Intel to consumers: 'Go PC!' - Intel to Apple: 'Good God do we need your business!'

2»

Comments

  • Reply 21 of 40
    DAalsethDAalseth Posts: 2,783member
    lkrupp said:
    Well, Intel can’t even do 7nm yet so how do they expect to get to 5nm in order to make chips forApple?
    LOL My first reaction when I heard that Intel was interested in making Apple’s chips was “But who wants a 14nm M2?”
    larryjwwatto_cobra
  • Reply 22 of 40
    robabarobaba Posts: 228member
    DAalseth said:
    lkrupp said:
    Well, Intel can’t even do 7nm yet so how do they expect to get to 5nm in order to make chips forApple?
    LOL My first reaction when I heard that Intel was interested in making Apple’s chips was “But who wants a 14nm M2?”
    Exactly, it’s all just talk until they demonstrate that they’ve fixed their process.  Less talk and more action please.
    muthuk_vanalingamwatto_cobra
  • Reply 23 of 40
    crowleycrowley Posts: 10,453member
    I wouldn't put too much emphasis on what the nm number is: https://www.extremetech.com/computing/296154-how-are-process-nodes-defined

    Intel aren't leading, but they aren't as far behind as many doomsayers would have you think.
    edited March 2021
  • Reply 24 of 40
    jdb8167jdb8167 Posts: 626member
    crowley said:
    I wouldn't put too much emphasis on what the nm number is: https://www.extremetech.com/computing/296154-how-are-process-nodes-defined

    Intel aren't leading, but they aren't as far behind as many doomsayers would have you think.
    If Apple can get class leading 5nm desktop Apple Silicon CPUs out this year it will put Intel several years behind. Right now Intel can’t get even 10nm working for desktop CPUs as evidenced by their recent 14nm release of Rocket Lake CPUs. Intel’s 7nm is still at least a year away and probably longer given their current issues with 10nm. By 2022 Apple will be at 4nm or 3nm. By 2023 Apple is almost certainly going to be at 3nm. Intel has nothing competitive. 
    edited March 2021 watto_cobra
  • Reply 25 of 40
    dewmedewme Posts: 5,335member
    I would love to see an Apple / Intel matchup via Apple Silicon.
    If successful, it would be a Win-Win-Win situation for Intel, for Apple and for the U.S.

    Sure, why not. It might be interesting to see an "Intel x86 Silicon Core" integrated as an asynchronous peer inside an Apple SoC to allow x86 code to run at close to native speed in Apple Silicon Macs (and maybe iPads). It would have its own memory but could share IO with the Mac side using far model mechanisms. I know that Intel has done at least one silicon level mashup with competitor AMD on the NUC Kaby Lake G systems.

    Of course the question is whether this sort of mashup that addresses a transitional need has enough projected shelf life to justify the investment. One thing I've learned over the past few decades is that software tends to stick around a lot longer than I ever thought it would. Once a business or enterprise gets their systems up and running, especially ones that involve a substantial capital investment, they try to keep them running for as long as possible - and then some. Some markets like gaming and mobile devices don't follow this model at all, but a lot of the stuff that keeps the lights on, essential functions operating, and people, money, and things moving have service lives that extend for decades and there's a lot of legacy software keeping it all running.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 26 of 40
    blastdoorblastdoor Posts: 3,258member
    jdb8167 said:
    crowley said:
    I wouldn't put too much emphasis on what the nm number is: https://www.extremetech.com/computing/296154-how-are-process-nodes-defined

    Intel aren't leading, but they aren't as far behind as many doomsayers would have you think.
    If Apple can get class leading 5nm desktop Apple Silicon CPUs out this year it will put Intel several years behind. Right now Intel can’t get even 10nm working for desktop CPUs as evidenced by their recent 14nm release of Rocket Lake CPUs. Intel’s 7nm is still at least a year away and probably longer given their current issues with 10nm. By 2022 Apple will be at 4nm or 3nm. By 2023 Apple is almost certainly going to be at 3nm. Intel has nothing competitive. 
    I’m sure apple will be an early adopter of TSMC 3nm, but it might not be for the entire product line. If the cost is high and/or if good yields can only be achieved with small die sizes, it might be the case that only mobile chip get the 3nm treatment while desktop Macs stay at TSMC 5nm (roughly equivalent to intel 7nm). 

