

AMD Is Fighting For Its Life - mojuba
http://www.cnbc.com/id/25624745

======
jellofish
I'm a regular HN community member (under a different account). Coincidentally,
I also work for AMD. Everything I say here is my own words and none of this is
endorsed/backed by my employer. From what I can tell, AMD's strategies are
more long-term than some people would like. For instance, we're taking time to
rewrite software when we could squeak by with just modifying it. We just
reorganized my entire building. These things have lots of up-front costs: lost
time, productivity, etc. But I would be surprised if they didn't pay off in
the future.

Until last month, we were in a hiring/raise freeze. Most benefits were frozen
(profit sharing, buying stock, etc.) Now that stuff is being lifted.
Management believes (as do most employees) that we have passed the worst of
the storm.

HR and legal can be a real pain (more so than many other companies i've worked
at). They can regularly prevent real things from happening. Thankfully, they
are physically seperated from the hardware/software boys (literally on the
other side of town). They have a dress code; we don't, they have lots of inane
security policies (no camera phones, etc.), we don't, etc.

The management style is very hands-off (at least for hardware/software boys),
which is both good and bad. The "very good" developers can really shine. If
you want to work on something, just do it. Rarely do you need manager
approval, and if you do it's usually just one level up. I've had several ideas
that I've gotten a chance to implement in the last few months that have really
streamlined the manufacturing process and saved the company a lot of money.

On the other hand, average/mediocre software developers are totally lost.
Upper-level management communication basically consists of elaborate ways of
saying "Make more money" and "make chips fail less" and that sort of thing,
things everybody should already know anyway. How to go about doing any of that
is largely left up to the ingenuity of the small team or even individual
developer. Great for smart people; bad for mediocre developers.

I certainly don't think AMD is in danger of collapsing or anything. It's just
not as competitive at this precise moment as it was in 2001-2005. I can say
that the company is treating its engineers/developers right--flexible hours,
casual dress, nice facilities, all the sort of things that lead to happy
programmers/engineers and great products. Most of the employees in my building
seem to own stock, so I would imagine they also think AMD has a good future.

------
jdoliner
My personal experience with AMD has been pretty miserable. As the proud owner
of an ATI (acquired by AMD 2 years ago) video card I've watched new drivers
roll out, wondering when AMD would decide to support its product. They even
refused for a long time to release APIs so that the opensource community could
aid in development. So I can see why these guys are dead in the water. Two
questions: Is there any chance of ATI not going under with them? Before they
were acquired they were good. Second Intel and nVidia might (probably will)
simultanously lose their most direct competitors. Is another company going to
fill the niche are might they begin viaing for each others market shares?

~~~
vizard
I think ATI will be bought off by someone .. maybe even Intel given that Intel
is now developing its own GPUs. On the x86 front, the only possible acquirer
for AMD CPU divison seems to be IBM.

Sun also bought a x86 startup a few months back but Sun has its own problems.
Samsung was considered as another contender but Samsung wont actually get the
x86 license (the license can only be transferred to US based companies I
believe).

Or maybe AMD will survive. They need to find a new management and probably
need to deeply collaborate with IBM on fabs and tech.

Despite Nvidia's sabre rattling, it cannot compete with Intel on the CPU front
though Intel certainly has the resources to give Nvidia a fight.

~~~
josefresco
AMD competed very well with Intel for years, only recently have they fallen
behind with the dominance of the Core 2 Duo chips. I wouldn't count them out
just yet.

Also, why would AMD who recently (2006) bought ATI sell it to Intel??? Makes
no sense.

------
mojuba
I think Apple + AMD merger/acquisition would make more sense than anything
else in this situation. And if it's going to happen, this is the right time
more than ever.

~~~
felix_t
Well, I think it would make much more sense for IBM to take over AMD. They
have an entire history together, they've shared/are sharing multiple
technological solutions and don't forget the mountain of rumors surrounding
the possibility of an IBM/AMD merger
[http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=IBM+AMD&btnG=Se...](http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=IBM+AMD&btnG=Search)

As for my personal experience with AMD, I have had only pleasant encounters. I
believe they've made quite a performance with beating the bytes out of INTEL
in the 2001-2005 interval. I think that's an important achievement for AMD,
being able to stay extremely competitive for that period of time + the fact
that they were a small fraction of the INTEL's presence. But the big mistake
AMD did was that they dedicate all there power (money and labor) on retouching
the K8 (which was basically an enhanced K7) architecture. They should, really,
have invested in an alternative solution (maybe an early big project with
IBM?) contrary to the strategy they've embraced. Just my opinion.

~~~
mojuba
Regardless of the readiness of IBM or any other monster in the field to take
over AMD, we are talking about scenarios that make more sense. As a consumer,
do you care about IBM and what they are doing? I don't.

Now, some basic facts: Apple needs (and presumably wants) to be independent;
Apple's software will run nicely on AMD; AMD got 64-bitness right even before
Intel; own video card would be a big bonus for Apple. And this is probably not
all.

~~~
felix_t
Well, why would Apple have gone with Intel in the first place? The Apple/Intel
relation is far more deeper then it looks or one understands.
[http://bigtech.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2008/06/13/apple-and-
in...](http://bigtech.blogs.fortune.cnn.com/2008/06/13/apple-and-intel-best-
buddies/)

And the fact is that AMD is quite large (especially considering the
acquisition of ATI) and even that it's market share dropped significantly it's
still a hard buy to digest. I personally don't thing that Apple would make
such a risky buy knowing what the ATI acquisition made to AMD itself.

And also a fact is that AMD did very well on the server market. A buy would
mean for IBM a win/win situation. What could possibly stand in IBM's way of
reentering the mainstream market? One lesson I've come to learn is that as
bigger is one's portfolio of good products as better is for one's income.
Don't you agree?

------
kirse
AMD isn't headed under yet, but their Fusion core better kick some serious
ass, similar to the release of the original Athlon64.

Also, some more good news for AMD: [http://www.engadget.com/2008/07/10/all-
nvidia-8400m-8600m-ch...](http://www.engadget.com/2008/07/10/all-
nvidia-8400m-8600m-chips-faulty/)

------
anr
That's a shame. We have to thank AMD for the x86-64 architecture ("64-bit for
the masses").

------
patrickg-zill
Would not be surprised if a large fab like TSMC bought them.

