Follow Slashdot blog updates by subscribing to our blog RSS feed


Forgot your password?
Intel Businesses

Intel Announces Brian Krzanich As Its Sixth-Ever CEO 43

wiredmikey writes "Intel on Thursday announced that Brian Krzanich will take the reins as chief executive officer (CEO) of the chip giant, succeeding Paul Otellini who previously announced that he would step down. Krzanich has served as Intel's chief operating officer since January 2012, and has held a series of technical and leadership roles since joining Intel in 1982, and will become the sixth CEO in Intel's history."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Intel Announces Brian Krzanich As Its Sixth-Ever CEO

Comments Filter:
    • by admdrew ( 782761 ) on Thursday May 02, 2013 @05:30PM (#43614679) Homepage
      Per some [] Googling: []
      82 - 94, process engineer
      94 - 96, manufacturing manager
      96 - 97, plant manager
      97 - 01, plant manager of another location
      01 - 03, "responsible for implementation of 0.13-micron logic process technology"
      03 - 10, "responsible for Assembly Test" (some sort of VP, not 100% on times)
      10 - 12, senior VP of Manufacturing and Supply Chain
      12 - now, COO
      • by boorack ( 1345877 ) on Thursday May 02, 2013 @05:46PM (#43614873)
        So they chose someone who was in this company for 30 years, almost half of it as engineer. I would call it smart move - especially if you compare them to, say AMD or HP - both suffering from somewhat randomly chosen CEOs interested in their bonuses and golden parachutes. Long term thinking is clearly in Intel's DNA - even if they occasionally slow down and get outinnovated by competitors (eg. AMD64). They'll be always there whatever happens - not by their sheer size but by quality of their management.
      • by servognome ( 738846 ) on Thursday May 02, 2013 @05:59PM (#43614999)
        That's insanity. A manufacturing company hiring somebody with hands on engineering experience at all levels. Everybody knows that to succeed you need an MBA who is great at marketing.
        • by Kjella ( 173770 )

          That's insanity. A manufacturing company hiring somebody with hands on engineering experience at all levels. Everybody knows that to succeed you need an MBA who is great at marketing.

          Depends on the manufacturing, if you're manufacturing toothpaste that is pretty much the same white goo as everyone else (hint, the coloring, taste and whatever is just superficial) then probably it's advertising, product placement, brand management and whatnot to make people choose yours over the next one that might be 5% more effective but nobody will ever notice. Processors on the other hand are intensely benchmark driven, it's very hard to talk your way out of engineering fail when you don't deliver - t

          • Not necessarily, some of the big wins Intel pulled off were marketing driven, for example Intel Inside and Centrino. End users didn't understand what they were getting, they just knew they wanted it.
            While there is a major technical side to processors, a lot of it is not to make them better in benchmarks. Architecture drives benchmarks, manufacturing improvements can contribute, but usually they are more about the bottom line. Die shrinks more die per wafer and better yields = profit.
            That said my post was
          • One can also make toothpaste more cheaply and win that way. Streamline manufacturing processes, find cheaper sources of raw materials, etc. And this Intel CEO has plenty of experience with that side of a business. This is critical for Intel since they need to make their chips cheaper than everyone else and be seen as a reliable supplier of parts.

            • Making chips cheaply is one thing but being relevant is another. Intel has the PC market, but from what we are seeing, the PC market is in decline. Part of this is that computers from six years ago are still good enough. Part of this is that tablet and smart phones are replacing the 2nd computer that people may have gotten. Part of it is that people outright detest Win 8. In the meantime, the sales of ARM processors have skyrocketed. Apple sold nearly 54M iOS devices in the first quarter alone. That'
              • by Darinbob ( 1142669 ) on Thursday May 02, 2013 @09:39PM (#43616591)

                Intel does a whole lot more than CPUs for PCs. If the home PC industry vanishes they'll still be making chips, just not as many and not as many premium ones. They've got chips that compete with ARM too, and they're not locked out of making ARM chips anyway as they've licensed it before in the past. They've licensed ARM before and can get back into that big time in short order. Then there's still the PC server side industry, and that's not vanishing, something's got to be there running the web searches and social networks. Look inside those iOS and Android devices and count the chips, some of those are from Intel. And the PC desktop won't die and vanish, it's still going to remain big in the workplace and for people who do more with their computer than update the social status, it'll just diminish.