    One way for intel to get a foot in the door might be to give apple a sweetheart deal on big multi-tile (to use intel’s lingo) 7nm chips for a Mac Pro. Low volume so low risk for both companies. If that were to go well, maybe more could follow. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 27 of 40
    techconctechconc Posts: 275member
    sflocal said:

    It's not necessarily being unable to meet Apple's needs, Intel couldn't meet the market's needs.  It's why AMD came in with guns blazing and showed Intel how to do it right and is progressing at a rate that will take Intel years to catch up.  It's an embarrassment really that showcased Intel's incompetence in remaining a market leader.  Intel essentially abandoned that position.
    AMD is indeed doing better than Intel, but really, what has AMD done?  They're basically the same with the only real advantage being AMD is on a superior TSMC manufacturing process.  They've done a nice job with thread ripper, etc. but Intel has pretty much countered that, minus the manufacturing process advantage.

    CuJoYYC said:
    lmasanti said:
    —three month to bankruptcy—.
    This is a myth. Apple's cash and cash equivalents in the mid 90s would last 7 years assuming their quarterly losses matched the worst quarterly loss of that period. I know. I built an all Mac business based upon this forgotten fact. It wasn't pretty but it wasn't on the brink of bankruptcy either.
    That's largely true, but probably not to the extent you claim.  In the worst days, they were losing roughly $500M or so per quarter.  Apple didn't have 7 years left at that rate.  It wasn't 3 months either.  That's obviously something that people have claimed to make the turn-around sound so dramatic.  I believe Jobs' own comments to that effect were taken literally by some without doing the actual analysis.  Still, Apple did have a cashflow problem. 

    GeorgeBMac said:

    That's not talking out of "both sides of his mouth".   It's simply the reality of situation.
    Further, Intel is correct that Apple's M1 does not have the power of an Intel system.  But that could be an accurate but misleading claim since so few have a need for the full power of an Intel system (such as a gaming laptop) and an M1 will meet their needs splendidly.
    That's not a correct assessment.  Let's be clear on a few things...
    1. The M1's CPU exceeds the single-core performance of ANY Intel chip.
    2. The M1 represents the low end of a family of Mac specific chips.  Other M1 based chips will of course offer more cores and by extension, more multi-core performance.
    3. The M1 is an SoC that provides a host of other advantages and accelerations such as Neural engine, matrix multiplication for ML, Image single processor, etc, etc. that Intel's CPU's lack. 
    In short, the M1 completely outclasses Intel's equivalent chips where they actually compete.  Apple will fill out its line of chips over the next year or so and they will each crush the Intel equivalent.  

    watto_cobra
  • Reply 28 of 40
    techconctechconc Posts: 275member
    DAalseth said:
    lkrupp said:
    Well, Intel can’t even do 7nm yet so how do they expect to get to 5nm in order to make chips forApple?
    LOL My first reaction when I heard that Intel was interested in making Apple’s chips was “But who wants a 14nm M2?”
    Exactly!   **IF** (and that's a big "if"), Intel ever becomes competitive again with the manufacturing process, then I'm sure Apple would be happy to work with them again.  However, not only would Intel have to catch up to TSMC which is unlikely, but they'd also have to show some level of consistency with improvements before anyone would trust them again.  Maybe Apple would test the waters with low quantity chips like the M1, but I can't imagine they'd ever trust Intel at this point with iPhone chip production.  Intel has dropped the ball and missed their own forecasts so many times over the past 10 years that they have little manufacturing credibility at this point.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 29 of 40
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    techconc said:

    GeorgeBMac said:

    That's not talking out of "both sides of his mouth".   It's simply the reality of situation.
    Further, Intel is correct that Apple's M1 does not have the power of an Intel system.  But that could be an accurate but misleading claim since so few have a need for the full power of an Intel system (such as a gaming laptop) and an M1 will meet their needs splendidly.
    That's not a correct assessment.  Let's be clear on a few things...
    1. The M1's CPU exceeds the single-core performance of ANY Intel chip.
    2. The M1 represents the low end of a family of Mac specific chips.  Other M1 based chips will of course offer more cores and by extension, more multi-core performance.
    3. The M1 is an SoC that provides a host of other advantages and accelerations such as Neural engine, matrix multiplication for ML, Image single processor, etc, etc. that Intel's CPU's lack. 
    In short, the M1 completely outclasses Intel's equivalent chips where they actually compete.  Apple will fill out its line of chips over the next year or so and they will each crush the Intel equivalent.  


