Intels Paul Otellini über den iPhone-Chip
“We ended up not winning it or passing on it, depending on how you want to view it. And the world would have been a lot different if we’d done it,” Otellini told me in a two-hour conversation during his last month at Intel. “The thing you have to remember is that this was before the iPhone was introduced and no one knew what the iPhone would do… At the end of the day, there was a chip that they were interested in that they wanted to pay a certain price for and not a nickel more and that price was below our forecasted cost. I couldn’t see it. It wasn’t one of these things you can make up on volume. And in hindsight, the forecasted cost was wrong and the volume was 100x what anyone thought.”
It was the only moment I heard regret slip into Otellini’s voice during the several hours of conversations I had with him. “The lesson I took away from that was, while we like to speak with data around here, so many times in my career I’ve ended up making decisions with my gut, and I should have followed my gut,” he said. “My gut told me to say yes.”
Egal ob’s ein ARM- oder x86-Chip geworden wäre (Ben Thompson wettet rückblickend hohe Summen auf ARM): Die Halbleiterbranche sähe heute fundamental anders aus.
Apropos (Mikro-)Prozessoren: In den beschriebenen Jahren 2006 und 2007 vollzog sich auch der Wechsel für Macs von der PowerPC-Architektur zu Intel (“inside”). Die dazugehörige WWDC-Ankündigung, ein Jahr zuvor, gehört zweifellos zu den zurückhaltendsten Publikums-Minuten einer Steve-Jobs-Keynote – immerhin wurde er dort nicht ausgebuht.