Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
Intel Businesses

Intel CEO Paul Otellini Retiring 108

Posted by Unknown Lamer
from the king-of-the-micro-world dept.
An anonymous reader writes with a quick bit from a press release about Intel's CEO retiring: "Intel Corporation today announced that the company's president and CEO, Paul Otellini, has decided to retire as an officer and director at the company's annual stockholders' meeting in May, starting an orderly leadership transition over the next six months. Otellini's decision to retire will bring to a close a remarkable career of nearly 40 years of continuous service to the company and its stockholders."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Intel CEO Paul Otellini Retiring

Comments Filter:
  • Obligatory (Score:5, Funny)

    by Elgonn (921934) on Monday November 19, 2012 @11:14PM (#42036037)
    He stepped down just before 40 years so we could make 39.9876 year pentium jokes.
  • good luck to the future.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Monday November 19, 2012 @11:23PM (#42036143)

    This man raised the personal computing industry from birth to adolescence. The entire world would be a different place (for better or worse) without Otellini's Intel. Now that's an accomplishment worth carrying into retirement.

    • Otellini's move comes at a time when Intel faces a shaky economy and a mobile gadget craze that is eating away at demand for its PC chips and it gives the company just six months to find a new leader.
  • by Grayhand (2610049) on Monday November 19, 2012 @11:26PM (#42036161)
    "For myself and my stock options I'd like to thank you all and wish you all the best of luck. Forward all mail to the Cayman Islands."
  • Notice how we haven't seen them in ads for years.

    • by MarioMax (907837)

      Notice how we haven't seen them in ads for years.

      As a bunny-suit wearing Intel fab worker, I find this interesting, but not completely unexpected. It was never a matter of if, but when. Otellini wasn't Intel's first CEO, and unless something crazy happens between now and May, he won't be the last.

  • Sanjay Jha is out of MOT. He'd be my pick for a replacement. You heard it here first!
  • Bad Ass (Score:5, Interesting)

    by cstec (521534) on Tuesday November 20, 2012 @12:05AM (#42036533)

    Intel is pretty corporate, and that's like a crime here on /. But for anyone old enough to remember or fool enough to listen, when it's all said and done this guy's track record has been damn close to paved in gold.

    No, I don't mean Intel's track record with the Peruvian Jackalope, Global Coating or whatever axe you have to grind. I mean his job of being part of, contributing to and guiding a very large and important ship. Much of it before the average /.r could read.

    Having been Z80 guy, a 6502 guy and a 68k guy, and also a guy writing endless apps in the Intel space and building endless machines, when it's all said and done, if your last words are anything other than "thank you", you're a punk.

    Safe travels Paul.

    • f your last words are anything other than "thank you", you're a punk

      Did the illegal trust-making activity happen on Otellini's watch?

    • by T.E.D. (34228)

      Having been Z80 guy, a 6502 guy and a 68k guy

      ... none of which were Intel CPU's (Zilog, and two Motorollas).

  • This guy will go down as a footnote. Andy Grove is the guy who made Intel a giant. And I'm rooting for AMD.
  • Remember the Alamo [wikipedia.org]

  • by dbc (135354) on Tuesday November 20, 2012 @01:12AM (#42036991)

    I worked at Intel for 11 years and met Otellini a couple of times. First of all, he was a great guy. But much more on point, he was a clear and level-headed thinker who asked the right questions, and role-modeled the best of Intel culture in every way. He rescued Intel from the aftermath of the train wreck that was Craig Barrett, and rebuilt the company and restored the company culture.

    Also note, Otellini was the first Intel CEO who came up through marketing. That was an important transition for the company in many ways, and the company is much better off for it.

    • by Kergan (780543)

      Also note, Otellini was the first Intel CEO who came up through marketing. That was an important transition for the company in many ways, and the company is much better off for it.

      I'm confused... How is leaving the lion's share of the market in mobile computing devices to ARM making Intel better off?

      • by dbc (135354)

        Yes you are confused. I was saying that Intel has been better off for the last 7 years for having been run by a marketing guy instead of a "sand head" (physical chemist, in Intel-ese) and would have been better off with a marketing guy running the co for 10+ years.

        Yes, the situation in mobile sucks. There are a host of reasons for that, mostly inherited by Otellini. The situation would suck harder if Barrett were still in charge. Otellini played the cards in his hand well.

        • the situation in mobile sucks

          No actually, it doesn't, we're finally ridding ourselves of the suffocating domination of Wintel.

          • By what, exchanging it for suffocating domination by ARM and Google? Much better.
            • by drinkypoo (153816)

              By what, exchanging it for suffocating domination by ARM and Google? Much better.

              Domination yes, suffocation no. They're not doing anything anticompetitive with Android; indeed, the anticompetitive things are being done to them by their competitors, like abuse of bad patents required for competition. (Apple was offered access to FRAND patents on a very reasonable basis; in exchange for their bullshit patents which they never should have been granted on obvious interface elements.)

      • by gl4ss (559668)

        by intel making better profits by using their foundries for producing intel chips which give much better $$$ than if said foundries were producing arm chips.

        don't be a fool. intel could be making the best fabbed arm chips in 6 months if they chose that x86 is dead. however the arm fabs can't switch other way.

        • by dkf (304284)

          intel could be making the best fabbed arm chips in 6 months if they chose that x86 is dead

          It'd take longer; Intel's fabs are a long way ahead of everyone else's and so ARM aren't yet producing layouts for that scale. Which would mean that Intel would have to rearchitect the Intel designs for their own fabs, which takes time.

          however the arm fabs can't switch other way

          Definitely true at the moment; the ARM licensees (ARM don't make stuff themselves; that's not their business model) are a generation or two behind Intel on the fab side of things. They compensate by having specialist hardware on their chips to do particularly important operat

          • by dbc (135354)

            Those are naive assertions. Intel's production logic processes are tuned for speed, not low power consumption. That doesn't mean that the fab chemists don't have a dozen low-power processes in their hip pocket that they have demonstrated in the development fab that could be rolled out to production fabs in a matter of a few months. Processes more suitable to going after ARM market share. As to doing a new layout -- Intel has the tools and the people to simply "make it so".

            Intel fabs run at max capacity

        • by dbc (135354)

          Yes. Somebody who gets it. Intel looks at gross margin per wafer. They know pretty much exactly how many wafers they can run through a fab in a year. They can easily calculate the gross margin per wafer for any product. For a while when I was at Intel, Intel was a huge buyer of outside fab capacity -- any project that wanted to run in Intel fab had to show that their gross margin per wafer justified being on it. Otherwise, the project was told to "go fish" -- for fab. And they did, or they shut down.

  • Does anyone who Knows have anything to say about Bob Cringely's analysis [cringely.com] of this departure?

    just wondering, hangning up and listening...ank

It is impossible to enjoy idling thoroughly unless one has plenty of work to do. -- Jerome Klapka Jerome

Working...