    I'll ask a gamer about switching to a Mac
  • Reply 30 of 40
    larryjwlarryjw Posts: 1,031member
    What is Intel smoking? It's been less than month since it was reported that Intel was strongly considering outsourcing chip production to China. Now they're talking about investing $20B to build a factory to produce Apple's ARM processors. In the US. 

    Whatever. Methinks they're just blowing smoke. 
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 31 of 40
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,312member
    I would love to see an Apple / Intel matchup via Apple Silicon.
    If successful, it would be a Win-Win-Win situation for Intel, for Apple and for the U.S.

    The U.S. government should be fully behind and supportive of such a match-up in all ways possible -- not because of some silly, fabricated, "National Security Concerns" (that one has gotten over-used!).   But to return the U.S. to manufacturing strength.

    China has no problem supporting and financing industrial expansion and the results speak for themselves -- an economy growing at triple the rate of ours.
    Conversely, the U.S. has let its industries flounder and die from foreign competition.  It's response to that competition has been to attack that competition instead of strengthening U.S. manufacturing.   Obviously that approach did not turn out so well.  It makes unemployed or under-employed U.S. workers feel better.   But it doesn't bring back their jobs.

    It's past time for the U.S. to do everything in its power to rebuild its industries so they are once again be competitive on the world stage.
    It can do that by both supporting those industries directly and by rebuilding the failing, out of date infrastructure that those industries rely on.
    It also has to improve its failing education system as U.S. students tend to fall far behind Asian students and higher education is becoming increasingly unaffordable for many (the days of getting a high paying union job in the mill with a High School Diploma are fading fast). 
    And likewise U.S. workers should be paying less attention to "work-life balance" and thinking in terms of the Asian 996 schedule.
    ... The first step in competing is to become competitive.
    .......It's not a question of IF the U.S. can do it but whether or not it has the will to do it.

    https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/24/economy/china-eu-investment-deal-sanctions-intl-hnk/index.html

    Only China could shoot itself in both feet so gloriously that it wipes out any chance of the EU trade agreement being signed, but that's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy" at work.

    I'm thinking that China passing the U.S. in GDP isn't going to happen "soon:, even if "soon" was never earlier than 2028 anyway. Now it's looking like even the dreaded 996 "work-life imbalance" isn't going to push China's GDP past the U.S. It's just a 72 hour workweek that kills any chance of China growing a consumer economy. 

    Self-immolation, Xi Jinping style.
    edited March 2021 watto_cobra
  • Reply 32 of 40
    danoxdanox Posts: 2,804member

    "Intel doesn't compete with Apple -- the PC ecosystem competes with Apple," Gelsinger said to CNBC, attempting to distance his company from the Mac-versus-PC spat. Except Intel itself has bankrolled the "Go PC" ads starring former "Get a Mac" actor Justin Long.

    That leaves Gelsinger talking out of both sides of his mouth -- praising Apple in hopes of earning their business, but also disparaging the Mac maker as a competitor that doesn't offer as much variety as the vast Windows PC ecosystem.

    Gelsinger and Intel are trying to have it both ways, which is a poor place to be when your company has already fallen behind. As cutthroat mob boss Michael Corleone says in "The Godfather:" "It's not personal -- it's strictly business."
    That's not talking out of "both sides of his mouth".   It's simply the reality of situation.
    Further, Intel is correct that Apple's M1 does not have the power of an Intel system.  But that could be an accurate but misleading claim since so few have a need for the full power of an Intel system (such as a gaming laptop) and an M1 will meet their needs splendidly.



    The second and third M chips haven’t been released yet, the M1 is the slowest M series Mac that will ever be.....Intel is just whistling Dixie.
    tmaywatto_cobra
  • Reply 33 of 40
    danoxdanox Posts: 2,804member

    nicholfd said:
    lkrupp said:
    Intel to invest $20 Billion for U.S. plants? 

    https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/23/tech/intel-semiconductor-manufacturing-turnaround-plan/index.html

    So how long does it take to get a new chip fab up and running? Five years, ten years? Apple will be long gone by that time. Maybe Apple could build its own chip fab and be done with it. They’ve got more than $20 billion laying around don’t they?
    TSMC said two years for their new plant coming to Arizona.

