this post was submitted on 02 Dec 2024
381 points (99.0% liked)

Technology

59772 readers
3191 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related content.
  3. Be excellent to each another!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, to ask if your bot can be added please contact us.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] frezik@midwest.social 28 points 1 day ago (2 children)

Eh, he was handed a company in a bad strategic place and he did not fix it.

Lisa Su was in a similar position when she took over AMD, but she managed it. While I don't want to put too much emphasis on the CEO alone, AMD's turnaround is quite remarkable. They very easily could have collapsed at one point.

[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 21 points 1 day ago (1 children)

He was handed a company in a horrible strategic place and he did the right things to fix it. Reinvest in process technology mainly. Those investments do not bear fruit overnight. They take years. Whoever replaces him could basically be a stuffed suit and will probably have some success if only from his investments starting to pay off. It's too bad he didn't get a few more quarters to see it happen.

[–] frezik@midwest.social 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Nah, they're stuck. The most recent 2xx series Intel chips are actually on a better TSMC fab than what AMD's 9000 series chips are using, but you wouldn't know it from almost any benchmark available. Their architecture is just bad, and a fab improvement can't even save it.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

All they need to do is hold out and survive until China invades Taiwan and the chip foundry game will change overnight. I bet they'll even get free access to TSMC patents just to try to get the west back into the chip lead. They won't be allowed to fail at that point.

Though I don't see the consumer semiconductor industry thriving after that.

[–] LavenderDay3544@lemmy.world 4 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (2 children)

China will never invade Taiwan. Taiwan has a backchannel protection deal with the US and China knows it.

[–] SirEDCaLot@lemmy.today 3 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

China's too smart to 'invade' Taiwan. There will be no tanks and helicopters invading. China / CCP may be assholes but they are also fucking smart.

Look at Hong Kong. There were no tanks or helicopters. Just steadily increasing political control. More or less the entirety of HK protested for weeks/months. It did fuck all.

That will be what happens with Taiwan. It won't be an invasion. It will be a gradual slide.

Right now, USA officially supports the 'One China' policy to appease China even though we want Taiwan to be independent. It's let us keep huge trade with China (which the Chinese also want/need) while we depend (and NEED) Taiwan for a lot of tech manufacturing especially computer chips.

Thing is, China has no desire to be dependent on us. They want us dependent on them for manufacturing, but don't want to need that business. That's why China is doing aggressive R&D on pretty much every high tech area they depend on the West for, trying to ensure that everything China needs can be made in China from Chinese tech. To do that they need to be able to design and manufacture the latest computer chips, which they currently can't. But they're pouring billions into figuring it out.

If China takes over Taiwan, either openly or covertly, they get TSMC. And that gives them all the chipmaking tech they need.

Don't expect tanks. Expect state sponsored industrial espionage at TSMC and their own suppliers. Then expect Chinese chipmakers to flood the market with top-line or near-top-line hardware at low prices, which US won't embargo and thus we'll get even more dependent on China.

[–] LavenderDay3544@lemmy.world 1 points 13 hours ago

Lol the biggest reason you're wrong to make that comparison is that Hong Kong was never its won country. Hong Kong was a British colony and then a Chinese special administrative region (SAR) given a degree of administrative autonomy by the Chinese government voluntarily as part of a treaty with the British. The treaty expired and then China decided to change the rules for Hong Kong.

Taiwan meanwhile was the territory that the Republic of China (RoC aka Nationalist China) held on to when it lost the Chinese Civil War against the People's Republic of China (PRC aka Communist China) who now control the mainland. The PRC never controlled Taiwan and the RoC government which rules there does not answer to the PRC nor has it ever. The PRC and it's Communist Partt can claim that Taiwan is a rogue province all they want but that's a lie. Taiwan is not theirs it was and still is under the government of the ROC even if the ROC has lost the rest of its territory to the PRC since the Civil War and World War 2.

Hong Kong's city government allowed China to take more direct control because it always answered to China since the British gave it to China. Meanwhile the ROC government in Taiwan has never answered to the PRC and it never will. Opposing the PRC is literally one of the main goals of that government and country and I don't think there are any major politicians there who want to join the PRC willingly nor would amy such politician be popular there.

Long story short the ROC (Taiwan) and Hong Kong are not even remotely comparable and the former won't just accept any attempted takeover by the communists.

[–] Buddahriffic@lemmy.world 2 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

That depends on Trump giving a shit about protecting anyone. I wouldn't be surprised at any outcome.

[–] LavenderDay3544@lemmy.world 1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Trump hates China so he would do it just to show that he's opposing it.

[–] fruitycoder@sh.itjust.works 1 points 14 hours ago (1 children)

Trump isn't given enough ego bait from China to not rally against them to feed his base. If he can spin it as "the beat deal" he will do it.

[–] LavenderDay3544@lemmy.world 1 points 13 hours ago

I doubt even he can spin it that way. His popularity would plummet and that's something he cares a lot about since he has a fragile ego.

[–] 4grams@lemmy.world 8 points 1 day ago (2 children)

I agree and my comment had obviously no nuance. I’m still dealing with VMware fallout in my professional life which is on Broadcom but still, this dude had control of another huge sinking ship previously…

[–] Trainguyrom@reddthat.com 1 points 13 hours ago

VMware had some pretty cool stuff in the pipeline related to DPUs that would've been killer in hypervisor networking but I'm pretty sure that's out the window post-acquisition.

Honestly with how good kvm and qemu have been getting and the number of competitors building hypervisor off of open source virtualization technologies it was probably a ticking time bomb before it fell to cheaper, freer competition. This way we have a bad guy to blame and not just pure corporate hubris

[–] waitmarks@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago

Yea, he was CEO of VMware from 2012 to early 2021. All the issues VMware has now came from broadcom buying them which happened well after he left.