the US is still capable of world class manufacturing. I sincerely hope they are successful in this transition.
As we unveil EE Times’ 2015 Silicon 60 list, journalist & Silicon 60 researcher Peter Clarke hosts a conversation on startups in the electronics industry. Panelists Dan Armbrust (investment firm Silicon Catalyst), Andrew Kau (venture capital firm Walden International), and Stan Boland (successful serial entrepreneur, former CEO of Neul, Icera) join in the live debate.