    Three years minimum, if land is already bought in hand, and the Architectural/Engineering/Structural plans are done like now based on that land! If not five years.....
    edited March 2021 watto_cobra
  • Reply 34 of 40
    danoxdanox Posts: 2,804member

    nicholfd said:
    lkrupp said:
    Intel to invest $20 Billion for U.S. plants? 

    https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/23/tech/intel-semiconductor-manufacturing-turnaround-plan/index.html

    So how long does it take to get a new chip fab up and running? Five years, ten years? Apple will be long gone by that time. Maybe Apple could build its own chip fab and be done with it. They’ve got more than $20 billion laying around don’t they?
    TSMC said two years for their new plant coming to Arizona.


    Two years Taiwan time :)
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 35 of 40
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    tmay said:
    I would love to see an Apple / Intel matchup via Apple Silicon.
    If successful, it would be a Win-Win-Win situation for Intel, for Apple and for the U.S.

    The U.S. government should be fully behind and supportive of such a match-up in all ways possible -- not because of some silly, fabricated, "National Security Concerns" (that one has gotten over-used!).   But to return the U.S. to manufacturing strength.

    China has no problem supporting and financing industrial expansion and the results speak for themselves -- an economy growing at triple the rate of ours.
    Conversely, the U.S. has let its industries flounder and die from foreign competition.  It's response to that competition has been to attack that competition instead of strengthening U.S. manufacturing.   Obviously that approach did not turn out so well.  It makes unemployed or under-employed U.S. workers feel better.   But it doesn't bring back their jobs.

    It's past time for the U.S. to do everything in its power to rebuild its industries so they are once again be competitive on the world stage.
    It can do that by both supporting those industries directly and by rebuilding the failing, out of date infrastructure that those industries rely on.
    It also has to improve its failing education system as U.S. students tend to fall far behind Asian students and higher education is becoming increasingly unaffordable for many (the days of getting a high paying union job in the mill with a High School Diploma are fading fast). 
    And likewise U.S. workers should be paying less attention to "work-life balance" and thinking in terms of the Asian 996 schedule.
    ... The first step in competing is to become competitive.
    .......It's not a question of IF the U.S. can do it but whether or not it has the will to do it.

    https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/24/economy/china-eu-investment-deal-sanctions-intl-hnk/index.html

    Only China could shoot itself in both feet so gloriously that it wipes out any chance of the EU trade agreement being signed, but that's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy" at work.

    I'm thinking that China passing the U.S. in GDP isn't going to happen "soon:, even if "soon" was never earlier than 2028 anyway. Now it's looking like even the dreaded 996 "work-life imbalance" isn't going to push China's GDP past the U.S. It's just a 72 hour workweek that kills any chance of China growing a consumer economy. 

    Self-immolation, Xi Jinping style.

    Your hatred has distorted reality for you.

    But, in your hatred, you missed the main point:   The U.S. needs to up its game.  And, instead of trying to hold other countries back, it should be putting all of its efforts into pushing itself forward.   In this case, that could mean supporting Intel to develop state of the art, U.S. based manufacturing centers.

    That could take the form of direct aid as well as indirect in the form of infrastructure ranging from developing highly educated staff to installing state of the art, modern power, communication and transportation systems that support manufacturing here in the U.S. 
    Those are the things we did 100 some years ago that helped make America great.  But 100 year old infrastructure won't cut it anymore.  Obviously.


    edited March 2021 muthuk_vanalingam
  • Reply 36 of 40
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    larryjw said:
    What is Intel smoking? It's been less than month since it was reported that Intel was strongly considering outsourcing chip production to China. Now they're talking about investing $20B to build a factory to produce Apple's ARM processors. In the US. 

    Whatever. Methinks they're just blowing smoke. 

    They may be blowing dollars rather than smoke.
    Chip wars are the new global war as countries race to establish their own secure supplies -- just as they have done with vaccines.

    From Reuters:

    Analysis: Money no object as governments race to build chip arsenals

    "Governments in the United States, the European Union and Japan are contemplating spending tens of billions of dollars on cutting-edge “fabs,” or chip fabrication plants, as unease grows that more than two-thirds of advanced computing chips are manufactured in Taiwan.
    ...
    Lawmakers in the United States, meanwhile, are preparing to authorize $30 billion or more for chip investments via an existing Pentagon funding bill and a clutch of new measures being championed by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer."

    The U.S. fired the first shot attempting to block China's access to chip manufacturing.  So, China responded with a multi-year plan to become independent of U.S. control in order to meet its own needs for chips.  But clearly, that competition has gone global as mulitple governments are vying for nationalistic control of chips.