                • Oh I don't disagree that Intel makes a lot of chips. Their flagship products are their CPUs. And that market is in danger or being overtaken by ARM processors indirectly as people start using more tablets and smartphones. So far Atom hasn't made much of an impact.

                  MS is in the same boat. The bulk of their revenue and profit is Windows and Office. More people choosing tablets and cloud software affects MS. So far the offering from MS have been lackluster.

                  • I would say the Atom line is being beaten by tablets, the mainstream Core series CPUs are not (yet). There's a lot of growth in ARM, but they are still playing catch-up in the desktop market. Tablets and phones tend to be compliments to traditional desktops. There are major input(mouse&keyboard), storage (1TB+) and output (24"+ screens) that ARM hasn't penetrated. Most people who use a tablet, have a desktop.
                    Growth is in portable computing, but standalone home computers aren't going away anytime soo
            • by tlhIngan ( 30335 )

              This is critical for Intel since they need to make their chips cheaper than everyone else and be seen as a reliable supplier of parts.

              Intel doesn't want to put the hurt on AMD - because AMD is keeping the government off their back in the name of competition. (If AMD fails, the government will probably force AMD's patents that Intel licenses to be distributed to everyone else, and the government may split Intel up into foundry and design).

              And Intel's a reliable supplier - they don't have shortages of parts,

          • Actually, a few toothpaste manufacturers put arginine or a comparable product in. This stuff (and the comparable products too) actually works [] and I usually shop for toothpaste with such an additive.
        • But if all else were to (hypothetically) fail (which it wouldn't, given that x86 won't go anywhere as long as Windows is around), Intel could still survive purely as a fab company - of the likes of TSMC, UMC, GSMC, et al, only far superior. As the #1 foundary company in the world, there wouldn't be a dearth of companies wanting to use their expertize for the latest & greatest in manufacturing. And Intel could always recoup its costs from various things - wafer pricing to allocations. If I understan
          • Intel has done will in the iOS department. The problem is they are still playing catch up with ARM in terms of cell, tablets, and other low power designs.
            Intel's business is heavily focused on gross margins. Just look at how the stock tanks when it dips below 60%.
            At Intel many of the foundry type applications are done when certain technology processes are being warmed down (machines have been fully amortized, processes have been stable and capable for years, and there aren't any breakthroughs needed to ge
  • by gameboyhippo ( 827141 ) on Thursday May 02, 2013 @05:20PM (#43614561) Journal

    That's nice. But Nintendo, a 124 year old company, has only had 4 presidents.

    • by admdrew ( 782761 )
      Heh, and honestly you could almost say they've only had 2, given Nintendo wasn't really the Nintendo we know now before Yamauchi.
      • There have been three Yamauchi's as president. Iwata is the only unrelated president. Yamauchi adapted his son-in-law to take over the company. Then Yamauchi adapted his son-in-law and his grandson took over the company. Finally Iwata became president.

    • by Aguazul2 ( 2591049 ) on Thursday May 02, 2013 @05:24PM (#43614589)

      That's nice. But Nintendo, a 124 year old company, has only had 4 presidents.

      So it's like the Vatican -- they (usually) wait until they die?

    • by Anonymous Coward

      That's nice. But Nintendo, a 124 year old company, has only had 4 presidents.

      That's nice, but I'd put more money on Intel surviving the next 100 years than Nintendo.

  • Reigns? (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday May 02, 2013 @05:34PM (#43614733)
    You mean he'll take the the reins.
  • KRZanich? (Score:2, Funny)

    by treeves ( 963993 )

    I'd like to buy a vowel, Pat.

  • by WedgeTalon ( 823522 ) on Thursday May 02, 2013 @10:39PM (#43616931)

    I don't know if I'm more impressed that they've only had 6 CEOs, or that they selected a guy who has risen from engineer through their ranks for 30 years.

Vitamin C deficiency is apauling.