    This is unlikely to end well...
    While governments need to protect their own, wars (whether hot or cold) seldom produce benefit for anybody but the rich.





  • Reply 37 of 40
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,312member
    larryjw said:
    What is Intel smoking? It's been less than month since it was reported that Intel was strongly considering outsourcing chip production to China. Now they're talking about investing $20B to build a factory to produce Apple's ARM processors. In the US. 

    Whatever. Methinks they're just blowing smoke. 

    They may be blowing dollars rather than smoke.
    Chip wars are the new global war as countries race to establish their own secure supplies -- just as they have done with vaccines.

    From Reuters:

    Analysis: Money no object as governments race to build chip arsenals

    "Governments in the United States, the European Union and Japan are contemplating spending tens of billions of dollars on cutting-edge “fabs,” or chip fabrication plants, as unease grows that more than two-thirds of advanced computing chips are manufactured in Taiwan.
    ...
    Lawmakers in the United States, meanwhile, are preparing to authorize $30 billion or more for chip investments via an existing Pentagon funding bill and a clutch of new measures being championed by Senate Majority Leader Chuck Schumer."

    The U.S. fired the first shot attempting to block China's access to chip manufacturing.  So, China responded with a multi-year plan to become independent of U.S. control in order to meet its own needs for chips.  But clearly, that competition has gone global as mulitple governments are vying for nationalistic control of chips.

    This is unlikely to end well...
    While governments need to protect their own, wars (whether hot or cold) seldom produce benefit for anybody but the rich.





    The problem for China is that any fab below 14nm will have to develop all of its own equipment and processes, from scratch, and the design software for new nodes will have to also be developed from scratch. There is also the necessary chemicals and other materials necessary for the operation of the fab that will have to be sourced within China. 

    It will happen, but not any time soon, so I would expect that China will be far behind in its fabs compared to the rest of the world for another decade, more or less.
    watto_cobra
  • Reply 38 of 40
    tmaytmay Posts: 6,312member

    tmay said:
    I would love to see an Apple / Intel matchup via Apple Silicon.
    If successful, it would be a Win-Win-Win situation for Intel, for Apple and for the U.S.

    The U.S. government should be fully behind and supportive of such a match-up in all ways possible -- not because of some silly, fabricated, "National Security Concerns" (that one has gotten over-used!).   But to return the U.S. to manufacturing strength.

    China has no problem supporting and financing industrial expansion and the results speak for themselves -- an economy growing at triple the rate of ours.
    Conversely, the U.S. has let its industries flounder and die from foreign competition.  It's response to that competition has been to attack that competition instead of strengthening U.S. manufacturing.   Obviously that approach did not turn out so well.  It makes unemployed or under-employed U.S. workers feel better.   But it doesn't bring back their jobs.

    It's past time for the U.S. to do everything in its power to rebuild its industries so they are once again be competitive on the world stage.
    It can do that by both supporting those industries directly and by rebuilding the failing, out of date infrastructure that those industries rely on.
    It also has to improve its failing education system as U.S. students tend to fall far behind Asian students and higher education is becoming increasingly unaffordable for many (the days of getting a high paying union job in the mill with a High School Diploma are fading fast). 
    And likewise U.S. workers should be paying less attention to "work-life balance" and thinking in terms of the Asian 996 schedule.
    ... The first step in competing is to become competitive.
    .......It's not a question of IF the U.S. can do it but whether or not it has the will to do it.

    https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/24/economy/china-eu-investment-deal-sanctions-intl-hnk/index.html

    Only China could shoot itself in both feet so gloriously that it wipes out any chance of the EU trade agreement being signed, but that's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy" at work.

    I'm thinking that China passing the U.S. in GDP isn't going to happen "soon:, even if "soon" was never earlier than 2028 anyway. Now it's looking like even the dreaded 996 "work-life imbalance" isn't going to push China's GDP past the U.S. It's just a 72 hour workweek that kills any chance of China growing a consumer economy. 

    Self-immolation, Xi Jinping style.

    Your hatred has distorted reality for you.

    But, in your hatred, you missed the main point:   The U.S. needs to up its game.  And, instead of trying to hold other countries back, it should be putting all of its efforts into pushing itself forward.   In this case, that could mean supporting Intel to develop state of the art, U.S. based manufacturing centers.

    That could take the form of direct aid as well as indirect in the form of infrastructure ranging from developing highly educated staff to installing state of the art, modern power, communication and transportation systems that support manufacturing here in the U.S. 
    Those are the things we did 100 some years ago that helped make America great.  But 100 year old infrastructure won't cut it anymore.  Obviously.


    I have no problem with the U.S. both "upping its game" and moving assembly and manufacturing out of China. I don't have a problem with restricting the technologies and IP that China wants access to, and I certainly don't have a problem ignoring your 996 work schedule.

    True story. I've actually work weeks straight at 16 to 20 hours a day when I was working as a Wildland Firefighter in the western U.S., including Alaska. That's emergency work. Asking anyone to do 72 hour work weeks is insane; it just isn't productive for most jobs. 
    edited March 2021 watto_cobra
  • Reply 39 of 40
    GeorgeBMacGeorgeBMac Posts: 11,421member
    tmay said:

    tmay said:
    I would love to see an Apple / Intel matchup via Apple Silicon.
    If successful, it would be a Win-Win-Win situation for Intel, for Apple and for the U.S.

    The U.S. government should be fully behind and supportive of such a match-up in all ways possible -- not because of some silly, fabricated, "National Security Concerns" (that one has gotten over-used!).   But to return the U.S. to manufacturing strength.

    China has no problem supporting and financing industrial expansion and the results speak for themselves -- an economy growing at triple the rate of ours.
    Conversely, the U.S. has let its industries flounder and die from foreign competition.  It's response to that competition has been to attack that competition instead of strengthening U.S. manufacturing.   Obviously that approach did not turn out so well.  It makes unemployed or under-employed U.S. workers feel better.   But it doesn't bring back their jobs.

    It's past time for the U.S. to do everything in its power to rebuild its industries so they are once again be competitive on the world stage.
    It can do that by both supporting those industries directly and by rebuilding the failing, out of date infrastructure that those industries rely on.
    It also has to improve its failing education system as U.S. students tend to fall far behind Asian students and higher education is becoming increasingly unaffordable for many (the days of getting a high paying union job in the mill with a High School Diploma are fading fast). 
    And likewise U.S. workers should be paying less attention to "work-life balance" and thinking in terms of the Asian 996 schedule.
    ... The first step in competing is to become competitive.
    .......It's not a question of IF the U.S. can do it but whether or not it has the will to do it.

    https://www.cnn.com/2021/03/24/economy/china-eu-investment-deal-sanctions-intl-hnk/index.html

    Only China could shoot itself in both feet so gloriously that it wipes out any chance of the EU trade agreement being signed, but that's "Wolf Warrior Diplomacy" at work.

    I'm thinking that China passing the U.S. in GDP isn't going to happen "soon:, even if "soon" was never earlier than 2028 anyway. Now it's looking like even the dreaded 996 "work-life imbalance" isn't going to push China's GDP past the U.S. It's just a 72 hour workweek that kills any chance of China growing a consumer economy. 

    Self-immolation, Xi Jinping style.

    Your hatred has distorted reality for you.

    But, in your hatred, you missed the main point:   The U.S. needs to up its game.  And, instead of trying to hold other countries back, it should be putting all of its efforts into pushing itself forward.   In this case, that could mean supporting Intel to develop state of the art, U.S. based manufacturing centers.

    That could take the form of direct aid as well as indirect in the form of infrastructure ranging from developing highly educated staff to installing state of the art, modern power, communication and transportation systems that support manufacturing here in the U.S. 
    Those are the things we did 100 some years ago that helped make America great.  But 100 year old infrastructure won't cut it anymore.  Obviously.


    I have no problem with the U.S. both "upping its game" and moving assembly and manufacturing out of China. I don't have a problem with restricting the technologies and IP that China wants access to, and I certainly don't have a problem ignoring your 996 work schedule.

    True story. I've actually work weeks straight at 16 to 20 hours a day when I was working as a Wildland Firefighter in the western U.S., including Alaska. That's emergency work. Asking anyone to do 72 hour work weeks is insane; it just isn't productive for most jobs. 
    The only thing that making an enemy out of a partner accomplishes is to make an enemy.   And, done needlessly, that's stupid.  Really stupid.

    I worked 70 hour weeks for many years.   If you're committed and dedicated its not a problem.  
    But, Americans think it's crazy.   Then they whine that China / Asia and their 996 schedules are out-competing us -- and make up lies and excuses to make themselves feel better.

Sign In or Register to comment.